Why making your children follow your religion truly is brainwashing

[Riverwolf]

Well...my maternal grandmother and the elementary school I attended did a good job on me. I was about 60 years old when I finally put it behind me. I've posted it before but when I was in the third and fourth grades at a school in west TN the teachers began each day with the lord's prayer and pledge of allegiance and on Mondays they assigned each member of the class a bible verse to memorize and recite back to the class on Thursdays or Fridays. They should try that nonsense now and see how far they get.

Something is changing:

Survey: One in five Americans has no religion – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

Survey: One in five Americans has no religion

Washington – The fastest growing "religious" group in America is made up of people with no religion at all, according to a Pew survey showing that one in five Americans is not affiliated with any religion.

The number of these Americans has grown by 25% just in the past five years, according to a survey released Tuesday by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

The survey found that the ranks of the unaffiliated are growing even faster among younger Americans.

Thirty-three million Americans now have no religious affiliation, with 13 million in that group identifying as either atheist or agnostic, according to the new survey.

Pew found that those who are religiously unaffiliated are strikingly less religious than the public at large. They attend church infrequently, if at all, are largely not seeking out religion and say that the lack of it in their lives is of little importance.

...okay. My point remains.

 

[Magic Man]

I don't agree with you. Friend metis has done the right thing.

Regards

I agree that he didn't do anything wrong, but he also wasn't raising his kids in his religion, as he said. Raising your children in your religion generally means raising them to be Catholic or Muslim or Hindu or whatever, rather than teaching them about a bunch of religions and letting them make their own decision.

 

[Magic Man]

It is ironic because you would like to infringe upon the parents right to parent.

Where did he say that?

I am okay with parents making lifelong decisions that effect children.

Of course. It's impossible for parents not to do this. Pretty much any decision we make as parents is a lifelong one for our kids. But teaching them something like religion is different from teaching them something like manners.

But raising your child in religion is not exactly the same as arranging a marriage.

It's not exactly the same, no. But it's a similar concept.

But, I understand that many cultures choose to arrange marriage and I am not so culture centric as to have the audacity to call them wrong.

I'm not a big fan of this kind of view. I like cultural diversity and being understanding of other cultures, but there is a point where it's reasonable to say that practices from another culture are wrong. For an extreme example, look to the honor killings that are making the news in Pakistan. I'm guessing, even though that's part of their culture, you'd feel OK with calling them wrong. I don't have a problem extending that to a case like arranged marriages.

As far as raising children goes, it's entirely possible to judge the methods of other parents. Sometimes, it's better to just let the parents do their own thing. Sometimes, it's better to pass judgement. For instance, there are the cases of fundamentalist religious parents letting their children die of easily-cured medical issues because they don't believe in medicine, preferring to rely solely on prayer. I think we can all agree that's wrong. So, it's just a matter of where exactly you draw the line. I think teaching a child your religion as the one true religion is wrong, and I don't think there's anything wrong with saying it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The bottom line for me here comes down to the Golden Rule: why should we be so willing to respect the religious beliefs of a parent who is unwilling to respect the religious beliefs of his family?

 

[Curious George]

Where did he say that?



Of course. It's impossible for parents not to do this. Pretty much any decision we make as parents is a lifelong one for our kids. But teaching them something like religion is different from teaching them something like manners.



It's not exactly the same, no. But it's a similar concept.



I'm not a big fan of this kind of view. I like cultural diversity and being understanding of other cultures, but there is a point where it's reasonable to say that practices from another culture are wrong. For an extreme example, look to the honor killings that are making the news in Pakistan. I'm guessing, even though that's part of their culture, you'd feel OK with calling them wrong. I don't have a problem extending that to a case like arranged marriages.

As far as raising children goes, it's entirely possible to judge the methods of other parents. Sometimes, it's better to just let the parents do their own thing. Sometimes, it's better to pass judgement. For instance, there are the cases of fundamentalist religious parents letting their children die of easily-cured medical issues because they don't believe in medicine, preferring to rely solely on prayer. I think we can all agree that's wrong. So, it's just a matter of where exactly you draw the line. I think teaching a child your religion as the one true religion is wrong, and I don't think there's anything wrong with saying it.

