Philosophy Discussion Forums

Grecorivera5150 wrote:Can religion be considered a form of child abuse? The use of fear tactics and imposed guilt on a young mind in a coercive way can have debilitating affects. I was not forced to go to church until I was 11 so I was in the middle of puberty and had already shrugged off Santa Claus the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy by this time and in so doing had developed an intuition towards empiricism. Throw in familial pressure to conform on top of the emotional coercion and you have a potential recipe for massive amounts of existential angst during critical years of human development. ...

My mom liked to go to church on Sunday; dad less enthusiastic. But our religion (Presbyterianism) was never used as a scare tactic. Bible was never forced on us, altho what I knew of it were the fairy tales: Jesus's birth & the Sermon on the Mount.

When the folks were older & we boys were outta the house, mom went to church alone: she joined the choir & she liked certain pastors. We joined her during the Christmas season. Even dad went, altho he remained a reluctant congregant.

Religion as abuse is the domain of the believer, not the religion. Mom liked to listen to people of all faiths: she grew up in a Lutheran orphanage, lived w/ a Jewish woman (when I asked, mom denied she was Jewish, but where would mom've picked up common Yiddish words like "tuchis" & "chutzpah?") as a teen, & invited Jehovah's Witnesses into her home. I never felt abused by going to church & listening to sermons. I know there are people that use their religion as a means of coercion, but I suspect that's a prime example of having other gods before Him.

Apathy wrote:I believe our society is pretty much based on indoctrination.

Yes I agree. We then gradually question more.

-- Updated July 6th, 2012, 8:00 am to add the following --

Ser10Rec1pr0 wrote:My mom liked to go to church on Sunday; dad less enthusiastic. But our religion (Presbyterianism) was never used as a scare tactic. Bible was never forced on us, altho what I knew of it were the fairy tales: Jesus's birth & the Sermon on the Mount.

When the folks were older & we boys were outta the house, mom went to church alone: she joined the choir & she liked certain pastors. We joined her during the Christmas season. Even dad went, altho he remained a reluctant congregant.

Religion as abuse is the domain of the believer, not the religion. Mom liked to listen to people of all faiths: she grew up in a Lutheran orphanage, lived w/ a Jewish woman (when I asked, mom denied she was Jewish, but where would mom've picked up common Yiddish words like "tuchis" & "chutzpah?") as a teen, & invited Jehovah's Witnesses into her home. I never felt abused by going to church & listening to sermons. I know there are people that use their religion as a means of coercion, but I suspect that's a prime example of having other gods before Him.

But it does not affect the children in the same way. So you can have children of similar families going to the same religious school, attending the same churches, but their characters are completely different and their attitudes to life are completely different.

Ecurb wrote:

Xris wrote:Witchcraft is a biblical invention that religous fanatics used against defenseless individuals. Maybe it was just not Christian but only religous fanatics had the inclination to do gods work and kill any suspected of witchcraft.

Communism is not atheism simply because they opposed religion. Even if you used communism as an example it bares no relationship to the harm religion has caused in last two centuries.

Well, Commies did kill 100 million people in the 20th century (acc. Stéphane Courtois et. al. in their widely acclaimed book "The Black Book of Communism".). They make the Inquisitors and the Witch Hunters look like small potatoes, in comparison.

How can witchcraft be "a biblical invention" when witches are decried and killed in most known societies, many of which preceded the Bible, and many others of which had never heard of the Bible when they were practicing witch hunts? The witch-hunting craze of the 16th and 17th centuries was horrific, and a great many people from all walks of life were accused of witchcraft (almost half of those executed were men). If you're interested, read H.R. Trevor-Roper's short book "The European Witch-craze of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries."

Communist dictators did not act in the name of atheism like Napoleon did not invade in the name of Catholicism. Hitler was a Catholic did he kill all those Jews in the name of Christ?


There is no historic reference of witches before christianity implemented the biblical demand. Witches have never existed.

Well, Commies did kill 100 million people in the 20th century (acc. Stéphane Courtois et. al. in their widely acclaimed book "The Black Book of Communism".). They make the Inquisitors and the Witch Hunters look like small potatoes, in comparison.

Stalin didn't have all those people killed because he was an atheist. He had them killed because he was paranoid. He thought people were plotting against him. The Catholic Church's crimes against humanity, in contrast, are well documented & are a direct result of being religious.

Rederic wrote:

Well, Commies did kill 100 million people in the 20th century (acc. Stéphane Courtois et. al. in their widely acclaimed book "The Black Book of Communism".). They make the Inquisitors and the Witch Hunters look like small potatoes, in comparison.

Stalin didn't have all those people killed because he was an atheist. He had them killed because he was paranoid. He thought people were plotting against him. The Catholic Church's crimes against humanity, in contrast, are well documented & are a direct result of being religious.

You can argue the same the other way. Such and such a pope did not kill all those because he was a christian, he did so because he was paranoid.

