Some of you are religious, which is great!

Would you force your kid to go to church even if he/she is a natural skeptic? How would you rationalize this? As a kid I always thought of church as a waste of time. I now view church as an educational experience from a cultural perspective, and it gives insight into culturally rooted beliefs.

If you're an atheist what is your opinion on religious people forcing their kids to go to church when they're obviously not buying the stories being told? I think it's a really convoluted subject, because with religion you have the whole belief aspect of it, and then you have the cultural aspect of it "it's our culture, and it's important and should be upheld!"

Nobody should be forced to believe in anything if they don't want to. I am an atheist but I would have no problem if my child (god forbid I ever have one) ended up subscribing to a religion. I would probably challenge them to test the strength of their beliefs but I would never force them to renounce their religion unless it became an extremist situation or they joined a cult or some shit lol.

I used to fluctuate between atheist and agnostic as a teenager. I thought religion was primitive and archaic. I've since renounced those lies and converted to Jesus. I would never force anyone to believe what I believe. If words and reason cannot convert them, coercion will never convert them in their heart of hearts. However, I do believe people should be forced to live by Christian standards of morality, which is truly God's will. Freedom is dead if that means the freedom to sin. We must only have the freedom to do good. So forced church attendance is a no, but adultery should have at least some social consequences.

Hi,

Would you force your kid to go to church even if he/she is a natural skeptic?
Up until a certain age, kids naturally believe everything their parents tell them. I don't believe there is a natural sceptic 8 year old or so.

It's stupid to force people to go to church.

religion is not culture. kids should not be introduced to any form of religion

As far as I'm concerned religion is just a mental safety net. It's something people believe in to give them security and comfort. If life sucks, it's okay, because you'll be rewarded in the afterlife for your good deeds. Such beliefs keep people honest. Such beliefs also give people hope and help them fend off despair. Religion as such can be useful for people. As far as I'm concerned though it's also a sham and a lie, something that is nice to believe in for those weak enough to require doing so, but something that those intelligent enough to think for themselves and analyze situations critically will reject. Religious people are brainwashed as far as I'm concerned - and no, I don't condone the brainwashing of children, or of anyone else for that matter.

To clarify, I have no issue with you believing whatever you believe, my issue is specifically with people converting others to believe what they do. Children in particular are incredibly impressionable. I could convince most children that the flying spaghetti monster is the One True God and they'd believe me unless someone else who they also respected told them some other religion was true at which point they'd be confused and not know who to trust and would hopefully then analyze the situation and try to decide which fake story made more sense (or optimally realize that both stories are bullshit).

As someone in the line between atheist and agnostic:

If you're an atheist what is your opinion on religious people forcing their kids to go to church when they're obviously not buying the stories being told?

That, I'd argue, depends on how often. It isn't an issue to try and pass down some of your religious experience to your son, and try to create that religious identity that you desire. The problem, however, arises when the kid isn't buying it, due to this generation being generally less invested in religious affairs, and yet you still insist in frequent visits, like every Sunday, you're pretty much just causing a weekly annoyance.

Being fully skeptical, you're using a fair chunk of the kid's time (since those duties take hours, and even more time to prepare/drive there/drive back/etc) on one of the few days that both you and your children are likely to be free, and could've been used for you both to bond in a more effective way; studying, playing, going out, whatever floats your boat. All of which for something that the kid considers useless - and, effectively, is, since attendance duties have very little non-psychological effect on one's life.

Most importantly, however, children don't like being directly told what to do. If you consistently tell them to do something that see as pointless or bad, they'll start to resent it. And it makes it all the more likely that they'll start to dislike religion as a side effect, ultimately pushing the child, accidentally, away from the religion and into atheism, since the kid will be looking for all kinds of justifications to not have to go to church, and it might get ingrained into their brain as they become teenagers or adults.

I think it's a really convoluted subject, because with religion you have the whole belief aspect of it, and then you have the cultural aspect of it "it's our culture, and it's important and should be upheld!"

In addition to what I mentioned above about it driving children away from the religion, there's a further point here - religion is just a fraction of what composes culture. There's plenty more, from traditions, clothing, music, cuisine, etc. There are better ways, for both you and your children, to preserve your cultural roots, whatever they are.

Atheism is beamed into children's minds from early on. I was a militant atheist from around 10-18 despite religious education because I accepted the authority of the television scientists and there was no intellectual counter-authority to set me straight. With the rise of independent commentary, I was fortunately persuaded out of atheism by some very, very intelligent theologians.

