Is indoctrinating your religion to your children moral?

Great Debates
21

I think a distinction needs to be made between teaching a child and imposing obligations on a child.

Take baptism, for instance. To a greater or lesser extent, depending upon which sect of Christianity to which one adheres, baptism imposes on the baptisee obligations to act or not act in particular ways that are not incumbent upon a non-baptized person. IMO, it is improper to impose those obligations on an infant/child who cannot provide informed consent.

Teaching a child about your religion is something that I, somewhat reluctantly, endorse. I think you are setting your child up for at least some guilt and heartbreak if they, as an adult, reject your religion, but I think it is inevitable that they are going to be influenced by your religion, so you might as well do it properly.

Sua

22

Kalt:

Sure these two are different. One’s a matter of fact, the other’s a matter of belief (and the Christian example is a bit exagerrated in my experience). How much difference is there between “We should restrict our use of fossil fuel because it’s not good for the enviornment” and “We should go to church because God wants us to”? Both of those are matters of belief.

23

I’ve long held deep resentment toward my parents for indoctrinating, nay, brainwashing me to speak English, and just because we happen to live in England, sheesh!, couldn’t they have waited until I was old enough to make the choice myself?

24

I personally feel that if someone–say a fundamentalist Christian–believes that all unsaved individuals go to Hell (or suffer some other horrible fate), then one of the most immoral things they CAN do is to not attempt to “save” their own children.

Yes, this borders on moral relativism, but saying that one should not raise a child in a certain religion–and declaring it immoral–is tantamount to saying that one is not free to follow one’s own religion, that all must adhere to an agnostic standpoint. Not good news, IMHO.

25

Language is a skill you need to learn in order to communicate with the people around you. There is no way around that. Plus, kids are taught other languages in school. Someone else tried to teach your kids a religion other than the one you brainwash…err… told them was the right one, you’d get pissy and start whining and screaming.

Religion is an opinion which you tell your kids is 100% fact. There are many religions, yet parents pick one (the one their parents’ parents etc picked for them) and make their kid believe that one, disregarding all the others.

26

Well, if you want your child to be a brilliant, freethinking, emotionally and theologically secure Zoroastrian/ Wiccan/ Atheist/ Cthulhu Worshipper/ Confucian/ Baalite/ Buddhist/ Jew/ Hindu/ Muslim/ Christian/ etc, you will, of course, teach your child early on about the existence of a multitude of religions, and the importance of understanding the long human struggle to attain religious answers, not to mention the long human struggle to attain freeom from having someone else’s answers forced down one’s throat. At some appropriate point (I recommend the age of 10), it would probably be a good idea to go with your child to attend churches and temples and covens and whatnot for long enough to provide a taste of what those religions are about. In most cases, being open with the pastor/imam/enabler/guru/yogsoggothecary will open some introductory & instructional doors that will make the process easier, although within some religions the notion that a nonmember wishes the child to learn about this religion but not to the exclusion of others will be upsetting and confusing to its mavens.

Ideally, a discussion including people of the child’s own age (or even restricted to same) on an ongoing basis would also be a good thing, if you have like-minded parents doing the same shtick with their own kids.

Be prepared to learn from your kid.

27

Isn’t this the crux of the matter though? The idea that if someone believes strongly enough in some cause, they will feel that their children should follow the same course?

For example, if I were a bigoted idiot, I could say my children must follow my lead on
[ul]
[li]Gays, hate them, because otherwise we’ll all turn gay and the human race will die out.[/li][li]Women, hate them, force them to be subserviant, or they’ll try to run things and screw it all up.[/li][li]Chinese, hate them, run them out of the country or they’ll turn us into communists.[/li][li]Hispanics, get them out, or we’ll all have to speak Spainish soon.[/ul][/li]
You would rightly think I was some sort of lunatic to hold all these ridiculous beliefs. But if I hold them steadfastly, believing the consequences of not following these tenets to be horrendous, does that give me the right to teach them to my children? Does that mean that I, in order to follow my own (however corrupt) morality, should force my children to believe? Yes these are ludicrous, but how do they differ in the depth of belief of the adherents from those who advocate the worship of a god?

