The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Parents Should Tell Their Children About Every Different Religion Instead of Indoctrinating Them

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/7/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 564 times Debate No: 86222
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (0)




In every society, parents should not indoctrinate their children with absolute statements about God, the origin of the universe, or any of the other big questions.

Parents should explain the differences between different religions and ideologies.

Then they should allow their children to decide for themselves what to believe or reject.

If you believe parents should bring up their children to believe a certain way without telling them about alternatives, I would love to debate you.



Good morning everyone who is reading this debate. My name is minddrag and I am very happy to meet my find opponent, Trying2Think. Now since my opponent only has a short paragraph as a sort of acceptance, I will only have a mall paragraph outlining my views on this subject.

First off, a child is the parents responsibility. This means that the parent is responsible for teaching them anything that the school does not cover, and is responsible for the upbringing of the child until the point that the school takes over, and even on from that point. This means that religion is part of the parents curriculum, not the education system, nor any other system of learning. I believe that the child should be a model of the parent itself, and if the parent only decides to teach the children a certain religion, then that is the religion that is taught in that household. How is it the responsibility of you, I or the government to tell parents what they should teach their children in terms of their religion.

Also, most religions have a process where you confirm that you are part of the religion at a later date, mostly when you are old enough to think for yourself. This process in my church is called confirmation, and it is where you take a journey through the christian faith, learn about the faith you were born into and confirm whether or not you would like to be a member of that faith and the congregation.

These are my beginning points, and I look forward to a good and fun debate. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for joining me.

A. First, allow me to detail that which I agree with in your first statement.

1. Parents are responsible for their children.

2. Parents are responsible for teaching their children anything they don't learn in school.

3. Religious teaching is the responsibility of the parents.

B. Now, I will detail two other points.

1. I am not arguing that a government should tell any parent how to teach their children. I am in favor of parents having the ability to homeschool their children. Although, I do recognize that a poor teacher is a poor teacher regardless of their relation to the student.

2. Also, I do not care if a religion has a process to confirm any of its maturing congregation. That is beside the point I am attempting to make.

C. My point still stands.

1. Parents should teach their children critical thinking. It is the obligation of a good parent to ensure their children know basic decision-making skills. They should do this regarding all decisions, but especially questions which do not have absolute answers.

2. It is morally wrong to tell a child an absolute statement which in reality is a mere belief.

3. I think that it disintegrates the child's ability to make coherent decisions because the child learns to accept things without thinking them through.


Thank you for that enlightening argument. I will now attempt to rebut your points, and then move on to my next constructive speech.

Now for my rebuttals. I would like to ask you how it is morally wrong to teach your child your religion? If a child is supposed to be a reflection of the adult then it should be the adult's choice to teach the child.

I would like to ask that if the parent teaches the child why a religion states what it states then it would not teach the child to accept things without thinking about them. It teaches the child to always ask why. As long as religion is taught in a loving and kind way to inform the child, and the child responds to the teaching then it is fine.

I would now like to move on to my constructive speech. I would like to first ask the question, Would you like to teach and parent a child that challenges the very core of your being and every word you say? No I would not. I would like to teach my child my religion, and take him to church with me. I would then have him/her critically examine everything within it and critically evaluate it. Religion is not hard and fast. Everyone should have their own reason why they have their religion and why they follow it.

If religion is defined as the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods, where you are taught certain morales and values ascribing to said religion. This means that religion is directly ascribed to morale values. Now I would like to again ask a rhetorical question, Would you like a child without the same morales as you? No I definitely would not. I would like my child to understand and follow my morales and values.

All of these facts and reasons are why children should be only taught the religion of their parents, as it is the parents decision what to teach their children. I look forward to your concluding round.
Debate Round No. 2


A. It is not morally wrong to teach a child ABOUT a certain religion.

B. It is morally wrong to teach a child to ACCEPT a certain religion.

1. A child is pre-disposed to trust its parents in order to survive.

2. A child needs to be able to trust its parents when it is told do not touch the hot stove or do not play in the street.

3. That same trust can be used to manipulate a child into believing certain unknowable aspects of our existence.

4. I am strongly opposed to any manipulation of a child's pure trust in order to believe certain ways about currently unknowable things.

C. The decision to follow a certain religion or religious leader is individualistic.

1. Young children cannot make this decision.

2. Because young children cannot make this decision, they should not have it made for them.

D. It is important to teach a child about morality.

1. There are multiple ways to derive a personal morality.

2. Religion is one way.

3. Society is another way.

4. The different means of obtaining morality should be explained to children.

E. It is detrimental to teach a child that morality should be unquestioned because of a creed or code.

F. Decisions regarding how a child should be raised should not flow from the personal pleasure of the parent.

Thank you.


