Opinion on the video?
[quote]Top scientists Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss advocate for children, arguing children should be allowed to develop as critical thinkers and be protected from religious indoctrination.
Speaking with The Irish Times, Dawkins, a leading biologist, and Krauss, a leading physicist, defended a child’s right to a proper education.
Dawkins said:
[quote] There is a balancing act and you have to balance the rights of parents and the rights of children and I think the balance has swung too far towards parents. Children do need to be protected so that they can have a proper education and not be indoctrinated in whatever religion their parents happen to have been brought up in.[/quote]
Krauss said:
[quote]That means parents have a limited — it seems to be — limited rights in determining what the curriculum is. The state is providing the education, it’s trying to make sure all children have equal opportunity.
And parents of course have concerns and a say, but they don’t have the right to shield their children from knowledge. That’s not a right any more than they have the right to shield their children from health care or medicine.
And those parents that do that are often tried and imprisoned when they refuse to allow their children to get blood transfusions or whatever is necessary for their health. And this is necessary for their mental health.[/quote]
Dawkins, Krauss, and other intellectuals make an interesting and compelling claim: forcing children to accept the religious superstitions of their parents can be a form of child abuse. [u]For example[/u], teaching children Biblical creationism as a legitimate scientific alternative to the theory of evolution is a form of child abuse.
Yet if we are to accept this claim, what are the implications for social policy? Should the government step in and protect children from the religious superstitions of their parents?
Or should parents retain the right to force their religious beliefs upon their children, even when those beliefs are demonstrably harmful to the education of the child, as is the case with teaching creationism, or even teaching kids a woman's role according to islam?
And what about religious schools, as well as homeschoolers, engaged in the explicit task of indoctrinating children?
How does society protect children from the damaging excesses of religion?
How does society defend a child’s right to a proper education, even if that education violates the sincerely held religious beliefs of their parents?[/quote]
Opinions?
-
It's a difficult question. By "protecting" someone from being influenced by a certain system of belief, you're enforcing your own belief on them. There are many non- religious equivalents as well, such as political affiliation. Another would be vegetarianism. If parents believe eating animals is cruel, should we "protect" the children by forcing the parents to feed them well rounded meals? Or should we make it so no children eat meat until they're old enough to make their own decisions on what, if any, rights animals may have? To truly "protect" someone from outside influence, you'd have to teach them nothing and just let them live wild and free until they were old enough to form their own interpretation, but that would lead to some very underdeveloped people. My personal opinion is that people should raise their own kids, but not shield them from alternative opinions. (limits on what they can watch on TV or what kind of video games are age appropriate are fine, but be willing to discuss why you've established those limits)