Ping Atheists/Agnostics: How do you handle religion/church with your kids?
 

My son is 4 years old now, and at some point I'll have to figure out whether I need to sack up and go to church for his (and my baby daughter's) "benefit". While I personally am not religious, I want my kids to be able to make that decision for themselves. In other words, I don't want to force my lack of religious beliefs down the kid's throats.

What do you guys do? So far, we simply haven't gone to church. Taking the kids there would, in a very real way, feel like lying to them, since I would potentially be projecting religious beliefs to my kids that aren't actually there. Like I said, I ultimately want the kids to come to their own conclusions sometime down the road, rather than creating little clones who parrot my own beliefs. Can folks who are a little farther down this road chime in with how they handled the situation?

I'll be in a similar situation someday soon, so I'm interested about this as well.

And not to threadjack, but maybe to thread-add: how should something like baptism be handled? My wife wants our kids baptised. I'm not really against it, but I'm not necessarily for it either. Also, I wasn't baptised and she says I should be at the same time (so that I'll be in heaven with my kids or something). I'm not so sure I agree, yet it seems stupid to get in a fight over someone pouring some water on my head.

My wife believes in God, but doesn't attend church, and in general is not a fan of most organized religion. We simply haven't had them baptised, even though her father is a Reverend.

If she had pushed for them at all, I would have gone along with it.

We're not religious either. I dunno, the way I see it is, if they don't ask, don't bother. Our oldest who is 8 didn't start asking until a couple of years ago. We don't go into specifics or anything, just basic stuff and we re-iterate that there are different beliefs out there.

I can only tell you what my parents did since they wanted the same thing (for me and my siblings to come to our own conclusions). They never took us to church, but when I asked to go to church with my friends, they let me. In other words, they didn't take me, but they didn't keep me from it either. Religion has simply never been something my family discussed all that much. I'm sure I asked them at some point when I was kid what they believed, but I don't remember. All I know is that my parents and siblings believe in God, or at least something like God, but do not go to church.

I don't have kids, but I would think you don't take them unless they ask. I'm not sure why you would take them just to not force your lack of beliefs on them. Religion is out there. If they get curious, take them to a church of their choosing.

Both my girls have been baptized and we'll be talking about church soon enough. Both my wife and I are Catholic but I've only gone to church when absolutely necessary (weddings, funerals, etc.) while she will attend from time to time when her mother is in town or when we're visiting her. I know she wants us to start taking the girls when they are older and I'm sure I'll go along with it, like a good CATHOLIC husband/father should.

Note: Please don't mix up the last statement...I'm not saying you are a bad husband/father if you don't take your kids to church but you would be viewed to be a less than stellar Catholic in the Church's eyes.

If they want to go to church with a friend, let them. I say let them find out for themselves what the actual church experience is. When I was a kid, it didn't take me long at all to figure out that it was not for me.

As for questions they may ask, just be honest.

I have gone through a loop here. I had Mormonism foced on me by a step father and while I have a respect for the religion, being made to go as a child pushed me completely away from any religion, to where I was basically agnostic. I am now fairly religious and attend church on a semi-regular basis and as far as my Kids go, I have two that are agnostic and two that are semi-religious and the other one is more religious than any of us.

I think the key is we talked about it and encouraged all the kids to explore different beliefs and and make their own decisions. At the age your kids are, if they express an interest I would totally encourage them to check it out, then as they get older discuss the different types of beliefs with them and encourage them to explore multiple options, including atheism as extreme as that sounds and go with what makes them feel comfortable.

I find the 'go with a friend' answer a little weird. If you are open enough to let your child decide for themselves, shouldn't you be open enough to check it out with them? Shouldn't you want to be there with them and to talk about the experience with them afterward? I think I'd be a little leery of letting some other parent take my place during a very influential and important moment in my child's life.

I did it when I was a kid. It wasn't really a big deal to me. The typical situation was, "Spend the night at a friends house, but they go to church the next day." So, if I wanted to spend the night, that was the deal, unless my mom would come by and pick me up before they went.

I would expect that he already knows his beliefs and doesn't need to "check it out."

Sorry, not what I meant to convey. I meant just go to support the child's "checking out" of the church. Just because you walk in the door doesn't mean you have to be there as a follower/potential follower (same deal with going to a funeral/wedding etc).

I went through this same process recently. I'm an atheist and my wife was raised Lutheran. She wanted to give our daughter a Christian upbringing, something that I was not totally opposed to even if it does not match my belief structure.

I told her that I would support going to church with her and our daughter, although I had a few ground rules:
1.) We found a church together where we could both be happy with the current pastor/reverend/whatever.
2.) If I was going to go through with this process, I did not want us to be a family that only attended Christmas and Easter. If that was going to be the case, why bother in the first place.
3.) Some flexibility about attending Saturday services if they wanted me along, as I have a semi-regular Sunday morning basketball game.

We ended up joining a United Methodist church (not a Lutheran one), based in part on my wife's aunt being a long-time member. My wife likes knowing someone in the congregation when she attends and it is nice for her to have another connection point to her family. It is also good that my daughter gets a little more exposure to some of her extended family.

OK, back to one of the core points from the original post. I'm certainly not wild about the idea of "lying" to my daughter, but that really is not an issue right now since she has not yet turned 2. I expect that I probably won't rush to tell her that I do not believe in a supreme being, creation, etc. But when the direct question comes, I don't think that I'll duck it either.

Don't have kids, but can talk about my experience. My mum is Agnostic, but religion was never really a topic of conversation for us, one way or the other. We had scripture at school and I went to church youth group for a few years as well, though the former was forced on me and the latter was more to meet girls than anything else. :)

My advice, don't feel like you have to take your kid to church for their benefit. They are going to be exposed to religion soon enough anyhow, and if that ignites a curiosity in them and they want to go, then take them.

As an agnostic and a UU, my family and I go to church every Sunday. My daughter gets Religious Education and my wife and I watch the sermon then teah RE. For UUs, RE consists mostly of educating the kids on our core principles - the inherent worth and dignity of every human, etc - as well as learning about all of the world's religions - Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, etc. It's kind of a grab bag. The important part of the RE program - especially in our church, is that we present everything as food for thought and let the kids make up their own minds. If my daughter asked me if I believe in God, I'd tell her "No." and then ask her what she thought and why, and enforce in her that her beliefs are valid and important no matter what they are.

