Should religious induction of children be banned?

FunLover18

Article 44, section 2.1 of Bunreacht na hÉireann states

Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practise of religion are, subject to public order and morality, guaranteed to every citizen

Like the vast majority of Irish children;

1) As a baby I was baptised and I think we can all agree that babies are in no position to understand the word ‘religion’ let alone what it means.
I attended a national school which like most was named after a saint and like most schools it had a Catholic ethos; religion class involved learning prayers, the story of Jesus, etc. There was little taught about other religions.
2) Aged 7/8 (I can’t remember) I received my first communion. This was a school event, a priest would come in every now and again to give special lessons and run through the procedure. I don’t remember ever being offered a choice. At the time I just understood it to be the norm and something all children did.
3) Aged 12 I was confirmed. Again no choice, and was led to believe it was the norm. Given the ethos of the school it was only in secondary school when I became inquisitive about religion and began to question it.

I believe that the induction a person under the age of 16 (age of sexual consent although I wouldn’t object to it being higher) into any religion should be considered unconstitutional given that the Catholic faith has been pressed upon me essentially since birth, and like most persons under 16 I lacked the information, knowledge, or experience to be aware of the full consequences. I wasn’t allowed vote till I was 18 but I’m allowed have my faith chosen for me after only a few months out of the womb.

I’m OK with religious education should be continued in schools provided it is an education of the history and global impact of the various religions and not a sermon. This would also be a huge step forward in the secularisation of our schools in this country.

Thoughts?

To clarify the poll options and poll results so far (as I accidentally made them private)
Yes = Yes 220 votes 64.33%
Down With This Sort Of Thing = No 65 votes 19.01%
Careful Now = Don't Care/Undecided 57 votes 16.67%

Pwindedd

I agree wholeheartedly. Especially as you can't officially leave the faith when you grow (wise) up.

kneemos

Where's the no option?

D1stant

Yes. I think Richard Dawkins characterises this correctly as child abuse.

catallus

Maybe you should ask your parents about it, OP? It is they, not the state, that treated you so harshly.

KyussBishop

It's a bit of a minefield this one - how would you ban it, without government dictating what parents can/cannot teach children? (which sets a bad precedent, where this could be expanded to other politically-charged topics)

Red Nissan

A child is until their 13th birthday.

Until then a child should not receive any religious instruction from any religion.

Links234

I'm going to say no, and say that it should be the right of the parents to raise their children within whatever moral or religious framework they want (within reason). I don't necesseraly think it's right to indoctrinate children into a religion, but I don't think it's right to make it illegal or otherwise ban it.

I'm an atheist and repeatedly been called a liberal fascist, but come on... That's a bit much.

eviltwin

I'm not religious but I don't think it should be banned. The state shouldn't micro manage our lives to that extent. It shouldn't facilitate that faith formation though, schools should be secular.

Sonics2k

KyussBishop wrote: »

It's a bit of a minefield this one - how would you ban it, without government dictating what parents can/cannot teach children? (which sets a bad precedent, where this could be expanded to other politically-charged topics)

Banning it is overkill, no-one rational would want that.

Schools however should not do it, and yes it is indoctrination. Schools should focus on actual education.

If a parent wants to raise their child under a certain religion, well that's fine and they can do so at home or at a local Church/Moque/Synagogue etc outside school hours. Nice and simple.

_Redzer_

Definitely yes in the sense that they're not allowed to trap you into one for like without your say.

I'm roped into an organisation for life now without my consent because they removed the option for me to leave.

I feel you should be able to grow up impartial to any religion and then choose what suits you best when you come of age. Be that a religion, or no religion at all.

I wouldn't care if parents raised the kid with a religious frame work, but I think the child should be free to go whenever they please.

catallus

Isn't the age of consent here 17? Am I wrong?

Tin Foil Hat

Yup, especially when that induction includes a ritual mutilation.

