# Children's Right to Religious Freedom **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 10, 2006, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989 "2006-10-10T23:08:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![rocksolid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@rocksolid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rocksolid)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2006, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/1 "2006-10-10T23:08:38Z")
Is it right that parents have the right to bring their children up to believe in any specific religion? Not sure about other countries but here in the UK parents can choose to send their children to (for example) a catholic school where they will be taught catholisism as fact. Whilst i have no problem with adults making their own choices about religious beliefs, isn’t taking advantage of the innocence and ignorance of childen morally wrong? Should it be illegal to make any attempt to teach a child the merits of one specific religion or another? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2006, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/2 "2006-10-10T23:12:04Z")
Is it right that parents have the right to bring their children up to believe in any specific society? Not sure about other countries but here in the US parents can choose to send their children to (for example) a public school where they will be taught democracy and capitalism as fact. Whilst i have no problem with adults making their own choices about philosophical beliefs, isn’t taking advantage of the innocence and ignorance of childen morally wrong? Should it be illegal to make any attempt to teach a child the merits of one specific society or another? ---
**Author:** ![Renob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8c91f0/32.png) [@Renob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Renob)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2006, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/3 "2006-10-10T23:14:32Z")
So you want the government to have the power to interfere with what parents teach their children regarding religion? That seems a big Big Brotherish to me. While it’s certainly true that parents try to impart their religious values on their children, it doesn’t seem to be particularly harmful. Parents impose their views in a number of ways. Vegetarian parents probably try to keep their children from eating meat. Liberal parents probably try to teach their parents to hate George Bush. If you desire the state to stop religious education, then why not have the state stop parents from imparting other values? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2006, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/4 "2006-10-10T23:35:00Z")
I agree that parents have the right to provide the religious education they choose to their children. Now, do they have the right to prevent the child from being exposed to other points of view? For instance, if a parent sends a child to public school, can they demand their child not be taught the basic facts of Islam, Hinduism, etc in a history class? I’m assuming that only facts are taught. How about letting their child take part in mock ceremonies of other religions? How about going on a field trip to a mosque, temple or church - not to take part in a service, just to see it? ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2006, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/5 "2006-10-10T23:38:23Z")
It depends on the way it’s done, in my opinion. Teaching your child your beliefs and value system is natural-- it’s called “socialization.” In some aspects, it’s almost unavoidable. It becomes a problem when you’re teaching your child that yours is the only way and that everyone who disagrees is evil. Teaching hate is always morally wrong. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/6 "2006-10-11T00:39:22Z")
[QUOTE=Lissa] It depends on the way it’s done, in my opinion. Teaching your child your beliefs and value system is natural-- it’s called “socialization.” In some aspects, it’s almost unavoidable. It becomes a problem when you’re teaching your child that yours is the only way and that everyone who disagrees is evil. Teaching hate is always morally wrong. [/QUOTE] No offense, but… is the statement “Teacing hate is always morally wrong” always true? Is it the “only way”? And are you saying that it’s wrong for parents to teach that their beliefs are correct and that those who disagree are wrong? Is this not a moral belief in itself? If someone disagrees, is that person wrong? I agree that parents have the right to impart their values to children. I also agree that a measure of respect for other beliefs is warranted. However, I think it’s foolish to suggest that it’s wrong for parents to say “What we believe is correct. Those who disagree with us as wrong.” It’s simply a self-refuting stance to take. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/7 "2006-10-11T00:40:08Z")
[QUOTE=Lissa] It depends on the way it’s done, in my opinion. Teaching your child your beliefs and value system is natural-- it’s called “socialization.” In some aspects, it’s almost unavoidable. It becomes a problem when you’re teaching your child that yours is the only way and that everyone who disagrees is evil. Teaching hate is always morally wrong. [/QUOTE] But not illegal, nor should it be. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/8 "2006-10-11T00:44:49Z")
