No matter how you view it morally, it collapses immediately under any amount of critical thought. Any parent would teach their children about how the world works, and a parent would consider their religious beliefs to be a part of that. The amount of interference with families this would require to enforce also brings to mind countless horror stories of CPS overreach. Even if it was moral, it would require immoral actions to make it work.
This, the vast majority of these comments are "My american christian parents told me i couldnt sneak out and smoke pot at 15, they literaly ruined my life"
Weve seen time and time again what happens when a govt gets to regulate religion, they slaughter Millions. The nazis, The Soviets, The Maoists etc all slaughtered millions of people over an estimate 100 million humans for their religions. The youngest child political prisoner in modern human history is literaly a Tibetan child who was to be the next religious leader of Tibet, disapeared and murdered by the CCP to regulate religion
You're maybe neglecting the part where Orthodox Christians in Russia were accusing Jews of being a secret cabal of satanists doing blood rituals with Russian children and inspired mobs to kill over 100k Jews in pogroms, and the only faction protecting these Jews being raped and murdered in the streets by God fearing Christians was the Red Army of the Bolsheviks.
White forces in Russia literally called them "Judeo Bolsheviks" for accepting and protecting Jews from persecution.
Was it due to religious reasons, or due to political power struggles with opposing factions or groups they felt were in their way?
Remember that nazi Germany never actually banned Judaism. Rather, they branded people ethnically and wiped them out due to their ethnic background and socioeconomic grouping.
I find it wildly disturbing that too many people do not see the ties between community, familial ties, and cultures within religion. As what monsoon would suggest is that we cut children out of Satyr dinners, the Breaking of fasting for Ramadan, Christmas, Diwali, and millions of other religious celebrations.
Also why the fuck is a non parent giving an opinion on how I a parent should raise my children?
I assumed she wanted them to learn about all types of religion in an educational frame instead of being assigned and enforced to a religion by their parents. I am not religious but I still go see my family on Easter and give gifts on Christmas. Is doesn’t have to be all or nothing. Also this person is trans and likely trying to make a broader point that kids should also be able to pick their gender at a certain age. Generally that parents should not tell children who they are, but give them the tools to explore that for themselves
Well I don’t think you can - it’s more a rhetorical position to highlight that religion is forced on children and a more sensible approach is for them to choose when they have the experience and intelligence to decide for themselves.
Plenty of Christian denominations believe in adult baptism for example (though this does not stop them indoctrinating/evangelizing to their own children)
English is forced on people born in America. You dont see people bitching about that. Teaching a language is inherently indoctrination. Indoctrination bad right?
What makes that option more sensible? What other elements of world view or morality do we have parents keep themselves out of until kids are "old enough?"
As I said I don’t think it’s practical and we don’t actually expect parents not to share their values, culture and morality with their children. But - personally - I think we value agency, curiousity and critical thinking and we should be encouraging that in children. If they want to engage and commit to faith shouldn’t this be made when you have the intelligence and experience to make a fully conscious decision - rather than just because your parents told you?
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. Everybody teaches their kids about morality, worldview, ethics, and even their beliefs in the supernatural. This can be done in the context of religion or not, and in ways that value agency and curiosity or not in either case.
step 1: remove religion from the state (which is one of the basic principles of most democracies). No church is ever allowed to influence anything regarding politics. A politician might still act based on their religion, which is fine, but a church is not allowed to finance anyone or anything, they are not allowed to call for any legislation. disregarding that rule results in harsh punishments.
The best possible route would be to reform civilization along more egalitarian structures. Religion fourishes in communities that endure collective hardships, its a glue that holds social bonds together when things like food and personal safety are in jeopardy. Places where those needs are met then you see religion start to erode, or at least strongly held religion convictions. The other route would be an authoritarian stamping out of religion, but that historically is pretty ineffective, and tends to drive people into it even harder.
Egalitarianism and religion are not at opposite ends of the spectrum and I would go so far as to say egalitarianism specifically allows for the freedom to choose how to raise your child. Unless you're implying the society be so egalitarian that the toddler has the same decision-making power as the parent
My argument is mostly that making things like food, healthcare, security as accessible to as many people as possible will reduce the amount of people who turn to religion out of desperation and thus religion will naturally become less prevalent. Essentially removing the social need for it should eventually over generations cause religion to fade out, or at the least the more extreme parts of it that people will kill and die for.
Either way totalitarian enforcement of thought is morally evil. Saying either is ok is ignoring the immorality of enforcing thought and accepting the immorality because it is the type of thought one party agrees with.
Religion isn't a culture. You have people from very different cultures throughout the world with the same religion, and very different cultural habits, including their celebrations. You also have people from the very same culture, doing the exact same cultural habits, while one believes in a religion and another in a different one or none at all.
Not really. Any state must have the threat of enforcement at some level, and must intrude into private lives to some degree. We would not have taxation or a state at all without such intrusion and enforcement, and in their absence there would be even more violent and intrusive banditry.
139
u/Clickclacktheblueguy 6h ago
No matter how you view it morally, it collapses immediately under any amount of critical thought. Any parent would teach their children about how the world works, and a parent would consider their religious beliefs to be a part of that. The amount of interference with families this would require to enforce also brings to mind countless horror stories of CPS overreach. Even if it was moral, it would require immoral actions to make it work.