Is Religious Indoctrination Criminal?

[PsychoticEpisode]

Is there a crime committed and what is the crime(s) when......

A person or persons of faith knowingly convert someone non-religious to their particular religion by any means possible.

Note: 'any means possible' includes anything from a loving perspective to a physical beating or worse. In each case, the person being converted either did not ask to be converted nor wish to be converted.

If someone is indoctrinated without expressing an original interest in the religion of faith of their converter then have they been violated?

*As an afterthought.....Is something similar to the Stockholm Syndrome at work in the minds of the indoctrinated?

 

[Hapsburg]

No, it's not criminal. Not anymore than changing someone's mind about anything else.
As long as real, discernible abuse is not a means or an end, then there's nothing wrong with attempting to convince others to hold your beliefs.

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

No, it's not criminal. Not anymore than changing someone's mind about anything else.
As long as real, discernible abuse is not a means or an end, then there's nothing wrong with attempting to convince others to hold your beliefs.

Do you admit to being indoctrinated?

 

[Hapsburg]

No, because I've never been indoctrinated into a religion. I was never raised with any religious beliefs or into any faith group; I came to my beliefs on my own accord.

But, I don't think it's wrong to proselytise, if that's what one's religion calls oneself to do. Mine doesn't, so it's a moot point for me. I just don't give a damn.

 

[mike47]

One of life mysteries : I always wondered why some folks are very preoccupied with trying to convince others to change their religions .
I see all religions as useless and therefore if you worship a mouse or a dog or an ass or a vagina; it is none of my business as long as you are peaceful, law abiding , with reason and logic . I follow no religion and I hope all religions will be buried before my end here in life .

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

No, because I've never been indoctrinated into a religion. I was never raised with any religious beliefs or into any faith group; I came to my beliefs on my own accord.

Sorry I just want to be clear about this before I comment..... Do you have your own religion or belong to a religious following?

 

[Doreen]

Is there a crime committed and what is the crime(s) when......

A person or persons of faith knowingly convert someone non-religious to their particular religion by any means possible.

I think you need to be more specific, as any law would be, at least compared with this. If they walk up and talk to someone, well they'd be free to do that. If they lock them in a basement and don't let them eat and bombard them with religious ideas, well, no, they don't get to do that, that's a crime.

If someone is indoctrinated without expressing an original interest in the religion of faith of their converter then have they been violated?

Depends on what the converter does.


What do you think?
Would you have the same ideas about political indoctrination?
Do you think the children of Republicans are the victims of a crime if they grow up to be Republicans?

 

[Michael]

I see all religions as useless and therefore if you worship a mouse or a dog or an ass or a vagina; it is none of my business as long as you are peaceful, law abiding , with reason and logic .

follow a religion with reason and logic?

 

[mike47]

follow a religion with reason and logic?

I mean you worship your dog but you are a nice person with society..... .

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

I think you need to be more specific,

I don't think I can be any more specific than the thread title.

Depends on what the converter does.

Of course there are already laws on the books for some things. This is a given. Yes, known criminal acts can be committed in the course of indoctrination. However the actual intent, to convert, would precede any act of persuasion...deemed criminal or otherwise.

 

[Hapsburg]

Sorry I just want to be clear about this before I comment..... Do you have your own religion or belong to a religious following?

Neither. I identify with a specific religion, but I am not a member of any religious group. No one taught me it or converted me; my beliefs are mine and I came to them on my own accord. Nevertheless, I choose to identify myself as part of a religion because my beliefs and practices fit to it.
If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, and looks like a duck, you might as well call it a duck. Because it certainly ain't a turkey.

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

No one taught me it or converted me; my beliefs are mine and I came to them on my own accord.

Indoctrination isn't always about being taught. There are other forms of psychological enticement. Plenty of methods that can sway the answers to one's innermost questions.

 

[Hapsburg]

When one comes upon the answers on one's own free will, that's not really indoctrination. Otherwise, you're defining all thought derived even tangentially from those of others' as indoctrination. Which is about as accurate as a shotgun at 1500 meters.

 

[NMSquirrel]

i think ppl tend to missuse the word indoctrinated..

wiki definition here

what i think it means
in order to join a particular orginization (not just churches) you have to believe in their rules,their statement or creed..and not question them..(that puts me out..)

you can be indoctrinated in any job that you have..you have to believe as they do and subscribe to their rules without question otherwise you will be fired..

don't make the mistake of assigning that word just to religious orginizations..

