L
Linnyo
Guest
That depends upon who is doing the teaching.
Do catholic upbringing and conv. of human rights contradict each other?
- Status
How many have seen a wedding in which the bride simply can’t go through with it? Even though they went through the rehearsal, and the classes, and the counseling.That depends upon who is doing the teaching.
How many have witnessed confirmation classes delayed because the child said ‘not now?’
I will repeat, teaching someone the ritual does not take their freedom to say yes or no.
There are too many that do, in fact, say ‘no’ to convince me that Confirmation is a denial of personnel freedom.
T
TAS2000
Guest
Well, it seems to me you aren’t interested in applying your logic to anything other than the RCC. Teaching is force in your book. So teaching a kid to eat meat is force. Especially if they are taught/“forced” to eat everything on their plate. They are totally indoctrinated into being meat eaters until they grow up and have free choice.
The point is that it is absurd to claim that as a general rule teaching a child anything before they have reached the age of reason is force. We do the same thing with eating habits, clothing styles, music choices, and on and on. What parents do or allow in their homes is up to them. And to claim that some extreme cases where it is tantamount to brainwashing should set the norm for the rest of us is ludicrous.
I also notice you skipped the part of my post where I asked you to provide supporting information that the chilren’s welfare would be better off NOT having religion in their lives. When you are interested in providing logical answers and not just “well its obviously force casue I say so” kind of answers, we can continue.
The point is that it is absurd to claim that as a general rule teaching a child anything before they have reached the age of reason is force. We do the same thing with eating habits, clothing styles, music choices, and on and on. What parents do or allow in their homes is up to them. And to claim that some extreme cases where it is tantamount to brainwashing should set the norm for the rest of us is ludicrous.
I also notice you skipped the part of my post where I asked you to provide supporting information that the chilren’s welfare would be better off NOT having religion in their lives. When you are interested in providing logical answers and not just “well its obviously force casue I say so” kind of answers, we can continue.
L
Linnyo
Guest
It seems that you have not noticed the context of the thread! There are clear cases where fundamental groups have tought there kids religion where it has not been in their best interests. You only have to look at suicide bombings to see that. On the whole, it is right to teach religion to children as they are growing up bu I think sacraments such as communion and confirmation ought to be left until the child understands what it is all about!
T
TAS2000
Guest
Well, you started the thread. So, please explain to me then, exactly which RCC groups are teaching their children suicide bombings? I recall only the RCC mentioned in your first post.
L
Linnyo
Guest
Get a grip!
L
Linnyo
Guest
I may have started the thread but you didn’t have to reply. Nobody forced you! 
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
I doubt a case could be won against the Church as it is not the Church doing the “forcing”, it is the child’s parents that do it.
The Church does not go out there and grab children off the street. Parents bring in their children.
Thank God we have the Constitution, even if the Senate ratified such nonsense it would lose when challenged to the Supreme Court as it is a violation of our Constitution.
The UN is a mess.
Also, Catholics are not the only ones who can suffer from this crud. Many Muslims send their children to muslim schools and force them to pray 5 times a day. And then there is the jewish schools and hindus… all religions are targeted, unless it is humanism and socialism.
The Church does not go out there and grab children off the street. Parents bring in their children.
Thank God we have the Constitution, even if the Senate ratified such nonsense it would lose when challenged to the Supreme Court as it is a violation of our Constitution.
The UN is a mess.
Also, Catholics are not the only ones who can suffer from this crud. Many Muslims send their children to muslim schools and force them to pray 5 times a day. And then there is the jewish schools and hindus… all religions are targeted, unless it is humanism and socialism.
T
TAS2000
Guest
Ok, so whenever I point out a gaping flaw in your argument, I am not getting the point?
Your original post only attacked the RCC, and up until your latest comment about suicide bombs, you were only talking about the RCC. So why the change?
Your orignal post was not about when the sacraments were administred, which many, including myself have pointed out occur in the teen years in many places, so it can hardly be a church edict saying “force them while they can’t fight back.” Your original post was about the RCC using force, which you have yet to support with any kind of actual evidence other than your own personal conjecture.
Seems to me you are the one straying from the original topic.
Your original post only attacked the RCC, and up until your latest comment about suicide bombs, you were only talking about the RCC. So why the change?
Your orignal post was not about when the sacraments were administred, which many, including myself have pointed out occur in the teen years in many places, so it can hardly be a church edict saying “force them while they can’t fight back.” Your original post was about the RCC using force, which you have yet to support with any kind of actual evidence other than your own personal conjecture.
Seems to me you are the one straying from the original topic.
L
Linnyo
Guest
- My original post did not attack the RCC.
- The point about suicide bombers was in response to your request for cases of where RE had been harmful! RE meaning religious education not necessarily catholic education!
- If you don’t like the discussion feel free to leave at any point. I do not force people to be here!
- Age 9 - 11 is not the teen years.
- I did not start with an argument only a query! I do, however enjoy debating the issue as do other people. If you don’t then that is your choice!
