Indoctrinating children

[Curious Atheist]

Atheists are keen on that word "indoctrinate" aren't they? If teenagers don't want to share their parents belief, they are entirely capable of rebelling against them, in case you hadn't noticed.

I think it is just the religious that don’t like the word, so just a point of view isn’t it. I should be more clear, I am referring to ‘children’ and specifically young children, before they have matured enough to rebel and consciously question their world, so for arguments sake let’s say under 13. Trying to teach a teenager is fine, they will be able to rebel like you quite rightly pointed out.

Teaching them about the Christian faith only ensures that they know what they are rejecting, if they do reject it, and it saves them from coming up with the kind of crude caricatures we so often hear from atheists

Yes that is fine if you are implying you are teaching alternatives. Like I keep saying, teaching is fine as long as they have the choice to explore other ideas and are free to be critical. Indoctrination refers to the examples where they don’t have that freedom. I do not know what caricatures you refer to, please give an example. Although I can’t help sensing a bit of hostility in the way you generalise atheists, so maybe you would be able to correct any mistakes if you were less hostile to questions? I mean that in the least offensive way possible.

 

[lesliedellow]

I do not know what caricatures you refer to, please give an example.

Christians indoctrinate their children is a good one. Alternatively, adult Christians believe because they were "brainwashed" as children. Oh, and Christians believe whatever their pastors tell them (because they can't think for themselves).

 

[razeontherock]

Also many books contain labels like this:

"This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."

I'm no expert on law, and my children are out of the system BUT i think all this stuff is past tense, and dealt with by the courts. BTW I do agree with that particular label, not that it matters.

My argument stems from the fact that children aren’t choosing to believe, but being told it is true and aren’t being given any alternative.

I find your portrayal of children as mindless automatons disturbing. I was never even remotely like that. Children ALWAYS have all the alternatives available in the universe; the human mind is indomitable, as is the spirit.

I admit I have never really understood your replies, but do you think it is just coincidence America is 90% Christian and Iran 100% Muslim?

Iran is not 100% Muslim, neither is US 90 C. If you wish to make a point, you will have to scale that back to reflect reality. It's not too hard to see what you're trying to drive at, but Faith is an individual thing, that statistics have no ability to measure. What matters on this subject is GOD's POV, and we don't really have a way of polling for that ...

 

[razeontherock]

I should be more clear, I am referring to ‘children’ and specifically young children, before they have matured enough to rebel and consciously question their world, so for arguments sake let’s say under 13.

Really? There was never a time when I didn't question my world, and my oldest son did that right out of the womb too. Apparently he didn't really care his eyes weren't even supposed to be open yet, let alone focusing across the room

Yes that is fine if you are implying you are teaching alternatives. Like I keep saying, teaching is fine as long as they have the choice to explore other ideas and are free to be critical. Indoctrination refers to the examples where they don’t have that freedom.

You posit unworkable hypotheticals. You would have a Christian parent actively teach their child that Jesus is both Christ, and not Christ? And if they are not "free to be critical," you have created a classic case of rebellion.

 

[Curious Atheist]

