But would you be willing to let them make some changes in how they go to church- for example, going on Saturday night (Catholics do have Masses on Saturday night as well as on Sunday morning, right?) instead of Sunday morning if they’re not morning people?
Well, sure…when I was a teenager, I had to plan church around my work & activities schedule…I don’t have a problem with that at all (especially if they are old enough to get there on their own…which would be a fairly young age for us because there is a Catholic Church about 5 blocks away that they could easily walk/ride a bike to). When I was talking about a family activity, I was talking more about a younger child, where we as parents would have to make major accomodations if they wanted to stay home. Certainly, attending church as a family is important, but some concessions do have to be made with teenagers, if possible.
I’m not talking about a kid who’s not old enough to stay home alone. I believe the law in Illinois is 12 years old (it was back in the day when it mattered to me). What about a 16 year old kid? Are they exempt if they don’t want to go?
Perhaps. But life, unlike these hallowed boards, doesn’t ban you for being a jerk.
I also think there are many very apparent and obvious reasons a parent would want his or her child to go to church (or do any number of activities) other than to get a hard-on by asserting parental dominance.
The most obvious reason would be “I believe, therefore YOU have to believe. Even if you don’t believe, you have to behave as if you DO believe.”
I would have said the most obvious reason would be “I believe, therefore it’d be preferable if you believe, too. And if you don’t, i’m going to use every opportunity to expose you to my beliefs in the hope you’ll change your mind”. Not the best sounding reason, or the most held to, but it’s pretty understandable.
Let me rephrase what I said. There are many other motivations I can think of beyond that of enjoying exercising one’s power over one’s children.
And, frankly, I can think of no one who would use that as a reason. “Mom, why do I have to go to church?” “Because, dear, I believe in God, therefore you have to believe also.” “But why do I have to believe, mom?” “Because I do.”
For example, perhaps the parent believes that doing something is in the best interest of the child, and so will force the child to participate regardless of the child’s level of engagement.
Perhaps the parent knows the child doesn’t quite enjoy or believe everything, but he or she holds out hope that the child will change his or her mind, or at least pick up some correct moral and spiritual ideas (correct of course being in this case a personal opinion).
Perhaps the parent values the time spent at church with the child as important family ‘togetherness’ time (like insisting that the family all sit down to dinner together), and that is why there is insistance on everyone going to church.
Ah, yes…the old brainwashing approach. There’s another thread going about that.
Exposure =/= brainwashing if done correctly. Like I said, though, a lot of people don’t actually go along with their own beliefs; turning “I believe in <certain deity>, though I accept they may not exist” into “my kids must go to church/synagogue/whatever, but i’m unbothered about exposing them to any other religion, or telling them I may be wrong”. The amount of people who are willing to accept they may be wrong but don’t do a thing to introduce other ideas to their kids seems *very * large to me.
None of these excuses hold water for me. The parent is being disrespectful of the child’s religious rights by forcing him to take part in a ritual he has no belief in. A good parent will display his or her morality all the time…not just in church. The spiritual ideas have already been dismissed by the child so to continue to force the child to attend amounts to telling him his religious beliefs don’t count.
There are plenty of ways a family can spend time together. Atheists manage to do it without church. If you want to use it as a social setting, there are plenty of non-religious activities at the church that a family can do together (rummage sales, bake sales, various community efforts). The religious aspect should not be mandatory for someone who has no faith.
In case you think this is strictly an issue of faith vs. non-faith…
What if your kid has a Jewish pal and your child decided they wanted to become a jew? What if the whole thing just sounded better to him? Would you invest in religious training for your child? Would you attend synagogue events as a family? Would you support his religion financially?
As I said in post #56:
The answer I gave to Anne Neville was about letting a teen choose which mass they wanted/needed to go to.
But at 14 they’re not capable of making a reasonable argument? What if their argument is that they simply don’t believe in god? What constitutes “reasonable?”
