https://www.strawpoll.me/45535761
If you're teaching your child that easily falsifiable things are true that's lying IMO.
We have enough people thinking the earth is flat. We need to work in reality if we are to make informed decisions. See the religious reaction to climate change.
Mostly US religious leaders, i.e. conservative politicians and, let's be honest, baptists that are responsible for that.
Plenty of other religious leaders and groups around the world do not deny it and consider it a priority.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Islamic_Declaration_on_Global_Climate_Change
The Catholics had a similar message.
The reactionary elements in the groups you're talking about are based in US politics and are not inherent in religions.
I completely agree there. Same with stuff like Santa Claus. Like it can be fun, and it's expected that they'll realize it's fake before too long, but it still seems wrong. Like, they don't know what kinds of things are plausible in the world. It's your job as a parent to teach them that. Why teach them wrong on purpose?
i work at a daytime summer camp and one of the 6 year olds told another 6 year old that theyll go to hell if they dont believe in god :agony-deep: so im gonna say no for sure
Religion and culture are intertwined. If you believe in a religion then you will inevitably think it is right to pass it on down to the child, same as other aspects of culture and tradition.
Turning this into a morality thing is fucking stupid and probably chauvinistic because it is inevitably going to hurt marginalized more than western ones. Like this is one step from white man's burden if you expand the idea globally.
If there is a reactionary element to a religion/culture/tradition then that part can be educated out without suggesting people are no longer allowed to teach their children things that are important to them.
Religion, especially deeply religious upbringing entwined with culture, are extremely common in the global south.
The idea that certain cultures and religions are damaging was the justification for white man's burden.
People raise their kids to believe what they believe is right. How delusional is this question.
I mean, my parents didn't raise me to believe what they believe is right because they believed different things.
In many interfaith families teaching religion to kids is a touchy topic, I assume. I don't know if my parents ever explicitly discussed this between themselves, but somehow they managed to keep from ever telling me about their respective religious beliefs. I don't think that's something I'd have enough restraint to do.
Less obnoxious and maybe a bit more relevant example is the cast system. Most would agree that it's been a part of Indian culture and Hinduism for quite some time. There was a movement of dalits converting to their own type of Buddhism because they considered Hinduism inherently discriminatory towards them.
Because people don't like religion. In the other thread some people were saying that religion is was an integral part of their culture so you can't pass down that culture without religion, which kinda rubbed me the wrong way. I feel like you can participate in religious cultural practices and without actually being religious.
I mean, where is the barrier here? If you're..for example, Orthodox Jewish, those religious events are at the centre of the culture. You can participate with the events without belief, but unless you're telling your children "this is full of shit but we should do it anyway for...uhh...reasons" (which is kind of defeating the point) they're going to pick up the basics of the theology by osmosis.
That's something many secular jews already do, isn't it? They celebrate holidays, eat traditional food, tell the bible stories, but treat them like stories, myths.
Saw this poll on anarchist twitter. Led to some interesting discussion considering that ideology and values are not much different from religion in this context.
I don't see how it's any different than raising your children with your culture, which I imagine would be uncontroversial here?
I'm a no but I'm admittedly biased because I'm a Lutheran raised atheist. Looking back I didn't believe in that shit since like early childhood and I absolutely hated dragging my ass out of bed on one of my days off.
I dunno if it's right or wrong but I will say that if you don't think your kids will reach whatever eternal truths you believe in, then you must understand on some level that either it's wrong or you're a shit parent
That's a dicey question. People have been saying "just tell your child facts about religion, don't push your opinion", but I feel like it's borderline impossible for a religiously devoted person to talk objectively about their religion, especially to a child.
Sorta, but I mean taking your kids to your religious activities on some level is fine, kinda as social activity, but if they tell you they rather won’t you should accept it (prolly in teen years?). It is kinda passing I guess :thonk:
Yeah, this seems to be a consensus. Don't push your ideas onto your kids. Try to raise a capable person, but a good parent and they'll be able to decide for themselves and make the right decision when they've grown up.
That sounds great, but probably only works out if surrounding culture is conductive to those ideas. Like if you were to raise a kid in my small Russian town, they are probably going to grow up homophobic, unless you do a fair bit of evangelism of opposite ideas.
for some reason I read this as the international society for @kristina consciousness
I just wanted to see the results so I voted yes. Saying that, surprised no one said depends on religion - cause I could imagine not wanting to pass on one of those creepy pedo mormon cult religions and being cool with mainline protestants or whatever. Maybe people were just imagining islamophobic chuds maybe.
On the original twitter poll people were getting angry at 20% going to "depending on religion", imagining it's Christians being bigoted, but knowing leftist twitter I'm willing to bet it's the "Christianity bad, religions of minorities are all right" sentiment.
My hot take:
Religions that are becoming less and less common over time and are at risk of dying out entirely have a moral imperative to preserve their religion, just as much as there is a moral imperative to preserve dying cultures or languages.
I think that it's morally neutral to pass on large religions that are unlikely to go anywhere. Like, if someone figures out a way to make science babies, I feel I don't have a need to pass on Judaism to my hypothetical child, but I don't think it would be morally wrong to pass it on either.
Culture and religion are deeply tied. Trying to let them wither away is just falling for western propaganda that culture shifting to that of the western hegemony is good, and that "modernization" (read: assimilation) is progress.
No internet documentation or Wikipedia article, no matter how detailed will capture a culture in a way that is sufficient, certainly not before we have some sort of sci-fi technology that will allow us to experience that culture in its fullness firsthand. Yes, cultures will evolve and change over time, but they have to be allowed to do that, instead of just rolling over the top of it with copy-pasted American culture like a coat of paint. That happens by teaching children that culture and that religion, and allowing it to evolve over time. It also doesn't mean that the culture is dead, just that it is a living and flourishing culture interacting and learning from other cultures. Cataloguing those changes and evolutions over time is within the realm of the internet, but preserving a comprehensive look or slice of that culture is not.
Allowing a religion's teachings to evolve and shift with good morals requires that the religion continue to exist, which won't really happen if you allow it to wither away into nothingness as a forgotten relic from another time. Of course people will teach their child the nuances. That's how it always happens. Most people, especially the religiously active, won't just hand their kid a holy book and then tell them to listen to everything their parents and religious leader says without question, even when it's nonsensical. That seems to be more of a phenomenon tied to people disengaging from religion on any level other than the aesthetic and for the purposes of controlling others.
Imma be real, it sounds like you had a shitty experience with religion and that sucks. A lot of people have that happen, and it's a significant driver behind the ever increasing atheism of the west. But not everyone has had that experience, and it's not your place to just say "Hey, it's an ethically good thing to just let First Nations religious beliefs, Mandaeism, or Zoroastrianism, for example, die out." It's not just about our knowledge of religious minutia, it's about our understanding of a culture. Religion and culture are deeply, inexorably tied for many people around the world, and you can't just say that your bad experiences with Christianity in a western country are universal and should apply to religions and cultures around the world. Different cultures provide for different perspectives and different experiences, and it would be a true shame to see that disappear more and more over time.
I don't think the Ship of Theseus argument really applies here, and certainly doesn't help your argument. The cells in your body are continually replaced and you are continually changing. Are you not still you despite the fact that all of your cells are routinely replaced? You continue to change, but you are still you.
This withering away overwhelmingly will affect more peripheral and uncommon cultures and religions far more drastically than it will affect those religions and cultures that are more common. It also doesn't result in people leaving religion entirely and becoming an atheist, it far more often results in them converting religions to one that is more popular.
I'm done arguing with you.
