For: Some people would argue that children should follow the religion of their parents to prevent possible family conflict. For example, if a child had grown up in an orthodox Christian family, but decided to convert to some other religion - like Buddhism - this could lead to arguments and strains in family ties if his/her parents were unwilling to accept the conversion (since many religions encourage followers to raise their children in their religion). Family is important to a lot of people, so to maintain good relationships with parents, it could be argued that children should follow the religion of their parents.
Against: Those who disagree may argue that children shouldn't have to follow the religion of their parents. This is because every person has the right to freedom of religion. Since even children have the fundamental human right to choose which religion to follow, a child does not necessarily have to follow the religion of their parents.
Although not everybody would agree, i think that children should follow the religion of their parents.
Those who disagree with me, says that just because a children's parents follow a certain religion, it does not mean that their children should follow it too. They say that children should have their own choice at what religion to follow.
In addition, some atheists say that their is no God, so all religion is nonsense. They argue that parents should not influence their child to believe in things which does not exist, as the world is not perfect and their is evil and suffering in the world.
However, some people say that children should follow their parents religion because the child is raised in a home where the religion is often practised. This allows the child to experience how the religion works, so they should follow it as they will understand the religion better.
Furthermore, some Christians also say that children should follow christianity because they are raised in a family of love and faithfulness. They say that the child will learn good morals and beliefs if they follow Christianity.
Therfor, i believe that a child should follow their parent's religion if they do not know which religion to follow, but ultimatley should not be forced to pick a religion just because their parents follow it, rather they should be persuaded to follow their parent's religion, but if after persuasion the child still does not want to follow that religion then the child should be able to pick their own religion.
FOR: some people would agree with the statement based on religious laws being an integral part of civil laws. For example, the basis of Christianity is the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:3-17). Four of these commandments evidently apply to atheists and agnostics, as well as theists: honour your father and mother, don't murder, don't steal and don't lie. By following these religious laws, children may understand more of these "rules" which generally apply to life and not just their childhood. In this way, children learn to be more independent quicker, seeing as these "guidelines" generally form the basis of their learning. Therefore, children should follow the religion of their parents.
AGAINST: religious laws sometimes cause problems (within a secular society), especially since not all religious laws are civil laws, and sometimes vice versa. A typical example is arranged marriages. In Hinduism (and Islam?) it is one's sacred dharma (duty) to marry someone of one's own respective varna (class system). Parents usually arrange the groom and bride, therefore children marry out of religion and not love. Being married to a "stranger" could cause conflict, especially since this marriage bond must be sustained until death. Therefore, children should not (be forced to) follow the religion of their parents.
The issue to be discussed is whether or not children should follow the religion of their parents. Those who say that children SHOULD follow their parents' religion would argue that it is the duty of children to obey parents and not oppose them. These people might also say that if children are brought up in a religious environment, it is unlikely that they will want to convert to another religion.
On the other hand, although not everyone would agree, I would like to argue that children do not HAVE to follow the religion of their parents. First of all, if a child's parents are religious, then he/she would grow up in a religious environment and inevitably become a follower of that religion. However, when children grow up, they may have religious experiences that are so strong that they cause them to convert to other beliefs. Furthermore, when God created us, He gave us free will, so that no matter what environment we grow up in, we all have the freedom to choose what we believe in.
In conclusion, I believe that children do not necessarily have to follow the religion of their parents.
For:
ReplyDeleteSome people would argue that children should follow the religion of their parents to prevent possible family conflict. For example, if a child had grown up in an orthodox Christian family, but decided to convert to some other religion - like Buddhism - this could lead to arguments and strains in family ties if his/her parents were unwilling to accept the conversion (since many religions encourage followers to raise their children in their religion). Family is important to a lot of people, so to maintain good relationships with parents, it could be argued that children should follow the religion of their parents.
Against:
Those who disagree may argue that children shouldn't have to follow the religion of their parents. This is because every person has the right to freedom of religion. Since even children have the fundamental human right to choose which religion to follow, a child does not necessarily have to follow the religion of their parents.
well here's my attempt at a proper answer :D
ReplyDeleteAlthough not everybody would agree, i think that children should follow the religion of their parents.
Those who disagree with me, says that just because a children's parents follow a certain religion, it does not mean that their children should follow it too. They say that children should have their own choice at what religion to follow.
In addition, some atheists say that their is no God, so all religion is nonsense. They argue that parents should not influence their child to believe in things which does not exist, as the world is not perfect and their is evil and suffering in the world.
However, some people say that children should follow their parents religion because the child is raised in a home where the religion is often practised. This allows the child to experience how the religion works, so they should follow it as they will understand the religion better.
Furthermore, some Christians also say that children should follow christianity because they are raised in a family of love and faithfulness. They say that the child will learn good morals and beliefs if they follow Christianity.
Therfor, i believe that a child should follow their parent's religion if they do not know which religion to follow, but ultimatley should not be forced to pick a religion just because their parents follow it, rather they should be persuaded to follow their parent's religion, but if after persuasion the child still does not want to follow that religion then the child should be able to pick their own religion.
See you if you can find a good quote to support or go against this statement
ReplyDeleteim not sure if this will work ... ?
ReplyDeleteFOR: some people would agree with the statement based on religious laws being an integral part of civil laws. For example, the basis of Christianity is the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:3-17). Four of these commandments evidently apply to atheists and agnostics, as well as theists: honour your father and mother, don't murder, don't steal and don't lie. By following these religious laws, children may understand more of these "rules" which generally apply to life and not just their childhood. In this way, children learn to be more independent quicker, seeing as these "guidelines" generally form the basis of their learning. Therefore, children should follow the religion of their parents.
AGAINST: religious laws sometimes cause problems (within a secular society), especially since not all religious laws are civil laws, and sometimes vice versa. A typical example is arranged marriages. In Hinduism (and Islam?) it is one's sacred dharma (duty) to marry someone of one's own respective varna (class system). Parents usually arrange the groom and bride, therefore children marry out of religion and not love. Being married to a "stranger" could cause conflict, especially since this marriage bond must be sustained until death. Therefore, children should not (be forced to) follow the religion of their parents.
The issue to be discussed is whether or not children should follow the religion of their parents. Those who say that children SHOULD follow their parents' religion would argue that it is the duty of children to obey parents and not oppose them. These people might also say that if children are brought up in a religious environment, it is unlikely that they will want to convert to another religion.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, although not everyone would agree, I would like to argue that children do not HAVE to follow the religion of their parents. First of all, if a child's parents are religious, then he/she would grow up in a religious environment and inevitably become a follower of that religion. However, when children grow up, they may have religious experiences that are so strong that they cause them to convert to other beliefs. Furthermore, when God created us, He gave us free will, so that no matter what environment we grow up in, we all have the freedom to choose what we believe in.
In conclusion, I believe that children do not necessarily have to follow the religion of their parents.
thank yoouuu :)
ReplyDelete