However the whole "going to church" experience is really about the community we are a part of. Our closest friends are from our church and we love the opportunity to get together every week, hear a good thought-provoking sermon, and then hang out and talk.

So, short story long, you should always be honest with your kids, never be afraid to say "I don't know" and make sure they feel empowered to believe what they feel is right.

I don't really feel a child can make an educated decision like that so young in life. I would probably just educate them on the different beliefs that are out there. Let them know why people go to Church, what they believe, and why you don't. Let them figure it out for themselves as they grow older.

I really don't think you make those decisions till you are in your late teens. I came from a family that was mixed on religion. They did send me to CCD, made sure I had my first holy communion and we went to church on occasion. By the time I was in my teens, I was more or less an agnostic and made that decision on my own. I doubt they really believe in God but we still celebrate Christmas and other holidays.

I've debated for awhile whether my parents were right or wrong on their decision to send me to classes. On one hand it was never something that interested me while on the other it was a life experience. I personally don't think you can go wrong either way as long as you aren't forcing beliefs on your kids and giving them the freedom to ask questions and make up their own minds.

I have a son and two step sons. In my youth I attended church regularly with my Grandmother, but my parents rarely went. I learned the bible and made my own decisions in life; culminating in a very agnostic/atheistic view. I don't go to church and do not make my sons go to church. They choose on their own. The oldest is now engaged to a girl that is going to school to be a pastor. The second really likes the church teen activities, but doesn't like being pushed by his brother and future sister in law about religion. The youngest goes with friends occasionally, but has already stated that he is probably agnostic (at 16, much younger than when I figured it out). I tell him I feel the same and every person should make their own choices.

Bottom line is I don't pressure them into any view, and they make their own decisions fairly well.

I can't quite understand your logic, kodos. You don't wish to force your religious views on your son - which is fine - but you would allow others to force theirs on him. A church deliberately creates the environment and atmosphere to reinforce faith. It will probably do a much better job of indoctrination than you could ever manage :)

The problem for agnostics and atheists is that the religious can't help forcing their views on others. Sometimes it's incidental such as Christmas, Easter etc though I find these sufficiently secular not to cause any problems - indeed Christmas trees and easter eggs are as common in my home as any Christian's. Sometimes it's evangelical when the religious think they're doing us a favour by "bringing us to god". Sometimes it's sociological when you may be picked out as in some way deviant. Sometimes, particularly in America, through politics as Christians, in particular, try to enshrine their views in legislation.

From your use of the word "benefit" I suspect you are succumbing to these influences, particularly the third.

I have a daughter. I would rather she be left alone until she has the ability to understand the difference between fact and faith. But that isn't possible. She goes to an Anglican school (a difficult decision for me) because the state schools are poor academically, badly funded and have disciplinary problems but the only affordable private schools are religious schools supported by government grants. A clear case of promoting religion through politics. So my daughter does have some religious indoctrination in her educational life and I allow myself a mild opposition to compensate - she knows mummy and daddy "don't believe in god" but that's about as far as it goes.

She's just turned 14, has no current interest in religion, and I'll leave it until she shows some interest before explaining why.

By allowing your children to go to church at an early age you are making indoctrination easy for the church. Kids want to be liked by their family and friends and it will be that much easier for them to be influenced. I feel especially strong on the topic of baptism because they can get that done at any point in their life. Why not let them make that decision for themselves when the are old enough to actually believe or not? I wish my parents never baptized me and they thought they were doing the "right" thing. I've taken the stance with my parents and my in-laws that they are not to bring up the topic of religion at all to my children until they are old enough to semi decipher the information. Right now my kids just want to make everyone happy and could be very easily manipulated. My kids can choose to believe what they want but since they would believe in the easter bunny and santa clause at this point, now is not that time.

Edit: I want to add just one thing. My number one goal here is to protect their minds and keep them as free as possible. I don't rant to them at all about how god doesn't exist or anything. The topic is simply not discussed and that is incredibly important for an open mind IMO.

I'm not sure if a believe in God, but my wife does. She has taken my 6 year old daughter to church a few times and my daughter has enjoyed it. She has asked to go back a few times.

My daughter also says prayers every night. She specifically asked my wife to teach her how to pray. So, before bed every night she prays.

I don't have any issues with it. I can't see any negative in it.

Some time before they go off to school / They ask, I'll be explaining what religion is, etc. The Freedom From Religion Foundation has good info if you want to educate your children on religion, though the atheist/agnostic viewpoint is represented. I married someone that shares my belief system, and luckily don't have to have that conversation with my wife about raising our children with mixed belief systems. I'd recommend whatever you elect to teach your children, make sure your spouse is on board.

"Benefit" signified my own belief that any gain was dubious from my standpoint. :)

And I definitely would fight any indoctrination. Nothing annoys me quicker than somebody trying to shove religion down somebody else's throat. I feel a bit for my nephew and niece who get Catholicism shoved down their throats at every turn by their mother.

But that's what a church does, Kodos. I think even Christians will agree with me that going to church isn't some meaningless Sunday morning outing. It instills religious feeling, promotes the teaching of that particular religion and generally develops, confirms and reinforces religious belief. It's not something you do just because there's nothing on tv.

I know people don't like the word "indoctrination" but if you take a child with a malleable mind into an environment in which religious faith is assumed and presented as truth then it will "indoctrinate" that young mind. Until that young mind is capable of scepticism, of recognising there's a difference between faith and fact then, for me, it should be left alone.

I've always felt that the only defensible "good" from organized religion is the standardization of positive morals. So saying, there is no need for the former to possess the latter.

If you're good parents and you've raised your children well, my perspective is that the value of religion is nearly non-existent. As noted by others, church is simply there to propagandize a certain faith-based viewpoint. I have zero inclination to expose my children to that without a compelling reason.

