Children's Rights?

[~kitty~]

I know I'm not a child anymore, but I am also not the youngest in my family.

Article 14 (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion): Children have the right to think and believe what they want and to practise their religion, as long as they are not stopping other people from enjoying their rights. (http://www.unicef.org/crc/files/Rights_overview.pdf)

According to this article, wouldn't it mean that telling a child they have to attend church, religious gatherings, or anything relating the religious practices is illegal? I want to know some opinions on the extent to which a parent can make a child do and think what they want. When does it stop another person from enjoying their rights?

[Without A Contraceptive]

sorry mayne/anyone that believes american law should enable kids (anyone who isn't completely financially independent regardless of age) to disobey their parents is just plain wrong

parents have the right to force a kid to go to church, they can force their beliefs on their children, and make them do anything. if you aren't financially independent you do not have any right to disobey your parents. in fact, id go as far as to say that you do not have any rights at all

[Emithith]

sorry mayne/anyone that believes american law should enable kids (anyone who isn't completely financially independent regardless of age) to disobey their parents is just plain wrong

parents have the right to force a kid to go to church, they can force their beliefs on their children, and make them do anything. if you aren't financially independent you do not have any right to disobey your parents. in fact, id go as far as to say that you do not have any rights at all

Are you saying that they have no right to complain if someone is sexually/emotionally/physically abusing them? Are you saying that the caregiver has every right to strike a child when it is more convenient for them, because they can't handle one more thing?

You have a right to believe what you want, but in my books, (and alot of others, too) believe that's extremely wrong.

I believe that you shouldn't force your religion on others, because that's not really being good to your religion, no? Take the Christians (Or the Catholics? I can't remember who was trying to convert), they tried to convert the Pagans, and they did succeed, but now they're forming little circles, and they feel just a little resentful. :\

Just sayin', everyone-- even children-- has a right to their beliefs about god. Whether they believe he even exists, or if there is more than one, or what ever.

[cry4eternity]

Unfortunately, I think WAC is right. It seems you only took the first line of the article and drew a premature conclusion.


The Convention respects the rights and duties of parents in providing religious and moral guidance to their children. Religious groups around the world have expressed support for the Convention, which indicates that it in no way prevents parents from bringing their children up within a religious tradition.


Here it looks like it says that parents can still do whatever the crap they want, within the law (no abuse, must provide food and shelter, etc.).


At the same time, the Convention recognizes that as children mature and are able to form their own views, some may question certain religious practices or cultural traditions. The Convention supports children's right to examine their beliefs, but it also states that their right to express their beliefs implies respect for the rights and freedoms of others.


As children mature and can form their own views, they are allowed to question religious practices and cultural traditions [but parents are still allowed to make them participate]. The only thing that appears to be prohibited is punishing children who question or shy away from the religion or other cultural practices in which they were brought up, as well as punishing them for expressing their new views. That's what I got from this.

[Kilroy_x]

In some contexts church and religion are directly abusive and children shouldn't be exposed to them. Make the category as broad as "religious practices" frankly ought to yield all sorts of illegalities. Stuff like this (http://www.reddit.com/r/troubledteens/comments/hk0xy/a_gay_teen_describes_her_experience_at_a_utah/) shouldn't just be illegal, the perpetrators should be lined up against a wall.

[MopeyJoe]

Stuff like this (http://www.reddit.com/r/troubledteens/comments/hk0xy/a_gay_teen_describes_her_experience_at_a_utah/)

The moment I saw "God didn't intend this" proved my thoughts correct - Just because someone has a different sexuality makes certain people think they are more evil than Hitler ever was.

By the way, defenders of the bible, you should know that your bible talks about owning and beating slaves.

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

Also, the beating...

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

And don't say "Oh, well that was in the old book. It doesn't say that in the new book," because they just calls slaves "servants" in the newer books....

But that was just a rant. WAC, what you said basically told me that you think children are slaves and should be treated as such.

[ChesterDalton]

All parents pass on their values to their children. If you had information that you honestly belived could save your childs life would you tell them or let them find that information out by themselves when it could be too late.

