ITT: People forget that religion is the foundation of our code of ethics and without it we would become a baby murdering liberal society. oh wait....

No We shouldn't teach them religion But we must teach them [i]about[/i] religion, it's role in human history is pretty important...or something

[spoiler] Although I answered yes before fully understanding the scope of the poll and the presented question, I must remain firm in my belief that Christianity should, and will inevitably, be practiced around and by the youth themselves.[/spoiler] [quote]Do you think children should become religious from the start of their lives? As in without their input? (I.e; going to CCD and getting confirmed as in Christianity)[/b][/quote] I believe there a certain delicacy we must take when approaching children with any sort of information. Santa obscured the reality kids lived in for centuries. We aren't talking about parents sitting their 5 year old kids down and speaking dialogue such as you would speak to the pride of a man or the essence of a woman. There is innocent and new life in the eyes of the youth, even more so when the children that are still under the wing. Meaning, a child without religion is the same as a child with religion, a seed will grow if one is planted. (Speaking in a psychological sense) The soil is no different for it is the consciousness we have obtained to view our world, the only difference is the seed. And there is one seed that counts for more occurrences and major harvests throughout history than any other and is still thriving today. Today, though, as we get older, our soil becomes polluted if not met with the maintenance only described as repentance. Seeds are suppose to eventually become manifested stalks of inexorable life. Some grow slower than others and others are conceived later than some, but they are all part of this universal stalk. And since scientist, atheists and secularists alike tend to like having their intelligence tested, I must ask if you even realize the capability of a conscious mind. Just think about it. Everything that is processed in our reality is a result of the evolutionary process. That is to say that the brain, being the control center of a human, was only produced by the genes that make up your genome. So essentially, the cells that met to fill the pool of genes in which you were to develop is what controls your every being. Your genes are in every aspect of your body but no one has ever said that "your hair secretly stores thoughts from every moment in your life". My point here is saying consciousness only happens in our minds, in the human brain and we are only conscious IN our bodies. You have some control of its processes and functions like choosing to exercise but it's mostly nature running it's course. We sleep, eat, reproduce. Now we have to work toward slavery to the ever exponentiating debt due to an unnamable amount of unnecessary reasons. I say all that only to digress, children are incredibly sensitive to the new world. (Meaning that what is exposed will be processed in that mind for the rest of it's existence. The narrowing of a mind happens the more opinionated you become. It has nothing to do with the capacity of mental functions. It's the overload of bs that makes people go on the defensive, psychologically.) Oh, and can be desensitized to it's worldly ways, simply through enough repetition. It ultimately boils down to whether you're going to teach your child about life or death. How often do we see death on the tv? In video games you die repeatedly. Hollywood thrillers. In turn, this completely redefines death, and all of it's messages in the psychology of the generations. But life has a book called the bible that hasn't really needed to "advance" much retain it's legitimacy. (And let's be honest, although Darwinists and most atheists embrace the now, and the potential to do great things with your existence, these values are still leading to questions that only accepting a merely physical death can suffice for. Not to say happiness or morality aren't obtainable.) In the beginning it was wisdom and humility and grace and justice that governed the land. Over time, this presence became more conservative with his might and direct influence and intervention on humanity. Leaving it up to us. Literally. Asking us "who and what will you allow to influence you? And would you want that influence on your child?" It seems that your question begs more explanation than you bargained for. I just pray that I'm on par with your level of rational thinking. In short, children should know about His story, and should be properly educated in all areas of the human inquisition, and should be able to relate to the world as soon as possible for the health of their well being and to be a positive member of society. Unfortunately, atheists attempt to make them look like outsiders so it's less inviting to prescribe to a religious belief in general. Nonetheless, history isn't complete without religion, the same way reality would not be complete without science. Would I rebuke science? Of course not and never will I discourage scientific vision or scientific inspired knowledge, but to me, there is a limit that science SHOULD abstain to, and also be at a certain level transparency with it's lesser involved counterparts. Children have a right to know--not only as your child, but as a growing, rapidly developing, potentially productive member of a society that is constantly changing trends-- that the principles, values, and mindset it takes to face the world are not coming directly from us but rather we are an example of this law in nature because consciously can be. We could defile each other over resources that we aren't in contention for in the first place, or we can commune and be a peaceful, civilized people. Did I say religion is required? No, but I say belief in such a place is. [quote]Do you believe religion would be as much of a commodity if children were not taught it, and how would this change your personal stance on faith?[/quote]b] Religion is a commodity because of the richness of life that it brings, and that goes for all religions. Not because they're taught but because they adopt it into their behavioral pattern and lifestyle. "Be fruitful" it says and to stay within constraints of the law. Which implies moral governance, not moral jurisdiction. Now, we see people having, and adopting, children for THEIR lifestyles. You don't find the English language to be a commodity anymore, do you? That's because pretty soon, the world will forget the English language ever existed. Religion is essentially the driving force for life in our modern era of death. And religion is on the brink of a revival of which the likes we have never seen. Which is why atheists are in upheaval over this truly enlightening fact. It has been a pleasant challenge, taking on your question. I'll end by answering the second part of the final question. I wasn't taught religion until I asked, maybe around.. 10 or 11, and even when I asked, I was skeptical. To this day my skepticism has skepticism. I had embraced my skepticism along with this image of myself knowing all the answers to all the questions before they were asked, which is fantasy of course. Mainly when I was researching Socrates and other philosophical teachers. Approaching every question from every angle I could imagine. But does it matter what angle you look at an object if there is no light? Does it matter if there is any light at all? Does the object still matter in the dark as much as it did in the light? If it did then you wouldn't have to see the object to appreciate it's value, it's shape, it's importance. Or does the light make it more glorious? Indeed. Light is necessary but sometimes it eludes us. Does that make the light any less revealing? Far from it.