If either my son or my daughter expressed interest in religion, I'd be more than happy to educate them on the history and beliefs of any of the major religions that I'm familiar with, and more than happy to provide them resources to learn about ones that I'm not. At that point, if they wanted to immerse themselves in a specific religion or religions, I certainly wouldn't oppose it. So saying, I would be very surprised if that ever occurred. I was raised in a very open, inquisitive and academic home and I like to think I foster the same thing now...and frankly there's never been a "need" (if that's the right word) for organized religion.

I think this would partly depend on the church and pastor. There are huge variations on how 'religious' a church can be (as dumb as that sounds, hopefully it makes sense).

That said, that's why I find the 'go with a friend' response some people gave earlier strange. I'd want to be there to see what was going on, and perhaps provide a counter to any over the top 'indoctrination' that might occur.

I think the other positive role religion/church can play is the idea of community and helpfulness.

Of course, there are a lot of negatives as well (hypocrisy being paramount), but you can't win 'em all I guess :P

And that happens when? Around 13 or some teen year at least? I'm not sure that's such a huge problem. I guess I would think that if Kodos is worried about letting his kids have the choice more available, he might as well take them to church, since it's more likely that they will get fed up with church and not go once they grow up instead of becoming interested in religion after not having attended at all (so that way, there's less chance that Kodos is the one making the decision for them).

Glad to see I am not the only one struggling with this.

For me, it transcends religion. Our church is a positive environment for my kids. Good families, good programs, good messages. The more that they interact with other kids and adults in those kinds of environments, the better.

I'm an agnostic now but I'm really happy I had the chance to be involved so much in a church as a kid. I never felt anybody, including my parents, were forcing anything. It was a family activity that I participated in, like any other family activity.

Some people talk about church like it's some kind of cult, and maybe those churches are out there, but it certainly wasn't my experience (Lutheran). Actually, the thing I remember most is talking about the Celtics and Bruins after church with the adults, and feeling all positive and grown up that I was "accepted" into those kind of conversations with them. Looking back, the place was filled with really, really good people, and I definitely think that benefited me.

And then there was church summer camp.....At a time when high school wasn't really clicking for me socially - somehow spending the summer in the woods with teenage Scandinavian Lutheran girls did.

It also gave me a respect for organized religion and people who are involved in them, even if I'm no longer involved. I think that's a big one. You see a lot of otherwise decent people spitting on other people's faiths (including at FOFC), and I guess it's just a fear/parnoia of the unknown, I don't think they see how it looks. I think it's good for kids to experience different things to help foster that respect in others.

If I ever had kids, I'd definitely raise them Lutheran.

Subby, I'm with you. For the most part, the family and community environment created by whatever faith you choose to follow can reinforce the values and beliefs you are trying to instill in your children. Make no mistake, I would like my children to get started on, what I think, is the right path and when they are old enough and mature enough to question it, then, by all means, they are free to make their own choices.

For those who insist on wanting to keep their child's mind "free" or "open" until they are old enough to decide...I'm curious, what do you guys do/talk about with your child during all these formidable years...presumably, right now? I would assume TV/movies/books/video games/other kids/other adults/etc. would be things you would want to keep your child away from because they could be swayed by anyone of those factors to form an opinion without having all the facts or the cognitive maturity to make an intelligent decision on their own, no? I mean, how do kids find out about stuff if they aren't exposed to it by their parents? How will Little Johnny decide if he likes music if he isn't exposed to it? How will Little Sally decide if she likes dancing if she isn't exposed to it?

I've never understood the indoctrination/forcing beliefs argument. It just doesn't make any sense. No matter what you do, you are indoctrinating/forcing some kind of belief on your child. Whether that is the belief in a specific religion, a belief that all religions are hokey, a belief that some religions have some truth or a belief that the child should pick and choose, the parent is indoctrinating the child and forcing a belief on that child. Just as a child may be forced to go to church/synagogue/mosque so too may a child be prevented from going to church/synagogue/mosque as well. Of course, once the child gets to a certain age (the number is up for debate), then that child can begin to think about what they have been indoctrinated into and that belief system is no longer indoctrination.

So you're going to be forcing a belief on your child no matter what. No need to feel guilty about it. It's up to you to weigh the merits of what you are indoctrinating that child into.

I don't hardly ever get caught up in the religious debates on the forums here as I honestly feel each person is allowed to choose what they will. I have mentioned before that I am Christian and I go to church semi-regularly (2 times a month on average). Coming from the opposite side from what seems like most of the posters in this thread however, this is not necessarily an easy answer for me either.

Just like other parents who might not share my beliefs, I do want my children to make their decisions for themselves. In the end the decision I made was to not really bring my girls to church at a super early age (as it ends up just being daycare for them anyways). My oldest child is 8 (soon to be 9) and I'm thinking that I want to start talking to her more about religion, what I believe and what others believe, and start having her to go with me at least occasionally to Church. I want her to make the decision for herself if she wants to go or not at some point just as my parents did with me (I did not go to church regularly as a child).

The reason I quoted Subby's post is one of the biggest reasons that I think I am close to ready for my oldest daughter to start going occasionally. I honestly am worried about the world, I worry about who my child might associate with, who they might go out on weekends with as she gets older, etc. I can do what I can to try to educate her to make smart choices and not do things that will bring her trouble, but I think I will feel better if some of her choices will end up being to go on a weekend ski trip with a church youth group rather than hang out at the mall and smoke or get in trouble at an early age.

I fully understand that there are still possibilities of getting in trouble on church trips (they are still pre-teens/teenagers/young adults), and likewise there are other ways to bring positive groups or organizations into my kids lives as well. I'm trying to encourage those as well (my oldest daughter played soccer last year and just started softball this year as an example).

I just wanted to provide my parenting choices as somewhat of a reverse perspective from others in this thread. Just for compare and contrast purposes.