[MopeyJoe]

All parents pass on their values to their children. If you had information that you honestly belived could save your childs life would you tell them or let them find that information out by themselves when it could be too late.

There are some things that parents should tell children, while there are some things that parents should just keep quiet about.

Just because a parent can pass their values to their children, doesn't mean they should.

[Cavernio]

No, the article only says that children are allowed to express to their parents their reasons for not wanting to go to church, and that the parents must listen, not say that their parents cannot force them to go.

[Without A Contraceptive]

But that was just a rant. WAC, what you said basically told me that you think children are slaves and should be treated as such.

ya because that is basically what you and all other "children" are.

i've been lucky enough to have rational parents who are open-minded and allow me (and encourage me) to develop my own thoughts, opinions, etc.. however, if you are unfortunate enough to have parents who force you to attend church and other things like that, too bad. you don't really have a choice in the matter.

[Izzy]

I've had this discussion with someone before and I believe that forcing religion upon children impedes on their freedom of religion. You can believe whatever you want, but forcing it upon your kids should be illegal.

[MopeyJoe]

ya because that is basically what you and all other "children" are.

i've been lucky enough to have rational parents who are open-minded and allow me (and encourage me) to develop my own thoughts, opinions, etc.. however, if you are unfortunate enough to have parents who force you to attend church and other things like that, too bad. you don't really have a choice in the matter.

Oh ok, so when I have children and they decide not to do something I told them to do, I will take a metal rod and beat them with it until they agree to do it.

No, you don't do that. That's what you do to slaves, I've never seen a 7 year-old be told to make dinner for their parents or clean the dishes afterward or else they will get beat.

[~kitty~]

No, the article only says that children are allowed to express to their parents their reasons for not wanting to go to church, and that the parents must listen, not say that their parents cannot force them to go.
" Moreover, the Convention recognizes that the level of a child’s
participation in decisions must be appropriate to the child's level of maturity. Children's ability to form and
express their opinions develops with age and most adults will naturally give the views of teenagers
greater weight than those of a preschooler, whether in family, legal or administrative decision"

[Cavernio]

Right kitty.

"Just because a parent can pass their values to their children, doesn't mean they should."

A parent will pass their values to their child whether they want to or not, just as society will. That's just how things work. Regardless though, if your values are actually values, you will want your child to have them as well, and unless your values go against societal values, then there's no reason to not teach your kid your own values.

[MopeyJoe]

where did i ever say anything about parents beating their kids mopey?

You didn't say parents beat their children but...

in fact, id go as far as to say that you do not have any rights at all

You are basically saying, parents have the right to beat their children because children have no rights, and parents just choose not to beat their kids.

Oh yes, and I do listen to my mom all the time. She never forces her religion on me (well, she does partially, but I don't like Christianity so I don't listen to her then), and I just do what she wants me to do around the house, and my life is just fine.

And WAC, what if a parent told their kid to go do drugs, mug people, and rape women? Would you think it would be bad if a child said no to their parents then?

[MaxGhost]

This is more related to the religion part of this conversation than the children part.
I was raised by catholic parents, who tried to force it on me as much as they could.
I also later chose to go to a catholic high-school because they actually had half-decent computer science classes. The religion class curriculum was still decided by nuns. They decided to change our 11th grade class, which was supposed to be our world religions class that year into some more catholic BS. Our 12th teacher thought that was ridiculous and she found a way to teach us world religions the next year while still following the curriculum, and I'm really glad. I was pretty outraged when I found out I'd have this crap forced on me because of my choice of having a better education.
We also had school masses, and they forced students to go. If you refused you'd be sent to the principal's office...

[perkeyone]

i saw a video made by richard dawkins on this issue, as soon as i find it again ill link it.

indoctrination is deplorable.
some restrictions should be made to prevent parents from forcing children to participate in religious activities.
it should be considered a form of child abuse.
i imagine threatening a child with hell causes psychological damage.

forcing religion on children is almost as bad as forcing sex upon them.
in both cases the child does not have the capacity to understand what they are being forced to do.

everyone is born atheist.