FunLover18

KyussBishop wrote: »

It's a bit of a minefield this one - how would you ban it, without government dictating what parents can/cannot teach children? (which sets a bad precedent, where this could be expanded to other politically-charged topics)

I have no problem with parents educating there children on their own religion however I don't see why they have a right to indoctrinate that child. That child has the right to choose its own religion and I don't believe a child of 7 who has been raised by Catholic parents in a Catholic school (your average Irish child) has all the information to make that choice.

kneemos wrote: »

Where's the no option?

'Down with this sort of thing' is the no option

catallus wrote: »

Maybe you should ask your parents about it, OP? It is they, not the state, that treated you so harshly.

Don't think I don't hold my parents accountable to some degree. They violated my rights however the State allowed them and allows thousands others to do so despite claiming to protect those rights.

nlgbbbblth

I am not religious but voted no.

It's communion month now. A lot of local businesses in my town have had a lift because of it - barbers, restaurants, clothes shops. Is that a bad thing?

catallus

FunLover18 wrote: »

I have no problem with parents educating there children on their own religion however I don't see why they have a right to indoctrinate that child. That child has the right to choose its own religion and I don't believe a child of 7 who has been raised by Catholic parents in a Catholic school (your average Irish child) has all the information to make that choice.

This is vacuous nonsense; it shows a little bit of wilful blindness to social mores. OP what age are you?

ryan101

It was done before, and didn't work out too well :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism

Benny_Cake

FunLover18 wrote: »

I have no problem with parents educating there children on their own religion however I don't see why they have a right to indoctrinate that child. That child has the right to choose its own religion and I don't believe a child of 7 who has been raised by Catholic parents in a Catholic school (your average Irish child) has all the information to make that choice.



'Down with this sort of thing' is the no option



Don't think I don't hold my parents accountable to some degree. They violated my rights however the State allowed them and allows thousands others to do so despite claiming to protect those rights.

What's the difference between "parents educating there children on their own religion" and indoctrination, though? It sounds like a subjective judgement call to me. Who gets to define what indoctrination is, and how would the State be able to prevent it?

eviltwin

ryan101 wrote: »

It was done before, and didn't work out too well :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism

I think you are confusing forced atheism with a secular state where no one faith is promoted but people are still free to practice as they wish.

Red Nissan

Links234 wrote: »

I'm going to say no, and say that it should be the right of the parents to raise their children within whatever moral or religious framework they want (within reason). I

See, the argument is coming apart already. The whole point of it all is reason. I personally put belief in a deity beyond reason.

And we must not confine this to a Christian or a Holy Roman Catholic upbringing.

Islam is so not within reason by any western standards and we have recently have had an Islamic King decrying Islamic Terrorists, now that is within reason ~ more of that and we would not need these arguments.

hairyprincess

Red Nissan wrote: »

A child is until their 13th birthday.

Until then a child should not receive any religious instruction from any religion.

A child is what until their 13th birthday?

Poll results are hidden op

Red Nissan

nlgbbbblth wrote: »

I am not religious but voted no.

It's communion month now. A lot of local businesses in my town have had a lift because of it - barbers, restaurants, clothes shops. Is that a bad thing?

It won't change too much, it will mean the child will now be a teenager and adolescent for Confirmation ~ actually might even make more money, in the confirmation circuit, I actually make as much from selling directly to the child.

Not too far removed from what the average Protestant COI families do in fact.

kneemos

FunLover18 wrote: »

I have no problem with parents educating there children on their own religion however I don't see why they have a right to indoctrinate that child. That child has the right to choose its own religion and I don't believe a child of 7 who has been raised by Catholic parents in a Catholic school (your average Irish child) has all the information to make that choice.



'Down with this sort of thing' is the no option



Don't think I don't hold my parents accountable to some degree. They violated my rights however the State allowed them and allows thousands others to do so despite claiming to protect those rights.

Not very clear.More like a yes than a no.

donegal.

religion should not be taught in schools.
if parents want to send their kids to sunday school to learn its thats fine.
where i live i have 2 choices, home schooling and brainwashing (a couple of weeks ago my six yr olds homework was to colour in a picture of the crucifiction ffs)

Red Nissan

hairyprincess wrote: »

A child is what until their 13th birthday?