The problem is, your kid is going to be exposed to culture that will have an impact on his religious worldview regardless of what you do with him. If he grows up in a strictly secular society, he will probably become an agnostic or an atheist. Taking your kid to church and sending him to sunday school is no less influencing him then putting him in front of a TV screen.

Last Kiss: I can turn that around and say that atheism is a mental safety net because it dispels the possibility of there being eternal consequences for actions. Also your liberal secularism has metaphysical presuppositions just like the religions you deride; it is not possible to have a worldview without presuppositions that are at base speculative. Atheism and secularism are just at base materialism and monism. I for one would rather have children educated by the church on theology than children educated on material monism in government schools.

Edited 1/13/2019 17:50:13

I'm an agnostic atheist living in a secular, culturally Christian society. I will raise my kids with philosophers rather than the Bible, but celebrate Christian holidays. My kids will not be baptized, but they may decide to themselves, when they become teenagers. I do hope, that if they do so, it will only be for the presents.

I strongly (as strongly as agnostically possible) align with The Last Kiss' comment:

"As far as I'm concerned religion is just a mental safety net. It's something people believe in to give them security and comfort. If life sucks, it's okay, because you'll be rewarded in the afterlife for your good deeds. Such beliefs keep people honest. Such beliefs also give people hope and help them fend off despair."

But I also think, that there are other ways to find comfort in hard times or hard lives. I have had a remarkably traumatic childhood, initially raised by a paranoid-skizophrenic mother, who cut me multiple times when I was an infant, followed by institutions similar to orphanages until I became a legal adult. (There's much to say about the inbetween, but this is not the time or the place.) To me the hardships never turned me toward any faith. I used psychology to better myself in the areas of my persona, where my upbringing left me wanting. My country is evangelical lutheran. It is a great shame but not a great sin to commit suicide. (From my limited knowledge) I believe I probably would have, if I at some point had turned religious. The promise of a better afterlife would have been appealing. As an agnostic atheist, however, I have continuously believed that this is all there is to it. One life. Spend it as you want. Each year I can look back and see how much I've progressed. So much so, that it actually feels like I was a different person just five years ago. I am happy, that I never found faith.

That was a bit of a sidetrack. I think it's a rare sight in Denmark to see children forced to go to church, so it is a surreal thing for me to comment on. I am obviously against it, but I also agree, regarding the cultural aspect. I wouldn't force my children to go to church once a year at Christmas, but I do plan to encourage it.

Sorry to hear that story , but the view that religion's/religious people's main goal is to score points with good deeds to then be awarded a pleasurable afterlife is abominably egoistic and false. And if someone says that religion pushes him to commit suicide, it's a result of this extremely oversimplified interpretation.

Religion is supposed to make you try being a better human here on Earth, much like philosophy, the two are interconnected after all.

Should one force their children to go to church? Absolutely not. There's no way it will ever work, if anything it's a surefire way to make them despise it. Lead by example, talk with them, make them question their worldview. It applies to pretty much everything in life.

By the way, one can be religious without attending church at all, like myself.

Religion in many cases can make people evil.

That's not the point I was trying to make, and I believe it to be a misinterpretation, too. I was talking about me, not religious people in general. I don't think religions push people to suicide, but I do believe, that believing in an afterlife will be a comfortable feeling, that can be the deciding factor.

No. I believe, that religions are designed to control the masses. When you can make people find comfort in an afterlife, while being deadpoor, living in slum and still pay taxes and contribute to the church coffers to pay for their sins, then you've got them exactly where you want them. Religion is not about making people think for themselves like philosophy. Religion is about telling people what to think. They are interconnected, sure. Historic philosophical figures have mostly been religious due to the cultural norms of their time, and religions use (parts) of the ethics taught in philosophy, but that is where the similarities end.

Great posts here but "With the rise of independent commentary, I was fortunately persuaded out of atheism by some very, very intelligent theologians."

Would you be willing to share any of their works? I'm in need of the knowledge.

I know this is practically a jinx but a WZ thread on a politic-religious topic that isn't a crapfest?!?

If you're an atheist what is your opinion on religious people forcing their kids to go to church when they're obviously not buying the stories being told? I think it's a really convoluted subject, because with religion you have the whole belief aspect of it, and then you have the cultural aspect of it "it's our culture, and it's important and should be upheld!"

Folk say religion influences culture, but I think the opposite is more often true. Anyhow, if you don't want to go to church chances are you've been there and have already experienced the "culture" of church. There are many other ways ways to learn about the "culture" of Christianity besides going to church.