EDIT: links
4 parts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_fLPYSW1hg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3lwa8faV9s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhbSVZ-XK9k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KNk6wNQjSU
3 parts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdZ_iA8fP_A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC1YFP19rCc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOBTtdcIITU

[Cavernio]

"everyone is born atheist."

We're also born not knowing up from down, left from right, without being able to see, not being able to feed ourselves, etc.

Semantic arguing aside though, I disagree with the idea. I could totally see a child or adult coming up with the idea of God and rituals of their own accord. Where did the idea of religion come from in the first place?

[perkeyone]

the difference between the fact that children cant feed themselves and cant understand religion is that one of those things is immediately important to the child's survival.

a parent does not need to foist religion on a child during their impressionable youth... the same that they are taught to believe in the easter bunny and santa, only the idea or religion is never redacted.

teaching the difference between left and right is put off until the child is capable of understanding, yet religion is not.

[devonin]

A good rule from parents that -will- be enforced:

If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all.

[perkeyone]

@devonin, i hope youre not suggesting that religion should "immune to criticism", as dawkins put it, simply because people might be offended.

[Cavernio]

"only the idea or religion is never redacted."

But millions of people were raised with religious beliefs and now don't believe them, so clearly this is not the case. And many people find religion only well after they're adults. I find it hard to believe that you've never had the thrilling opportunity to discuss with someone, either you parents or someone else, the possibility of God existing. I'd imagine that christian pastors/priests etc. come across the question on a regular basis, probably especially by the younger people in their community.

The ~real~ difference b/w santa and god is that one of them is clearly impossible, (unless santa was god or something.)

It seems to me that your problem with religion is not that it isn't looked at critically, but that it can never fully be disagreed with, even though it could easily be hogwash, and that to give such a value to a child is very harmful, seeing as you're comparing it child sex.

As to a child's 'understanding' of something...well, if you've read what I posted about child sex (awhile ago now), I think that children are pretty good at understanding a lot more than we give them credit for. If they weren't, then things like sexually abusing a child (without physically harming them in any way, shape or form), would have no impact on a child.

And as to the argument about teaching right and left until the child understands, how do you know when a child understands the difference? We talk to kids and kids see things that they may not understand immediately in their lives all the time. That really isn't a good argument.

It seems like you have personal feelings attached to this perkeyone, but you are generalizing them such that your argument is weakened. Either that, or you are assuming things are worse for kids then they are.

I personally was raised Catholic. It indeed was a very large part of my life for the majority of it. However, I still don't feel like I was...abused because of it.
Your arguments would make very much sense to me, personally, if they were more about the level of 'indoctrination' that a child would undergo. However, as it stands, to essentially outlaw teaching religion to kids is something that morally seems wrong to me.

[Cavernio]

@devonin, i hope youre not suggesting that religion should "immune to criticism", as dawkins put it, simply because people might be offended.

For all we know he deleted the post he was talking about.

It also makes me think he has kids...:-p

[MopeyJoe]

Cavernio, you are right about how we cannot feed ourselves when we are born, but perkeyone is also right on how children are born Atheist. No one is born and immediately thinks "Ok, so I'm a Christan."

Think about this, what if we never had technology and we had to survive by hunting and gathering? The mother would take care of the child until it can fend for itself. I don't think along the line somewhere the kids are going to think "You know, I think I should make a ritual for this mystical being in the sky."

That side note aside, I do think forcing religion on a child should be illegal because, let's face it, Christans tell their kids if they don't pray to god, they are going to hell. That is known as Fear Tactics - People scaring others into doing what they want, which can also be considered a threat.

And the fear tactic continues throughout the entire life of the believers with all the sins in the Christan religion. I've figured out that almost anything could be considered a sin in the Christan religion. For example (this is a bit branching out), me sitting on this computer typing this up would be considered a sin in the Amish eyes, and people being baptized as a baby is could also be considered a sin in the Amish eyes. Hasn't anyone learned about the Amish?