Read the last hundred pages again... It's kind of what we are talking about.

Similar yes, just as simular, if not less so, than teaching child religion is similar to shaping a child's diet.

Draw the line at greatly detrimental. Not allowing life saving medicine is universally detrimental, honor killings is so as well. Circumcision, arranged marriage, and least of all - teaching your child a particular religious view- is not. Sure we can derive some attenuated argument about diminished ability to choose later in life, but even after all of these pages any person has yet to come up with a detriment which is in any fashion significantly detrimental and associated with the simplest act of "indoctrinating" your children. Even now you only come with extreme examples of abuses which are wrong because they are abusive, not because they are "indoctrinating.".

You may have a bone to pick with religion as a whole, but you are not doing a very good job articulating it.

 

[Magic Man]

Read the last hundred pages again... It's kind of what we are talking about.

I've never heard him say anything that could be construed as infringing on parents' rights to parent. Did he say there should be a law against teaching children religion?

Similar yes, just as simular, if not less so, than teaching child religion is similar to shaping a child's diet.

No. As far as diet goes, we have objective evidence for good diets and bad ones. It's mostly not a matter of personal views.

Draw the line at greatly detrimental. Not allowing life saving medicine is universally detrimental, honor killings is so as well. Circumcision, arranged marriage, and least of all - teaching your child a particular religious view- is not. Sure we can derive some attenuated argument about diminished ability to choose later in life, but even after all of these pages any person has yet to come up with a detriment which is in any fashion significantly detrimental and associated with the simplest act of "indoctrinating" your children. Even now you only come with extreme examples of abuses which are wrong because they are abusive, not because they are "indoctrinating.".

You may have a bone to pick with religion as a whole, but you are not doing a very good job articulating it.

Your last line is silly.

So, anything short of something that results in death is perfectly fine with you? That seems a bit extreme. I used extreme examples to prove a point, that we're not arguing about whether we should judge the practices of other cultures. We're arguing about which practices we should judge. We already agree that it's OK to judge some practices of other cultures.

I'm not sure how indoctrinating children with religious beliefs that don't have any objective evidence to support them, thereby trying to force your kids to believe in your religion could not be considered bad. Why do you feel it's OK to impose your personal beliefs on your children?

 

[paarsurrey]

I agree that he didn't do anything wrong, but he also wasn't raising his kids in his religion, as he said. Raising your children in your religion generally means raising them to be Catholic or Muslim or Hindu or whatever, rather than teaching them about a bunch of religions and letting them make their own decision.

The parents have a right to bring up their children as per their religion in infancy; nevertheless the parents have to be themselves open to truth; then their children would also be open to truth, moderates; they will not become radicals.

Regards

 

[ZooGirl02]

From Wikipedia:

Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive persuasion, thought control, or thought reform) is a theoretical indoctrination process which results in "an impairment of autonomy, an inability to think independently, and a disruption of beliefs and affiliations. In this context, brainwashing refers to the involuntary reeducation of basic beliefs and values"[1] The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or otherwise, which can be seen as subverting an individual's sense of control over their own thinking, behavior, emotions or decision making.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainwashing

In my religion, Catholicism, Catholics are required to raise their children Catholic. HOwever, this, in my opinion, does not result in impairment of autonomy, inability to think independently, or a disruption of beliefs and affiliations. If it did, there wouldn't be so many former Catholics. Obviously former Catholics had the ability to think independently or they wouldn't have chosen to leave the Catholic Church.

So anyway, in my opinion, raising a child as Catholic is definitely not the same thing as brainwashing.

Also, if a Catholic parent does a good job of raising their child Catholic then they will teach the child to think critically about everything, including their own religion. We Catholics are taught that it is okay to question things, even our own religion. The reason why is because it can help us to better understand our own religion. Also, the ability to think critically about other religions is an essential aspect of evangelism which all Catholics are called to do. In addition, we should be taught to think critically about things like politics, science, etc. Nobody should be a blind follower of anything. It is perfectly okay to question anything and everying because questioning things often leads to a better understanding of things or an outright rejection of things. Unfortunately it seems that sometimes when young people question the Catholic Faith, they leave Catholicism. I honestly think this is because they were not catechized properly and therefore they have misconceptions or ignorance concerning Catholic teaching. The failure to catechize young people properly is a HUGE problem in the Catholic Church both within the past several decades and in modern times. However, the Catholic Church is trying to correct this with various youth programs, Bible studies, and such.