[QUOTE=JThunder] No offense, but… is the statement “Teacing hate is always morally wrong” always true? Is it the “only way”? And are you saying that it’s wrong for parents to teach that their beliefs are correct and that those who disagree are wrong? Is this not a moral belief in itself? If someone disagrees, is that person wrong? I agree that parents have the right to impart their values to children. I also agree that a measure of respect for other beliefs is warranted. However, I think it’s foolish to suggest that it’s wrong for parents to say “What we believe is correct. Those who disagree with us as wrong.” It’s simply a self-refuting stance to take. [/QUOTE] I think there may be some middle ground between, “This is what we believe is right,” and “People who disagree with us are pigs who should burn in hell.” But I don’t have kids, so what do I know? ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/9 "2006-10-11T01:10:05Z")
[QUOTE=Miller] I think there may be some middle ground between, “This is what we believe is right,” and “People who disagree with us are pigs who should burn in hell.” [/QUOTE] I’m not talking about the latter, though. I’m talking about the claim that it’s wrong to say “[ours] is the only way” (to use **Lissa** ’s wording). Is saying “our is not the only way” the only way to approach morality? And if we say “teaching hate is always morally wrong” (again, using **Lissa** ’s wording), are we not saying that those who believe otherwise are wrong? Or should we instead tell our children, “We believe that it’s wrong to teach hate, but remember, ours is not the only way!” ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/10 "2006-10-11T01:20:25Z")
On a broader interpretation of the title question, do children have a right to choose their religion even if their parents object? Could, for example, a ten year old child whose parents are devout Catholics declare she’s a Baptist and insist on her right to not attend Catholic mass? ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/11 "2006-10-11T01:23:06Z")
[QUOTE=JThunder] I’m not talking about the latter, though. I’m talking about the claim that it’s wrong to say “[ours] is the only way” (to use **Lissa** ’s wording). Is saying “our is not the only way” the only way to approach morality? And if we say “teaching hate is always morally wrong” (again, using **Lissa** ’s wording), are we not saying that those who believe otherwise are wrong? Or should we instead tell our children, “We believe that it’s wrong to teach hate, but remember, ours is not the only way!” [/QUOTE] You cut off the last and most important part of that first line: > [@me](#): > > . . .yours is the only way **and that everyone who disagrees is evil**. Secondly, you can tell your children that you don’t agree with others’ views without being hateful. I’m saddened that I’d even have to explain this. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/12 "2006-10-11T01:24:16Z")
[QUOTE=JThunder] I’m not talking about the latter, though. I’m talking about the claim that it’s wrong to say “[ours] is the only way” (to use **Lissa** ’s wording). Is saying “our is not the only way” the only way to approach morality? And if we say “teaching hate is always morally wrong” (again, using **Lissa** ’s wording), are we not saying that those who believe otherwise are wrong? Or should we instead tell our children, “We believe that it’s wrong to teach hate, but remember, ours is not the only way!” [/QUOTE] **Lissa** ’s wording was, “ours is the only way, **and that everyone who disagrees is evil.** ” (Emphasis mine.) So whatever it is you’re talking about, it does not seem to be what she was talking about. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/13 "2006-10-11T02:40:13Z")
[QUOTE=Miller] **Lissa** ’s wording was, “ours is the only way, **and that everyone who disagrees is evil.** ” (Emphasis mine.) So whatever it is you’re talking about, it does not seem to be what she was talking about. [/QUOTE] Let’s go over this again. I’m disagreeing with **part** of what she said. Not the whole thing. It is entirely possible to agree with somebody on some points, while disagreeing with them on others. I agree that it’s bad form to say that everyone who disagrees is automatically evil. However, there is nothing inherently wrong about saying “ours is the only way.” Sure, there are people who say that it’s wrong to claim that people who disagree with you are wrong; however, such a stance is eminently self-refuting. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/14 "2006-10-11T02:43:36Z")
I think a problem only arises when children or taught or made to believe that they have no _right_ to disagree or to ask questions or to seek information elsewhere. That Jesus Camp movie is a perfect example. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/15 "2006-10-11T02:48:34Z")
[QUOTE=Lissa] You cut off the last and most important part of that first line: [/QUOTE] As I pointed out to **Miller** , I’m disagreeing with _part_ of what you said, not the whole thing. Surely you don’t think that agreement is an all-or-nothing proposition. Y’know, if you had merely said, “It’s wrong for parents to teach their children that everyone who disagrees with them is evil,” then I would concur wholeheartedly. The additional clause about claiming to follow “the only way” is simply irrelevant. There is nothing inherently good or evil about claiming that one’s stance is “the only way”; indeed, people who take a rational approach to morality **must** often state that those who believe in contrary ways are just plain wrong. > [@](#): > > Secondly, you can tell your children that you don’t agree with others’ views without being hateful. I’m saddened that I’d even have to explain this. And if I had claimed that one _must_ be hateful to disagree with others, you would have a point. I made no such claim though, nor did anybody else in this forum. It seems to me that you are attacking a position which nobody is advocating. I did NOT (repeat: **NOT** ) disagree with your claim that it’s wrong to teach hate. I happen to agree that it is. However, one cannot accept that claim without simultaneously acknowledging that this is the **only** acceptable stance on the matter – the “only way,” to use your wording. This shows that there is nothing intrinsically wrong (or right) about claiming to follow the “only way” on moral matters. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/16 "2006-10-11T02:50:23Z")
