Quote:
Originally Posted by idi banashapan
I can't help but think then, you are accepting that there may be an element of indoctrination involved when a family of faith brings up a child.
Apply it to a theoretical scenario of your choice that includes the elements of ideology and manipulation and give me an answer then. If you get stuck, you could choose the Nazi movement in WW2, communism, religion, a family of Everton fans trying to make a child follow their team, to name a few examples... Any scenario where the option of free choice is diminished through manipulation (reciprocation, commitment/consistency, scarcity, likeability, authority and/or social proofing). Do you not feel that if those elements are forcefully employed, that is wrong?
|
Idi, I appreciate, from a debating point of view, what you're trying to do here. But I'm not biting. The simple, unavoidable truth of human existence is this: I am responsible for my children. Instructing them is my right and my responsibility. That includes my faith.
Down the road from here is a family which actively subscribes to paganism and they teach their kids accordingly. I believe them to be absolutely wrong in their world view, but I absolutely respect their right to teach it to their children, because that is how life works, and that is what a normal parent-child relationship looks like.
You just can't escape from the fact that Dawkins (and yours) is an argument that is simply self-serving, aiming not to open up equal exploration of competing world views, but to replace one with another and make atheism the default position in the life of a child, regardless of what that child's parents believe.