Thank you for your argument, and for a great debate. I would first like to rebut some of my opponents points, and then I will end with a conclusion. Why is it morally wrong to teach a child to accept one religion? How is it wrong for you to not accept all religions. I accept all religions but I only FOLLOW Christianity. It should not be morally wrong to accept one religion nor to follow or practice one.

Even when children are told not to touch a hot stove, they often do. This demonstrates that children are not even as close to dumb as you think they are, and are more then able to think for themselves to a certain extent. Since this blind trust is, as I have proved, not there then you cannot manipulate a child based on blind trust.

One example of this is my friend, brought up a Catholic and sent to catholic school, who is now an atheist. Even though she was forced and only taught one religion she still turned out as an Aethiest, so this just shows that you can follow whatever religion you like, even though you were only taught one.

Now I agree that the decision to follow a certain religion is individualistic, but it is not the RIGHT nor the RESPONSIBILITY for the parents to take their child to all places of worship, in order for my 6 year old son, to think he knows about all religions, so that he can go to the mousque while I go to my church, and have one of us take him. NO! He will go to church with me, until he is no longer in my house. (This is a hypothetical situation, I am a student)

If young children cannot make this decision, why should it not be made for them until they can decide for themselves. Contracts are like this. Is religion not a little like a contract?! As long as it is not harmful and deemed for the minors benefit, church and religion is a good thing! I would like to point out, due to the new T.V. Shows and other things on television and that we see in society, it is not the greatest way to gain a morale code.

I would now like to unprofessionally scream at your last point. "Decisions regarding how a child should be raised should not flow from the judgement of the parent". SAY WHAT NOW!? So now, I cannot raise my child the way I want him to be raised, because why? Not really a reason, just people think that I am not fit to raise my own child. That nobody is fit to raise their child. If nobody raises the child then does the child not get raised? Will we have 50 year old babies as the population of the world, with no religion, and no thought?

I say NAY! I should teach my hypothetical child any religion and morale code I like, as his/her upbringing is left for me to decide!

In conclusion, I as side con must firmly state that I would encourage a con winning vote because every parent should have the right and responsibility to freely bring up their child in any way they like, allowing them to practice the religion with the parent, until they can practice what they wish! Thank you for this wonderful debate and I wish to debate with you further on!
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by minddrag 2 years ago
My apologies Trying2Think,
I have reviewed this debate and I do agree that I wrote the wrong word there, and that I would have to restructure that whole argument, because of that word. That is an oversight on my side, and I would implore anyone that is voting on this debate to discount those final 2 paragraphs which that point is part of. Although I do not see it as a grade A straw-man, I do believe it is a straw-man argument upon careful consideration. I again apologize as I am also new to this site and new to logical fallacies in a way, it was not my intention to use a logical fallacy. Thank you for the debate, and I hope we can debate another topic one day. Again my apologies for the misinterpretation and I hope it does not tarnish the image of this debate.
Posted by trying2think 2 years ago

You completely misinterpreted my final point in round three. Personal pleasure and judgment are two completely different things. It's a shame that you took issue with something that I did not even write. That was a grade A strawman argument. I am very new to this website, and I have quickly found most arguments boil down to semantics. I suppose that is the price we pay to debate online. I'll have to work harder to make the meaning of my words clear. Thank you again.
Posted by minddrag 2 years ago
I would you rather not debate in the comments... Why don't you create an opinion post if you would like to debate it with multiple people?!
Posted by Briannj17 2 years ago
Right on then, my way of thinking exactly.
Posted by trying2think 2 years ago

You wouldn't lengthily explain every different religion to a young child.
However, parents should explain that their way of thinking is one of many. Parents can provide the full weight of reasoning behind choosing their religion. Then they should offer encouragement to explore other religions and ideologies. When I say "tell their children about every different religion," I mean it in a very literal sense. They should convey to their children that there are other ways of reasoning and understanding.
Posted by Briannj17 2 years ago
I believe this would discourage children. Do you realize how many religions there are? Why not tell the children what you believed which is something you know more about instead of giving the children info on something you don't know enough about? I believe you should tell them all about your religion take them to church if you go then tell them to do their research when they're old enough to find other religions that are suitable to them.
Posted by trying2think 2 years ago
If a parent truly believes their religion is true they should not take issue with offering it up to scrutiny.
They should teach their children to be critical of every absolute statement, especially their own.
Posted by dsjpk5 2 years ago
I don't have a problem with explaining other religions as they come up, but if the parents truly believe their religion is best for their children, they'd be bad parents by NOT guiding them in the way they see fit. It's like not teaching them not to touch a hot stove.
No votes have been placed for this debate.