Age of consent for participation in religion

[chri'stina 190]

I honestly find it horrible if someone actually believes that religion should be illegal.

We legislate against many things in this society which we believe are harmful for people. If one were to genuinely believe that religion was as harmful to a childs mind as, say, cocaine or marijuana or LSD... then would it still be 'horrible' of them to feel that way?

Yes, I still think it would be. If someone wanted to do a study comparing the effects of drugs on a children's mind and physical body with the effects of growing up in a household that has faith in a certain religion, I don't think the results could be comparable. Unless the parents are teaching their children violence, or as I said above, something already illegal, I don't see how the two can compare. People who are religious may get on other peoples' nerves, but if they are not acting violently or harassing someone, I don't see why that person cannot believe whatever they want to. I was mostly commenting on the "religion should be illegal" comment, not simply the age of consent issue.

I don't support a parent forcing their child to be a certain religion, but I think it's fine if the child learns their parent's religion from simply being around them. The child should be allowed to make their own choice, and in the US we are free to make that choice even if our parents get mad at us.

More of my thoughts on the subject in general...

All I think of when I hear of religion being illegal is places like North Korea, and other countries where people have been severely oppressed and forbidden to believe in something like Christianity or other religions. Yet there are still some in those countries having to live a secret life because they believe something they feel is true and they could be arrested for it. They don't think it's "cool" to be religious because it's illegal, as was suggested earlier that ppl might be more drawn to religion because of it being illegal. They are terrified.

I just saw part of a program on the National Geographic channel about North Korea and how insanely the ppl have to worship Kim Jung Il. They have no choice. We have a choice. And there was a story about a young man who escaped into South Korea, and said he felt a higher power helped him survive. Well because he left the country, his family was probably killed. They asked what happened to his family after he escaped, and he said he did not want to even talk about it.

So how can banning religion be a good thing? Even if it gets on people's nerves? If it is causing someone to act violent, then there are consequences for that.

Edited March 11, 2007 by stina&suj

[Rob and Melinda 0]

In Israel, when a baby was born, the father held it up and spoke into it's ear "There is only One Lord..."

We are obligligated to tell our children of the Lords great love for them every day of their life. And when they are Older they will not depart from Him.

Rob

[mmarlo 1]

So we're obligated to lie to our kids? Good idea. I think they get enough of that in school, on tv, and from the administration. Maybe we should innundate them with less truth-by-assertion guidance, and teach them to think critically for themselves and make their own choices.

The Bible is so full of genocide, mixed messages, and discrimination, I want my children to have none of it. They can get the Golden Rule, and love thy neighbor, but beyond that, it's incoherent and dangerous.

[Rob and Melinda 0]

mmarlo,

You say the things that you say because you don't know the Lord or His Word. .Jesus died to pay for all of your sins and He wants for you to know Him and have eternal life. Until you accept His offer of salvation through His Cross, you will not be able to understand spiritual things. I would love to introduce you to Him, interested?

Rob

[mmarlo 1]

mmarlo,

You say the things that you say because you don't know the Lord or His Word. .Jesus died to pay for all of your sins and He wants for you to know Him and have eternal life. Until you accept His offer of salvation through His Cross, you will not be able to understand spiritual things. I would love to introduce you to Him, interested?

Rob

You're wrong. I grew up in the church, and my sisters are both missionaries. I have read the Word. I accepted, and then I subsequently rejected, after I got enough education and other experiences to realize that it was at best misleading. I was able to escape the mind control. My sisters weren't. Their desire for our country is a fascist theocracy. They prey on the poor and the needy because they are the most vulnerable and the most desparate and therefore the most willing to submit to the control. My goal is to help the poor and the needy to create a more equitable world. I'm the one working for good. They say they're working for God, but it seems like they'd prefer to control how other people think and act.

[Fuzzness 2]

I am somewhere between an atheist and a red path. My wife is not sure. We go to a presbyterian church but that doesn't make us christian. Our daughter is christian. However she has the freedom to chose her own beliefs.

In the south there is a lot of brainwashing by the baptist churches. So I chose yes for an age of consent because religion has steered a LOT of people here (at least 80%) down the wrong path (I know I shouldn't decide that for other people but come on, it is getting ridiculous)

[Alex+R 0]

I honestly find it horrible if someone actually believes that religion should be illegal.

We legislate against many things in this society which we believe are harmful for people. If one were to genuinely believe that religion was as harmful to a childs mind as, say, cocaine or marijuana or LSD... then would it still be 'horrible' of them to feel that way?

Yes, I still think it would be. If someone wanted to do a study comparing the effects of drugs on a children's mind and physical body with the effects of growing up in a household that has faith in a certain religion, I don't think the results could be comparable. Unless the parents are teaching their children violence, or as I said above, something already illegal, I don't see how the two can compare. People who are religious may get on other peoples' nerves, but if they are not acting violently or harassing someone, I don't see why that person cannot believe whatever they want to. I was mostly commenting on the "religion should be illegal" comment, not simply the age of consent issue.

I don't support a parent forcing their child to be a certain religion, but I think it's fine if the child learns their parent's religion from simply being around them. The child should be allowed to make their own choice, and in the US we are free to make that choice even if our parents get mad at us.

More of my thoughts on the subject in general...