Poll results are hidden op

A child. Up to 12 years of age ~ they are legally children.

FYI: Up to 1908 the age of the First Holy Communicant was 12 years OR more, and her parents had also to be practicing Catholics AND pass a few questions from the Bishop who, back then, administered the sacrament.

catallus

Religious induction is solely the responsibility and choice of the parents of the child. End of story. There are pagans out there who would like to have social control over people about what they say and think and there's no softer target than religious choice.

For what it's worth I think we should have more religious education, not less. The little heathens need to be turned into responsible adults and the best way is to have the fear of god in them!

dlouth15

Two aspects to this.

If a child's parents are practicing catholics, budhists, muslims whatever, it's not the state's business telling those parents what they can and cannot pass on to their children. It may be an enlightened decision for a parent to allow their child to grow to maturity and let them make up their own mind, but this has to be voluntary on the part of the parent. Anything else is futile in any case. If parents are devout religious people, they are going to pass that on to their offspring no matter what.

However, I don't think the state should be involved in religious education. Let the religious organisations organise their own classes after school or on the weekends if they so wish. I would have no objection to school buildings being rented after hours to these organisations on the same basis that they do for others.

_Redzer_

catallus wrote: »

Religious induction is solely the responsibility and choice of the parents of the child. End of story. There are pagans out there who would like to have social control over people about what they say and think and there's no softer target than religious choice.

For what it's worth I think we should have more religious education, not less. The little heathens need to be turned into responsible adults and the best way is to have the fear of god in them!

Why waste their time learning fairytales when that could be spent learning a foreign language or improving their maths skills?

There's far more practical and beneficial things you could do instead of wasting time with more religious education which shouldn't be in the schools at all.

shruikan2553

I wouldnt ban it but leave it to parents and their religious groups to do the teaching. I find it pointless the state trying to teach it while the parents complain about having to actually go to mass around communions and confirmations.

StudentDad

Banning religious indoctrination is a step too far. I do consider the 'forced' indoctrination of children to be wrong. Just as parents have the right to educate their children in the tenets of their beliefs. Parents who do not follow a particular faith and do not want their children indoctrinated in any faith should have that wish recognised.

For me anyway there should be an absolute separation of church and state and as a follow on from that any school that receives state funding should be neutral in terms of belief.

To my mind religious instruction is a private matter, to be attended to outside school hours, where the school in question receives state funds.

SD

Lapin

Yes.

Arthur Beesley

FunLover18 wrote: »

Article 44, section 2.1 of Bunreacht na hÉireann states



Like the vast majority of Irish children;

1) As a baby I was baptised and I think we can all agree that babies are in no position to understand the word ‘religion’ let alone what it means.
I attended a national school which like most was named after a saint and like most schools it had a Catholic ethos; religion class involved learning prayers, the story of Jesus, etc. There was little taught about other religions.
2) Aged 7/8 (I can’t remember) I received my first communion. This was a school event, a priest would come in every now and again to give special lessons and run through the procedure. I don’t remember ever being offered a choice. At the time I just understood it to be the norm and something all children did.
3) Aged 12 I was confirmed. Again no choice, and was led to believe it was the norm. Given the ethos of the school it was only in secondary school when I became inquisitive about religion and began to question it.

I believe that the induction a person under the age of 16 (age of sexual consent although I wouldn’t object to it being higher) into any religion should be considered unconstitutional given that the Catholic faith has been pressed upon me essentially since birth, and like most persons under 16 I lacked the information, knowledge, or experience to be aware of the full consequences. I wasn’t allowed vote till I was 18 but I’m allowed have my faith chosen for me after only a few months out of the womb.

I’m OK with religious education should be continued in schools provided it is an education of the history and global impact of the various religions and not a sermon. This would also be a huge step forward in the secularisation of our schools in this country.