Frankly, there are so many parameters involved that I can’t give you a black-and-white answer. What if the kid is 14? What if the kid is 15? What if the kid is super-duper smart, and can argue circles around me? What if I suspect, as the parent, that the kid is just giving me a hard time, and hasn’t really thought about the issue for more than 2 minutes, but they just can think of a million things that are more fun than going to church? What if the kid is just trying to get a rise out of me? What if they genuinely think they would rather be Shinto? To be quite honest, I doubt there are too many teens who have thought it through to the point of having some kind of serious case for not going…I remember being a teenager, and most of what they don’t want to do is out of general apathy than any kind of hard-core conviction. Apathy doesn’t cut it in my book. This is why I made the point that if they weren’t going to go to church, you can be sure that they will be participating in some other worthwhile activity (like, I don’t know, volunteering at a soup kitchen or something), and not just laying around congratulating themselves on pulling one over on me & their dad.
I suppose the way I will end up handling it, if this does prove to be an issue with my family, is to take it on a case-by-case basis. But I have to tell you, I am not too worried about violating their religious freedom by making them sit in church for an hour a week. The whole point of the OP is whether or not it is a violation of a child’s rights to raise them with a specific religion. I have seen no argument that would convince me of this. Am I violating the child’s rights in determining where they live? What kind of clothes I will allow them to wear? What school I send them to? What after school activities they participate in? What shows they are allowed to watch on TV? All of these choices are subjective ones, that a parent has to exercise some judgment on, and do the best they know how. Someone else might think my choices are terribly misguided, or not what they would do, but unless you can prove some specific detrimental effect, then I think the parents are within their rights to make them.
Hrm. Just so that we’re on the same page, do you find this specific ‘making a kid do something’ an issue because it is religious in nature, and that you feel that every person has a ‘religious right’? If we were talking about something other than religion (say the kid had to stay in on Tuesday nights to play Monopoly), would we be having this conversation? I suppose that that is the question the OP was asking.
I guess that while I don’t agree with forcing a kid to go to church (beyond a certain age… not sure where that would be for me, maybe high school?), I don’t think that it’s a sign of bad parenting or disrespect. Kids have feelings, opinions, and beliefs about a lot of things, and parents have a right and duty to help guide those feelings, opinions, and beliefs. Really, the parents don’t have much of a choice; they will heavily influence those things both through action and inaction.
You said that my examples were ‘excuses’ that didn’t ‘hold water,’ but it really doesn’t matter whether you or I agree with the conclusions reached by the parents. I was responding to your assertation that all the parent was doing was flexing muscle, when in fact parents are likely trying to accomplish a number of potential things.
Maybe they are effective methods, maybe they aren’t. Maybe the parents are actually being jerks. But there are many possible outcomes of making a kid do something he or she doesn’t (including going to church), just as there are many reasons a parent might make the choice to make a kid do something.
Well, I’m an atheist with a Jewish father who was raised in a Unitarian Universalist church, so perhaps you won’t get the answer you might have been expecting from me. 
I’d support his choice, but I will have brought him/her up knowing that I believe that there is no god, and the reasons for it. If he/she spent enough time pursuing it on his/her own, and then wanted support to go to hebrew school, well, I think it would depend on the cost, and I would make him/her bear some of the cost (either by working for me or for others).
I’d attend for specific events where it was important for him/her to be supported by parents, but in general I wouldn’t go to temple.
At the moment my dad has started going to temple again (I don’t think he ever did while I was growing up). When I go to visit him, sometimes I’ll go with him, for a special event or speaker, or for a holiday. I go because it means something to him that I go and we share an experience that is important to him. I wouldn’t go all the time. I imagine I would do the same with my kid if he became Jewish/whatever.
Well. I was raised Catholic and went to Catholic schools, but I am still not sure what is meant by it being taught “as fact”. I mean, it doesn’t get much more explicit than “This is our faith, we are proud to profess it”. Does it?