[FONT=&quot]"This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I'm no expert on law, and my children are out of the system BUT i think all this stuff is past tense, and dealt with by the courts. BTW I do agree with that particular label, not that it matters.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Perhaps it is out dated now, I don’t really know as I have even been to Texas so I will back down on that one. The fact you agree with the label though is my point exactly. Not referring to evolution exactly, as evolution is accepted fact, but let’s not get in to that debate here. However to play ‘devil’s advocate’ you may be of the point of view that evolution should not be taught as fact and creationism should be a valid alternative, I would argue that it IS your right as a parent to share your faith with your children but using the same theme as the above message. That is all that I am arguing, that alternative should be given. I would not want to use evolution as the basis of this argument though as my fundamental basis for differentiation is that religion is faith, which defines it as not being based on fact.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]My argument stems from the fact that children aren’t choosing to believe, but being told it is true and aren’t being given any alternative.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I find your portrayal of children as mindless automatons disturbing. I was never even remotely like that. Children ALWAYS have all the alternatives available in the universe; the human mind is indomitable, as is the spirit.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I do not think they are mindless, but if they are only taught creationism then they don’t know what they are rejecting. In a way this is counter-productive from a Christian point of view because it isn’t really faith if it is taught as fact. I was under the impression God wants us to have faith, but teaching it as fact is like God revealing himself to a non-believer to convert them, it goes against free will. You can tell by our past discussions I question everything and am very critical, always looking for problems in theories. Yet I believed in Santa, the tooth fairy and anything else I was taught the same way I would most likely believe in Witches and magic if I was Nigerian or eating a tigers penis will get me a beautiful wife (to phrase it politely) if my tradition suggested this. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I admit I have never really understood your replies, but do you think it is just coincidence America is 90% Christian and Iran 100% Muslim?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Iran is not 100% Muslim, neither is US 90 C. If you wish to make a point, you will have to scale that back to reflect reality. It's not too hard to see what you're trying to drive at, but Faith is an individual thing, that statistics have no ability to measure. What matters on this subject is GOD's POV, and we don't really have a way of polling for that ...[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I get my statistics from sites like this Religions statistics - Countries compared - NationMaster and all my references agree with each other. I do not believe America to be 90% Christian either, many lie on forms as it is part of American heritage (to be Christian, not a liar!) and seen as patriotic and part of being a good person. For example if everyone who claimed to go to church every week actually did, they would be over flowing and you would need more churches. But that is another topic. I don’t think the statistics lie, most Islamic countries are 95%+ Muslim but this may be due to those leaving the faith facing death if they do. However if we even scale this down to 60% it still shows an undeniable trend that faith is based on cultural bias and education. The best example would be trying to say you would be Christian if born in ancient Greece or Egypt, of course you would not.[/FONT]

 

[Curious Atheist]

[FONT=&quot]Originally Posted by Curious Atheist[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I should be more clear, I am referring to ‘children’ and specifically young children, before they have matured enough to rebel and consciously question their world, so for arguments sake let’s say under 13.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Really?[/FONT][FONT=&quot] There was never a time when I didn't question my world, and my oldest son did that right out of the womb too. Apparently he didn't really care his eyes weren't even supposed to be open yet, let alone focusing across the room [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Indoctrination teaches to not be critical of what is being told ie suggesting Jesus was not God could be responded with ‘that’s blasphemy’ instead of, ‘that is what I believe based on the Bible which I have concluded is the word of God’[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]You posit unworkable hypotheticals. You would have a Christian parent actively teach their child that Jesus is both Christ, and not Christ? And if they are not "free to be critical," you have created a classic case of rebellion.[/FONT]

No, I am suggesting you do not teach either way. So you can say ‘I believe God created us in his image, all of the universe and we are descended from Adam and Eve which is part of my faith that the Bible is the word of God’. You can also say ‘scientists believe in evolution and cannot find any evidence of the supernatural, nor is it possible to definitively prove God didn’t guide evolution’ and then explain the process of evolution the best you can. Then ask ‘what do you think makes the most sense to you, which do you think is true?’ without trying to force a decision either way. It is just the sharing of perspective and point of view and letting them come to their own conclusion. If they are only given one or the other, it is usually a forgone conclusion what path they will walk.
But I can see the main point of debate is whether children believe what they are told or not, so here is just one reference (I haven’t read it yet) that shows what I am saying Young children are especially trusting of things they're told

 

[AlexBP]

I don’t know if it is particular widespread, most of the news stories I hear are usually about Texas. Many have only changed in the last few years and every now and again I hear a story of a teacher refusing to teach evolution. Also many books contain labels like this:

"This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."

Would it be possible for you to tell us the titles of the textbooks that contain these labels and to link to the articles which establish that Texas or some parts thereof do not teach evolution in high school? Thank you in advance.

 

[HaveHope]

I live in Texas and have a child currently taking biology in a public high school. They are teaching her evolution and nothing even remotely "creationist." I just now looked at her textbook, and there is an entire unit with four chapters consisting of about 100 pages which is dedicated to evolution (and not one word that I can find anywhere about any religious creation). The state's standardized test which is given to all public school students in Texas has questions about evolution, so that would mean that all public school students in Texas are in fact being taught evolution.