[QUOTE=rocksolid] Whilst i have no problem with adults making their own choices about religious beliefs, isn’t taking advantage of the innocence and ignorance of childen morally wrong? [/QUOTE] Clarify what you mean by “taking advantage” because in the United States it typically means you’re behaving immorally/unethically in order to benefit at the expense of another. What we’re talking about is enculturation, ie. ways we learn to become members of our society, and there isn’t a society on Earth that doesn’t have various methods ot enculturate their children. In the western world, I would presume most of the most of the western world, a significant chunk of enculturation occurs from family members. We learn how males are suppose to behave from our fathers, brothers, grandparents, etc. and we learn how women are suppose to behave from our sisters, mothers, grandmothers, etc. What I’m getting at is that enculturation is a natural part of any society. > [@](#): > > Should it be illegal to make any attempt to teach a child the merits of one specific religion or another? Of course not. In fact any state that gets so involved in what goes on in my home is a terrifying prospect. I’m an atheist, why shouldn’t I teach my children that atheism is correct and Christiams, Muslims, Jews, and Hindus are all wrong? I do recognize that the state has an interest in interference in cases of child abuse but how is teaching them one religion over another abuse? If you can make a case for it then please do so. I won’t have any problem telling my kids I think some beliefs or religions are evil. I think the Church of Scientology is bad news. I would certainly teach my child that people who assault others for being homosexual or black are evil. Is that wrong? Does anyone think it’s a good idea for the state to mandate how you teach religion to your child? Marc ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/17 "2006-10-11T03:01:11Z")
[QUOTE=JThunder] Let’s go over this again. I’m disagreeing with **part** of what she said. Not the whole thing. It is entirely possible to agree with somebody on some points, while disagreeing with them on others. [/quote] That’s not what you’re doing, though. You’re taking one portion of a sentence out of context, and claiming it represents an argument **Lissa** has not made. She has not said that it is wrong to teach a child that “ours is the only way.” She has said it is wrong to teach a child that “ours is the only way and everyone else is evil.” This is one argument, not two. You can tell by the way it’s all part of the same sentence. Removing the final clause entirely alters the meaning of the sentence. ---
**Author:** ![Caridwen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c89c15/32.png) [@Caridwen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caridwen)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/18 "2006-10-11T03:11:37Z")
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic] I think a problem only arises when children or taught or made to believe that they have no _right_ to disagree or to ask questions or to seek information elsewhere. That Jesus Camp movie is a perfect example. [/QUOTE] Couldn’t agree more. Both my parents were agnostic but it was important to them that we make our own decisions when we became adults so we were exposed to religion. They took us to Sunday School and we made our conformation and attended church. They both attended church when they were young so I guess they wanted us to be exposed to religion and make our own choices as they did. They never really shared their own personal beliefs until we were older and we asked or something came up in conversation. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/19 "2006-10-11T12:32:45Z")
[QUOTE=Miller] That’s not what you’re doing, though. You’re taking one portion of a sentence out of context, and claiming it represents an argument **Lissa** has not made. She has not said that it is wrong to teach a child that “ours is the only way.” She has said it is wrong to teach a child that “ours is the only way and everyone else is evil.” [/QUOTE] And, as I’ve already explained twice now, my contention is that this portion of the claim is IRRELEVANT. Is is not inherently wrong; in fact, _it is often necessary to claim that one has the only way, such as when one claims that it’s wrong to “teach hatred.”_ Is it correc that (a) one should not claim to have the only way, and (b) that one shouldn’t claim that everyone who disagrees is necessarily evil? Certainly, **but only because all the moral culpability rests on clause (b) of that statement**. Clause (a) has no affect, no bearing whatsoever on the argument. One may as well say that it’s wrong to teach hatred and wear red suspenders at the same time. Is this technically correct? Certainly, but only because it’s wrong to teach hatred, **period**. That bit about wearing red suspenders is both unnecessary and irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2006, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989/20 "2006-10-11T12:38:55Z")
[QUOTE=rocksolid] Is it right that parents have the right to bring their children up to believe in any specific religion? Not sure about other countries but here in the UK parents can choose to send their children to (for example) a catholic school where they will be taught catholisism as fact. [/QUOTE] I went to a British Catholic school. We were never taught Catholicism as fact. We had science lessons just like any other child. Our Religious education consisted of studying Judaism, Buddhism and all the major Christian denominations. We studied Catholicism in depth, but we were never told that it was any more correct than any other religion. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/childrens-right-to-religious-freedom/375989.md?page=2)