All I think of when I hear of religion being illegal is places like North Korea, and other countries where people have been severely oppressed and forbidden to believe in something like Christianity or other religions. Yet there are still some in those countries having to live a secret life because they believe something they feel is true and they could be arrested for it. They don't think it's "cool" to be religious because it's illegal, as was suggested earlier that ppl might be more drawn to religion because of it being illegal. They are terrified.

I just saw part of a program on the National Geographic channel about North Korea and how insanely the ppl have to worship Kim Jung Il. They have no choice. We have a choice. And there was a story about a young man who escaped into South Korea, and said he felt a higher power helped him survive. Well because he left the country, his family was probably killed. They asked what happened to his family after he escaped, and he said he did not want to even talk about it.

So how can banning religion be a good thing? Even if it gets on people's nerves? If it is causing someone to act violent, then there are consequences for that.

While I feel that introducing religion to my children would be more harmful to them than handing them a joint and encouraging smoking it, I agree that banning religion or anything along those lines is FAR too reminiscent of some scary scary regimes and I don't think that has a place in America.

I would never ever expose my kids to religion before they were ready to choose it, and that's also how I feel about smoking. But not everyone feels that way and that's the great thing about America: choice.

[mawilson 2,133]

I would never ever expose my kids to religion before they were ready to choose it, and that's also how I feel about smoking. But not everyone feels that way and that's the great thing about America: choice.

Choice -- that's exactly what this thread is about. I'm sure that most Burka-wearing

12-year-old girls will tell you they do it by choice but in reality they only do it because

they've been brainwashed to adhere to a nonsensical dogma.

[Alex+R 0]

If it were possible to keep children from religion until later in their lives, then I'd be for it. But it would be impossible, so it's a moot point. You can't legislate something and reverse thousands or hundreds of years of religious tradition without bloodshed.

[pushbrk 12,883]

We, as a society, protect children from pornography, alcohol, politics, smoking, drugs,

marriage, and sex, as we deem them too young and lacking in emotional development

to make rational judgments or to be in control of such situations themselves.

At the same time, we offer no protection to children from being force-fed the religion

of their parents from birth.

Should a legal age of consent be introduced for participation in religion, at which point

young adults would be sufficiently educated to make a free choice as to whether their

inherited religion, or any religion, is right for them?

Your thoughts, please.

Do you propose as an alternative that young children be dropped off at a State run secular nursery facility paid for with tax dollars while their parents attend church? What do you propose they be force fed in this nursery facility?

Your poll is ludicrous.

[mawilson 2,133]

Do you propose as an alternative that young children be dropped off at a State run secular nursery facility paid for with tax dollars while their parents attend church? What do you propose they be force fed in this nursery facility?

Your poll is ludicrous.

Your suggestion is equally ludicrous.

[pushbrk 12,883]

Do you propose as an alternative that young children be dropped off at a State run secular nursery facility paid for with tax dollars while their parents attend church? What do you propose they be force fed in this nursery facility?

Your poll is ludicrous.

Your suggestion is equally ludicrous.

You don't understand. I didn't suggest anything. I asked if you proposed it as an alternative. You see, parents with young children cannot just leave their children at home while they attend religious activities. So unless you also propose that parents of young children forego all religious activities until their children are at some government mandated "age of consent" you'll have to have a solution for the childcare problem.

I'm simply pointing out just how ludicrous an idea imposing an age of consent for participation in religion is.

Just why do you think children are being "force fed" religion?

[Alex+R 0]

Do you propose as an alternative that young children be dropped off at a State run secular nursery facility paid for with tax dollars while their parents attend church? What do you propose they be force fed in this nursery facility?

Your poll is ludicrous.

Your suggestion is equally ludicrous.

You don't understand. I didn't suggest anything. I asked if you proposed it as an alternative. You see, parents with young children cannot just leave their children at home while they attend religious activities. So unless you also propose that parents of young children forego all religious activities until their children are at some government mandated "age of consent" you'll have to have a solution for the childcare problem.

I'm simply pointing out just how ludicrous an idea imposing an age of consent for participation in religion is.

Just why do you think children are being "force fed" religion?

Mark is suggesting that religion is an "adult" activity. Does the government provide childcare when parents go to an R-rated movie, a play that goes past their kids' bedtimes, or to a business meeting?

eta: What kids who participate in religion are *not* forcefed religion? Do you ask a baby if they want to be baptized? Do kids get to choose if they go to Sunday School very often? Or go to church at all?

Edited March 22, 2007 by Alex+R

[mawilson 2,133]

Mark is suggesting that religion is an "adult" activity. Does the government provide childcare when parents go to an R-rated movie, a play that goes past their kids' bedtimes, or to a business meeting?

Indeed. Thanks for clarifying my point, Alex.

[pushbrk 12,883]

Mark is suggesting that religion is an "adult" activity. Does the government provide childcare when parents go to an R-rated movie, a play that goes past their kids' bedtimes, or to a business meeting?

Indeed. Thanks for clarifying my point, Alex.

Just why is it that people with the kookiest ideas think others would agree with them if they only understood their point. I understood your point.

The suggestion is ludicrous. That's my opinion. Religion is a lifetime activity. Is school an adult activity? Is learning about evolution an adult activity? Is bathing an adult activity? Is eating an adult activity? Just what is it you WOULD leave for the parents to decide about their children's lives?

Children will learn "values" no matter where they are taught. Learning is not an adult activity.

Edited March 22, 2007 by pushbrk