I am also personally taking a biology course at the local community college and am also being taught about evolution with no mention of anything remotely religious in nature.

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

 

[Curious Atheist]

[/color]
[/color]
Would it be possible for you to tell us the titles of the textbooks that contain these labels and to link to the articles which establish that Texas or some parts thereof do not teach evolution in high school? Thank you in advance.

I admit things might have changed in recent years, but as recent as 2008 it wasn't much of a secret. Things went from creationism to intelligent design, which amounts to the same thing. Here are a few references of what may have sparked a lot of more recent headlines, which may have been hyped up by the media in fairness.
Creationist Rick Perry wins endorsement from fellow creationist Governor | Repealing the Louisiana Science Education Act

PolitiFact Texas | Gov. Rick Perry says Texas public schools teach evolution and creationism


http://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/aclu-ohio-demands-schools-stop-teaching-intelligent-design-science

Creationists on Texas School Board Prevail: Watered-Down Science Coming to Your Kids’ Textbooks | Firedoglake

Here's a link for the stickers

Judge nixes evolution textbook stickers - Technology & science - Science - msnbc.com

and another


Textbook disclaimers » Colin Purrington


and another suggesting the stickers were banned in 2006


http://ncse.com/creationism/legal/selman-v-cobb-county-textbook-disclaimer-case-0

Although I am happy to report I can't find anything that suggests it still being openly taught. It has been banned from the curriculum as it goes against the American constitution. So if I said it was openly still happening, I think I was wrong. However there are many mentions of it being allowed to be discussed, so I wouldn't say it was guaranteed to not be suggested as a legitimate scientific theory.


But anyway, I think this thread has reached it's end. I have said everything I think I can to make my point, so if it falls on deaf ears then so be it. I just wished religious people weren't blind to their faith and realise it isn't scientific fact, therefore shouldn't be taught to anyone as being so.
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[Curious Atheist]

That is not what scientists do. They come up with models of reality, often with the knowledge that those models cannot be true in any absolute sense.

The bible was written with an assumed model of reality, ie that we aren’t a computer program for example.

For example, General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are incompatible, so at least one of them (and probably both) is wrong. But Quantum Mechanics concerns itself with the very small, and those who work with atoms and molecules can use Quantum Mechanics, whilst ignoring General Relativity - which is only relevant in the case of the very big. Conversely, astronomers can work with General Relativity, whilst ignoring Quantum Mechanics.

In between those two extremes, Newtonian Mechanics rule the roost.

Try making your sat nav work without relativity. Sorry for being condescending, but do you understanding either theory? It just seems incredulous you would say you think you know better than Einstein and every physicist since unless you are at least one of the leaders in the field. As you are a Christian, I would wager you are not. You are barely scratching the surface of what we don’t understand about the universe, but that doesn’t mean ‘Goddidit’. There are many theories to explain things, string theory is the favourite theory to tie relativity and the quantum world together (also M theory, brane theory etc). But the theories will always remain theoretical as they can’t be tested, despite how well they might balance out equations. Another way to look at is we don’t even know what’s at the bottom of the sea, does that mean it is rational to believe in sea monsters and mermaids until someone categorically proves otherwise? What if they did prove much of what you believe to be false, would it be rational to carry on believing through ‘faith’?
The key thing to gather from science is that when new evidence gives rise to a better theory, the old one is left behind. For example, everything was created as it is today in seven days has been superseded by evolution. So now no rational person believes evolution isn’t real.

 

[twob4me]

~~~~~~~~~~~~MOD HAT ON!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This thread has gone through a clean up. I have removed all Non Christian (NC) posts that were not the OP and the replies to them. Please remember this rule when posting:

If another non-Christian seeker wishes to ask questions about the Christian faith, they may start their own thread. No more than one non-Christian (the OP) may post in a thread.

You can find that listed within the Exploring Christianity FSG's


Also, if you notice a NC posting in EC and they are not the OP please report the post and do not reply to it or any posts they make.

Documentation of thread clean up is HERE for staff only!

