Teaching Creationism is Child Abuse

ScatteredThoughts

I just finished watching this on Youtube. A couple of things which were said really stood out to me.


"The purpose of education is not to validate ignorance, but to overcome it."

50% of people surveyed people get this question wrong: The Earth goes around the Sun, and takes a year to do it. True or False?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTedvV6oZjo

BrianSharpe

That reminds of the story about Bill Nye (the Science Guy) being booed by fundamentalists in Texas when he said something about the moon reflecting sunlight (some of them actually believed the biblical statement about the moon being its own light source.....)

sanjoparolas

An intentionally provocative topic for sure! I will never support the teaching of religious doctrines in public institutions. However, if people share their genuinely-held beliefs with their children in their home or in their church, that is their own business. Hopefully, the teachings in public institutions will lead children to question what they are taught and to seek out the truth. I think the term 'child abuse' should be used judiciously to not water it down. That being said, I find the natural world to be awe-inspiring, and feel that the need to look to bizarre myths for 'truth' is the result of an intentional effort to control people with fear.

ScatteredThoughts

I agree that the title is perhaps a bit too much. I almost changed it for this thread, but decided to just go with what was listed for the video.

I think part of the problem is that some people in positions of authority, such as the senator mentioned, are more concerned about pleasing certain groups, even when what they say flies in the face of all evidence.

It is an amazing and intriguing world we live in, and we should be able to explore it fully.

soldier4242

When it comes to me teaching my own children I am emphatic that creationism is bull****. I don't leave any room for ambiguity. I think I would be doing a great disservice to them if i did otherwise. I can see how one could describe it as a form of child abuse or maybe more accurately a form of neglect. For example, I think if they intend to go in to any field of science they would be extremely disadvantage if their ideas were archaic and nonscientific.

emergencytennis

One may as well say that teaching theism is child abuse. The premise is the same - teaching unfounded conclusions to children is so dangerous that it is criminal.

I agree with the poster who said that we should not water down the term "child abuse".

toutmonpossible

I wouldn't have used "Child Abuse" because that's so inflammatory and might even be construed as trivializing child abuse (which I know was not the intention). But yes, teaching creationism or any doctrine that is patently untrue should be criminal. We have enough stupid, uncritical, but terribly vocally opinionated people as it is.

LuckyMunky

I'm torn on this. Part of me agrees with him completely, that it IS in fact child abuse. A parent's job isn't to mold their child into a little version of themselves, with all the prejudices and ignorance intact. A parent's job is to raise another, separate human being into an autonomous adult with their own thoughts and opinions on things. Never once have I tried to push my children into MY way of thinking. Creationists think it's OK to stunt their child's intellectual growth, which is almost just as important as physical growth. If I neglected my son's physical health I could be charged with child abuse, but the same is not true of intellectual or mental health. I have several family members that were raised as strict creationists, and watching them fumble about in a world dominated by science is almost heartbreaking. They were NOT properly prepared for this world and many (mostly the women) live a stifled life.

On the other hand, child abuse is such a heinous and evil crime. I'm not sure forcing outdated ideas and stifling critical thought is on par with sexual molestation and neglect. It is no doubt harmful, but then so is a lot of crap bad parents do. Exposing your child to second hand smoke is probably abusive and will certainly cause harm, but it is not illegal and is in no way on the same level as assault.

soldier4242

Child abuse has always been subject to gradation. I don't think anyone is attempting to dilute the meaning of blatant violence against children. Some instances of child abuse are more severe than others. If we are talking about a violent case of physical abuse then the children need to be removed from the parents.

If we are talking about a parent that is hamstringing the education of their children by claiming that their religious views are scientific views then clearly it isn't bad enough to warrant relocation the children.

Perhaps we shouldn't use the word abuse. I can see how that could be seen as over reaching. I think it is blatantly obvious that the children are being done a major disservice by their parents though.