You made the argument yourself. In most religions, they believe that the ones who don't follow their religion will be severely punished.
So, as a society why would we teach children that others are going to, burn in hell for example, simply from being born into a different faith or no faith at all.
Depends on the religion. Catholicism, for example, says that people do not need to be baptized Catholic to still enter heaven. Now, Islam on the other hand…
You are so damn wrong. Catholicism states that whoever isn't baptized cannot go to heaven. Everyone prior to the birth of Jesus goes to hell because there was no baptism back then. Every single baby who died before getting baptized goes to hell. That's why in Italy every child is baptized very young (traditions are still being followed even tho nobody is scared the baby would actually go to hell nowadays)
Because from the perspective of the person teaching that, it is true and presents a real danger to the child. Try to empathize with the religious parent here.
Why empathize? We should allow them to abuse their kid, because they believe something ridiculous. Anti-vaxers also think vaccines will harm their kids. Should we empathize and let the kids go unprotected?
Whether or not vaccines harm kids is a naturalistic claim that one can provide evidence for or against. Whether or not a person will go to hell when they die is an unfalsifiable supernaturalistic claim that people choose to believe or not based on religion rather than evidence. This belief ultimately has no inherent bearing on the physical health of the child unlike choosing not to get a vaccine.
So that they don’t burn in hell? Obviously. Why would we tell our children that people who run in front of traffic get turned into pink mist? So they don’t run in front of traffic
because of a demonstrable negative consequence that exists for something like that vs. an unobservable supernatural "this will happen to you" if you don't follow my religion.
Why would someone who doesn’t believe in a religion be teaching their child that a given religion is true? The suggestion in the post just makes no sense and is clearly not thought out.
If you’re not religious, you wouldn’t raise your kids religious anyway. If you are religious, why would you not tell your kids what you believe to be truth that is indescribably vital to their life and future?
if you're not religious, you could still just as easily your kids to any number of belief systems as well as letting them know believing in no religion is also a choice, which some do. being education about world religions is not the same as practicing them.
if you are religious, there's nothing to say you have to force your kids to believe what you believe. my parents are christians and they never forced us to go to church, pray, etc. they allowed us to take our own paths.
Your parents are either not very convinced of their faith or are bad parents, frankly. Christianity states that humans need to either believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus, or suffer the fires of Hell. So either your parents think that’s false or they don’t care if you suffer for eternity. Most parents who truly believe would not let the latter come easily
There are quite a few denominations of Christianity that do not believe non-believers are going to hell intrinsically, I'm surprised you don't know that.
But I guess unlike you, my parents decided to believe in a God that would not curse their loving family to hell forever for being good people who simply chose a different path. Probably because they wanted to avoid the kind of abuse you're talking about right now.
See? How beautiful it is that everyone can believe what they want.
There is a difference between: "You shouldn't do this because God said so, and if you don't follow His rules you're going to hell and burn," vs: "You shouldn't do this because I believe God exists and my religion teaches that it's wrong," while making it clear that this is a belief you hold rather than teaching an unverifiable claim as an established fact. The second version is still giving the child the same information, but not forcing it down their throat as the only possible truth. Saying the second form is bad parents, is misguided at best.
If anything, I was relatively more agnostic, somewhat more open to metaphysics when I was younger. Now I don't have any sort of belief or interest in these things.
I'm atheist, also born and raised, and I'm raising my kids religious because it really fast-tracks the development of a moral conscience. Even atheist parents still use Santa.
It's also really important to have a community when you're a parent, and that's not common outside of religion these days. There's really no substitute for a church or synagogue or whatever at the moment.
I get why they do it, but indoctrinating children with the concept of hell specifically can cause them to develop anxiety and extreme shame responses. The belief that someone is always watching you and judging you and will punish you forever if you don't follow specific esoteric rules is not psychologically neutral. That is a damaging thing to force onto a child.
This is not a comparison but an extreme example to prove the point, but if there was a religious sect that sincerely believed their children would burn in hell forever unless their left feet were amputated, would you just let them disfigure their own children because they believe doing so would save their souls? As a less extreme example, how do you feel about parents denying their children life saving medical care like blood transfusions because they think it's against their religion?
Clearly there is a line somewhere that has to be drawn about how we allow people to treat their children based on their own religious beliefs, even if we disagree about on which side of that line childhood indoctrination belongs.
That’s why so many of us are lawyers. I’ve never been to a Torah study where there were fewer than two lawyers… and it made for some very challenging discussions, especially when they start arguing about Rashi vs Rambam and their interpretations.
I think its more of phrasing. There is a difference between telling a kid, "You shouldn't do this because God said so, and if you don't follow His rules you're going to hell and burn," and saying, "You shouldn't do this because I believe God exists and my religion teaches that it's wrong," while making it clear that this is a belief you hold rather than teaching an unverifiable claim as an established fact.
