Subscribe to End Hereditary ReligionNews FeedSubscribe to End Hereditary ReligionComments

Home > Blog > Archive by category 'Religion'

Robert Kunzman: The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child vs. the Parental Rights Movement
October 26th, 2011 by Richard Collins

Today’s post is from Robert Kunzman, author of Write These Laws on Your Children: Inside the World of Conservative Christian Homeschooling. Kunzman spent ten years as a high school teacher, coach, and administrator and is currently an associate professor in the Indiana University School of Education. He is also the author of Grappling with the Good: Talking about Religion and Morality in Public Schools.

Book Cover for Write These Laws on Your ChildrenQuick—who are the only two nations who haven’t ratified the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?

Somalia is one of them—no bonus points for that guess. Who else stands against the 193 nations who’ve ratified the treaty? None other than the United States of America. This may change under the Obama administration; U.N. ambassador Susan Rice recently proclaimed the situation a disgrace and indicated that U.S. ratification of the treaty was under active discussion.

But not if the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) has their way. Calling the UNCRC “anti-family” and “anti-American,” they have urged their 80,000 members—as well as those who’ve joined ParentalRights.org, a “grassroots” organization founded by HSLDA—to voice their opposition. To further their cause, they have been a driving force in promoting a Parental Rights Amendment, which now has more than 110 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives.

Why does the most powerful and prominent homeschool advocacy organization in the world see the UNCRC as such a threat? Ultimately, it’s an argument about who should have a say in the raising and educating of children.

I’ve spent the past five years exploring the world of homeschooling from a variety of angles, traveling the country and visiting with families in their homes, observing their homeschooling practices and talking with them about what they’re doing and why they’re doing it. I quickly discovered that the range of philosophies, methods, and outcomes is vast indeed. But one fundamental conviction among homeschool parents emerges again and again: the state has no business telling them how to raise or educate their children.

This conviction is especially strong among conservative Christian homeschoolers, who most observers agree constitute the largest subset of the likely two million homeschoolers in the United States (HSLDA describes itself as a Christian organization). Not infrequently, parents pointed to the biblical passage of Deuteronomy 6:6-9 when explaining to me their motivation to homeschool. The Message, a popular Bible paraphrase, puts it this way: “Write these commandments that I’ve given you today on your hearts. Get them inside of you and then get them inside your children. Talk about them wherever you are, sitting at home or walking in the street; talk about them from the time you get up in the morning to when you fall into bed at night.”

This orientation toward parenting and education helps explain why homeschool parents are particularly resistant toward any government role or authority in the education of their children. Good parents (whether homeschoolers or not) see education, broadly construed, as part of their job description: raising a child involves constant teaching, and the most important lessons in life generally occur outside of school walls. But most homeschoolers take this a step further. They don’t see any real distinction between this broader notion of education and formal schooling itself—which makes sense, if homeschooling is just woven into the fabric of everyday family life. And if homeschooling is seen as simply part of parenting, then it becomes easier to understand why many homeschool parents view government oversight of education as an unjustifiable intrusion into their sacred domain.

For conservative Christian homeschoolers, educating their children is a God-given right and responsibility, and one they can delegate only at great moral and spiritual peril. Like many in the broader homeschool population, conservative Christians see homeschooling as a twenty-four-hour-a-day, all-encompassing endeavor. For them, perhaps more explicitly than other homeschoolers, homeschooling is a shaping not only of intellect but—even more crucially—character. This means more than just moral choices of right and wrong; character is developed through the inculcation of an overarching Christian worldview that guides those moral choices. These parents share a fierce determination to instill Christian character in their children, a process that entails protecting them from the corrupting influences of broader society. To accomplish this, the family becomes the defensive bulwark and sanctuary wherein children are prepared for eventual engagement with the world.