So anyway, in my opinion, we are not brainwashed because we are not taught to follow the Catholic Church blindly or at least we're not supposed to be. Rather, we are supposed to be taught to think critically, even about our own religion, so that way we can come to a better understanding of it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

From Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainwashing

In my religion, Catholicism, Catholics are required to raise their children Catholic. HOwever, this, in my opinion, does not result in impairment of autonomy, inability to think independently, or a disruption of beliefs and affiliations. If it did, there wouldn't be so many former Catholics. Obviously former Catholics had the ability to think independently or they wouldn't have chosen to leave the Catholic Church.

So anyway, in my opinion, raising a child as Catholic is definitely not the same thing as brainwashing.

That's a ridiculous argument. Does the large number of non-smokers imply that smoking isn't addictive, too?

Also, if a Catholic parent does a good job of raising their child Catholic then they will teach the child to think critically about everything, including their own religion.

Funny - in the interviews my ex and I had with the priest before we got married, he never once mentioned anything about teaching our kids to think critically. He talked quite a bit about seeing to the sacraments for our kids, and quite a bit about not using contraception, but he didn't say anything at all about raising critical thinkers.

We Catholics are taught that it is okay to question things, even our own religion. The reason why is because it can help us to better understand our own religion. Also, the ability to think critically about other religions is an essential aspect of evangelism which all Catholics are called to do. In addition, we should be taught to think critically about things like politics, science, etc. Nobody should be a blind follower of anything. It is perfectly okay to question anything and everying because questioning things often leads to a better understanding of things or an outright rejection of things. Unfortunately it seems that sometimes when young people question the Catholic Faith, they leave Catholicism. I honestly think this is because they were not catechized properly and therefore they have misconceptions or ignorance concerning Catholic teaching. The failure to catechize young people properly is a HUGE problem in the Catholic Church both within the past several decades and in modern times. However, the Catholic Church is trying to correct this with various youth programs, Bible studies, and such.

So anyway, in my opinion, we are not brainwashed because we are not taught to follow the Catholic Church blindly or at least we're not supposed to be. Rather, we are supposed to be taught to think critically, even about our own religion, so that way we can come to a better understanding of it.

Your experience with the Catholic Church is very different from mine, and from the experience I've heard described to me by others. It sounds like you acknowledge that the reality is often very different from your idealized vision of how the Catholic Church should be; personally, I think the reality of the Church is more important that its "ideal" when judging its effects.

Also, I've read the Catechism and can't recall anything in it that praises critical thinking. If it's in there and I've just forgotten, I'd be interested for you to show me the passage(s). If it's not, then I don't see how "proper" catechesis would fix the problems you describe.

 

[paarsurrey]

So anyway, in my opinion, we are not brainwashed because we are not taught to follow the Catholic Church blindly or at least we're not supposed to be. Rather, we are supposed to be taught to think critically, even about our own religion, so that way we can come to a better understanding of it.

If a reformation has been made in Catholicism; that is a positive thing and must be appreciated.

Regards

 

[Curious George]

I've never heard him say anything that could be construed as infringing on parents' rights to parent. Did he say there should be a law against teaching children religion?



No. As far as diet goes, we have objective evidence for good diets and bad ones. It's mostly not a matter of personal views.



Your last line is silly.

So, anything short of something that results in death is perfectly fine with you? That seems a bit extreme. I used extreme examples to prove a point, that we're not arguing about whether we should judge the practices of other cultures. We're arguing about which practices we should judge. We already agree that it's OK to judge some practices of other cultures.

I'm not sure how indoctrinating children with religious beliefs that don't have any objective evidence to support them, thereby trying to force your kids to believe in your religion could not be considered bad. Why do you feel it's OK to impose your personal beliefs on your children?