And I assume everyone here are boring EU-ans and Americans so I make a counterpoint: folk should go to things outside their religion, as it's inevitable living in a dominantly Christian/Islaamic country to learn about Christianity&Bible/Islaam&Quran. Additionally I heard from many deeply-religious-turned-atheist that looking at the faith of others in a "wrong" religion shook their own.

Wonderful people got angry. Alright let me explain when i said "Religion in many cases can make people evil" i never said in all cases however this does not mean religion makes people good either rather for most people religion doesn't effect their morality much as good people who are religious who become non religious will stay good likewise bad people who are religious who become non religious will stay bad. In other cases (mainly islamic countries but also in christian countries to a lesser degree in frequency and severity) some otherwise good people are so devout they will commit some awful actions in the name of their faith.

I'm a Movementarian and all of my kids will be raised to love the leader

"And I assume everyone here are boring EU-ans and Americans so I make a counterpoint: folk should go to things outside their religion, as it's inevitable living in a dominantly Christian/Islaamic country to learn about Christianity&Bible/Islaam&Quran. Additionally I heard from many deeply-religious-turned-atheist that looking at the faith of others in a "wrong" religion shook their own."

Slightly anecdotal, but one of my study friends at my university went from extremely religious muslim to atheist after studying religion there. He says he saw too many inconsistencies. It's an interesting anthropology study in itself to see him experience the smallest things for the first time now. Living a very strict islamic life he has never even played games. Now he attends our bi-monthly boardgame nights, he has started drinking beer, and I have never seen anyone love pork liver pâté as much as him.

A child with an imaginary friend is normal.

An adult with an imaginary friend is peculiar.

A group of people with an imaginary friend is a religion.

"Taking your kid to church and sending him to sunday school is no less influencing him then putting him in front of a TV screen."

This is nonsense. If you want to suggest television can influence peoples train of thought, you are correct. To pretend though that television is as persuasive as something like church to a young child is completely nonsensical. Children trust their parents immensely when they are young. It takes a LOT more persuasion to convince a child that their parents are wrong than to convince them to align their views with their parents.

"Sorry to hear that story , but the view that religion's/religious people's main goal is to score points with good deeds to then be awarded a pleasurable afterlife is abominably egoistic and false."

Determining the main goal of something isn't necessarily trivial, but, I would certainly argue that the bible and other similar works were typically written by those in power, and written with the intent of convincing people to follow rules ordained by those in power.

I can tell you something is illegal. You may or may not care, you may also think that the potential punishments do not matter so long as you don't get caught.

If, on the other hand I convince you that doing that same thing is immoral and goes against gods wishes, I can much more easily convince you to not do said action. You may think you can outsmart me, but if you believe in God then the idea of outsmarting God would be incredibly arrogant. Similarly if you believe in God it would be incredibly arrogant to expect to be able to do something without God knowing about it. As such, if I can convince you that you will be punished in the afterlife if you do something, and that if you perform such an action it is sure to be noticed and to have repercussions, then I am much more able to control your actions than if I were to make such demands myself.

The bible may impart some good life values in people, it's certainly not something I consider to be wholly harmful upon those that follow it, but I do think the notion that it was written by God rather than by Man to be complete nonsense. If that were the case, why are there multiple versions of the Bible? Surely they can't all have been written by God.

Similarly, I find it absurd that people whom would never believe their daughter if she came home pregnant and told them she was both pregnant and a virgin are willing to believe in the idea of the virgin birth as portrayed in the bible. Virgins giving birth is either impossible, or it isn't. If you wouldn't even dream of believing your daughter if she claimed such a thing had occurred to her, you shouldn't take the word of a book that claims the exact same thing happened. If you are picking and choosing which parts of the bible you believe, then you must be also acknowledging that the bible was in fact written by man as opposed to by God. The alternative is to believe God wrote a book filled with lies - and that seems incredibly blasphemous from the perspective of a believer.


There are innumerable religions, and most of them contradict each other numerous times. At most one religion can get all of its supposed facts right. It seems like a far safer bet to me to wager on them all being wrong than to place all my eggs on one specific religion being the correct one. I also reject Pascal's Gamble and consider the entire concept of it to be bullshit. You cannot pretend to believe in something to benefit yourself in the afterlife. Even if you did manage to pick the right thing to pretend to believe in, pretending would surely not trick a deity into rewarding you. Not to mention that fundamentally, you can't choose whether to believe in something. You either believe it, or you don't, it's not a conscious choice. I