The Instigator
mossbeboss2
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Rightwrongs
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points

Should parents be able to punish children for not believing the same faith as them?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Rightwrongs
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/12/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 412 times Debate No: 88135
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

mossbeboss2

Con

Parents shouldn't be able to say that kids have to believe in their religion, and that if the kids don't, the parents can't be unfairly strict with them. For example, the parent's can't say that the kids can do something if they don't live in their house because it would be physically impossible for the children to do so.
Rightwrongs

Pro

Parents are the ones that pay in all possible sense for a child and should be aloud to pass on their religion. For example a mother feels the need to protect their child (and I will use Christianity for example) and if they have not accepted Christ risk death. Should a parent live knowing their child could die and risk eternal salvation. Religion can also pass good moral and lessons for life and can assist in the parenting process with guidance. And when they say that a child can do what they want when they live elsewhere is physically impossible. I will assume you are a minor having issues with your parents or something of the sort. A child will not die or just simply cannot physically leave to another home. The word you might look for is legally leave to live elsewhere. And even then children can get new homes and at age 16 you can go to court to be legally recognized an adult. And that phrase means when they turn 18 they can do what they want so because they are an adult.
Debate Round No. 1
mossbeboss2

Con

Okay. I agree now with the whole legal thing, but it still isn't right for parents to force children to do something just because of an opinion they have. The parents need to realize that so far the child has been raised in that certain faith, and the faith has impacted the child in some way. The child isn't going to completely disregard the church's beliefs. They probably will end up in a different church, that still believes in the same base beliefs as the first church. Also, about the whole should the parents have to suffer thing, the parents should accept that that is what the child believes and get on with it.
Rightwrongs

Pro

For this argument I will be using Christianity for my examples and references being one of the religions I am most familiar with.

It is a lot easier to say a parent should just get on with it if you have never had a child. You worry about them always until you die its that simple. And don't think of it as forcing an opinion but a belief that its fact. They believe in eternal damnation that is easily avoidable. But will keep you out of trouble through your life, you wont worry about STD, what happens next, job, money, anything. Because its all in Gods hands and it will give you an emotional base. And if you don't agree with the religion then just go with it, it wont cause you physical harm and it will put there minds to ease a little more. And in the constitution first amendment freedom of religion. And part of that religion is passing it on to your child.
Debate Round No. 2
mossbeboss2

Con

I don't have a problem with them not agreeing with me. I have a problem when they start making it so that I can't do other things because they are mad that I don't believe what they believe. Whether they believe the child is going to go to Hell or not, they shouldn't let that interfere with other things that the child needs. For example, they can't stop doing some of their responsibilities to do as a parent like feeding the child and providing other necessary physical as well as mental things that the child needs. The Constitution's first amendment of the freedom of religion applies to both children and adults. The children have the right to choose their religion, and the adults need to not force the children to believe a certain religion.
Rightwrongs

Pro

I would like to clear whether you are arguing that it is moral or legal to do so. But for now I will argue the legality of it.

It is accepted in the courts that a minor does not have the same amount of rights that an adult has. This is why you can't say what you want when you want at school. Your parents are legally in charge of you and make the choice of what, where, why, and how you do things. That's why they say you can do what you want when you live in your own house. you will be an adult and have full legal rights.

I am arguing the devils advocate (meaning I don't necessarily agree with my side) I do not agree that children should be neglected in any form and should not be punished beyond minor adjustments. And I happen to be a christian and I get this faith from my parents. I know that it is not always easy to agree with them, and I am sorry for any emotional tolls this is taking. But maybe listen to the faith and think for a bit, or at the very least "pretend" they cant read your mind so just act like you believe. It will get them off you and give you time to breathe. But at the very least you can say the following that is good at fixing this type of problem. say that you are willing to look over the faith, but that you need to believe it yourself not just go through the motions and have it demanded from you, and that is what God wants and says in scripture. I wish you the best of luck and God bless.
Debate Round No. 3
mossbeboss2

Con

I guess your side makes sense too. Whatever.
Rightwrongs

Pro

Thank you for a good debate and I hope your personal situation improves and that you take my advice to heart. Though you may not agree with it but it does holds merit. God bless you
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Rightwrongs 11 months ago
Rightwrongs
andd to the shrekoning it does not go against what america stands for especially considering it was built on and with religious aspects such as In god we trust and our inalienable God given rights. But it is also obvious that a child can not have full legal rights because they are still children and many of the constitutions rights apply to adults. Or are limited to some degree.
Posted by Rightwrongs 11 months ago
Rightwrongs
Redatheist I would love to have a good debate.
Posted by Shrekoning 11 months ago
Shrekoning
If the child was an adult, it would be a direct violation of the first amendment. But our culture allows parents to essentially be dictators. They can literally make all kinds of stupid rules just to make the kid's life hell, just for the fun of it.

So it sounds like a moral argument to me. IS a parent allowed to punish for kids being heathens to their religion? Unfortunately yes. A direct violation of the constitution is allowed for children. It is disgustingly un-american. SHOULD a parent be able to punish for disbelief? No. Definitely not. Not only is it immoral, it is a direct violation of everything America stands for.
Posted by RedAtheist219 11 months ago
RedAtheist219
Rightwrongs could I have a debate with you of the same topic please?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Hoppi 11 months ago
Hoppi
mossbeboss2RightwrongsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro argued clearly that parents have a legal right to raise their children as they see as best, and Con seemed to concede on this point. Pro also argued convincingly that religious parents would see faith as essential for the child's wellbeing and future, and Con did not really address this point, so overall arguments to Pro. Con's arguments that parents shouldn't force their children to believe were too vague to be convincing, and I was confused because I don't think it's possible to force someone to believe something. I think you can only force them to act in certain ways and say certain things, so a bit more clarity on this issue from Con would have made his argument stronger.