That is why I said "No." I refused to believe such nonsense. Am I really expected to believe that if I believe and pray long enough, that I could throw mountains into the ocean? Because that's what it says in the Bible if you didn't know.

[Cavernio]

But the priests I listened to only use the bible as very, very loose backbones to their preachings. I never grew up afraid of the devil or hell, but of the beauty of believing in god and all the good things god is.

No, at some point i don't think someone would ever think "I'm going to pray to this mystical god in the sky", but people ask themselves things like 'Why do I exist?', and 'How can I feel all these things?', or 'Why is it, if I'm in a group of people who are doing the same thing, I can feel connected to them even though we are clear, separate individuals?'
The...specifics that a religion bring to religiousness are clearly man-made. But the religion itself..the belief in something larger than you, the faith in thinking that there is more out there than just yourself...that is what I'm thinking about. Like, humanity creates art, and it's supposed to evoke emotions and such, but all that is clearly an aside of the art itself. The art is just a medium for those emotions, and sometimes not everyone will perceive the art in the same way. That is what ritual is. It is the best way we have of communicating the other stuff.

Really, if you think about it, why do we have this romantic idea of love? Is love 'real'? We can't see it, we just feel it, and we're sometimes disappointed by it. Does that mean you think we shouldn't be taught that love exists? Do you think that romantic movies shouldn't exist, or stories in general exist, because they will just show the exciting parts of life, giving a very false view of what life is?

perkeye's argument could be used for saying that parents shouldn't let their kids watch romantic movies because they are unrealistic. That is the basis for their argument, (at least what they've posted that I can tell), that people believe something more exists, like true love or God, therefore, because it is unproven and likely does not exist, it should not be taught because the parents will never sit them down to say, 'Look, I live with your father/mother, but I don't love them like in the movies, yet I still believe in love."

[MopeyJoe]

but people ask themselves things like 'Why do I exist?'

So you think people invented religion to find an easy answer of why people exist, why they have emotions, and why they share similar interests with others? Because scientists have a theory about where people come from, yet you religious fanatics refuse to believe it and therefore is still a theory, even though there is so much evidence to back-up that theory. It's just that one tiny bit of argument that people carry with them, and it is this:

Discussion between a man of science and a man of Christianity.
Science: "We humans descend from apes."
Christianity: "No, you are wrong."
Science: "How so?"
Christianity: "God created Man."

And that's the only argument. I'm surprised to see that people haven't abandoned religion yet with all the evidence in science's favor and absolutely no evidence or even a clear explanation of how we got here from religion. Did god one theoretical day say, "You know what? I'm going to create a living thing called 'Humans' and just let them roam free across this newly created planet," and then snapped his fingers and poof there we are?

There's no explanation, and there never will be.

Wait, how did this thread go from "Children should have rights to their own religion" to "Is religion right or wrong"?

[devonin]

@devonin, i hope youre not suggesting that religion should "immune to criticism", as dawkins put it, simply because people might be offended.

My post had nothing to do with the subject, but instead had to do with the attitude of some posters. Keep it civil.

[G.S.M]

Children have rights, most just don't know that they do.

I am mostly basing this off my childhood and what I think about some of this stuff...

I do think the topic is silly, we know whats bad and whats good. Should parents teach their religion to children? Its their right. Are they allowed to force it on their children? Yes they are (hell most children choose their own path later, then they can decide if they want to keep the religion they were taught or not). Who are you to tell other parents how they raise their children? Yes there are bad parents, in which case the child may run away, or think its normal, or someone else finds out and the parents lose their child.

Don't be silly about this... of course child sex/beating/etc is wrong, I thought this was the critical thinking forum? Anyways the parents CAN beat their children but its just a matter of time before someone finds it out. Or maybe no one does and the kid will be emotionally scarred for the future? Who knows... i don't think it is illegal in some countries though... not sure.

No matter how hard a parent tries they will NEVER control their child fully. Controlling a child is wrong, I agree, however not every single child will be brought up the same way. Welcome to planet Earth. I myself was brought up with fantastic parents! my grandma was religious, but she is no nut. Never followed that from her. My mom? no religion, she never talked about anything religious, she believes people have the right to believe anything.

