Sunday, January 13, 2008

New Definition of Child Abuse

The Jewish Chronicle has an article this month about a woman who claims that training a child up in the ways of the Lord amounts to child abuse.

Why does my heart sink when I see a toddler with a dummy in her mouth dressed in the hijab? Or a small boy in peot and the hat of an 18th-century nobleman? The Jesuits are famed for declaring that all they need is the first seven years of a child’s life to make him a Catholic for life.

Perhaps organised religion should carry a health warning and only be made available at 18 with the right to vote. Isn’t it child abuse to imprint religion and identity on an infant? In our Western democracies, we say we believe in the freedom of the individual to make their own life choices but we allow parents to enforce their own dogma on their offspring. Why not teach children about all religions, as well as secularism and humanism, and let them decide how they wish to identify when they become adults?

The evil here so saturated. It goes to so many levels. First of all it is your God-given duty to train your children up in His ways. To not do so is a sin. But even further than that this is evil. There was a king (I believe of France) that did an experiment centuries ago. He wanted to see what language the children would speak if left to themselves. So they were given food and clean diapers but no other interaction. Every child died in less than 2 years. This woman is saying we should do the same with our children's souls. That we are to leave the soul alone and see what religion it comes up with (if any). Can you imagine the stunted twisted souls that would be caused by this neglect? The other evil is what the Devil has done to this woman. He has so deceived her that I am sure she really believes that in writing this she is helping children.

Oh God, stand against these evils. Fight for us against them. The enemy is crafty. Help us to be aware of his schemes.

2 comments:

Karen said...

This woman says, "...we allow parents to enforce their own dogma on their offspring." That comment really angered me. We allow parents?!? Since when do I as a parent have to go to her for permission regarding how to raise my child? Children are not creatures of the state! My children are my precious own flesh and blood, whom I love and whom have been given to me with the responsibility to raise. So keep your grubby hands and ideas off! (Please excuse the outburst.) Also, she is very confused if she believes that religion is something meant to be "chosen" for purposes of your personal "identity." Do you prefer white tic-tacs or orange? Such a view shows a belief that all religions are man-made constructs and that none, except secular humanism, is actually truth. Thus it doesn't matter which you "pick." So though her argument is cleverly disguised as promoting greater religious freedom to children, it is one wishing to restrict children to a humanist's view of religion, as well as taking away the rights and responsibilities of parents toward their children and giving them to the state.

Frances Clements said...

Karen,
Well said. I think you are right to say that this is really a secular humanism is the only "right" answer view point.