This is just a thought i had right now while thinking about a conversation i had with a friend over dinner last night. He said,

"religion shouldn't be inherited. no child should be enrolled into a religion at birth (ex. baptism) without their consent. it becomes a part of their identity, yet many don't receive any kind of real education about it throughout their life. it's taken for granted and essentially loses value. moreover, i think a greater problem lies in the fact that because they've been raised with that one belief alone, their openness to other beliefs may be limited because it contradicts the one that's already been forced upon them. if one chooses to accept a religion into their life, i think they should only do so after some education (not just academia) and real world experience. many religions have their own codes of conduct in regards to social interaction; they have their own interpretations of the true nature of civilization, its origins and the ultimate purpose in existing (assuming there is one), etc etc. shouldn't one actually know their world first before accepting those ideas, rather than accepting it at the stage of their life in which their intelligence and, moreover, cognitive abilities were at their lowest? of course it's impossible to discover everything here in a lifetime, but one should pursue to create some kind of foundation of knowledge before they make a real concrete decision to orient their life around one set of ideas, whether it be religion or other philosophy, etc etc. those who merely accept religion as something they've grown up with are essentially just signing a contract while blindfolded."

That's all. Your thoughts on this are more than welcome. I would appreciate if you would share your thoughts on this. So I could maybe stop thinking about this.

I agree to disagree with your view. What parents impose on their children is what they think is right and as their parents this is the one right they have to teach their children about education as well as religion. However, when their children are grown up and can have mature decision it should be left to them which is quite a common case for Christians. If a Christian wants to adopt another religion as far as my knowledge is concerned they just give free will to their children to do so.

I don't know much about other religion like Islam and Hinduism whether they allow their children to do the same freely or not. I heard that in Islam it is the toughest. That's my small take on this matter. Thanks.

Lets take this apart...


This implies that baptism is an act solely done with and for the person being baptised. This ignores the fact that religious rituals, of which the baptism is one. HAve a meaning not just for the person immediately involved, but also for the relatives - parents. Very often a religious ceremony like a funeral is for those left behind and not simply for the person gone, or just born.
This also ignores the fact that IN a religious ceremony a religious act takes place. God accepts the Child and the parents celebrate this. God takes the dead person into heaven and the relatives celebrate this.

Consent: Tricky. Did you consent to the fact that you were born? Or died? That you are white or happy, that you are born in a slum in Washington DC, that you have red hair, or black, or none? What did you do, when your parents took you to the football game each weekend. Did you become a sport superstar, or did you hate it? Who chose your kindergarden and your primary school?


I cannot see anything negative about taking something for granted - apart from the fact that lack of education is to be lamented and reveals a lack of curiosity and interest.


Now here I would strickly disgree. See my first point. Something does not loos value simply because the people involved don't know what they are doing. It might lose value FOR THEM. But that does not mean it looses value overall. I am also wary of the use of the term values here, but more to that later.


Now this seem to be rather strange. The fact that you don;t know about something and have no relationship too - which the writer implies - makes more opposed against something else. If you don't know anything about what you are for, how does that make you more opposed? You either do know about what was forced on you, and the argument falls apart, or you don't know about what was forced on you, which makes it impossible for you to distinguis the other belief from the one forced on you, apart from the label attached. Example: You don't know that as a Christian you belief in the resurrection of Christ. Now a Muslim comes along and says, Jesus did not resurect, but he ascended straight into heaven. How are you to argue this, if you don't know anything about the Koran, the Bible, the Christian tradition? The only thing you can say is. He is a Muslim - he is wrong, but why you don't know, because of your lack of education. If you were educated, you could say: "Yes, I know the Koran claims that Jesus did not die on the Cross. But I believe the account as it is being described in the Bible. Jesus did die on the Cross. We have to agree to disagree here. Moreover I believe the greater importance of the Bible over the Koran and I cannot accept this interpretation of Jesus suffering simply because it is what the Koran says. It has a relevancy to me on the following........ What do you think about that?...... Aha.... Very interesting .... Hmm.... Good.... Still.... Thank you I learnd a lot about your faith and I hope you too."


Well I sort of agree with the poster here. Of course it would be good if a cognitive decision was a the start of all religious life. But it hardly ever is. I don't know anybody that said, My intellect says I have to become a Muslim, my reflection over the last ten years made me realise that only Krishna shows me the only true path, having learned about all world religions, compared their human right records, their attitude towards woman, drugs and spirituality, I have come to the conclusion that only as a Rastafarin I will truely become on with the Universe.

You see conversion does not work that way.

You want to marry someone and her family makes you convert to their religion becasue that is what they want and you are alright about it.
You go to a service and suddenly a feeling overcomes you that makes you feel relaxed, elated and joyous at the same time. And everytime you pray you have the feeling that your actions are not futile, but are carried not by you, but by your God.

That is more like how conversions take place. They are not rational decision but emotional ones. That does not mean that religion is only emotional and cannot be rational - far from it. But very often religious pracice need emotion to manifest itself.

Now the writer is rejecting being born into a religion. I simply cannot agree with him on that. In my opinion he oversimplyfies the complexities that is religious life, the social aspects and the cultural traditions that are important to ones identity.

Your parents have chosen you to born, when to born, where you born, your name, your school etc etc.

Your parents have chosen to you your father or your mother, when they selected their partner or having sex.

Your parents chosen for you your nationality your mother-tongue.

You have inherited from your parents, your genes, color, shape, your blood category and many many from their features and charcterstics

The government and the laws recognized that and put them in the laws of custody, cultures, non-discrimination....independent person, driving age, election age, candidacy age,....

Your parents are responsible for your fault when you still dependent.

Your parent choose for you what they think is the best for you: your clothes, your school,, your food, your drink,.....

Then what the difference for the religions. They think you it is better to you their religion because they believe that they chooses the best. They think the values and commandment for you in their religion will be good for you.

You have the right when you become independent to change your name and your religion as well.

Imagine when your parents go to church or other religion temples, do you expect they will leave you home and seek baby-sitting?

Imagine when your parents and other relatives celebrate religion festival, how they isolate you from that?

I agree with the friend, religion should not be inherited. How many of you with inherited religions genuinely decided to look into each religion and question your own? It doesn't happen, except to few people who become enlightened alone or through life circumstance, because we grow up and live in the box that is labeled for us. My parents were strict believers in their religion, Islam, but they were against me believing in it until I knew about other religions first so that I could choose what was right. I was even put in a Catholic school for all of elementary and the rest of my education in private Christian schools. I was made to take classes in Judaism. I chose Islam myself, I am such a stronger believer in it because it wasnt inherited and taken for granted.

I don't think it is bad for religion to be inherited, as long as the child in question is completely content and has had the chance to explore other religions as well. Parents should not push children into participating in religious activities they do not find meaningful.

I agree with your friends. A human beings we have the right to choose for our selves, freedom of hoice, right? Well if you force something, whether it is religion, or anything else, it almost brakes that right.

religion shouldn't be inherited
just because your mom is catholic doesn't mean you're catholic
you have to really believe and have faith