It my hope as a parent that my kids will be a part of this particular community of the faith, sure. But I haven’t got a great deal invested in either outcome, myself. And the reality is that I wouldn’t even know when to measure the outcome. I suppose that religiously speaking Confirmation would be a start, that being the point at which a person makes the personal decision to be RC, but it’s really only the start, even if they do opt to be confirmed. It isn’t a goal.
I have not exactly been unwavering in my own faith or practice for heaven’s sake, it’s a journey and not a mechanical process of some kind. Barring actual physical restraint or isolation, people are going to make their own choices about their religious beliefs, irrespective of what their parents would like, and I expect this includes my own children. So of course I expect to teach them our faith. And if they turn out not to be proud to profess it, well, that belongs to them.
We’re not talking hypotheticals here…we’re talking about a kid who simply doesn’t believe in god. Or a kid that simply isn’t a christian and wants to study judaeism. You’re adding unrelated contingencies to the situation. It’s a simple scenario: why do you feel its your right to force your religion on someone who wants nothing to do with it? You don’t think that it’s harmful to disregard your child’s heartfelt thoughts on a subject that you consider to be one of the most important issues in a person’s life? By saying it doesn’t hurt anything, you’re saying the religion itself isn’t important. While you may say you’re doing it for the kids, it appears you’re really doing it for yourself.
But there ARE all kinds of contingencies, not the least of which is whether I think the kid is old enough to have actually formed a coherent opinion on the matter, or whether I believe them when they tell me they “simply don’t believe in god.”
I would never “disregard” a heartfelt thought of my child. I will ALWAYS be willing to listen and dialogue. I have had long and detailed theological discussions with both my parents, and everyone in my family disagrees to a certain extent when it comes to religion…we all respect this.
But if I believe I am being fed a line of BS, I am not necessarily going give into it, either. A kid will come up with a lot of creative excuses to avoid doing certain things, and all I am saying is they are going to have to come up with a pretty good story to convince me. I don’t think this is unreasonable.
But you’re refusing to address the scenario I laid out here. Suppose the 14-year-old child has had lengthy discussions with you over a period of years. Suppose you don’t believe he’s handing you a line of bullshit. Suppose you actually believe that he’s laid out an accurate assessment of his feelings on the subject. You are assuming the kid is bullshitting you, regardless of the actual situation. It sounds as though you can’t possibly imagine a kid actually dismissing the existence of a higher power.
I said I would take it on a case-by-case basis. I said that I would have discussions…as far as I am concerned, the likelyhood of a scenario playing out like that is very low. But, if I say “Yes, Kalhoun, if, over a period of years, my 14-year-old child has had lengthy discussions with me and I was convinced that he has given me an accurate assessment of his feelings, and he REALLY does not believe in God, I will no longer make him go to church,” will you feel like you have won? Fine…I will agree that this would be a fair decision. I just doubt very, very highly that a scenario like this will ever happen. If it does, it does.
BUT…this is not what the OP was about. The OP was about whether teaching a child a specific religion is violating his or her religious freedom. I say no, for the following reasons:
-
Most people who teach a religion to their child do not consider it to be a “belief,” they consider it to be “truth.” They teach it as they teach other things they believe to be true. What someone else’s version of the truth is in this area is kind of irrelevant.
-
Most people do not have much of a working knowledge of any religion but their own. The parent can only truly teach about a culture they belong to…anything else is really just “book learning,” not real immersion in what it MEANS to be another religion.
-
As I said earlier, parents use their best judgment. Sometimes they are right, sometimes they are wrong…but if they make a choice in good faith that they are doing the best they can, and that decision does no discernable harm to the child outside of maybe annoying them a little at times, then I see no problem with it. When children grow up, they can make their own choices. Until then, parents have to do the best they can.
They do? You don’t believe there’s a possibility you’re wrong? There’s a difference between “This is certainly true” and “I believe this is certainly true”.