- Image by k.Akagami via Flickr
I’m sure that people who favored slavery would have made the same argument. As would have those who did not want to grant women the right to vote, people of mixed races to marry, and blacks to use the same drinking fountain as whites. Nonetheless, change came about.
Realistically what we write here is not going to convert any bigots, or people who cannot see the injustice of the present system because they were raised to think belief was a duty. If it’s a choice of following what we advocate versus following what they think their god would say — well we know what the decision will be. God has the hell weapon in his arsenal.
It is an interesting fact that children who were punished physically during their childhood frequently defend the practice of hitting children. They also vociferously defend their parents. The analogy to people who were subjected to childhood religious indoctrination is rather striking and may stem from a similar psychological mechanism. All children are strongly indoctrinated with the idea that they must love their parents and obey them. The conditioning works against them seeing their parents in a true light.
Our project is interested in learning why parents believe forcing religion on their captive children is their right, even when shown that it can be harmful to some, probably large percentage, of children and that parent’s so called rights are on shaky moral ground. The indoctrination of children is customary, traditional, and shielded by strong taboos and tropes the institutions have put in place to guard themselves from criticism. Of that we may be sure.
Out of all the people who decide to objectively investigate and think about their options, there will be some percentage that agree that it is healthy to stop and question practices that are continued solely on the basis of tradition. In fact, solely on the basis of patriarchal tradition. In Rome, fathers could legally murder a rebellious son because family fortunes passed down the patriarchal line. It is no accident that we have a saying that a man’s home is his castle and the notion that it is wrong to interfere in another man’s castle is so strong. Child rearing is loaded with sanctimony and issues of male dominance and power. Conservatives just totally lose control of their bladders when parental “rights” are challenged. What about the rights of children? No one talks about that.
With the issue of childhood religious indoctrination, parents usually face pressure from family members, their co-religionists, clerics and what they themselves were forced to endure. The culture, institutions, and unfortunately even the law in the USA, offer formidable resistance to change. That does not mean that we cannot examine what is going on and see how it might be changed.
If the institutions are deprived of vulnerable children they are apt to strike a more reasonable tone. Free inquiry if allowed to flourish is the best defense we have against bad institutions and bad ideas. Children raised to value rational thought over superstition and dogma will make far more discerning consumers of religion and parents that are far more more fair to their offspring.
If the religious institutions of today are so good, so fair, and wise, they should not fear people who set out to question them and demand changes. The number one change would be to allow children a voice in decisions that effect them. Allow them to opt out if they are unhappy with religion. Respect their wishes. Let them question everything freely even the heretical bits. Let them say they don’t believe, if they don’t believe. They have a right to their own thoughts. The present practice is dishonest and unethical.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Encouraging Children to Believe Falsehoods (msatheists.org)
- A selection of the comments received regarding last week’s article on faith schools (guardian.co.uk)
| Posted on Monday, March 16th, 2009 at 2:23 pm in Childhood Indoctrination, Children's rights, Parental rights. | |
Share/Save
|
|
Comments (2)