Should it be illegal to force a child to believe in a religion or ideology?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Grand High Witch

It would make it against the law to use force, coercion, undue influence or blackmail in order to make a child believe/practise a religion or ideology.

So, refusing a child dinner if they did not attend church would be unlawful, as would using pressure on a child to make them fast for Ramadan or Lent ('you will be grounded if you don't fast', etc.)

It would not be unlawful to give the child the option: 'do you want to go to church with us today?'

Views?

I think children should try to follow the religion that their parents follow but if they don't feel any connection what so ever then parent's should not force this upon them. After all, religion is something very personal to you.
This should not be made unlawful but these actions should be discouraged in our society.

Reply 21

Gman786

Original post by Grand High Witch

Without using religion(heaven or hell), explain to me why raping or murdering is bad for ME? This is a though experiment, hypothetically im the head of a crime syndicate: i rape, murder, rob and I am rich. No one can touch me im living as a king. Now tell me what im doing is bad without using religion.

Reply 22

1010marina

I think it should be made illegal for children to openly follow any part of their religion until they are 16/18 and old enough to decide for themselves instead of having it shoved through their throats. Including fasting, attending your place of worship or wearing religious dress like hijab etc. I find it so sad when I see toddlers and very young children in religious dress - do they even understand what it means? Of course not. Just pushy parents. It's sad.

Never going happen, but this is my personal opinion. And preferably you should have to have a qualification in RE that you are aware of the teachings of all the major religions before you pick just one. ^^

Reply 23

1010marina

Original post by Gman786

Because you've hurt another fellow human being?? Do you not have respect for other people outside of your religion?

God shouldn't have to tell you what is wrong and right. There's a law, follow it. Also just be a nice person... It's really not hard. If the threat of hell is all that's keeping you from rape and theft then you need to take a look at your morals.

Disturbing o.o

Reply 24

username2763536

Original post by Gman786

If you want to know where morals come from I'd say that there is probably good evoloutionary reasons not to harm other people.Humans are weak creatures,the only advantage we have is our big brains.If we stuck together and didnt harm each other then we were more likely to survive against the predators that would harm us.In the same way we were more likely to catch prey if we cooperated with each other.Those early humans that did harm each other,that didnt cooperate with each other died out so didnt reproduce.Hence morality is selected for because humans that werent moral to other people in their group died out.Im not a biologist so thats just a theory,I could be wrong but you can see how there could be evoloutionary reasons to be nice to each other.

Reply 25

username2763536

Original post by JohnGreek

I can't quote your most recent post for some reason, so I'll have to quote your previous one.

If "atheism" was included as an ideology, then this would affect atheist parents as much as religious parents.

However, a lot of this debate depends on what we define as the default. If we choose agnosticism as the only "valid" default, and anything that is not that as an "ideology", then atheism would be included. If we thought that not being a theist is the default so as to use this policy against religious families, then yes, I would agree with your point that you are giving certain families privileges over others.

I would, however, contend that a move to remove privileges from religious families to prevent them from indoctrinating the young could be justified for a host of reasons, some of which were expanded upon in my previous post.

I would dispute that Agnostocism is the only valid default.Atheism is a much more valid default.You're assuming that its equally likely there is not a god as there is.However its much more like 99% vs 1%.Im as much an atheist as I am an Afairyist or an Aleprachaunist,but you wouldnt say that leprachauns and fairys are just as likely to be real as not real.Atheism is the valid default because no one is born believing in God.

Reply 26

Gman786

Original post by 1010marina

Do you know what a though experiment is? Clearly not...

Right and wrong is subjective. What might be good for you, maybe bad for someone else.

Reply 27

Gman786

Its worth googling 'pascals wager'...for the ones who are logical.

Reply 28

Gman786

Original post by Robby2312

Early humans did not harm each other?? I take it history is not your strong suit. Out of the homo genus, homo sapiens are the only species to survive. We literally wiped out the neandarthals.

Natural selection/survival of the fittest ring a bell?

(edited 7 years ago)

Original post by Gman786

Do you know what a though experiment is? Clearly not...

Right and wrong is subjective. What might be good for you, maybe bad for someone else.

Do you know what common sense is? Clearly not...

Rape, murder, thievery - without religion, we're barbarians. That explains why so many people live in complete and utter fear of what athiests will do to them if they get near to one.

Reply 31

1010marina

Original post by Gman786

Its worth googling 'pascals wager'...for the ones who are logical.

That's actually very interesting - thanks for the heads up.

Though of course, that only applies if you think of Heaven as a good place to be - which indeed it does not seem to be, to me anyways.

Reply 32

the bear

forcing a child to be an atheist is indoctrination of the most pernicious kind.

:hat2:

Reply 33

Gman786

Original post by 1010marina

That's actually very interesting - thanks for the heads up.

Though of course, that only applies if you think of Heaven as a good place to be - which indeed it does not seem to be, to me anyways.

Why isn't heaven a good place according to you?

Reply 34

Good bloke

Original post by the bear

forcing a child to be an atheist is indoctrination of the most pernicious kind.

:hat2:

Have you any evidence that any parent has ever done so?

Reply 35

the bear

Original post by Good bloke

Have you any evidence that any parent has ever done so?

yes i keep it in a special box

Reply 36

username2763536

Original post by Gman786

When I said early humans I meant homo sapiens and their anscestors.I meant that its makes sense for humans not to harm members of our own species as this would give us an advantage over predators if we cooperated within groups.Also its not proven that we wiped out the neanderthals,their are quite a few theories as to how they met their end but nothings been proven.It is known that we interbred with them.And for the record this isnt really history but prehistory.

Reply 37

1010marina

Original post by Gman786

Why isn't heaven a good place according to you?

Depending on which religion we're talking about, this God fella is cool with rape, incest, slavery, mass murder, misogyny...

So between a Heaven full of bigots and a Hell with a scientists, gays and atheists I know which one I'd rather be in ^^

Reply 38

Nadile

People saying how do you enforce it, how do you know what people do in their homes and there's no way to control it - are you saying there's no point having child abuse as illegal? After all, most children don't do anything about it, nor do people who notice it. Rape is often not reported either. Or domestic violence and abuse. That doesn't mean we should just go "well there's no point making it illegal".

Personally I agree with op, this sort of forcing any type of ideology or belief onto a child should simply be seen as child abuse. It will not always be reported, but the fact it's not 100% effective doesn't mean child services should be abolished.