Bermudj wrote: ...So you can have children of similar families going to the same religious school, attending the same churches, but their characters are completely different and their attitudes to life are completely different.

The same could be said about general education: children affected differently.

It's the emphasis parents place on religion, I think, that affects children. Mom wanted to go to church, but she wasn't adverse to staying home Sunday mornings to do gardening. That's the value of religious indoctrination I got: it was nice but not always necessary.

OTOH, some families insist on church services even when kids or parents are sick. Explicit there is the necessity of going to church; implicit the disregard for the welfare of others. We know only later which of those or whether both became integral to the child's "value system."

Xris wrote:
There is no historic reference of witches before christianity implemented the biblical demand. Witches have never existed.

Actually, witchcraft accusations were common in the pre-Christian world (although, of course, evidence is more scant from 2000+ years ago), and in the more modern non-Christian world. Here's one link http://www.witchcraftandwitches.com/his ... cient.html. For information on witchcraft practices among non-Chirsitians, the classic anthropological text is "Witchcraft among the Azande" by Oxford anthropologist E.E. Evans-Pritchard.

Ecurb wrote:

Xris wrote:
There is no historic reference of witches before christianity implemented the biblical demand. Witches have never existed.

Actually, witchcraft accusations were common in the pre-Christian world (although, of course, evidence is more scant from 2000+ years ago), and in the more modern non-Christian world. Here's one link http://www.witchcraftandwitches.com/his ... cient.html. For information on witchcraft practices among non-Chirsitians, the classic anthropological text is "Witchcraft among the Azande" by Oxford anthropologist E.E. Evans-Pritchard.

Simple propaganda from a silly link that has no academic credibility. Witches in Britain are never mentioned till the crazed christian priests demanded they be searched out and murdered. Even the Romans never mentioned them in all the twisted and bigoted views of the Celtic tribes they conquered. The Celts had priests who administered at rituals and probably did all the normal magical tricks to convince their flock but no witches. Witches in Britain originated from the bibles warning and recommendation. To claim otherwise is academic fraud.

Ser10Rec1pr0 wrote:

Bermudj wrote: ...So you can have children of similar families going to the same religious school, attending the same churches, but their characters are completely different and their attitudes to life are completely different.

..... The same could be said about general education: children affected differently. .....

And can we change the effect the general education, including religion had on us? Or are some of us so completely brainwashed that we are not able to do this?

Jjpregler wrote:

But then we need to further clarify what indoctrination is good or bad. Is indoctrination of the capitalist system abuse? Or indoctrination of democracy? Or is it only indoctrination of things that the majority believes to be wrong, or a certain subset of deciders?

I submit that indoctrination is not the content but the method of teaching which tends to be abusive of the child's trust in hat adults tell him about the world. I further submit that education aims to teach a child how to be an independent thinker with the maximum of freedom, whereas indoctrination blanks off possibilities for exploration.

While it would be very difficult to legislate what parents do and say to a child, teaching professions can and are legislated about both as to methods and also as to curriculums.

Belinda wrote: While it would be very difficult to legislate what parents do and say to a child, teaching professions can and are legislated about both as to methods and also as to curriculums.

My teaching experience is mainly at university level, so it may not count as much, but I can assure you that at this level very little legislation and overseeing takes place.

I take your point Bermudj. However schools are subject to legislation regarding methods and curriculums. The American Constitution moreover, doesn't it legislate for separation of church and state and that this be carried into schools?

Belinda wrote:I take your point Bermudj. However schools are subject to legislation regarding methods and curriculums. The American Constitution moreover, doesn't it legislate for separation of church and state and that this be carried into schools?

Yes, but indoctrination occurs in the US schools for a number of other topics. Especially on topics such as capitalism and democracy as just a few. A plain and simple definition of indoctrination is the teaching of a doctrine as better than other choices. So for a history teacher to teach 6th graders the benefits of democracy is indoctrination. So one cannot make a blanket statement that indoctrination is wrong. In some cases a very strong argument can be made for indoctrination actually being necessary.

So one cannot call indoctrination child abuse. Which therefore, makes calling indoctrination of religious ideas child abuse harder, as the only difference then is being indoctrination of an idea that is wrong or that a certain goup of people do not believe the idea. This then would entail that one can argue that indoctrination of democratic society as wrong and therefore child abuse.

So for a history teacher to teach 6th graders the benefits of democracy is indoctrination

Not if they're taught about other forms of government also.

Indoctrination is teaching a subject and denying one the freedom to learn or think otherwise. If one takes a class on boxing one would not expect to be taught wrestling. One is free to take another course to learn wrestling. So, if one belongs to a certain religious organization, they will not usually be taught another religion but will state their religion is the right one, which may discourage one from other choices. Indoctrination is the inability by restraint of another to pursue and change ones mind at any given time. Indoctrination may use guilt, fear, physical restraint, and is without the possibility to choose something different. In this context religion and other organizations can be abusive.