Thoughts?

To clarify the poll options:
Yes = Yes
Down With This Sort Of Thing = No
Careful Now = Don't Care/Undecided

Before I read all that, can you clarify whether you are an atheist or not?

foggy_lad

Why are poll results hidden OP?

Greenmachine

Should not happen. State should have seized all the church assets when they had a chance. The church should be tenants in their churches and should not own any schools anymore.

hairyprincess

Red Nissan wrote: »

A child. Up to 12 years of age ~ they are legally children.

FYI: Up to 1908 the age of the First Holy Communicant was 12 years OR more, and her parents had also to be practicing Catholics AND pass a few questions from the Bishop who, back then, administered the sacrament.

A child is a child up to the age of 18.

Red Pepper

Brainwashing of children by any organised cult is wrong whether it takes place in schools or elsewhere. Children should be left to be children. A happy wondrous childhood is often the most precious gift we can have - filling that childhood with fears about sin/hell/crucifiction etc is not healthy. Let them figure out the meaning of life and join an organised religion when they are 18, if they feel the need to do so.

PopePalpatine

catallus wrote: »

This is vacuous nonsense; it shows a little bit of wilful blindness to social mores. OP what age are you?

2, 4, 6, 8!

It is time to obfuscate!

Birroc

nlgbbbblth wrote: »

I am not religious but voted no.

It's communion month now. A lot of local businesses in my town have had a lift because of it - barbers, restaurants, clothes shops. Is that a bad thing?

Sure, we should expand the whole cannibalism traditions to keep the economy growing.

Red Nissan

hairyprincess wrote: »

A child is a child up to the age of 18.

No. Common misconception. It is 12 in the Ireland and the UK. Minor is the word you are looking for and it is a legal definition.

For technical reasons, a dependent can be a child until 24 ~ I'd have to look it up but I won't, and after that they are adults. But a child is up to 12 years of age.

Arthur Beesley

Birroc wrote: »

Sure, we should expand the whole cannibalism traditions to keep the economy growing.

Makes sense alright. Not sure reducing the population artificially will help the economy grow though - unless we are eating illegal immigrants and non nationals on the dole or something.

Cazzoenorme

Links234 wrote: »

I'm going to say no, and say that it should be the right of the parents to raise their children within whatever moral or religious framework they want (within reason). I don't necesseraly think it's right to indoctrinate children into a religion, but I don't think it's right to make it illegal or otherwise ban it.

I'm an atheist and repeatedly been called a liberal fascist, but come on... That's a bit much.

Children's right to make their own religous decisions are more important than parents' rights to indocrinate their children. It's immoral, simple as.

Czarcasm

D1stant wrote: »

Yes. I think Richard Dawkins characterises this correctly as child abuse.

Five posts into a discussion on religion and someone throws in Dawkins. It's like the new Godwin (God... win? Hmm). Seriously though, have you no opinion of your own or do you just defer to Dawkins for everything in your life?

I'm fairly sure the irony is lost on you.

(notwithstanding the fact that Dawkins came out with that knowing full well he'd get a reaction. Most people saw it for what it was though - Dick being a dick).

catallus wrote: »

For what it's worth I think we should have more religious education, not less. The little heathens need to be turned into responsible adults and the best way is to have the fear of god in them!

And this sort of crap is just as bad, but I've come to expect nothing less from you catallus tbh. That's why nobody with an ounce of common sense will ever take you seriously. I'm not sure why you specifically picked on people who are pagan either, they're as likely to be secular as anyone else, religious, spiritual or atheist.


To address the question itself -

No OP, I don't think religious practice should be banned. Prohibition has historically been proven to exacerbate an issue rather than quash it. So naturally if you were to ban all forms of religious indoctrination, you'd only drive it underground (think catacombs, and even hedge schools!).

The way to promote secularism is not through promoting anti-theism, but through educating people and allowing them to come to their own conclusions. That way it's less about some "Won't somebody think of the children!" mentality, and more simply allowing people to think for themselves.