Parental interests aren’t the only ones at stake in the educational process, of course. A democracy depends upon the cultivation of informed citizens who can deliberate respectfully about the best ways to live together. And while most parents naturally believe that their efforts are dedicated to what’s best for their children, in reality this isn’t always the case; as the UNCRC asserts, children have their own educational interests at stake as well. But in the context of homeschooling—the ultimate in educational privatization—how to define and protect these various interests remains a complicated and contested question indeed.
Conservative Christian homeschoolers are creating an unnatural “bubble” to raise their children in, shielded from the larger society, which conservatives have learned they cannot control. They do a great disservice to their children by handicapping them from every living comfortably outside the bible. They are outcast from normal society and cannot flourish once they leave their bubble. They develop backward attitudes that make them unpopular among their peers. Those that suffer the most are the ones that attend a college that is not specifically religious.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta


Bridging the science-religion gap is possible — some stunning new insights
October 16th, 2011 by Richard Collins

Robert A. Burton, M. D. has advanced compelling arguments for radically rethinking the age old science versus religion fight. Burton in the closing chapter of his book, On Being Certain Believing you Are Right Even When You Are Not fingers the glaring error both sides make. Recently gained scientific knowledge shows how humans are biologically constrained to ever know certainty, yet our evolution sets us up to want, nay crave, certainty.
On the science side, Burton argues that evolution must only be granted provisional assent to certainty. Perhaps one day new facts will radically revise what we now think is certain. On the other side, the visceral feelings of the religious that gives them a sense of purpose and meaning must not be lightly negated. Burton says the visceral sensation, often noted by mystics, has real adaptive benefits and equals the power of rationality with respect to benefiting humans. Placebos have power.
Burton writes, “Objectivity and reason must be seen within a larger picture of our biological needs and constraints.”
“The goal of this dialogue should be to maximize personal hope and a sense of meaning while minimizing the untoward effects of unjustifiable personal attitudes and social policies. We should force ourselves to distinguish between separate physiological categories of faith — the basic visceral drive for meaning that has real purpose versus the unsubstantiated cognitive acceptance of an idea. Compassion, empathy and humility can only arise out of recognizing that out common desires are differently expressed.”
“If possible, both science and religion should try to adopt and stick with the idea of provisional facts. Once all facts become works-in-progress, absolutism would be dethroned. No matter how great the “evidence” the literal interpretation of the Bible or Koran would no longer be the only possibility. By exploring and making common knowledge of how the brain balances off contradictory aspects of its biology we might gradually turn absolutism into an untenable stance of ignorance.”
“Imagine how different dialogue might be with future generations raised on the idea that there are biological constraints on our ability to know what we know. To me, that is our only hope.”
Science has a leg up in this respect because scientists and rationalists fundamentally accept that all knowledge is susceptible to change and all knowledge must be rigorously challenged. Religion is just the opposite, because their foundational beliefs are asserted to come directly from a supreme being who is all powerful and created the universe and everything in the entire universe. Yet, clear headed humans not swayed by indoctrination can easily spot the giant cracks in this belief. Burton says in as much as belief in god is a placebo for billions of people, we need to recognize that it has power. He does not defend all the ramifications that flow from belief in the supernatural.
Open mindedness is a key component of critical thinking, which is something freethinkers have accepted for centuries. The trick is getting our social systems firmly behind this concept so that our schools, homes, and institutions start turning out people that can think independently and live their lives autonomously  as they personally choose to live them and not the way others demand they live.
Related articles

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuyUz2XLp1E The four horseman have a discussion.

Enhanced by Zemanta


For children to be free, mothers must first break free from superstition and dogma
August 23rd, 2011 by Richard Collins

A major roadblock to elevating children’s rights over parental authority is the conservative refusal to modify their position on gender roles, and to discard worn out family stereotypes. The religious nuclear family with father at the head, an obedient wife trailing behind, and well behaved self controlled children is their ideal. Women in the US, Western Europe and other enlightened countries have managed to pry the grasping hands of backwards patriarchal men loose to some degree, but in places like Africa,
South Asia, and the Middle East, patriarchal systems are alive, well, and doing great damage to women and children. Consistently, justifications for the status quo reside in religious practices and cultural
norms, which are held sacrosanct, immutable. Parents free exercise of religion trumps children’s human rights.