Of course these ideas would be a poor set of morals to live by, and would cause disharmony and dysfunction in most people and societies. But then again, look at the trouble religion has and is causing.

28

Yes.

Look at the trouble that any belief has and is causing. Is it moral to teach our children to believe anything at all?

29

**

At leat pick an example that is applicable. It seems to me that according to your example a parent cannot morally teach their children anything to do with morality. After all brainwashing your kids into thinking that stealing is wrong is different then teaching them that 1 + 1 = 2.

Children are not capable of making certain decisions for themselves. Children are not adults and the younger they are the fewer decisions they should make in regards to their own lives.

Marc

30

Well read some of the suggestions above, such as believing in fastening seatbelts, politeness, hygiene etc. I don’t see these having caused trouble. Evidently there are beliefs which it is moral to teach our children as there are tangible benefits.

31

Funny you should mention this. I remember hearing a story (on NPR?) about a 16th or 17th century prince. It seems that this prince fancied himself a man of science and proceeded to use his children in an experiment.
One of the ideas making the rounds at the time was that either Greek or Latin was a priori knowledge to all humans. So this prince instructs all his servants to not talk around the newborn children with the idea of seeing what language they spoke when they got older.
I don’t remember exactly how the “experiment” turned out, but the kids where developmently disabled.

32

And, I hope I don’t need to really point this out, fluent in neither Greek nor Latin.

33

Andy, Re: parents teaching their kids prejudice.
My parents were prejudiced (that is, they told me black folk had a smell and you shouldn’t have kids together because neither side would accept them), but i never bought it.
Kids don’t alwaya believe their parents.
You teach them good things (in my case, Christianity) and hope it sticks.

34

I think the difference isn’t about the “provableness” of things or if they are social construct. I think it is about that it’s alright to tell your child to look both ways before crossing the street, because everyone agrees about it. The same goes for “don’t steal stuff”, “don’t lie”, personal hygiene, etc.

It’s when you teach your children things that are still disputed I think it goes into a gray area. I’d never tell my children what to believe about religion, gun control, capital punishmen, abortion, etc., as those issues are legitimately discussed every day. THESE are the kind of issues where children must be able to think for themselves.

It does noone good to let children decide for themselves if they want to look both ways before crossing the street.

35

JC - do you have kids?

I have a hard time imagining the dynamics in a family where the parents did not overtly or indirectly communicate to the kids their opinions on these and a number of other “unresolved” issues. And, given common familial dynamics, in many cases and at certain ages the child will consciously of subconsciously emulate their parent, thereby internalizing beliefs and behaviors of their role model.

Simplistic example, how do you answer when the kid asks “Who are you voting for for president?” First you say they are both good people, etc. But then the kid presses, “But who?” Or maybe they say “I like (the candidate you dislike).” And if you say who you intend to vote for, the kid asks “Why?”

If you can get through that and a million other minefields that occur day in and day out in any family where the parents teach their kids to ask questions, and can avoid in ever-so-subtly influencing your kids’ beliefs on numerous debatable issues, I’m not sure it would be worth the effort. Moreover, I believe that even tho things are debatable, it is possible for an individual to make up their mind sufficiently that they have no qualms about teaching their children that position as “correct.”

The responsible parent walks a tightrope. On the one hand, they must force their children to figure certain things out for themselves, and to struggle to attain some things in order to appreciate their worth. OTOH - in some respects a parent appropriately desires to help their child out, to give them the benefit of their experience and efforts.

Tough work, and there is not guidebook.

36

At the risk of inflaming religious types everywhere, I have to say I’ve always thought it really sucks that people are indoctrinated into a religion before they have any ability to even understand what it is they are being “taught”. As the jesuits say: “Give me a child until he is 6 years old, and he is mine for life.” Or something like that. Yuck.

So I’d have to say that I don’t find it particularly moral.

37

I suppose that indoctrinating a child to atheism is a most proper method of raising a child. Do tell.

38

And who said that?