Adults pass their values and morals on to the next generation in many more ways than just religion, so if the State were to ban religion, where would you suggest they then stop? Because someone else will want fast food banned, someone else again will want the Irish language banned, etc, etc, so your methods would allow for more State interference in people's lives, at the expense of your civil liberties - the very thing you were advocating for, is now being used against you, or eventually would be anyway.

The State loves nothing more than interfering in the lives of it's citizens, and you'll have just handed them a hammer to use on their wedging their way into people's civil liberties.

Red Nissan

Arthur Beesley wrote: »

Makes sense alright. Not sure reducing the population artificially will help the economy grow though - unless we are eating illegal immigrants and non nationals on the dole or something.

We'd need bigger pots, wouldn't we? That might regenerate the Blacksmith Industry to make giant cauldrons, and we'd need wood of course, or Gas Mark 7 ~ no, we'd better go Eco and chop down a few trees for firewood.

steddyeddy

The old saying goes you learn something new everyday unless you go to a faith school.

Red Nissan

Cazzoenorme wrote: »

Children's right to make their own religous decisions are more important than parents' rights to indocrinate their children. It's immoral, simple as.

Worth saying again.

One's child is one's most precious gift, or should be, most parents only want the best and dote on their children.

Yet, like come on a minute, freedom is the most precious gift one can give one's children.

catallus

I'd be more concerned about those parents who reject religion and deprive their children of the cultural treasure of faith; what kind of future citizens are they raising?

To say that children can choose anything for themselves is just one of the cruder manifestations of this anti-cultural malaise which unbelievers would gleefully foist on our society.

Red Nissan

catallus wrote: »

I'd be more concerned about those parents who reject religion and deprive their children of the cultural treasure of faith; what kind of future citizens are they raising?

To say that children can choose anything for themselves is just one of the cruder manifestations of this anti-cultural malaise which unbelievers would gleefully foist on our society.

Just don't lie about it. It is in fact one of the prime commandments and yet that's the first thing we do, is lie to our kids [children].

As example, I told my own brood, five of them, that Santa was a story and we and people who loved them bought the presents and we put then under the trees and in the socks and so on ~ we had brilliant times.

There is one essential commodity in life, truth. One must set their chikdren on the path of truth.

catallus

Red Nissan wrote: »

Just don't lie about it.....[]

There is one essential commodity in life, truth. One must set their chikdren on the path of truth.

Which makes it all the more important to make sure they are aware of their cultural heritage and know about the things which have fostered our culture for thousands of years, no?

Kiwi in IE

If Parents wish to independently indoctrinate their own children, then that is their business and right to do so. Parents are entitled to bring up their children as they think best, so long as they are doing so within the law, this does not exclude those who believe in fantasies/fairytales/superstitions. On saying that I am eternally grateful that I have patients who are not deluded by religion.

Where I agree with you wholeheartedly, is that it should be completely removed from state schools. Communion/Confirmation being done in school time is bizarre and absurd. Schools are there to educate, not indoctrinate therefore factual information about the beliefs of all religions should be given, as opposed to presenting the superstitious/supernatural beliefs and rituals of one religion as fact. The way the education systems works presently in this country is indoctrination of epic proportions.

kingchess

my youngest daughter is six,anytime she asks me about God I just say some people believe in him and others do not,she learns about different faiths in the gaelscoil and most kids in her class and herself are not getting communion

el pasco

Links234 wrote: »

I'm going to say no, and say that it should be the right of the parents to raise their children within whatever moral or religious framework they want (within reason). I don't necesseraly think it's right to indoctrinate children into a religion, but I don't think it's right to make it illegal or otherwise ban it.

I'm an atheist and repeatedly been called a liberal fascist, but come on... That's a bit much.

Agree with you 100%
Imagine having you're child indoctrinated by Prophet Dawkins hehe!! ,-)
God now that would be hell
Glad to see that there are levelled headed atheists out there

Don't know which is worse a religious fanatic or a atheist fanatic!