Really, you have not seen any reference to abuse. Really? You have not seen association with any number of acts that are considered abusive? Don't pick petty arguments and be wrong.

And I asked a question regarding evidence. Still waiting for an answer.

But, no I am pretty sure that the issue is more similar to diet. Btw, what objective evidence do you have that raising kids inside religion is bad... I am still waiting for that. I could care less what the religion is, so objective evidence about whether there is a God, gods, or chi do not matter. But, I am glad you note that the discussion is about personal views. The point here is why should we impose our personal views on the parents? If it is just your personal view that this "indoctrination" is bad, then any imposition of doctrine which embraces your personal view is just as wrong as that which you are criticizing. Your position is contradictory.

I feel it is ok, because that is the position which is not inherently contradictory. The only position other than those who believe parents should have the right to decide belongs to Luis dantas. Because he is attacking the concept of a right to parent in the first place. In other words, he is taking an extreme best interest approach wherein the focus is solely on the best interests of the child. I believe that such a worldview is not sustainable and lends itself to a breakdown of productivity in favor of conflict and disputes, so I do not ascribe to that philosophy. Thus, my view is what it is.

If you agree that parents should have the right to make choices for their children then the only reason to interfere is when there is evidence that the parents choices are substantially detrimental to the child. Thus, the burden is on those who wish to interfere.

So, it is not that I feel indoctrinating your children is okay, but that there is no valid reason to interfere. Similarly, other cultures make choices on beliefs. An example of this is the contrast between fostering independence versus dependence as seen in U.S. culture versus many Asian cultures. Now either side can point to extreme examples of instances where one philosophy could have worked better, but this is a nearsighted approach. We are not talking about specific instances but rather a cultural aspect. So, it is foolish to try and judge another culture without a shred of evidence just because you cannot see how that cultures practice is not bad.

Hence, I am not being "silly." you, nor anyone save the possibility of Luis, has articulated an argument, that can support your position. So, if you have some issue with parents raising there kids in a religion please articulate your argument. Do not give me examples of specific religions doing something bad, do not simply say that it infringes on the children's "rights."

Specific examples are case studies that show no causal relationship. The idea that infringing upon the child's rights is not good enough. Parents infringe on their children's rights everyday. We say this is wrong when the infringing causes a substantial detriment to the child. Being less likely to choose a different religion is hardly a substantial detriment. Just clearly articulate what is the detriment. What is soooo bad?

 

[Magic Man]

The parents have a right to bring up their children as per their religion in infancy;

Of course they have the right. That doesn't mean they should choose to do it.

nevertheless the parents have to be themselves open to truth; then their children would also be open to truth, moderates; they will not become radicals.

Regards

If they're open to "truth", then they're probably not bringing their children up in their religion.

 

[Magic Man]

From Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainwashing

In my religion, Catholicism, Catholics are required to raise their children Catholic. HOwever, this, in my opinion, does not result in impairment of autonomy, inability to think independently, or a disruption of beliefs and affiliations. If it did, there wouldn't be so many former Catholics. Obviously former Catholics had the ability to think independently or they wouldn't have chosen to leave the Catholic Church.

You're looking at it from the wrong angle. The fact that so many who are raised Catholic remain Catholic for the rest of their lives is the evidence that it impairs their ability to think independently about the subject.

So anyway, in my opinion, raising a child as Catholic is definitely not the same thing as brainwashing.

No, not the same as brainwashing, but it is indoctrination. Brainwashing would imply there was something there that was being replaced. Indoctrination is basically the same, except starting from scratch.

Also, if a Catholic parent does a good job of raising their child Catholic then they will teach the child to think critically about everything, including their own religion. We Catholics are taught that it is okay to question things, even our own religion. The reason why is because it can help us to better understand our own religion. Also, the ability to think critically about other religions is an essential aspect of evangelism which all Catholics are called to do. In addition, we should be taught to think critically about things like politics, science, etc. Nobody should be a blind follower of anything. It is perfectly okay to question anything and everying because questioning things often leads to a better understanding of things or an outright rejection of things. Unfortunately it seems that sometimes when young people question the Catholic Faith, they leave Catholicism. I honestly think this is because they were not catechized properly and therefore they have misconceptions or ignorance concerning Catholic teaching. The failure to catechize young people properly is a HUGE problem in the Catholic Church both within the past several decades and in modern times. However, the Catholic Church is trying to correct this with various youth programs, Bible studies, and such.

