World Religions: Statistics, Respect and Selecting a Faith

[the 48th regulator]

Bingo! A one year old child obviously cannot weigh the pros and cons of religion, they're still figuring out how to walk. The parents need to provide some sort of moral/philosophical framework within which they can bring up their kids. Once the kids start thinking for themselves, it's the parents' obligation to respect the choice of their offspring.

Correct,

But that goes with any choice, not just religion.

18 is the universal age where it is accepted a person is an adult, and until that time it behooves all parents to be the authority in which the child must abide to.

Wouldn't you agree?

dileas

tess

 

[Richie]

I'm not sure if it's because I want my bed, but I don't understand that part of your sentence.
Could you rephrase, please ? (Is rephrase English?)

Yrys,

Dans le francais: "...un education religieux est un education faux dans lequel il ne proscrit pas a la libre volonte."

Mon francais est pauvre, mais j'espere que cela vous aide.

Richie

 

[MG34]

Correct,

But that goes with any choice, not just religion.

18 is the universal age where it is accepted a person is an adult, and until that time it behooves all parents to be the authority in which the child must abide to.

Wouldn't you agree?

dileas

tess

No not at all, children are free to choose what music they listen to, what friends to have, what foods they will eat,etc well before the age of 18, religion or the lack of it is a personal choice that can be made well before 18 years of exposure. I knew at age 13 that the church was not for me, at age 16 I gave up any affilliation to  religion, as it was senseless to me among other reasons. Once a child is able to make intelligent choices for themselves is when they should be free to follow the "religion of their fathers"  or not. One doesn't have to wait until adulthood to make this decision.
Just my $0.02

 

[Richie]

Correct,

But that goes with any choice, not just religion.

18 is the universal age where it is accepted a person is an adult, and until that time it behooves all parents to be the authority in which the child must abide to.

Wouldn't you agree?

dileas

tess

I agree that children should obey their parents' wishes in regard to such matters as when to be home at night, finishing high school, cleaning their room, etc.  However, some children start to think about the meaning of life at a much earlier age than eighteen and if a fifteen year old child can express valid reasons why he or she feels uncomfortable in church or saying prayers or believing in god, then the parents should not stifle their child's intellectual growth. I would hope that the parents would talk with the child and try to discover the thoughts and ideas that their offspring is developing. A child at this stage is beginning to become a Free Thinker and that is a good thing.

Richie

 

[the 48th regulator]

No not at all, children are free to choose what music they listen to, what friends to have, what foods they will eat,etc well before the age of 18, religion or the lack of it is a personal choice that can be made well before 18 years of exposure. I knew at age 13 that the church was not for me, at age 16 I gave up any affilliation to  religion, as it was senseless to me among other reasons. Once a child is able to make intelligent choices for themselves is when they should be free to follow the "religion of their fathers"  or not. One doesn't have to wait until adulthood to make this decision.
Just my $0.02

I agree that children should obey their parents' wishes in regard to such matters as when to be home at night, finishing high school, cleaning their room, etc.  However, some children start to think about the meaning of life at a much earlier age than eighteen and if a fifteen year old child can express valid reasons why he or she feels uncomfortable in church or saying prayers or believing in god, then the parents should not stifle their child's intellectual growth. I would hope that the parents would talk with the child and try to discover the thoughts and ideas that their offspring is developing. A child at this stage is beginning to become a Free Thinker and that is a good thing.

Richie

So you will allow a child to quit school and start their life, getting a job and a place of their own before the age of 18?  Would you allow them to drink, before the age of consent?  Would you allow them to join a gang carry a gun, committ a crime to be part of that group?

You may have been mature for you age, by all means, but we as a society must set parameter. At young age a parent is the embodiment of authority.  I as a parent incorporate religion, which is our familial belief as part of those parameters that I set aside for my child.

I may have taken a strong stance in the examples I have given above, but this is to illustrate that as a society we have created a standard age where a chile is governed by the parent, and unitl otherwise this is the law.

I believe the best post that describes my thoughts is as follows;

If one has strong religious beliefs and is of the conviction that baptism (or other religious rites of initiation) are essential to human spiritual development (or spiritual protection or spiritual survival or whatever), well then that person will ensure their children pass these milestones.  As part of their religious belief, this is looking after the child in the best way possible; failing to do this would be as irresponsible as not teaching a child to keep of the street while playing.