Religion is something you find, not something you learn. [spoiler]hail hydra[/spoiler]

A child shouldn't be branded with such a burden as religion from birth. Let the child grow and develope, they'll come around to asking you about Jesus. You will be the definite answer to their questions. What religion, if any, chosen upon it is beyond the control of whoever taught. [spoiler]No, OP, I'm not using "you" as in you.[/spoiler]

No. Even tho we are being taught religion where I am (Christian) in school. I don't think you should. There's so many religions. And if you have a desire to be a part of 1,then you'll have to seek out and find the 1 matching you. Teaching kids in school about religion will force them to believe in 1 thing. I don't believe in any God or anything. I believe in science and the big bang theory etc. I believe in what can be proved. Not what ppl wrote down centuries ago. That's just my opinion

It's funny how like I'll ask people if they believe in God and they say no, then keep on talking about him and they'll say the hate him, but how do you hate something that doesn't exsist? Jesus died for us so we could live on after death. A lot of people take it for granted.

For some reason atheists tend to think they're smarter than Christians based solely on the fact that they do not believe in God. It even appears as if some users here are making the claim that religious people do not know how to critically think. If that's the case, then I guess all the scientific achievements Christians have achieved do not exist, and all the inventions Christians made that atheists take for granted must not exist, because they were constructed by intelligent, critically thinking Christians, who apparently do not exist. According to these atheists, Einstein's theories are wrong, because he was religious, and all the atheists there ever were know far more than Einstein, just because they do not believe in God. This is a dangerous line of thought these atheists are treading down. These atheist arguments actually contribute to my argument: that we need to improve religious education in the United States and the to the rest of the western world, in order to fight these atheist delusions and manipulations that are a plague to intellectualism.

Everyone's born an agnostic. Is say let them stay that way until they are mature enough to comprehend what religion is.

I don't believe it should be required however I think that science should only include stuff that is it contradicting religion. I mean I'm a huge atheist but it pisses me off when they talk about science and include stuff that religion says is wrong. In my eyes religion is wrong but I'm not forced to learn their belief so why should religious people be required to learn something that goes against what they believe.

Children should have a right to be taught religion. But the dumbass atheists don't want their kids to know about God. They want their kids to grow up to become close minded fu[b]c[/b]ks

How is teaching them atheism any different? Regardless, you're indoctrinating them into a particular belief system.