I'm not opposed to teaching other views when asked. While the religious community may be full of nice people, it is irrelevant to me. They get plenty of time to play with others without that setting. Its one thing to teach your children to root for the Cleveland Browns but it's a whole other ballgame when it comes to something that may spend a lifetime believing and fearing. If Grandma teaches a child the "right" belief structure, don't you think your child will be more inclined to believe that too, regardless of facts? Same rule applies to their friends. They are not allowed to go to church unless they can tell me why they would like to go, such as "I would like to learn about this." I will teach my kids facts and logic and if that leads them to religion(unlikely) than so be it. I feel bad enough tricking them into believing in Santa Claus.
Let me ask you this? Do you take your child to the services of every kind of religion? Whats the harm? They all have the same values. Every time I hear this argument it makes my skin crawl.

You are not indoctrinating your child into non-belief if religion is a non issue in your house. If you never talk about basketball you are not indoctrinating your child's views one way or another. They will form their own opinion when exposed to it.

When are they going to be exposed to it, from others, through school? Wouldn't you, as the parent, want to be involved in that process too?

I was definitely "indoctrinated" into being a baseball fan when I was kid from my father, and I'm glad I was. Does anyone become baseball fans as adults?

Being indoctrinated into a religion I guess is different. But how do you explain all these people that went to church as a kid and now don't anymore?

They will definitely be exposed to it. Its discussed on television and during the holidays. There is a difference between being exposed and being indoctrinated. If they see and ask, "Who is God?" I will answer that some cultures believe in a creator ,etc. I will supply examples such as the christian god, zeus etc. If they ask what I believe, I will tell them.

Your last question I think proves my point. You are more inclined to believe something and have it feel natural for you if you are around it a lot as a child and have positive experiences with it. That leads them one way or another. I think there is a lot more at stake with matters such as religion. In a similar vein, most racist people are racist because they learned their prejudices from their parents. It feels natural for them to think themselves superior because that's how they grew up. People aren't born racist. No, I will not show my kids how to be a a racist so they can see the other side of that way of thinking. If they want to be racist later, fine, but I won't show them. I'm not saying racism and religion are the same thing, just that they are both seriously life altering ways of thinking.

Our case is weird because my wife is a non-practicing Jew and I'm a flaming, burn-in-Hell atheist. Our older daughter is 9 and has already gone through a faze of interest in religion. My wife was great, reading to her from an illustrated children's bible, both old and new testament stories. My job is astronomy and earth sciences. We answer any questions she throws at us (I even had to tell her what a homosexual was recently), although we've danced around the tougher sex questions.
I'll admit that I don't mind going to protestant services in the States. Truth be told, I wish you could somehow simulate the atmosphere of spirituality without the basic assumptions about Christ and a personal god.
In short, Kudos, I don't think religious teaching is like learning to speak or catch a ball where you're going to be stunted if you're not introduced to it at a young age.

You might be interested in this:

Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations

It's something I looked up when I was having similar questions to those in this thread when my wife was pregnant. A few years later I'm still not sure what avenue I'm going to take with her, but I will take an active role when I determine what that is...I'd rather introduce her to this subject than have others do it for her.

To use your basketball example here. If you never talk about basketball, you are indoctrinating your child into the belief that basketball is not important. Indoctrination is unavoidable if the child is not old enough to be able to begin to understand the implications of the choices a parent is making. Because you are not talking about basketball, the child is already forming an opinion about basketball, an opinion that basketball isn't worthy of attention. The same could be said of religion. Failing to talk about religion is indoctrinating the child into a belief that religion is not worthy of attention.

Parenting a young child is unavoidably about indoctrination into how that child should behave. Even if that parent never pays any attention to that child, the child is being indoctrinated into a certain perspective on parent-child relationships.

Children can obviously make their own decisions as they get older, but the indoctrination/belief forcing question has no bearing here. Every parent has to do it simply by virtue of being a parent. Again, it's a matter of what the parent is indoctrinating the child with and not indoctrination.

I think there is a big difference between teaching them about religion and teaching them to be religious.

+1

yep.

my wife is Catholic. I'm undeclared. She had stopped going to church before we meant, but now that the kids are of that age, we've started going and my oldest is going to Sunday school. We don't go, um, religiously, but often enough to expose the kids to it. I think it's healthy for them to have some exposure to religion.

As for me, it's not a big deal. It's not my favorite way to spend an hour and a half, but it's not a total loss - I usually enjoy the sermons (with the exception of the one jarring anti-abortion rant) and I've even taken the kids a couple of times alone when the wife is working. Overall the experience has been quite positive.

I will get the name of some of the books my wife has read to our kids. Some of them have stories from various religions/myths from all over the world. It's an easy way to expose your children to religious stories, plus you can easily see how so many of them are almost exact copies of each other (including the Christian ones too).

Just say no, Kodos. Just say no.

I don't know if this question was directed at johnny, but that's actually our plan. The daycare she went to this past summer took the kids to Baptist bible classes so we let her go. Her friend from Houston invited her to her church (which is a Christian church) and we went (*she* was invited but I felt the need to go). So our plan is to get her exposed to different services little by little. It'll be good exposure for me as well since I've only attended Catholic church. I've also read them a kid's Jehovah Witness bible "stories".

So yes, you're right, there's no harm in getting them exposed to different religions/belief systems, as long as it's not overwhelming them.

As I started this indoctrination thing let me explain what I mean.

I'm not saying that a four year old will be indoctrinated into the specific dogma of that religion. He clearly will have little understanding of the sermon. He won't fully grasp even the words of the hymns. But what he will pick up, because all these big, important adults around him are singing his praises, is that God exists. God is real. God is the creature that we should put at the centre of our lives.

The child will be indoctrinated into the belief that God exists.

Now the difference between agnostics/atheists and religious people is not the morality, it's not the dogma specific to any particular religion. It's specifically about whether God exists. Whether there is sufficient evidence to cause us to believe - accept to be the absolute truth - that God exists.

As an agnostic I argue that, by 21st century standards, there is simply no such evidence. I do not argue that there is evidence he doesn't - I'm not sure what form such evidence could take - but I argue that there is nothing to cause me to accept the existence of a supernatural being that created this universe and is compassionate and apparently deeply interested in what I do or think. Even if there is a creator, what appalling arrogance to believe that this creator of a universe of 100 billion galaxies of a 100-400 billion stars, stretching across billions of light years and been around for 13.7 billion years should have any interest at all in me let alone what I do and think from day to day..