In tracing where religious freedom is cited as a justification to maintain absolute control over childhood religious indoctrination my research has taken many turns. Most recently I have focused on International conventions and treaties such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (which 147 nations ratified, but Somalia and the United States did not) the CCIPR, (which the United States signed, but added stipulations that essentially make selected provisions worthless within our borders) and the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) I have to research the status of this convention’s adoption by the US, but I suspect it has no status either because of conservative objections. I was led to the UN conventions by the work of Innaiah Narisetti, the CFI/India Chair and a proponent of child rights. His paper is on Dawkins.net.

How is resistance to child’s rights articulated? Well, there is no better place to discern the thinking of conservatives than their think tanks. I started with The Heritage Foundation and came up with this long critique of the UN approach to bringing women and children out of the dark ages and free of the bondage of religion and tribal oppression.

http://tinyurl.com/2eg6nm

The following are brief excerpts to give you a flavor of the paper:

Yet, on the issue of women’s and children’s rights, the U.N. High Commissioner on Human Rights has permitted committees and agents under the U.N. umbrella to turn these principles on their head as they communicate with the signatories of the CRC and CEDAW treaties. These agents are targeting patterns of behavior and social norms that have had the greatest positive effects on society and the individual: marriage, motherhood and fatherhood, caring for children in the family, chastity, and the special role of religion. They have asked nations to change their domestic laws in ways that ultimately will promote sexual activity among adolescents, increase abortion and legitimize prostitution, and in general alter the
foundations of society. The sexual norms they promote, moreover, are primarily those sought by radical feminists. They are becoming the tenets of a new “moral” code against which all religions, domestic policies, and cultures would be judged.

<

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta


To All Religious Teenagers
July 10th, 2011 by Richard Collins

Reblog from YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RkbDUc9HBA&NR=1

Hit REPLAY to watch To All Religious Teenagers

Would you believe in Giraffism if only one person believed in it? Of course not!


Forcing children into faith is ethically objectionable
June 5th, 2011 by Richard Collins

World Religions by percentage according to CIA...

Image via Wikipedia

The indoctrination of children is done without their informed consent. How could a three year old child be informed? Forcing children into faith is ethically objectionable for that reason alone, but on top of this, the process deliberately:

  • fosters an attitude of superiority, only one faith can be true (they are better than others)
  • encourages solipsism (god loves me and created a universe just for me)
  • creates enmity towards outsiders be they non-believers or members of a different faith
  • plants an unrealistic, patently false view of reality (evolution is often targeted)
  • stifles the mind and punishes curiosity which hampers full intellectual development
  • creates fear of holy retribution, which can lead to mental stress or even breakdown
  • creates guilt for infracting rules against unrealistic prohibitions (for example, masturbation)
  • sets up impossible standards (critics would say this is to drive children to confession)
  • infantilizes children and implants feelings of inferiority (god is great, I am unworthy)
  • creates feelings of hopelessness (there is no escape from god)
  • nourishes fear of human sexuality and creates neuroses about normal sexual feelings and sexual pleasure
These objections apply to religion without respect to creed or national boundaries. The worldwide acceptance of childhood religious grooming means the practice can be used to simultaneously pass on tribal feuds, racism, loyalty to patriarchy, mysogeny and distrust. Bear in mind that clerics are usually male and their loyalty is to men. There is usually a concerted effort to keep information about competing religions or sects from the child. The situation with Islam is the worst because Islamists do not separate religion and government. Accordingly, there is no check on the  power of unscrupulous rogue imams.
Belief in the supernatural opens a child’s mind to all kinds of spurious unreal ideas and concepts. For example, the paranormal, quack medical remedies, astrology and so on. The philosophy of idealism is embraced instead of realism so you get people saying and believing that anything is possible. The laws of physics be damned.
Some institutions try to say they don’t introduce children to the barbaric practice of blood atonement until children are older. So called Sunday schools (indoctrination centers is more like it)  focus on the story of Jesus and it is all coloring books, songs and cake and ice cream in the basement. Nevertheless children are exposed to the iconography of religion, things like angels and demons are all about them. Once a child is labeled and accepts the label it matters not what is conveyed inside the walls of their homes and institutions. The culture, at least in the USA is dripping with religious dogma and supernatural concepts. If you are raising a child in the bible belt you can be very sure they will be told about sin and redemption and some extreme right religious leaders, such as Franklin Graham, actually proposed training small children in how to proselytize their playground chums. He wanted at least one such trained child in every classroom in the USA. They are worried because so many young people are deserting the fold. Yet, old folks still have the disquieting habit of dying off.
Everything about the indoctrination process is predicated on a child becoming a life long member. Once the gate closes behind a child  everything is done to insure they never leave until they croak. The die is cast, the decision is irrevocable.
Freeing oneself from the grip of religion is similar to the process of matrimonial divorce. It can be emotionally and financially painful, it can destroy long standing friendships and in the extreme cases lead to  being shunned. Just read some of the personal narratives of exchristians posted on the web. Who knows how many people remain trapped in their religious closet because they fear the consequences of walking away.
Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta


‘Christianity stole my childhood’ – Katy Perry
May 6th, 2011 by Richard Collins

American pop-artist, Katy Perry.

Image via Wikipedia

KATY Perry says she left her strict religious upbringing behind after her evangelical minister parents left her without a childhood.

The pop singer is on the cover of the June issue of Vanity Fair magazine, where she revealed the differences between hers and her parents’ way of thinking in an interview.

“I didn’t have a childhood,” she told the magazine. She said she was not allowed to use terms like “deviled eggs” or “Dirt Devil,” to listen to secular music or to read any books but the Bible.

In March, Perry’s mother revealed that she was shopping a book about the impact of her daughter’s career on her ministry. She said she was proud of Katy but disagreed with “a lot of choices she makes.”

“I think sometimes when children grow up, their parents grow up,” Katy Perry told Vanity Fair.

“Mine grew up with me. We co-exist. I don’t try to change them anymore, and I don’t think they try to change me. We agree to disagree. They’re excited about [my success]. They’re happy that things are going well for their three children and that they’re not on drugs. Or in prison.”

Perry credited her husband, actor Russell Brand, with opening her mind even more.

“I come from a very non-accepting family, but I’m very accepting,” Perry said of her current religious beliefs.

“Russell is into Hinduism, and I’m not [really] involved in it. He meditates in the morning and the evening; I’m starting to do it more because it really centres me. [But] I just let him be him, and he lets me be me.”

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta


Osama bin Laden did the world a huge service
May 2nd, 2011 by Richard Collins

A still of 2004 Osama bin Laden video

Image via Wikipedia

Throughout history organized religion has been co-opted by truly warped power mad men who left destruction and horror in their wake. Osama Bin Laden and his crazed Islamic followers were such men. In a way we have him to thank for the remarkable strides Humanists, atheists and anti-theists have made in the last 10 years. He made millions of people think hard about the danger of consciously and deliberately releasing their grip on reality. Worse yet, foisting their madness on vulnerable children.

The attacks on 9/11 roused me from complacency and turned me into a dedicated foe of organized religion, for life. Whatever positive elements people find believing in fantasy are far outweighed by the danger such unquestioned belief imposes. Like Christopher Hitchens has written, religion poisons everything.

How many times must humans learn this lesson? Over and over we have had to put religion back in chains, only for this curse to break out again and be commandeered by madmen. The problem is faith and let us vow that the end of Osama Bin Laden will be the final chapter.

End the unethical practice of forcing faith on vulnerable children. End the betrayal of children by their misguided parents and guardians.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta


Children discuss Jesus with the vicar
March 14th, 2011 by Richard Collins

Children think of possibilities that elude grownups. Amazing creative insights come from the mouths of babes. They lack false modesty and have no restrictions on their ability to formulate ideas. Unfortunately, indoctrination weakens and possibly dulls forever this profound quality of the child mind. If adults really respected children they would treat every one of their questions with the greatest of care. The Vicar doesn’t have any answers, yet he valiantly goes on with his script and looks for an excuse to depart his small dining companions. Chalk one up for the children.