I think a trend common to the non-believers here has been to suggest that the most “moral” approach might be to raise your child in a manner that they will be able to reach their own conclusions when they are capable of doing so.

When a child is very young, they are capable of believing in Santa, the Easter bunny, fairies, and any number of supernatural beings and events. I am often surprised that religious people consider such a formative and impressionable mind capable of truly understanding and appreciating their message. To my ears, it somehow sounds somehow demeaning of sincere beliefs to hear them presented to kids in storybook fashion. With no distinction between the various styles of teaching in the bible (christianity being the religion I am most familiar with.)

IMO many, if not most believers do not consider their beliefs to be merely one of multiple legitimate choices. Many atheists are equally closeminded.

But it seems to me that if you believe something to be “true” - you would not need to go to considerable efforts to ensure that young children parrot things and exercise actions they are not sufficiently mature to understand. If it is “true” when your child is an infant, or five years old, why don’t you believe that it will be just as true when the child is somewhat older and more mature, and capable of distinguishing certain supernatural beliefs from others. There is a reason why children below a certain age are generally not held responsible for their criminal acts to the same extent as an adult.
Moreover, if your beliefs are so strong and true, and evident to you, why not hold them up against the strongest fire you can. As someone earlier suggested, why not aggressively educate your children in other religions? If your belief is the right one, you should not have to fear your child choosing a different path.

IME, doing so on your own is a lot of hard work. When my kids were young, I had every intention of conducting my own little comparative religions class for them. But that was one of many on the list of things I never got around to. One thing I appreciate most about the UU church I now attend is that they offer such classes to youth. My kids and I have attended any number of ceremonies, ranging from Buddhist, to native american, with countless stops at various judeo-christian faiths.

I am a devout atheist. And I have no qualms about telling my children what my beliefs are when they ask. But I try very hard to avoid forcing my beliefs on them. Instead, I try to expose them to as much relevant info on the subject as possible, in the hopes that so doing will best help them make up their minds. To that end I am willing to discuss and or debate any issue they want, or even just listen to their rambling if that is what they want at the time.
Speaking of rambling, that is what I seem to be doing so I will stop now.

39

I don’t think it is necessary to indoctrinate a child into any spiritual belief system or lack thereof. I like the way I was raised. My parents taught me good values and morals which I learned were valuable for their own sake, as well as smoothing my way through life. Golden rule, and all that. No gods required. I have generally found the moral grounding of non-religious people to be much more trustworthy than the moral grounding of those who arrive at it through religion. Not invariably, but generally. YMMV.

As for spiritual ideas, I had a lapsed Catholic and a lapsed Baptist for parents. As i grew up and questions occurred to me, as they are likely to do unless you raise your children in a cave, they answered them without any obvious bias one way or another. There was a great deal of “Some people believe” going on, but never “It’s a lie/untrue/fantasy/wrong”. When i would press them for what * they * believed, the answer I got most often was “Everybody has to figure that out for themselves”. (Although I will never forget how I reacted upon learning the concept that “God is everywhere”: I spent an entire afternoon attempting to catch him under a pot. I was 7.)

As a result, by the time the * really * big questions came up for me, in my mid-late teens, I was able to seek out answers that made sense to me, without any sense of guilt, shame or fear that I was turning my back on anything.

And today I am NOT an atheist. Neither am I a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu or a Buddhist. I do not identify with any organized religion. And I am happy to be so. I, and others raised like me, may have come to a different place. Perhaps an atheist, or a Christian, or whatever. Better to have done so out of a true seeking, as an adult or near-adult, without pressure and with the ability to reason and view things with a healthy skepticism, arriving at a belief that feels true for you.

And what Dinsdale said, too.

stoid

40

Is it immoral to indoctrinate a child into a religion? Yes.
Is it immoral to raise a child within a religion? No.

To me, the difference lies in approach. Indoctrination allows no question, permits no dissent, and provides no framework for future independent evaluation.

Raising a child in a religion can provide answers to questions, avenues for dissent to be explored and addressed, and provides a framework for coninual evaluation into adulthood.

One tries to turn the child into a spiritual puppet. The other tries to prepare the child for a spiritual journey.