Oh yeah. There is also the influence from other family members.. like grandparents! Mine were inspiring. My grandma grew up in Germany in the ww2 era separated from her parents for many years and eventually reunited with them. She became a strong woman from that and I respected it. That helped me become the strong person I am today - because it inspired me. My grandpa is also a strong person, very smart, was in the Korean war (EDIT: oops put in the wrong war LOL, fixed), was a sheriff for a long time, lots of medals, built things (sheds and other cool things). Now that is inspiring indeed. Mom is also strong.

AS for me I mostly learned good moral choices and thinking from the world around me. My parents/grandparents helped with that a lot. I have seen the bad, but that is not getting me down.

Getting offtrack here but you get my point. Every childhood is different, so I cannot speak for others... just what I think about it.

Wait, how did this thread go from "Children should have rights to their own religion" to "Is religion right or wrong"?

I understand that the bible teaches good moral lessons, but it is an old dead thing (in my eyes). Religion seems silly to me. I also don't like being labeled atheist or anything they come up with... I honestly just don't care because its not going away any time soon.

let me contradict myself for a minute...

I don't think there needs to be a higher power for us to exist. Seriously? I believe in myself... I believe in Humans. We are capable of anything.

no tldr for you

[MopeyJoe]

I understand that the bible teaches good moral lessons, but it is an old dead thing (in my eyes). Religion seems silly to me.

I completely agree. The thing is, I wouldn't have such a problem with religion if people didn't constantly nag about it every time someone says something against it. It's like they don't know people have the right to choose what they want to believe.

Although, I would still have a problem with it if people didn't nag about it because some of the stuff in the bible is just stupid.

[Cavernio]

So you think people invented religion to find an easy answer of why people exist, why they have emotions, and why they share similar interests with others? Because scientists have a theory about where people come from, yet you religious fanatics refuse to believe it and therefore is still a theory, even though there is so much evidence to back-up that theory. It's just that one tiny bit of argument that people carry with them, and it is this:

Discussion between a man of science and a man of Christianity.
Science: "We humans descend from apes."
Christianity: "No, you are wrong."
Science: "How so?"
Christianity: "God created Man."

And that's the only argument. I'm surprised to see that people haven't abandoned religion yet with all the evidence in science's favor and absolutely no evidence or even a clear explanation of how we got here from religion. Did god one theoretical day say, "You know what? I'm going to create a living thing called 'Humans' and just let them roam free across this newly created planet," and then snapped his fingers and poof there we are?

There's no explanation, and there never will be.

Wait, how did this thread go from "Children should have rights to their own religion" to "Is religion right or wrong"?

This post of yours changed the topic. I also do not believe in god or some other religion, so clearly I'm not a religious fanatic. I don't even think buddhism is a good 'religion'. I also never refuted anything science says.

But yes, I do believe people invented religion to explain such things like our emotions and the world, and still exists even for some researchers and scientists because even if you believe everything science says, it still doesn't answer things like why or how does energy exist, or what existence of anything really is. You can still fully believe in evolution and cause and effect and science and yet still believe god exists. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

But all that is really an aside to the topic about whether or not parents should be allowed to pass on religion to their kids. Perk's argument is that religion is unnatural and harmful to children, both of which I don't see as true. And as to natural, I wouldn't exactly call science natural.

A much stronger argument against being allowed to teach kids religion is to say that it by nature breeds animosity between differing religions, and therefore is always going to cause strife and war and the like. But if using that argument you could then use it argue against allowing more than a single mainstream culture to exist.

[~kitty~]

I kind of feel like lots of these posts are either, "Let's just conform to what the government considers right or wrong." which just kind of says we can keep the things the way they are, this doesn't need to be improved. The family is where lots of things start and why lots of corruption exists, and even if it may not necessarily be illegal, why shouldn't it be? However, the other side is also biased and thinks a bit too freely because this is "America" or that we should just be able to do whatever we want and not be guided to some healthy moral development. I was away for a week so I didn't see these posts until now.