Parents' rights vs childrens' rights: where do we draw the line, and why?
It is generally accepted that we want to raise our children to be moral, well-adjusted, contributing members of society. It is not difficult to fathom why this is. However, the processes that different parents use to achieve this goal vary widely across the world, and even within particular societies. All of these different processes, of course, provide different results. Many modern societies have come to a general consensus on the different factors that contribute to the proper upbringing of a child: basic shelter and food, a secular education (math, science, history, literature, and other subjects that do not deal directly with any particular worldview), nutrition and physical health, ethical guidance, and religious instruction, to name a few. I would like to examine this last factor and open up for discussion the appropriateness of childhood indoctrination.
Blood tends to boil when such topics are discussed, and for good reason. For many of us, our children are the world, if not more. To challenge one's judgment on the proper way to raise her child is to challenge her reason, her integrity, and her capability (why is this the case? I can think of a reason or two). I do not take such feelings lightly, but I do not believe that these emotions should limit our unbiased inquiry into the subject, for it is in defense of the health of these children that I wish to discuss this topic, and any argument with such intentions I see as no less than noble, and I am certain that both sides of such a discussion will have the same intentions. I shall try my best to avoid offending, and I ask that you try your best to not be offended.
Young children are extremely impressionable. They are programmed, for good reason, to accept anything and everything that is expressed to them by their parents. This allows for easy inculcation of concepts essential for life (you have to eat your vegetables, don't jump off the house, etc). It also allows for the introduction of supernatural beliefs.
The problem that I see with the latter concepts, but not for the former, is that most of these beliefs are not obviously beneficial, and many are quite harmful to some children. Take as an example teenage suicide bombers, female circumcision, etc. Perhaps your religious beliefs are not as harmful, but how can you, as a practicing member of that religion, look at such things objectively? Are you sure that all the doctrines you are introducing to your children are harmless? I bet there are people of other faiths (or of no faith) who will disagree with you, and can provide evidence to support that opinion.
Do we not have the right to raise our children the way we want to? The answer to this question should be obvious: a resounding "NO!" To give in to such a thought process is what allows people to train their children to be walking bombs, to sabotage their secular education, to destroy their objective faculties, and to cripple their sense of right and wrong. Put simply, if it comes down to a conflict between the rights of our children to avoid damaging religious doctrines, and the right of parents to expound their religion, then we should err on the side of the safety of our children. This may be difficult to hear, as we all hold dear the founding principles of modern democracy, but we need a standardized process that eliminates the destructive habits of all religions, and this is to protect the rights of children, perhaps at the expense of yours. Does this not interfere with our concept of the freedom of religion? I would answer that it does not, as you, as an adult, are free to practice whatever religion you choose, and that your children are, for the first time, able to reap the fruits of that modern concept, without fear of ostracization from the family and the effects of societal punishments. Indeed, they may be the first generation to realize those benefits.
So, how do we decide what to do? Do we just carry on the way we have, self-assured that we are teaching our children the right things? That is a dangerous path, and it should be apparent that such a thing would require investigation. I propose that we cut religion out of our children's lives entirely, at least until it is determined that all of the effects of each religion are harmless. Let them make up their own minds, when they are capable of doing so. I don't think this will have a negative effect on religion either. Those who accept the religion will do so under the full power of their reason, who can defend their faith with reason and poise, and cannot be accused of being puppets of the worldview of their parents. What stronger adherents could a god want? We have seen the beginnings of this transition in the ethical progress our societies have made since the overwhelming prevalence of theocracies in the Middle Ages. I feel this will lead to the most rational possible majority of those who are religious, and will reduce the atrocities committed in the name of god, or other supernatural agents.