While it's good to hear support for critical thinking, this idea is not supported by the general consensus on teaching religion. If the idea is to teach kids to think critically about religion, then you don't teach them a specific religion as the one true one from the time they're infants. Basically what you're saying is to teach them yours is the true religion, but then say they should question it later. If you truly want them to question it, then wait until they're older (like teenagers or adults) and then teach it to them, when they can fully understand it and really question it without starting from a biased position.

So anyway, in my opinion, we are not brainwashed because we are not taught to follow the Catholic Church blindly or at least we're not supposed to be. Rather, we are supposed to be taught to think critically, even about our own religion, so that way we can come to a better understanding of it.

Again this sounds great, but it ignores the fact that you're stacking the deck in your favor before expecting them to question it. It's like saying "OK, Bobby, you can go with your daddy or you can stay with me (and if you stay with me, you'll get ice cream whenever you want and I'll buy you any toy you want)". Technically you're letting him make up his own mind, but you're really stacking the deck in your favor.

In the case of religion, you're telling them all this stuff about yours is true from the time they can understand your words. That gives your religion a very unfair advantage later when they question things.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Of course people like dawkins claims it is brainwashing and child abuse, and many of his followers feel the same way.

ok...... as they are slowly brainwashed by him. Presumably he let his daughter see religion from a modern Christian perspective, considering he is in a Christian country, otherwise he might be seen as brainwashing, however clever he may be in his approach........ Don't say the door is there, and no one will answer it, and we shall call that freedom

 

[Robert.Evans]

You're looking at it from the wrong angle. The fact that so many who are raised Catholic remain Catholic for the rest of their lives is the evidence that it impairs their ability to think independently about the subject.



No, not the same as brainwashing, but it is indoctrination. Brainwashing would imply there was something there that was being replaced. Indoctrination is basically the same, except starting from scratch.



While it's good to hear support for critical thinking, this idea is not supported by the general consensus on teaching religion. If the idea is to teach kids to think critically about religion, then you don't teach them a specific religion as the one true one from the time they're infants. Basically what you're saying is to teach them yours is the true religion, but then say they should question it later. If you truly want them to question it, then wait until they're older (like teenagers or adults) and then teach it to them, when they can fully understand it and really question it without starting from a biased position.



Again this sounds great, but it ignores the fact that you're stacking the deck in your favor before expecting them to question it. It's like saying "OK, Bobby, you can go with your daddy or you can stay with me (and if you stay with me, you'll get ice cream whenever you want and I'll buy you any toy you want)". Technically you're letting him make up his own mind, but you're really stacking the deck in your favor.

In the case of religion, you're telling them all this stuff about yours is true from the time they can understand your words. That gives your religion a very unfair advantage later when they question things.

Romania and Russia indoctrinated.... atheism that is.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Romania and Russia indoctrinated.... atheism that is.

The political ideology of the Soviet Union has much more in common with traditional religion than it does with the freethought, skepticism, and humanism of the mainstream atheist movement today.

Edit: and these examples of what were, in effect, godless political religions just underscores the importance of not forcing religions on children at all.

 

[Robert.Evans]

The political ideology of the Soviet Union has much more in common with traditional religion than it does with the freethought, skepticism, and humanism of the mainstream atheist movement today.

Communist atheist propaganda in Russia Romania led to jailing of Christians, torture and murder. They targeted Christians. They took their children from them and raised them by atheists. They were told over and over again that there is no G--. They drugged them as prisoners, Christians and believers that is, beat them, raped them, smashed the front teeth out of women. Atheists targeted believers.

It had little to do with traditional religion I think.

 

[Magic Man]

Really, you have not seen any reference to abuse. Really? You have not seen association with any number of acts that are considered abusive? Don't pick petty arguments and be wrong.