As the philosopher and Christian theologian Kierkegaard said (I paraphrase): to believe in such an entity requires a leap of faith. There's no logic can justify it. It has to be a leap of faith.

But he was wrong. Far better than a leap of faith is to establish it in a child's mind when he's too young to understand things like logic, evidence and faith. Because once you have it there and you reinforce it over the next 10 years or so then it will, in the majority of cases, stay for the rest of his life.

I know. I've been there, I've bought the tshirt etc. When you come to have your doubts then discarding the dogma of a particular faith isn't difficult - there are numerous dogmas and it's obvious not all can be right so why this one - but dropping God is hell (if you'll pardon the description). It's hell because it requires enormous confidence, arrogance perhaps, to believe that you know better than the billions that do believe in God and have done for centuries. That alone can cause many to turn away from turning away. There can be enormous guilt involved with rejecting what has been the basis of morality for centuries.

There can be enormous emotional strain in dropping belief in God particularly when there isn't anything obvious to take its place. But as he matures and begins to understand how humans lie and spin and deceive and self-deceive and believe what benefits them and the only evidence we have is from humans themselves then the doubts will kick in. And in some cases the doubts will overwhelm the beliefs. What's more this emotional turmoil will often come when he's struggling with the turmoil of becoming his own adult.

So that's what you're setting up for the child when you allow him to be indoctrinated into the belief that God exists. And, though there are many inescapable such influences in society at large, there's nothing quite like church and numerous worshiping adults to convince the young malleable mind.

Now, as has been said a couple of times in earlier posts, you can't avoid the child receiving some form of information on the existence/non-existence of God. For myself I inform my daughter that there are people who believe and some that don't and that at some time in the future she will probably decide for herself which group to join. She has no interest whatsoever at the moment but when she does I'll certainly give her the reasons for my own position but hopefully by then she'll have the ability to come to her own conclusions and I will not feel that I'm abusing our relationship by giving her my opinion.

I really question whether that's true. Maybe it depends on the religion. I've never once been to church when I wasn't living at home, with my parents. That seems to be true of most people I know (until they have kids, and they generally go back).

You say "you've been there" - but you're an agnostic.

It seems like people are avoiding just saying the obvious - "I don't like church and I don't want to bring my kids there." There's no shame in that. "I don't want them to be stuck with a religion for life when it's not their choice" just seems like an unnecessary justification. Most kids rebel against their youth in some capacity. Pastors' daughters are notorious in some circles.......

I see this like Ajaxab does. It just seems like an illogical paranoia.

Precisely. I was brought up as a Christian but went through the process I describe to become an agnostic. It was a long painful period.


Or how seriously you take parenting.

Most parents will try to give their children a relatively stress-free childhood but eventually they'll leave and life will throw some curve balls at them. How successfully they deal with those will depend on their belief system or model of the world. Giving them the tools, as it were, to deal successfully is what this is all about.

I think this tends to be way overblown. I certainly agree that many people build a stronger sense of community and charity through churches, but there are many other avenues to achieve those same things without a specific faith-based worldview permeating the proceedings.

Our local community has fairly regular picnics and seasonal gatherings. My wife seems to have made most of her "recent" good friends (meaning not those from school age) through kid's events (swimming, gymnastics, t-ball, etc).

To me, many things can serve as the backdrop, if you will, of community-building and/or -enhancing. Churches, sports, secular gatherings, etc.

As for charity/helpfulness...though those certainly are encouraged by many faith-based organizations, there are again a large number of secular organizations that encourage and enable the same things. The vast majority of the people I know who donate money or volunteer their time do so through or to a non-religious organization (though to be fair, the majority of the people I tend to affiliate with are in the "never" to "rarely" on the church attendance scale).

I agree, there are lots of avenues to "get your community on", I was just trying to highlight that churches are often quite good at this. I'm not a church-goer by any means, and if someone wants to start a thread called "lets list all the crappy things about churches" I'll be in it like a dirty shirt, but credit where credit is due.

The problem with meeting friends at church is that the people you meet there are usually religious.

*shudder*

I know you're making a joke, but surprisingly, this isn't really true, at least with protestant Christian churches I've been too.

It kind of makes me a little sad that church has become this scary boogeyman to people that they're afraid to expose their kids to, that it's this cult that will brainwash a child into a lifetime theology that they can't possibily escape. Alternative community "groups" are great but it doesn't seem like they've filled the gap of the (non-religious) role churches have played in this country.

I actually think this is one of the larger problems in society at large in a lot of countries, within England we got away with a lacklustre Church attendance because the traditional socialisation in England is pub based rather than Church based (this is the case in a lot of European societies imho - incidentally imho Germany has the BEST pubs by far these days).

Recent changes in England banning smoking and suchlike from pubs is threatening to fracture society and further reduce social integration as people living in the same region spend less and less time together.

This is a real problem as its been shown in society time and time again that when people don't feel a part of the community they are less inclined to obey its rules and live up to its expectations (it also explains why kids today don't worry about doing things in front of 'grown ups' - simply put they know the chance of mom/dad hearing about it is slim because no one communicates like they used to).

So in summary - every country needs more pubs, simple as that ;)

If that is the case (the people who go to church are not religious) then it certainly explains our difference of opinion. It has been said, though I suspect it wasn't intended to be taken seriously, that to be a member of the Church of England (Anglican) you don't even have to believe in God. Perhaps that reinforces your point.


There's no "scary boogeyman" about it - it is quite rational for parents not to take their children to institutions that promote religious views that they don't hold. Nothing wrong in going to the Bingo or quiz nights but the Sunday service, regardless of whether the audience is religious or not, tends to be religious. I suspect that's true even in America ;)

Suchlike? Not drinking surely? ;)

:D

SI

I'll drink to that!!

Speaking of which:



Ah, the nostalgia :)

Haven't read the thread, just offering an answer to the question - I plan on telling my kids why I am not religious, once they're old enough to understand the thought behind it. Up to that point, I won't reject if my grandparents want to take them to church, or if they have some friends that want to take them along, etc. It will be up to the kid to make the decision at that age. I don't think a young mind can scope the reality of religion, so I don't want it to be a serious issue until later in life. If they want to do it, cool.