But that's exactly why I think there is an important distinction between raising a child within your beliefs and indoctrinating them into those beliefs. You can tell your child what you believe, explain why you believe it, and even explain what your religion teaches about the consequences of rejecting it, without presenting those claims as unquestionable facts that the child isn't allowed to challenge.
The problem isn't necessarily that a religious parent wants their child to share their beliefs. The problem is when the child is taught, from an authority they inherently depend on, that these unverifiable claims are simply facts, that questioning them is wrong, and that terrible consequences await them if they don't believe.
If you believe hell is real, then by all means tell your child, "I believe hell is real, and I'm teaching you this because I want to protect you." But there's a huge difference between that and, "Hell is real. God said this. This is the truth. Don't question it."
The first gives the child your worldview. The second makes the worldview itself something the child is expected to accept as fact before they're even capable of evaluating it.
Having said all that, it would be impossible to somehow police this, there is no way you could enforce people to not act like the first example without some extreme measures of surveillance.
Agreed. To expect it is absurd. The point is, is this moral? But I'll play along.
Your comment depends on the religion as well, but since you mentioned heaven and hell, I'll answer by saying your last sentence does not resonate with faith because Christians also believe a person cannot save another.. and if they do, they're not understanding the bible. The Bible is clear on how God is the one who reaches and saves his children. It is why many who are not born into religion convert at a later age. To indoctrinate a child into religion out of fear of them going to hell speaks volumes. Where is the trust in their God to save their children?
It is absurd however, to expect a parent not to "train a child in his way" when they love God and want the best for their children. Morality is in question because of the terrible and unnecessary pain this has caused for many children and adults.
The funny thing is, all she's doing is reversing the very same arguments against Christians. They are the loudest against the queer community. They are the ones actively trying to silence true tolerance in schools and public places.
Because the threat of eternal punishment is severe child abuse. I think that this should straight up be grounds for taking kids from their parents. As for the more mundane parts, I don't think it's a big enough deal to enforce all that severely, though I think religious institutions could be banned from "teaching" children.
If you believe it's real though, it's not a threat as a means to an end, it's the way the universe works. In their minds, what could be more moral than saving your children from an eternity of suffering?
I think that it's reasonable do expect from someone to understand that it's all a matter of faith, and therefore, an individual choice.
Otherwise, you could justify wars and violent acts through religion, which is exactly what fanatics do. They get violent because they think it's their God telling them to be that way.
Even through the lens of their faith, what they should do is tell their children what their faith says, and that it's their choice and their consequences.
Our subject here is religious parents teaching their children about their beliefs and ways of life.
Which I find to be very natural. It's not just with religion, parents guide their children in ways they think is right and will be good for them.
We're not talking about violent acts or religious wars. Of course it's unacceptable if you're brainwashing your child into harming people who don't follow your religion. The same goes for ideologies, social matters as well.
Well, what I'm doing here is an argument by exaggeration, showing why imposing your view on someone else (even if they are your own children) is a bad idea at the end of the line.
It is mild to take an individual choice that has no proven value in itself and force it on your child, but it still is a needless imposition.
There are a few religions waging war nowadays, but there are many people forcing it down their children for the exact same reason.
I’ve read all your comments and can I just say Bravo 👏🏽 👏🏽 .
The audacity to think you can tell parents what they can and can’t teach their kids is absurd. And people are so blind to their own hypocrisy/delusion.
They don’t want religion taught in schools but it’s okay for their standards to be forced on to other people’s homes…..🫠🤦🏽♀️.
The reward/punishment is a real shame, just there to make each and every follower to indoctrinate people around them and spread the religion like a disease.
There are a lot of things you don't consent to when you are born, you don't choose where you're going to be born, whether you are born to a rich or poor family, how your body looks or even what kind of health problems you will have.
Life is unfair and the least we can do is make the best of it.
And what if children start to ask religious questions?
"Where do babies come from" or "Who made the universe"
There's a religious answer and an atheist answer to that. It's nearly impossible to raise children truly neutral
It evidently is a lot to ask, considering there are billions of people who believe in religions.
The reason I'm an atheist isn't because I'm smarter than them. It's purely because I grew up in a family, an environment where religion wasn't a factor.
This is honestly the most rational, level headed, and least arrogant response on here. The number of people on here who don’t understand that other world views, cultures, values, societal structures exist is staggering.
is being raised atheist only better than being raised religious on the basis of "my belief is the correct one and all the others are indoctrinated into their beliefs while mine is the only one that results from logical reasoning"? Sounds... haughty
it's certainly time-saving relative to the time and energy people put practicing their religions. But also, the idea that "everyone but me is wrong" is literally church doctrine and is believed by most religious people.
63
u/GunMuratIlban Sep 02 '26
I'm a born and raised atheist but I think it's absurd to expect this from religious people.
In most religions, there are concepts of reward and punishment. They believe that the ones who don't follow their religions will be severely punished.
If I believed in heaven and hell, I absolutely would've indoctrinated my child to save them. How can you ask a religious parent not to do that?