Free thinking is all good, as I follow that in our democratic society.  However, we must follow rules, and while a child lives within the confines of a parents care, it is up to the parent to decide what is right and what is wrong, and the child to live within those rules;  Full Stop!

dileas

tess

 

[Reccesoldier]

I may have taken a strong stance in the examples I have given above, but this is to illustrate that as a society we have created a standard age where a chile is governed by the parent, and unitl otherwise this is the law.

But really 18 isn't some sort of majic number society has agred to.  14 (or is it 16) is the legal age of consent. 18 is the legal age to drink in Quebec but it's 19 everywhere else. At 16 a child can apply to the courts to become emancapated (an adult) and you must be 18 to vote.

 

[the 48th regulator]

But really 18 isn't some sort of majic number society has agred to.  14 (or is it 16) is the legal age of consent. 18 is the legal age to drink in Quebec but it's 19 everywhere else. At 16 a child can apply to the courts to become emancapated (an adult) and you must be 19 to vote.

For sexual consent, my mistake the legal age of Majority is 18 or 19.  I made an error on words.

Age of Majority in Canadian Provinces

Canadian Province Age of Majority
Alberta 18
British Columbia 19
Manitoba 18
New Brunswick 18
Newfoundland and Labrador 19
Northwest Territories 19
Nova Scotia 19
Nunavut 19
Ontario 18
Prince Edward Island 18
Quebec 18
Saskatchewan 18
Yukon 19


dileas

tess

 

[Yrys]

and you must be 19 to vote.

Huh, where ? Not in Canada, to my knowledge.

I do agree that 18 is not a magic number.

For sexual consent, my mistake the legal age of Majority is 18 or 19.  I made an error on words.

http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/A/96007_01.htm
dileas

tess

OK. I think I just change univers. 19 for the majority in Canada ? :-X

Add : It is in BC . Is it in Canada ?

Is age majority a provincial think ? Does Canada have also one ? If so, what is the difference between age majority in a province and in Canada, laws speaking ? Elsewhere then in Quebec, there is only 1 set of law. I never heard of someone being able to do something under Québec age majority, and not Canada one. I wonder
if it complicated think in the provinces where the age is 19.

 

[Reccesoldier]

Huh, where ? Not in Canada, to my knowledge.

Brain fart, You're right I was wrong. 18 it is.

 

[McG]

So you will allow a child to quit school and start their life, getting a job and a place of their own before the age of 18?  Would you allow them to drink, before the age of consent? 

By that logic, do you allow your children to pick out their socks & underwear before 18? Do you allow them to decide if they will have juice or milk at supper before 18?  Would you allow a 16 or 17 year old to operate a motor vehicle and make all the decisions that go with that?  You know as well as anyone else in this thread that 18 is not a magical age at which people suddenly become capable of making a decision. 

You, as a responsible parent, know your children and their maturity.  As a responsible parent, you are also able to ascertain whether or not your child has reached the level of maturity to make the decision (be it 9 or 19). 

 

[Greymatters]

You know as well as anyone else in this thread that 18 is not a magical age at which people suddenly become capable of making a decision. 

Too true, I have met people under 18 who are fully capable of making well-informed decisions, and even more over 18 whose capability I would question...

 

[McG]

... even more over 18 whose capability I would question...

It's a sad but true statement.

 

[the 48th regulator]

By that logic, do you allow your children to pick out their socks & underwear before 18?

From my experience with Socks and Underwear, we would choose the best ones suited to fill their drawer.  After that them may choose which individual ones pique their fancy for that day.

Do you allow them to decide if they will have juice or milk at supper before 18?

I may offer Gazoza or apollinaris,  again choices within the parameters we allow.

Would you allow a 16 or 17 year old to operate a motor vehicle and make all the decisions that go with that?

Sure would, 16 is the legal age to begin to learn to operate a motor vehicle, a parameter set by the Government.

You know as well as anyone else in this thread that 18 is not a magical age at which people suddenly become capable of making a decision.

All about parameters.  I don't allow them to illegally break the laws, because the child feels he is mature enough to do so.  Picking socks and Driving a vehicle is the age old Apples and Oranges.

You, as a responsible parent, know your children and their maturity.  As a responsible parent, you are also able to ascertain whether or not your child has reached the level of maturity to make the decision (be it 9 or 19).  