At that point, I will explain what I think about religion as defined by man and faith as defined by ones choice to believe in a higher power. I'll let my kid know I will support their decision to either be religious or not be, but that I personally am set in my ways as I have already experienced what it feels like to be "in love with God" and I don't think of the experience as a wholly negative one, but I learned the difference between religion and faith during that part of my life and that is why I am the way I am.

I'll also encourage my kid to learn all they can about every religion if they take an interest in it. I believe that is really the most important part of it all, because there have been many gods throughout history and man has worshiped them with the same fervent attitude through all their different forms. Surely there is a valuable lesson to be learned there.

Nice! I'm thirsty now...

Ya, that's totally rational. I think it's just the fear that a child's mind and soul will be turned over permantly to a religion if they're exposed to church that's a little bit of parnoia, but it's really a meaningless practical distinction.

If you do not think children are indoctrinated into religion by having them attend early in their lives, I suspect you are wrong. James Dobson has written at length about how you must get children into Christianity early in their lives before they have a chance to make up their own minds.

So how do explain all the people that went to church as kids and aren't religious as adults? Or all the "born again" Christans who "find God" as adults? There are a HUGE number of these people.

There's a number of different ways to think about church. I don't see church as something you "make up your mind about" in any deeper sense that you make up your mind about anything. I wouldn't be worried, if I took my kid to a baseball game, that he might become some super-baseball freak. I guess I just don't see religion as "heavy" as others.

It's a family activity, that I would take part in if I had a family, but not if I didn't have kids.

I think there's a lot to appreciate about Christianity, and church, without having to "own it all" spirituality or in a faith sense. That was the norm to me growing up, the super-religious were unusual, even in the church context. Organized religion isn't a matter of black and white, where you either have to jump all in or be afraid of its influence on your kids.

Or all the people who "find" religion while at college or later in life?

A better question would be, why would someone like James Dobson write about how important it is to get your kids into the church early in their lives? I recall it being in the book Dr. James Dobson on Parenting.

I'm not going to argue about all the problems with religion in this thread. Those are the kinds of things that people have to open their own mind up to. These answers are found all around in today's world, as well as throughout history. There's no point in trying to convince anybody. People have to want to find their own answers.

The point with children is not to give them one version of religion as "the truth." Give them all religion and see what they make of it.

Getting kids into church early in their lives helps ground them on a lot of things. There are a lot of good life lessons in the Bible, for example, that are completely separate from the religious aspects of it.

Sure, I think that would be beneficial for a kid, to learn about all religions, maybe even take in a few various services across the spectrum. Not because religion is the "truth", but because it's a part of society, and it's good to have respect for others in your society.

As someone else said, when you completely ignore religion though, you ARE make a pretty significant statement about it. There's nothing wrong with that, if that's how you want to indoctrinate your kid, but its certainly not a neutral stance that leaves someone to make up their own mind.

While not appropriate for this thread, I would love for you to share some of these with me.

Well, we can start with the Ten Commandmants for one. For the most part there's a prety good set of "be nice to others" stories in there.

I believe there are at least 4 of them that have nothing to do with being nice to anybody, except perhaps "God."

That Jesus guy is a pretty decent role model, if you're into love, peace, forgiveness, treating people equally, etc.

EDITED to remove my comments since this isn't what this thread was meant to be about. Start a new one.

I didn't claim that Jesus didn't do some "tricks" too, not sure what your point is, we're just answering your question.

Religion can be so many different things. It can be a Pixar movie, the secrets of life and the universe, a place to talk about sports, an excuse to drink beer with girls in the woods, an academic study, WHATEVER. The fact that something that be so rich, so complicated, mean so much to different people means it matters, somehow, to society as a whole. A kid with no knowledge or exposure of that, with no opportunity to experience those complications, that critical thought, IMO, is being deprived a little.

My first experiences with critical thought were questioning things in the bible. It was enlightening. It blew my young mind. I wondered what else out there should be questioned. I don't know that you can teach a kid to question, they just have to find those questions on their own.

The point still, is that it is about exposing them to all religious stories. They will see the pattern pretty quickly when the same sort of stories repeat themselves over and over, and be able to derive the useful lessons while dispensing with the dogma.

And six of them that don't. Yes, there is lots of the Bible that is highly religious, but lots that is just generally a good idea. The rest provides a framework for getting those lessons across.

Anyway, just answering the question of "why would you want young children involved in a church?". Agreed that this sidetrack is not quite appropriate, so I'll stop posting as well. FWIW, I was raised a Catholic, am currently a non-fervent believer in God (I'm not quite sure I know what form he takes, or exactly how happy with that belief I am), am not a big fan of organized religion (I believe most are far more interested in political issues than true religious issues), but my kids attend a Christian Church to help them with some of this grounding, hence my reply here. We picked a Church whose doctrine includes open discussion of the Bible and religious issues and admits openly that there is no one right way aside from their hard-and-fast Christian belief in Jesus Christ. I was very pleased to find a Church that wanted to DISCUSS things rather than TELL things.

There is no example you could give me that they couldn't get in some other aspect of life, except only for the belief in God. The grounding is done by the parents and the example they set, not the church.

Each person has their own story. I convinced my kids that Santa Claus is real. They will believe it until they figure out the truth for themselves. That doesn't exactly make it ok. I have set the default belief and every year we reinforce that by singing songs and giving presents. You can call it harmless but that is a form of dogma. That is the indoctrination. God is on a much larger scale and it takes alot more to "shake" the belief. I was religious as a child and the habits of believing made it impossible to have an open mind. I always had a bias of believing because my parents did, and their parents did and so on and so on. Noone gave me the slightest idea that something might be different or there might be another explanation. How is that fair? Do you take your child to atheist/secular get-togethers? These events exist but I doubt you would find many "open-minded" Christians there.

There is nothing wrong with some of the basic rules most religions teach, but attending church isn't necessary, as I can tell them the same things their pastor/priest would... without some of the hocus pocus I don't want them exposed to.