I have not seen Penguin ever support laws against teaching children the parents' religion. Maybe I missed it, but that's why I was asking. My point was that you might be misconstruing someone disagreeing with the practice as someone trying to infringe on parents' rights.

And I asked a question regarding evidence. Still waiting for an answer.

I went back and looked and didn't see this question. I'm not even sure what it's referring to. Could you restate the question?

But, no I am pretty sure that the issue is more similar to diet.

You might be pretty sure, but it's still not true.

Btw, what objective evidence do you have that raising kids inside religion is bad... I am still waiting for that.

You're looking at it wrong. Generally it's frowned upon to force your kids to believe stuff that you believe. It's one thing to teach them about the world, especially when it's things that are objectively verifiable, like the earth is round. It's another when it's personal beliefs that are purely subjective. Even then, if you try to do it in a way that's not forcing it, it's not so bad.

This isn't about "objective evidence that raising kids in a religion is bad". It's about how you view the act of forcing beliefs on your kids.

I could care less what the religion is, so objective evidence about whether there is a God, gods, or chi do not matter. But, I am glad you note that the discussion is about personal views. The point here is why should we impose our personal views on the parents? If it is just your personal view that this "indoctrination" is bad, then any imposition of doctrine which embraces your personal view is just as wrong as that which you are criticizing. Your position is contradictory.

No. My argument is that we let people make their own decisions. Let the kid form his own personal views without trying to influence him to copy yours. I'm not trying to force this onto anyone. I'm not advocating a law against raising your child in your religion. I'm only saying I think it's the wrong way to go. So, just like I'm not advocating forcing views on the parents, I don't think they should force views on their kids.

If you agree that parents should have the right to make choices for their children then the only reason to interfere is when there is evidence that the parents choices are substantially detrimental to the child. Thus, the burden is on those who wish to interfere.

See, this is why I asked the question about where Penguin said he wants to infringe on parents' rights. You're misunderstanding the argument. Just because someone disagrees with the actions of others doesn't mean they want to ban that action. I will speak out against people making racist comments, but that doesn't mean I want to ban them from making them. Same with raising kids in religion. I don't like parents doing it, but I'm not trying to force them to stop.

So, it is not that I feel indoctrinating your children is okay, but that there is no valid reason to interfere.

In other words, we agree, but you misunderstand what I'm saying.

Hence, I am not being "silly." you, nor anyone save the possibility of Luis, has articulated an argument, that can support your position.

I don't think it's that we haven't provided such an argument. I think the problem is you've misunderstood the arguments we have provided, as evidenced above.

So, if you have some issue with parents raising there kids in a religion please articulate your argument. Do not give me examples of specific religions doing something bad, do not simply say that it infringes on the children's "rights."

Wait...first you tell me to give an argument, and then say I can't use a valid argument. Which is it? You just said it's not that you feel indoctrinating kids is OK. So, why do you want an argument from me for why it's not OK, if you're not trying to argue that it is OK?

The idea that infringing upon the child's rights is not good enough. Parents infringe on their children's rights everyday. We say this is wrong when the infringing causes a substantial detriment to the child. Being less likely to choose a different religion is hardly a substantial detriment. Just clearly articulate what is the detriment. What is soooo bad?

There's a difference between "infringing on a child's rights" by forcing them to go to bed or go to school and "infringing on their rights" by forcing them to believe certain personal beliefs. There's no good reason to force the religious beliefs on them. With beliefs that require a somewhat advanced level of understanding, it's best to wait until that level of understanding is possible.

It's really just the specific style of teaching. I don't advocate teaching anything is true "just because". I wouldn't expect my kids to believe something just because I told them. So, it doesn't make sense to teach them a specific belief that they could only possibly accept because I told them so.

 

[Magic Man]

Romania and Russia indoctrinated.... atheism that is.

And?

 

[Magic Man]

Communist atheist propaganda in Russia Romania led to jailing of Christians, torture and murder. They targeted Christians. They took their children from them and raised them by atheists. They were told over and over again that there is no G--. They drugged them as prisoners, Christians and believers that is, beat them, raped them, smashed the front teeth out of women. Atheists targeted believers.

It had little to do with traditional religion I think.

I'm still trying to figure out your point.