This video is cut from the popular British sitcom, Outnumbered

Awkward Questions About Jesus

At almost 300,000 views and counting (as of April 14th, 2010) this clip appears to be the most popular Outnumbered clip on YouTube. Perhaps that’s because of the slightly provocative title I gave it, or maybe just because it’s downright hilarious.

It is interesting that of the two Outnumbered clips I posted, this one has caused far more debate over the validity of religion. I guess that’s because of Ben’s rather forthright questioning of the vicar. Even though most of the questions are rather silly, I think the fact that you very rarely see these type of confrontational questions asked of the clergy, it can appear to be a little shocking to some people which, judging from some of the comments I have seen, appears to be the case.

Some have also taken offence to “using children” in this manner, but I think they are way off the mark. It’s the use of children that gives the scene authenticity, given that there are likely very few children who haven’t asked some awkward questions about religion or Christianity at one time or another.

Of all the questions in the clip, I think the one that Karen asks is the most interesting—why couldn’t Jesus find another way to tell people to be “a bit better otherwise something bad’s going to happen” (like writing to them). As I have discussed elsewhere on this blog, one of the major problems with the fundamentalist’s take on the Doctrine of Salvation is the sheer randomness of any one person’s chances of both hearing about Jesus and his death on the cross and not being told that it’s nonsense and just a story made up by people of a different religion.

For example, if you were a Muslim who had been been living in down town Mecca all your life before the advent of shortwave radio, there is not a hope in hell (pun intended) that you have had a chance of hearing the “Good News” of Jesus Christ, and yet you are supposedly “without excuse” when you die completely ignorant of the existence of the New Testament. Posted by: http://rationaldreaming.com/videos/awkward-questions-about-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-432

From the Wiki page for Outnumbered:

Outnumbered is a British Comedy Award winning and BAFTA nominated British sitcom that has aired on BBC One since 2007.[1] It stars Hugh Dennis andClaire Skinner as a father and mother who are outnumbered by their three children played by Tyger Drew-Honey, Daniel Roche and Ramona Marquez.

Produced by Hat Trick Productions, Outnumbered is written, directed and produced by Andy Hamilton and Guy Jenkin, although parts of the show are semi-improvised.[2]

The programme has been critically acclaimed for its semi-improvisational scripting and realistic portrayal of children and family life.”[3] Ratings have been average for its time slot, but the series has won a number of awards from the Comedy.co.uk awards, the Royal Television Society, the British Comedy Awards and the Broadcasting Press Guild.[4] All three series are available on DVD and a fourth has been commissioned for a 2011 broadcast. An American adaptation is currently being planned.[5]

Enhanced by Zemanta


How powerful is childhood religious indoctrination?
March 14th, 2011 by Richard Collins

Joseph Smith dictating the Book of Mormon by r...

Image via Wikipedia

Mormonism would cease to exist in just a few generations if it were not for the indoctrination of hapless gulible children. The foundation of the LDS faith rests on the Mormon Bible, which is a transparent rip off of the St James bible, as Mark Twain recounts in his book Roughing It. Not even a modest skeptic could swallow the imagineerings of the Mormon bible. Yet there are millions of true believers and that is undeniable fact.

Mark Twain Meets The Mormons

Copied from “Roughing It – A Personal Narrative” as he tried to figure out the Mormons during his two day stop over in Great Salt Lake City on his way to silver mines of Nevada.

All men have heard of the Mormon Bible, but few, except the elect have seen it or at least taken the trouble to read it. I brought away a copy from Salt Lake. The book is a curiosity to me. It is such a pretentious affair and yet so slow, so sleepy, such an insipid mess of inspiration. It is chloroform in print.