Not necessarily "permanently" but it can cause them significant mental trauma to break away and, for some, it's too much trauma and for others simply too much effort.

You say elsewhere there are many people who change their position later in life but there are many, many more who stick with the religion they receive as a child. A part of the reason Christianity predominates in America and Islam in Saudi Arabia is the messages we convey to children when they're open to persuasion.

We're too close to the religious messages, too familiar with them to see their true significance. Let me put forward a different scenario which makes it clearer:

There's a community hall down the road. It has a big placard outside that reads "Jesus Sucks!" or "God is Dead!". They hold meetings every Sunday morning in which songs are sung celebrating the "fact" that there is no God. A sermon is preached praising the freedom of a life without God. The congregation cry "God doesn't exist" instead of "Amen" or "God is great".

They run the best kids soccer team in the country, feed vagrants at their soup kitchen, run the best fish bakes and the people who go are very friendly and likable.

But is there a single Christian reading this that would take his child to these Sunday morning meetings? Are you being paranoid if think your son's malleable, welcoming mind might be significantly affected by these atheist messages and would far rather he didn't experience them?

There is a difference of course. It is that we've become so blase about religious messages bombarding our senses 24/7 we think we're immune. But any PR man will tell you that subliminal messages are the best and messages that bypass the conscious and work on the subconscious are the most effective. By taking his child to a church service the agnostic/atheist is allowing these messages to be reinforced by an organisation dedicated to and well practised at promoting these messages, that creates an atmosphere emphasising the glory of God and is populated almost exclusively by people who hold the same religious views.

If a father wants his son to make his own, deliberate decision on what belief system he will eventually subscribe to he will do his best to protect the child from propaganda of any sort and certainly not deliberately subject him to messages of one kind, particularly a kind he himself finds unacceptable.

If the kids keep pressing the issue, you need to be firm and say something like "For the love of God, we're not going to church!", or "Jesus Christ! Give it a rest already!"

I prefer "Jesus Fucking Christ," but when I say that in public I get dirty looks.

What doesn't make sense about this position is that not deliberately subjecting the child to messages of one kind is still deliberately subjecting the child to a message. If you protect the child from propaganda, to use your term, you are subjecting the child to a message that this propaganda is either unimportant or so dangerously effective. It's still deliberately subjecting the child to one message whether it's the propaganda of a religious message or the apparent open-mindedness of a non-religious message.

One cannot take the mythical high-road of open-mindedness when this position is just as rigid as that of a religious position.

I don't disagree with you about the message at all. But I don't claim that I'm not giving a message. Indeed, I don't hide it. To my daughter (and my suggestion to kodos to his son) it is:

a) some people believe in God, some don't
b) I prefer that you make up your own mind when you are capable with a minimum of influence from those with committed views who would influence you while you have no ability to determine the value of those influences

Bearing that second in mind I suggest that it is imminently sensible to keep her away from church where she would clearly be significantly influenced in the direction of religion.


Unimportant? No! Dangerously effective? Yes. And I would add "unsubstantiated". Because of all three I see it as my responsibility to protect her from "propaganda" while she has no ability to recognise it for what it is.


Your post is thought provoking - even caused me to remove my first reactions - but where I disagree with you most is in not granting any difference of value to the messages. The "make your own mind up" is not "apparent" open-mindedness when compared with "this is the way it is". I believe the message to be less controlling, less dictatorial and, yes, more open-minded. I value that more.

I'm still not seeing viability of the argument here. You are one who has a committed view to agnosticism/atheism and you are, intentionally or otherwise, influencing your daughter while she has no ability to determine the value of your influence. There seems to be a contradiction between word and action with this position.


Just to clarify, I don't see the value of the messages as on the same plane. I just see their means of communication as equal. We all constantly communicate messages to our kids so this constant communication is where the equality lies. The respective messages have different values though.

So messages that are less controlling, less dictatorial and more open-minded have more value. And that's the way it is. ;)

I think this is where I hope that my daughter's experience will be different from your childhood. I'll be the parent that does open the door to something besides what she is learning at church. Which in turn may open the door to the critical thought concept that molson raised a few posts earlier.

I do not see the idea of introducing church to a child as a huge negative. I certainly felt differently 10-15 years ago when I thought about it in the hypothetical, but I guess my anti-religious zeal has dulled over time. I'm now more willing to see some of the good in the message, even if I reject the larger premise.

I would hope that whatever church your daughter goes to would open the door to questions. It's unfortunate that too many, from what I've heard, reject questions and blame them on a lack of faith or some other nonsense.

The problem for me was always the lack of answers. Once you get to the point where the answers are variations on "God works in mysterious ways", you know you've hit a dead end.

Our society is such that religious messages from both sides will impinge on her life and most of those will be pro-religion. That can't be avoided in our "Christian" society. However I can minimise the number by not inviting them in unnecessarily by having her attend church. And that's what I'm arguing - don't expose the child to unnecessary messages by attending a place dedicated to communicating these messages.


I'm puzzled by your idea of church, ajaxab. They do not "open the door to questions". They promote faith and dogma which are the very antithesis of "open to questions".

I don't see this, generally a child's experience in school, especially high school and then into college certainly tends to not be pro-religion.

Going to a church service is a lesson on how to properly be religious. Sure they have functions that are nice but those are supplied by baseball, clubs, and other similar activities devoid of religion. Anyone who views them as unequal has an obvious bias.

You can still teach you child what christians (or whatever religion) believe without allowing them to attend church and being subjected to their dogmatic point of view. Its the point of view that is important here. You suggest that we saying religion is unimportant if we don't teach it to them. You just don't like that we don't teach it your way and call it silly illogical paranoia. We are teaching it to them, just not brainwashing them from birth.

Perhaps things are different in Australia, but I tend to think the US is a Christian/pro-religion nation in name only. I flip on my television and more than 90% of the content never references God or any religious idea. I go through the educational system and have to take a religious studies course in order to be exposed to any religious idea. I drive down the street and see building after building devoted to all things other than religion. In this sense, I'm puzzled that having a kid spend less than 2% of their week in a religious service somehow dominates the 98% of their week when they are not subject to religious messages. It could be our different national contexts, but I think we disagree about the nature of society.