~~~~~~~~~~~~MOD HAT OFF!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[razeontherock]

to play ‘devil’s advocate’ you may be of the point of view that evolution should not be taught as fact and creationism should be a valid alternative

While this is not our main pint of discussion, I should be open about my position that Ev should be taught in school, along with the FACT that there is no competing theory. (Your statement that "Ev is fact," is a loaded term. Within certain confines this is true, and beyond those children are merely indoctrinated, violating the very reason for teaching science)

,I would argue that it IS your right as a parent to share your faith with your children but using the same theme as the above message. That is all that I am arguing, that alternative should be given.

Are you familiar with our poster "hikersong?" He posts in CWR, here in the outreach section. This is a big issue to him, and the two of you no doubt would find common ground. I will respond to you as I responded to him, that G-d chose Abraham specifically because He KNEW He would teach his children G-d's ways.

My point is that parenting is quite different from running a public school, and what's good for the goose is not good for the gander, in this instance. Parents should be more individualized and active in their roles, and I fear that enacting what you suggest would erode that yet further. This is a passionate topic, as it should be; it is crucial to our survival as a species.


my fundamental basis for differentiation is that religion is faith, which defines it as not being based on fact. [/quote]

FALSE! All you're doing is demonstrating that you do not know what Christianity refers to as "Faith." This hinders effective communication, and I know of no easy way to impart this understanding to you. I will suggest that you do not attempt to speak on behalf of Christianity, and recognize that when you do so we will look at you precisely the way you look at the most rabid, foaming at the mouth type of anti- Ev creationist who clearly knows nothing of science. Those types are a blight to rational Faith, and I trust you don't want to represent that contingent within atheism! Just do realize that atheism has it's parallel group.

We can still communicate effectively, even regarding areas of difference, such as the thread topic. A good Christian parent will encourage critical thinking, just as a good Bible study includes hard questions.

My argument stems from the fact that children aren’t choosing to believe, but being told it is true and aren’t being given any alternative.

There are 2 major problems with this statement:

1) A parent does not somehow grant permission to their child's mind to function. A child is a unique, living entity. The verbiage that they need to be somehow be "given an alternative" is highly offensive to me. I do recognize that i am somewhat more spirited than the average population, (intentional understatement, an attempt at humor, no doubt lost online) but any alternative available to any child is 100% beyond the scope of parental control.

2) Being told it is true is not merely Christian duty for parents towards their own children, but towards our entire globe:

"it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe." Give that phrase some thought, and the context is 1 Corinthians 1:21, available here in a good modern translation:

1 Corinthians 1 (Blue Letter Bible: ESV - English Standard Version)

We have an atheist in this section, (a College Prof no less) who is convinced Christianity declares atheists their enemy. It does not. Yet if you try to silence those who preach the Gospel, you declare yourself the enemy of G-d. I say this because you should factor this into your stance on this topic.

God revealing himself to a non-believer to convert them, it goes against free will.

This misunderstanding of yours is soundly refuted by the Bible.

You can tell by our past discussions I question everything and am very critical, always looking for problems in theories. Yet I believed in Santa, the tooth fairy and anything else I was taught

So we have uncovered a most fundamental difference between us.

I get my statistics from sites like this Religions statistics - Countries compared - NationMaster

This shows US to be 76.8% Christian, roughly what I thought. And 4% atheist, which I will make a point of using, so thank you (Others here interpret the same data as saying 20% atheist)

Your source does show Iran to be 98% Muslim and 2% other. Which means there is not a single atheist in the whole Country. I find that hard to believe.

My original point stands: it is GOD's POV on this that matters, and we have no way of polling for that. Here is what Jesus had to say on the subject during His short time here:

"when the Son of Man returns, will He find Faith on earth?"

What do you think HIS reaction is to the claim that every single soul in Iran is a believer?

The best example would be trying to say you would be Christian if born in ancient Greece or Egypt, of course you would not.

This not a good example; ancient Greece and Egypt were BC

 

[razeontherock]

now no rational person believes evolution isn’t real.

This is a horribly prejudiced thing to say. I know a tenured College Biology Prof, who while writing his doctoral thesis in microbiolgy came to the Lord out of sheer logic, recognizing that things did not happen as science claims. The man is brilliant, warm, and a highly effective teacher. His doctoral thesis was on a subject most relevant to the discussion here. You oppose many things and many people by labeling him is irrational.