If Joseph Smith composed this book, the act was a miracle. Keeping awake while he did it, was at any rate. If he, according to tradtion, merely translated it from certain ancient and myteriously engraved plates of copper, which he declares he found under a stone, in an out of the way locality, the work of translating it was equally a miracle for the same reason.

The book seems to be merely a prosey detail of imaginary history with the Old Testament for a model followed by a tedious plegiarism of the New Testament. The author labored to give his words and phrases the quaint old fashioned sound and structure of our King James translation of the scriptures. The result is a mongrel, half modern glibbness and half ancient simplicity and gravity. The latter is awkward and constrained, the former natural, but grotesque by the contrast. Whenever he found his speech growing too modern, which was about every sentence or two, he ladeled in a few such scriptural phrases as, “exceeding sore,” “and it came to pass,” etc. and made things satisfactory again. “And it came to pass,” was his pet. If he had left that out, his bible would have been only a pamphlet.

The title page goes as follows: “The Book of Mormon, an account written by the hand of Mormon upon plates taken from the plates of Nephi. Wherefore, it is an abridgement of the record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites – Written to the Lamanites, who are a remnan of the house of Israel; and also to Jew and Gentile. Written by way of commandment and also by the spirit of prophecy and of revelation – written and sealed up and hid up unto the Lord that they might not be destroyed, to come forth by the gift and power of God unto the interpretation thereof – sealed by the hand of Moroni and hid up unto the Lord, to come forth in due time by way of the Gentile – the interpretation thereof by the gift of God.

An abridgement taken from the Book of Ether, also, which is a record of the people of Jared, who were scattered at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people, when they were building a tower to get to heaven – (hid up is good, and so is wherefore, though why, wherefore? Any other word would have answered as well, though in truth it would not have sounded so scriptural.)”

Next comes the testimony of three witnesses. “Be it know unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people unto whom this work shall come, that we, through the grace of God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record which is a record of the people of Nephi and also of the Lamanites, their brethren and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for His voice hath declared it unto us. Wherefore we know of a surety that the work it true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates and they have been shown unto us by the power of God and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness that an angel of God came down from heaven and he brought and laid before our eyes that we beheld and saw the plates and the engravings thereon. And we know that it by the grace of God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ that we beheld and bear record that these things are true. And it is marvelous in our eyes. Nevertheless, the voice of the Lord commanded us that we should bear record of it. Wherefore to be obedient unto the commandments of God we bear testimony to these things. And we know that if we are faithful in Christ we shall rid our garments of the blood of all men and be found spotless before the judgement seat of Christ and shall dwell with Him eternally in the heavens. And the honor be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost, which is one god, Amen. Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris.”

Some people have to have a world of evidence before they can come anywhere in the neighborhood of believing anything, but for me when a man tells me that he has seen the engravings which are upon the plates and not only that, but an angel was there at the time and saw them see him and probably took his receipt for it, I am very far on the road to conviction no matter whether I have ever heard of that man before or not, and even if I do not know the name of the angel or his nationality either.

 

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta


i-am-a-post-mormon – Dustin Patzer speaks about leaving the LDS
March 11th, 2011 by Richard Collins

Justin found his way out of the LDS trap. The steps he took will work just as well to spring the trap of Catholicism, Pentacostalism, or any of the other thousands of sects. The first step is to listen to the nagging doubts you have and resolve to take action. The first thing you learn is that all religious traps have the same mechanisms to keep their adherents enslaved. They all make the same claim to ultimate exclusive truth and discount all competitors. You were probably snared as an innocent child before you had any intellectual guardians at the gate to your young mind. You were taken advantage of, pure and simple.

Once you realize the truth of your situation you can look objectively at the dogma you are subjected to and see that it just does not make any sense at all. The bible is not a sacred book. The bible is an invention of thousands of men with agendas. In Justin’s case the notion that golden plates were discovered buried in a field is outlandish on it’s face.

Sample some of the other videos produced by this project. Maybe one day you will have the opportunity to tell your story.


Older Posts »