I think one can still be open to questions and promote faith and dogma. I have heard of churches where any questioning of the faith is avoided and/or outright rejected. No questions are ever allowed. The person asking the question is left feeling rejected as well. On the contrary, I have also heard of churches that invite any and all questions. The church's answers will be based on their faith and, in many cases non-negotiable (it's a system of belief after all), but they do not reject the question or the questioner.

Absolutely.


Please define dogmatic.


Absolutely, that's what I'm saying. And that's what I'm saying you are saying. My parents never said anything about the sport of cricket while I was growing up. I subsequently thought it wasn't important. I have since learned otherwise, but for the longest time I didn't have a fleeting thought about cricket. The same would seem to apply to religious discussion as well. If you never discuss Shintoism, your child will grow up believing Shintoism is not important. That child would not be able to conceptualize how it could ever be important.


I think you are confusing me with someone else in this thread as I never used the phrase "silly illogical paranoia." Is a commitment to open-mindedness illogical? Sure, but it's hardly paranoia.


Brainwashing is not a helpful term to use. It implies a lack of choice. Clearly, there have been those raised in religious homes who have become agnostics/atheists and vice-versa. Brainwashing suggests that once a person is on the track, there's no getting off.

Even if we do go with this term in the way you are using it (a usage I don't find helpful), we're all being brainwashed into something. The religious are brainwashing their kids about religious ideas. You are brainwashing your kids about whatever you might be teaching them about world religions. The critical issue is what you will brainwash your kids into and not that one can somehow avoid brainwashing.

That's my big point for Kodos to take from this thread. If he decides he doesn't want to take his daughter to a religious service because he finds religion problematic or potentially damaging, so be it. That is logically consistent. But if he decides he doesn't want to take his daughter to a religious service out of a concern for keeping her open-minded, that does not make sense and that concern should be set aside.

I'm beginning to understand where you're coming from. But you're missing a crucial point: the child is four years old

You and I may go to church to widen our horizons. We understand the difference between faith and fact. We understand debate. Contradicting argument doesn't confuse us.

But the 4 year old does not understand any of these. Whatever he hears, he hears as fact. Father Christmas, God, the Tooth Fairy, angels - tell him they're real and they'll all be fact to him. So, when you give him faith he will see fact. That's why you're indoctrinating (inculcating doctrine into) him because he will take what is faith to be fact. You're putting faith/doctrine into him when he's incapable of understanding what faith is.

And that's the whole point of so many of these arguments: leave the child alone until he is capable of distinguishing faith from fact, of weighing up contrary arguments and of making his own mind up about what is acceptable to him and what is not. Do not expose him to things he cannot understand - or at least, no more than cannot be avoided - until he can understand.


essentially dogmatic is the very opposite of open-minded :)

Do you have similar concerns about all of the other non-facts out there? Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy, Cartoons, TV, Children's Books, etc?

I'm sure you have some concerns about those things - but are you worried your son will grow up thinking Cartoons are Santa Clause are real if he's "indoctrinated" now, and that his little mind will just never be able to change his mind on those things?

To a certain degree, yes. And I think many parents wonder if it's a good idea but tend to go along with it because of the enormous pleasure it gives the kids.


No. First because these myths are so ridiculous that the child comes to realise they're not true well before the parents fess up. Second because half the world does not continue to tell them it's true as is the case with religious ideas. It would be impossible for them to continue to believe in Father Christmas but they can quite well continue to believe the religious ideas and will find many others who do so also and will support them in their beliefs.

I see your point, but I don't think it's possible to "leave the child alone" as it were. The child is never truly alone, but is always being influenced by someone/something. Kodos needs to make his decision based on what types of influence he wants his child to experience and not on the basis of making sure the child can have an open-mind.

I agree with you that a child is incapable of considering the nuances of arguments about religious belief. Yet, the child is also incapable of weighing arguments about atheism/agnosticism as well (at least the four year olds I've met anyways). In living a life from this position, the parent is indoctrinating the child into things the child cannot understand, the very thing that seems objectionable.


So the difference between being dogmatic about religion and dogmatic about being open-minded is...:)

If the objection is about the content of the dogma, that's a legitimate discussion, but it's tangential and one for another day. I think the content of religious dogma is where your primary objection lies and should lie rather than this line of argument about indoctrination vs. open-mindedness.

But if the objection is that dogma is objectionable merely because it is dogma, open-mindedness is itself a form of dogma and must be objected to as well to be consistent.

You're missing the fact that you don't actually teach the agnostic/atheist point of view. Are you suggesting that by not living within and disussing religion to a 4 year old, you are teaching them to be an atheist/agnostic? Living that way allows them to become atheist/agnostic(or christian/Jew/whatever) if they choose later in life with significantly less bias that by doing the church thing. Just like Mac said, at that age they take whatever is said around them as fact and you need to tread lightly on matters of such importance as religion. Taking them to church around people singing and praying and being religious is not treading lightly.

Even giving you the point that not taking them to church is somehow indoctrinating them into atheism, it far from the opposite extreme of going to church. You are atleast striving for neutrality. If they ask you can say, "some people believe x and other do not". Pretty neutral. You could stress that it is so important to some people that they kill others. All without going to church.

"We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. " -Richard Dawkins
Do you teach your children about all other gods? Do you take them to services of other religions? According to your arguments, by not doing so you are suggesting they are unimportant.

And because most kids once the figure out the truth enjoy having figured out the truth and play along from that point. Assuming they figure out and don't have some jerk ruin it for them at too early an age...

If religion does not have an effect on the rest of anybody's life, how do you explain religious people pouring millions of dollars into preventing "gay marriage" with no secular/scientific reasoning behind their position on the issue? How do we have no alcohol sales on Sundays, if religion is not having an impact on the rest of our lives? Is it because these initiatives are not driven by, or supported by, those who merely attend on Sunday? If our society really were as secular as some say, how do any of these purely religious issues ever make it into law?