I however am teaching them rules.  They can pick the colour of underwear, within the group that I have provided.  They want to go outside of the box, then by all means they are responsible enough to go out and buy them with their own money.  By doing this I see that they have reached the next level of maturity and more responsibilities will be given in that I cease to buy their underwear and socks.   At nine if my child decides to grab my keys and go for a joy ride, nope.  The laws of society state 16, with certain rules, they will be allowed to do this.

Although it is all about choices, it is also  about living within a society greater than oneself.

dileas

tess

 

[Reccesoldier]

I agree with living within society (which is really just a collection of individuals) but there are so, so many things about society that are anything but 'greater' than what I can/do/will teach my kids regardless of what society demands or holds as a norm.

 

[the 48th regulator]

I agree with living within society (which is really just a collection of individuals) but there are so, so many things about society that are anything but 'greater' than what I can/do/will teach my kids regardless of what society demands or holds as a norm.

So therefore you agree with what I am saying.

See I knew we would find a common ground, I will hide your name from any future inqusitions for sure!

dileas

tess

 

[Yrys]

I will hide your name from any future inqusitions for sure!

(as the thread is in Radio Chatter) When will it happen ? That I can try to flee the "heretic" sticker ?

 

[McG]

I don't allow them to illegally break the laws, because the child feels he is mature enough to do so. 

Are you saying that there is an age at which you will support your child breaking the law, or are you suggesting that selection of religion (regardless of age) is akin to braking the law?  I don't see either of these as reasonable positions, so please clarify.

The laws of society state . . .

Although it is all about choices, it is also  about living within a society greater than oneself.

The laws of society do not ascribe a minimum age to freedom of religion.  That is your choice, so why are you going to arbitrarily hang your hat on 18 and then hide behind legislated dates related to alcohol?

Keep in mind that society does not have the flexibility to individually allow youth through these gateways into driving, voting, drinking, etc.  Instead an arbitrary age is pick at which it is expected that most will have achieved sufficient maturity.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Are you saying that there is an age at which you will support your child breaking the law, or are you suggesting that selection of religion (regardless of age) is akin to braking the law?  I don't see either of these as reasonable positions, so please clarify.
The laws of society do not ascribe a minimum age to freedom of religion.  That is your choice, so why are you going to arbitrarily hang your hat on 18 and then hide behind legislated dates related to alcohol?

Keep in mind that society does not have the flexibility to individually allow youth through these gateways into driving, voting, drinking, etc.  Instead an arbitrary age is pick at which it is expected that most will have achieved sufficient maturity.

Maybe I am a bit screwed up here, but what is it you are trying to say?

I mean you state one thing, that I quote below, that falls into what I am saying, however now you are questioning my ideology that follows that;

If one has strong religious beliefs and is of the conviction that baptism (or other religious rites of initiation) are essential to human spiritual development (or spiritual protection or spiritual survival or whatever), well then that person will ensure their children pass these milestones.  As part of their religious belief, this is looking after the child in the best way possible; failing to do this would be as irresponsible as not teaching a child to keep of the street while playing.

The laws of society do not ascribe a minimum age to freedom of religion.  That is your choice, so why are you going to arbitrarily hang your hat on 18 and then hide behind legislated dates related to alcohol?

What is the difference?

Again, maybe I am missing your point all together...

dileas

tess

 

[Yrys]

Keep in mind that society does not have the flexibility to individually allow youth through these gateways into driving, voting, drinking, etc.  Instead an arbitrary age is pick at which it is expected that most will have achieved sufficient maturity.

Isn't more because it's convenient that way ?

Competency in an adult is judge by specialists : to stand trial, to refuse medical treatment, etc. It would be inconvenient to have specialist to judge
the maturity of each child about each think : driving, voting, drinking, etc.

 

[McG]

What is the difference?

Again, maybe I am missing your point all together...

We both might be missing each other.  I would have had no argument if you were to have said something to the effect that, as a practice of your religion, you did not believe it acceptable to ever give your children a choice.  It would therefore seem reasonable for you to exercise this prerogative for as long as you are legally permitted (or even longer as a condition of living under your roof). 

I was of the misunderstanding that you were arguing for religious choice arbitrarily at 18 years & thus abdicating your responsibility to make an assessment of maturity.  In reality, I now suspect you are yielding to a legal limit imposed on you.