Ban

[Tiberius]

“Religion” can claim no dominion over children or their minds. Besides the fact that as a container of all religious practices “religion” is no legal entity, there is no educational or other basis for that. Your suggestion that it somehow can claim this is just ridiculous and reminds me of the state of affairs in early twentieth century and earlier in history. Parents do not “own” their children and have no unlimited and exclusive rights to influence their young minds. The state however IS a legal entity that has partial responsibility in ensuring equal opportunities for all its citizens and protection from threats like the ones posed by ambitious religious indoctrination.

My apologies; I meant to put "parents" instead of religion, so the statement reads:

"What parents decide to teach their children is up to them, not the government."

No, parents do not have ownership of their children, but they are guardians; they do look after them, and in modern society we still (thankfully) leave much of the decision making up to the parents. Parents decide what schools their children should go to, which friends they play with, and what their children wear. Parents also have a right to teach their children things, and teaching them about their own religious beliefs is one of the things that parents teach their children. I don't see why the government should stop parents from teaching their children specific religious beliefs; parents tell their children all sorts of nonsensical things, so are we going to crack down on bedtime stories as well? You are trying to interfere with someone else's kids, and that is where I see a violation of rights. I don't see why government should mandate what our children learn, especially in this highly diverse and multicultural world.

Your libertarian take on this totally passes over the rights of individuals that not or not yet can make their own decisions. Secularism entails the right to be free from religious rule and teachings and free choice on this must be guaranteed for children as well. Freedom of religion is easy to understand for adults, most of us are repulsed at the thought of someone forcing religious views on us. But what choice do we leave for children if we follow your libertarian advice?

No, secularism entails us the right to be free from a government that interferes with religion, and religions that interfere with government. It does not guarantee a free choice in any private way, only public. What people believe in the privacy of their own homes (or at private churches / gatherings) is entirely up to them, and if you are a child and are brought along to one of these events, it is your parent / guardian's decision. You accuse me of passing over the rights of individuals, but raising your own child is a right in itself. I don't want the government telling me how to raise my children. As long as I don't cause them any harm, or put them in harm's way, I should not be breaking the law. Teaching them my religious beliefs (or non-beliefs) is something I should have every right to do.

Since children at a young age cannot overlook consequences of specific religious upbringing and how it affects their potential, their right on freedom of choice as an adult is impacted by decisions made by others when they are young . Also even when a child is capable of formulating opposing views there is the dependency on parents for social security that leaves little room for free choice. This means that extreme caution for the possible occurrence of a situation of early indoctrination is necessary. If the parents fail to recognize this, the state should interfere. Not interfering would mean favoring the religion of the parents over free choice of the adult that grows out of the child. In the case where religious upbringing clearly inhibits the potential of the child, as is the case with muslim schools, the state cannot be passive. Not to mention the physical abuse that is common all over the world in muslim schools.

It has been shown time and time again that people can escape the clutches of religion, and if an adult really wants to, they can make the free choice to do so. Nobody is stopping them from doing that. What you are doing is making the large assumption that all religion is evil, and so we shouldn't teach it to any child, lest they become a believer. If we take your ideas to the extreme, we shouldn't be teaching children any ideologies, since they are "too young" to comprehend them properly and make reasoned decisions on them. That sounds like a very boring childhood to me.

Bringing up religious child abuse is a pretty low thing to do by the way. As you are probably well aware from other conversations about politics, I don't consider business (that includes faith schools) to be beyond the laws of people. If a business abuses children, they should be prosecuted, simple as that.

When are civil rights more broken? Are they broken when we put a limit on how parents and religious institutes can indoctrinate young minds or are they broken when we allow that young minds can be fucked up by any religion or sect that can lay its hands on them? Your problem is that you adhere to a rather romanticized version of libertarianism and shut your eyes for the consequences for young people that are the adult citizens of tomorrow shaping the secular society. In the end you may find no secular society left to fulfill your ideas in, since libertarianism can only be sustained by free minds.

The obvious fallacy in the above is of course your assertion that religious people cannot have "free minds". Libertarianism relies on thinkers; of which there are plenty, religious and non-religious. Yes, children can be fucked up by cults; as can any adult. At the end of the day, the child's decisions should be made by the guardian. It shouldn't be up to the state to interfere with that child, even in their religious upbringing. Indeed, it is once again a complete disregard for what secularism is if you think that the government should make laws that prevent parents from teaching their religion. A law that affects religion is the complete anti-thesis of secularism.