L
Linnyo
Guest
Interesting point. It also seems a valid point. Interestingly enough, I live in Scotland and the schools here were originally started by the churches (RC and non-RC). When the churches handed the schools over to the government it was on the condition that RE was always to be part of the curriculum in every school. It is a legal requirement to have RE and religious observance in UK public schools. We are also part of the UN which to me seems a bit odd.
RE/observance has a written law to ensure that it is continued whereas maths and English don’t. Makes a person wonder what school is all about. :whacky:
T
TAS2000
Guest
Ok, I’ll try to slow down so you can understand.
1.Your original post said:
1.Your original post said:
So I assumed we were only discussing the RCC.
- I see no mention of a cradle muslim sueing because he was forced to become a suicide bomber in your original post. You were the one who jumped from the RCC to other fanatical groups. I would agree that just about any fanatical group could easily be proved to be using force. But I thought we were discussing the RCC. Please provide supporting evidence of any kind that the RCC uses force in its RE, which was the topic at hand.
- I never said anything about not liking the discussion, just about your continual refusal to stick to the original topic, the RCC using force, and to provide any kind of supporting evidence for your position. If you can’t provide proof, don’t blame me and ask me to leave. Try supporting your position.
- Several posters have pointed out that it is typical to be confirmed at around the mid-teens here (and I respectfully submit that the population in the US is greater than in Scotland). I myself pointed out I was 15, which was actually young for my group, most other kids as sophmores were 16. You have stated that in your area, it is typically done around 9-11. Since there is obviously a difference, it can hardly be said to be a church plot trying to get them before the age of reason.
- An argument is a discussion; a debate, or a dispute. I would think as an educator that you would know that, but if not consider yourself informed. I also enjoy debating, but you aren’t really holding up your end. You have to provide support for your position, and I have yet to see you do so.
L
Linnyo
Guest
- well as you yourself pointed out, I started the thread and I can change the subject as often as I like. Call it … a woman’s perogative.
G
gogogirl
Guest
View the UN’s Office for Human Rights. There is a Convention on the Rights of the Child that spells out the “rights” of a child.
This document can be viewed at:ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm
Here is just one of the articles listed.
W
wjp984
Guest
I thought children don’t have rights until the age of 18 on these kinds of issues. Basically, as long as the parents aren’t showing neglect I think they are allowed to enforce whatever beleifs and upbringing desired. I could be wrong though.
B
Black_Jaque
Guest
It just goes with natural law that the parents should hold the perogative of passing their faith on to their children. The parents are the most qualified to pass on a faith without biased interest. There are very few parents who would pass on a belief system that they themselves do not hold to be true. A governmental body certainly could and would take advantage of indoctrinating a child in a faith that could be exploited later by the ruling elite.
Besides, think of all the other whacky scenarios you could cook up with this line of reasoning. Doesn’t every child have the right to choose their own language? Being raised in an English speaking household is infringing on a child’s rights if they would rather learn Spanish.
And finally, doesn’t every child have the right to be taught the truth? If this is so, prove that Catholicism is untrue and you’ve got it case. If you can’t prove it untrue, then I guess you’ve gotta let the parents go with it.
Besides, think of all the other whacky scenarios you could cook up with this line of reasoning. Doesn’t every child have the right to choose their own language? Being raised in an English speaking household is infringing on a child’s rights if they would rather learn Spanish.
And finally, doesn’t every child have the right to be taught the truth? If this is so, prove that Catholicism is untrue and you’ve got it case. If you can’t prove it untrue, then I guess you’ve gotta let the parents go with it.
L
Linnyo
Guest
If you live in the UK, you are part of the UN and have to abide by the Genoeva Convention of Human Rights or you could potentially be taken to court. The question we are debating is whether or not a person brought up in RC schools and homes would be able to make a plausable case.
B
Black_Jaque
Guest
I think I see why it’s going to get more and more critical for the US to open it’s doors to immigrants. We’re gonna have Catholics coming from Mexico, China, and now the UK.
G
gogogirl
Guest
Based on what I have read about the children’s rights, I think the child would be able to make a plausable case if he or she was forced to learn about any faith against their will. First, the child would have to know that this document existed. Second, they woud have to be able to find someone willing to represent them. I have done quite a bit of reading on this topic and have seen several instances where the state and social services organizations have stepped in because there was a fundamental difference in how they viewed things versus how the parents actually did things. I have read cases of people losing their children because they did not do as the state saw fit. Believe it or not, that has been in the U.S. and we technically did not sign and agree to the Children’s part of the Bill of Rights. In this day and age, many people and organizations are of the attitude that parents are incapable of raising children. All it would take is one of these fanatics to find a child that was dissatisfied with the way the parents are handling him and make the case.
L
Linnyo
Guest
Interestingly enough, in the UK in the 1600’s (I think) when the churches handed the schools over to the government there was an attached condition so that legally, schools must teach R.E and observance. Strange…there is no law that states the same abou language and maths!:whacky:
- Status