Should a person be allowed to teach their own children morals? Or should the state do that job?

Question

Should a parent be allowed to teach their children that homosexuality is wrong? If not, what should the penalty be to the parents who do?

Should a parent be allowed to teach their children their faith? If not, what should the penalty be to the parents who do?


My opinion is that parents should be free to teach their morals and faith to their children and they should be free to associate with people with like morals and faith, and they should be free to not associate with people with radically different morals and faith.

Answer 1

So far this isn't a big issue. As people in the USA often say, it's a free country.
Basically, I don't know why you're asking this. People are already allowed to teach their children what they please and associate with whoever they want.

Answer 2

The parents should be the only ones teaching morals to children. Not that I dont believe schools have a responsibility also but the parents are the primary teachers.
If the parents believe that homesexuality is wrong then they have every right to believe that it is the schools teaching the wrong morality. Society does not creat absolutes in morality today anymore than they did when they taught that homosexuality was evil. Remember that society has not been all that accepting of alternate life styles for very long. There are still laws on the books about sodomy.
So do you think that schools should teach their version of morality over parents. Considering that societys opinions change faster than parents or churches?
Schools will teach the governments morality. So if the goverment decides that there is an epedimic threatening a country then that epidemic will become immoral ( aids, Ecoli) and begin to teach a morality that reflects that fear.
For that matter hitlers germany taught a morality that meant eliminating all inferior beings. Retardation, epilepsy, physical deformity, race. Was it ok for that goverment to teach morality?
or is it only ok if the goverment teaches a form of morality that I agree with?
Parents teach morality. Goverments brainwash!

Answer 3

I'd love to agree that the parent should teach a child morals and faith. But coming from a background in Family Court, I understand that this is not an optimal solution. Of course, neither is having the State do it. The problem is the either group will simply continue to foster its own hates and fears. We can't punish the parents or children for teaching and learning poor morals -- but eventually, the children will punish society, if taught poor morals, by disobeying the LAWS -- and then the State will punish the children and parents.

Teaching children to have an open mind, gather facts, and judge for themselves would be the best thing to do, but that is not about to happen, now, is it?

Answer 4

Children learn what the live... How can a parent Not teach their children their faith and morals(or lack thereof) if their living in the same home?? I plan to homeschool my own children because I don't want them to get utterly confused about basic Right and Wrong issues with all of the gray area on whats okay and isn't baing taught in public schools.

Answer 5

Do you feel that someone is challenging this right?

You can teach children that homosexuality is wrong all you want. I advise against teaching children that they should punch every gay person they meet in the face. That obviously infringes on the rights of others.

You can teach your children any religion you want. I advise against teaching your children that they should forcefully convert everyone they meet. I feel that many people out there would like to force their own messed up religion on me and my kids. I say there's no need for religion in public schools. If someone is such a great Christian, they're spending lots of time teaching their children about religion anyway, so why is it so important to have a 15 second prayer out loud in every classroom?

You are free to distance yourself from whomever you like. What do you think your children should do if they grow up and get a great job, only to find out that the boss has a different religion? Should they quit? What if they get another job only to find out that a coworker is gay? Quit that job too?

That's why tolerance and good manners are important. We all share the same earth and we might as well live peacefully. If you choose not to, then you do. That's your right and no one challenges it. Personally, I like everyone. Even you.

Answer 6

The State needs to keep their collective noses out of what parents teach their children. Once the State started telling people how to raise their children, things have gone downhill ever since.

And the most vocal on how to raise children are the ones that never had any!

Answer 7

The State does'nt know how and some of the
parents don't know how and they leave it to
the teachers at school. The teachers don't
know how and THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG
WITH THIS COUNTRY. The parents need to
start doing their job and teach their children
the basic morals. Also, I agree with your
statement.

Answer 8

I agree with the first half. As for the last paragraph, I would associate with those with different morals. Mind you, I'm not going to any gay rights things, but if I knew someone is gay or lesbian, I'll still be friendly. One time in my single years I worked with two lesbians. Yes, they were shacked up. Anyway, I hadn't had a boyfriend in a long time, and they got the wrong impression. They invited me to their house. I accepted. They had also invited this other gal to their house for lunch or whatever. Me, being unstupid, figured out what was going on. I informed them I don't swing that way or believe in that choice. We were still friendly, but I had no more invites to dinner. But we still got along well at work. I'll be friendly with muslims and so on. I won't take part in their religious practices, but will still visit with them and so on.

Answer 9

In California, this is a big deal right now. The lawmakers are trying to pass bills saying that the school (state) is in charge of education, and the parents have no say in the matter.

Personally, I think the parents are the ones that should be responsible for teaching faith and morals to their children. I don't think the public schools should teach that stuff. They should stick to math and stuff.

The day they pass the law that says public schools will be teaching sexual indoctrination to children is the day I pull my kids out and start homeschooling. I will not have such lies taught to my kids. It's shameful.

Answer 10

i'm no longer so advantageous that breaking apart households replaced into the point of the welfare gadget, even regardless of the undeniable fact that that's a effect. AFDC did no longer fund intact households because of the fact it replaced into theory that the conventional public does no longer help giving funds to able bodied adult men, so the adult men left. in case you do away with that limit, households should not be broken up by using TANF, fairly if reception of advantages demands that the two mothers and fathers gain literacy on the 10th grade point and then flow directly to the two community college or technical training or apprenticeship. i might have the education service, incredibly than a social centers place of work, furnish those advantages and does no longer place self assurance in the conventional public education gadget to furnish the education. incredibly, i might settlement with the countless parochial structures, the Catholic gadget is composed of recommendations, to open remedial person severe colleges. different faiths could additionally get on the bandwagon, even regardless of the undeniable fact that they have much less of a music checklist of inner maximum education. Even then, they might do greater constructive than the state. so a techniques as unemployment and Social risk-free practices, there is a few thing to be mentioned for using households. even regardless of the undeniable fact that, you are able to no longer turn a pickle lower back right into a cucumber. i think of the proper we are able to do, and what might desire to have been finished initially, is to establish a gadget the place those taxes are diverted to direct worker possession, with a pair of million/3 held lower back into conventional funds for the widow (probably greater, on condition that existence expectancies for widowed spouses are longer). those funds does no longer be paid down at as quickly as, yet incredibly they may be used to purchase an annuity in the process the residing house of worship, or if none exists, by way of an authorized secular fund with strict barriers on commissions.