 

[lightgigantic]

Is there a crime committed and what is the crime(s) when......

A person or persons of faith knowingly convert someone non-religious to their particular religion by any means possible.


Note: 'any means possible' includes anything from a loving perspective to a physical beating or worse. In each case, the person being converted either did not ask to be converted nor wish to be converted.

If someone is indoctrinated without expressing an original interest in the religion of faith of their converter then have they been violated?

*As an afterthought.....Is something similar to the Stockholm Syndrome at work in the minds of the indoctrinated?

So if I wasn't convinced that it was a crime, and you knowingly convinced me to think otherwise, would that make you a criminal?

 

[Doreen]

I don't think I can be any more specific than the thread title.

Then the answer is clearly that religious indoctrination is not, per se, criminal. Some forms of indoctrination, including some of the ones you've mentioned, are illegal. But they would be illegal if you used them to get someone to buy Colgate toothpaste or even to get someone to engage in empirical studies.

Of course there are already laws on the books for some things. This is a given. Yes, known criminal acts can be committed in the course of indoctrination. However the actual intent, to convert, would precede any act of persuasion...deemed criminal or otherwise.

Yes, the attempt to convert is not illegal.

 

[Bishadi]

Is there a crime committed and what is the crime(s) when......

A person or persons of faith knowingly convert someone non-religious to their particular religion by any means possible.

Note: 'any means possible' includes anything from a loving perspective to a physical beating or worse. In each case, the person being converted either did not ask to be converted nor wish to be converted.

If someone is indoctrinated without expressing an original interest in the religion of faith of their converter then have they been violated?

*As an afterthought.....Is something similar to the Stockholm Syndrome at work in the minds of the indoctrinated?

so since EVERY child is born unaware of any word called 'god' then does it make the parents responsible, liable, a criminal?

interesting thread

 

[parmalee]

so since EVERY child is born unaware of any word called 'god' then does it make the parents responsible, liable, a criminal?

interesting thread

well, apparently the introduction of every single fucking notion for which there is no immediate, apparent evidence may very well be a criminal act on the part of the part of the parent, i.e. "you're going to the zoo today, little billy!" billy accepts this, but what the fuck is a "zoo." and there you have your "crime."

yeah, it's all real CLEAR.

try again.

 

[PsychoticEpisode]

don't make the mistake of assigning that word just to religious orginizations..

I am well aware of that. I have done no such assigning...the thread is in the form of a question.

lightgigantic
So if I wasn't convinced that it was a crime, and you knowingly convinced me to think otherwise, would that make you a criminal?

If I wasn't convinced it was a crime to kill someone and you convinced me it was then I don't see how that makes you a criminal. I see your reasoning, the crime in reference to the thread title would be atheism and religious indoctrination the crime preventer. Something like that?:shrug:

Doreen
Yes, the attempt to convert is not illegal.

I think LG's use of the word knowingly is important because when someone consciously makes the decision to convert another person, it implies that premeditation & motive existed prior to the conversion. IOW's a deliberate act is perpetrated upon another person. Now whether you think that's criminal or not is the question.

I could take it a step further and ask if violating the rights of an individual is a criminal act. Does a person have the right to decide their religious destiny without interference from religion, as in Hapsburg's case? Does a religious organization or a member of that group have the right to indoctrinate as many people into their fold as possible?

 

[Bishadi]

well, apparently the introduction of every single fucking notion for which there is no immediate, apparent evidence may very well be a criminal act on the part of the part of the parent, i.e. "you're going to the zoo today, little billy!" billy accepts this, but what the fuck is a "zoo." and there you have your "crime."

yeah, it's all real CLEAR.

try again.

at least the zoo can be defined, experienced and verified

bringing up a 'god' to a child REQUIRES most to lie thru their teeth

(practically requiring the teaching party to break (per se) god's rules of no false witnessing)

what is more important?

creating an image (lie) and teaching it (breaking the law)

or being honest; in compassion for the others over the selfish NEEDS of the complacent

teaching 'good and bad' has nothing to do with a diety

and the first rule i try and keep is honesty over my own weaknesses (complacent ideology)

ie... it is perhaps why most atheist (blatantly deny a god) come from previous adherants (they sick of the lies)

kids aint born liars, they learn it