For many religious people, raising their children in their faith is an important part of their religious practice. They might see getting their kids into heaven as one of the most important things they can do as parent. And certainly, adults should have the right to practice their religion freely, but children are impressionable and unlikely to realize that they are being indoctrinated into one religion out of the thousands that humans practice.
And many faith traditions have beliefs that are at odds with science or support bigoted worldviews. For example, a queer person being raised in the Catholic Church would be taught that they are inherently disordered and would likely be discouraged from being involved in LGBTQ support groups.
Where do you think the line is between practicing your own religion faithfully and unethically forcing your beliefs on someone else?
I think it’s important to teach children the cultural traditions of their family and religion can be a good tool to teach children the social contracts of ethical behavior. The abstract metaphysical elements of faith can be a good substitute until they’re old enough to understand the usefulness of moral behavior from a social contract perspective.
The line is crossed when religion is used as a tool to teach bigotry. But the world is made richer by cultural traditions and those should be carried on.
This would be true if religion were not so often used to suppress and hurt people.
It’s true that it’s unethical to raise children in a way that suppresses or hurts them or tells them to do that to others, but that isn’t a requirement of religion, even if it’s a trend of some. There exists an entire globe of different faiths and practitioners of varying levels of orthodoxy, to malign every last one of them as abusive and harmful isn’t just a gross over generalization, it simply isn’t a truthful representation of many many faith practitioners.
The history books are full of religions’ heinous crimes against humanity. Maybe there is some religion out there that is purely benevolent but I have never heard of it in the sea of counterexamples.
If you are currently trapped in a religion, I am here to tell you that you can escape. Once you do, a lot becomes much more clear.
It is also important to remember that religions are human organizational structures, but their basis of authority is “because I said so.” We see this structure arise over and over until it is eventually removed for something more based in reality.
I think this kinda gets closer to my point. Humans create these kinds of social organizational structures and have made various kinds throughout history. Both religious and non-religious structures get used in horrendously abusive ways. But to decry all religion as a harmful structure is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I think it’s possible to maintain the cultural aspects of faith while removing the abuse and bigotry that often comes with it. And I think you can see that in many of the lives of practitioners that don’t make the history book and news. Though I’d never deny that religion frequently gets used as a tool of control, I just think it requires a lack of imagination to say that it always is. Or to say that removing religion from the world would create a world without communal tools of control and abuse.
You are like a younger me who refused to see the 10,000 year history of abuse and realize that any system based on “because I told you so” us unethical and harmful to human life.
I’m not arguing to say we should be basing any society on any religion, but rather that it isn’t unethical to teach children religion because it’s part of culture and culture should be carried on as long as it doesn’t teach intolerance or abuse. Those aren’t inherent to religion and any religion that does feature those can probably have them be removed without harming the cultural aspects.
Teaching anyone that they must be judged by arbitrary, unprovable rules or face dire consequences is unethical.
Edit: I feel like your last sentence implies a huge misunderstanding of my point. I think religion has value as a cultural and communal institution, and absolutely not as a replacement for ethics and science
History is full of heinous things that should never be repeated and we have a moral imperative to teach younger generations about them, why they happened and why they must never be allowed to happen again and how to do your best to prevent them. A lot of them can be traced back to religion, but absolutely not all of them.
Religion is not the single source of bigotry and bigotry is the issue. There probably isn’t any faith that is purely benevolent, but there doesn’t need to be, it’s the actions of those who practice it that matter.
I can easily see the appeal to look at the past and say “we must end religion to prevent the horrors that arise from it” but I think it’s a lazy solution. Those horrors happen outside of religion as well and will continue to happen in an atheistic world if the issues causing them (e.g. inequality, injustice, bigotry, abuse of authority, etc.) continue. But by removing religion, you remove part of the many beautiful cultural traditions that make up who all the varied people on this planet are. And I don’t think it’s useful to destroy cultures.
Edit: of course, religion can’t be used as a replacement for a scientific understanding of the world and I think at some point it must be taught that the metaphysics of religion are based in myth, but I think there’s a great deal of value in the way religion is part of a culture and fosters community. The threat of religion comes in how that culture and community is used.
Lmao another edit because I thought a lot about this during the pandemic: I also used to think the world would be better off with no religion, but I think that’s an easier point to make when looking at the largest religions in the world and the terrible things they’ve been (and continue to be) weaponized to do. As a thought experiment, ask yourself if it would be ethical to gather every Catholic in the world and re-educate them to deny their faith. Now try again with the First Nation’s people, or smaller local faiths in Africa or South America. I won’t speak for you, but I think at some point it crosses a line where it stops being a call for rational thought and an end to the opiate of the masses but a vehicle through which cultures are irreparably harmed or erased.