Is taking children to church a form of child abuse?

[Monster Energy]

On 2026-05-03 at 4:09 PM, enchanted said:

Everything is child abuse: Our food, our education system, our culture, the way we encourage our kids to out compete each other.  And then we wonder why they become destructive unhappy adults.

Not to mention that just by giving birth you are contributing to overall net suffering. Even relatively good lives have more suffering than pleasure. This makes reproduction unethical in a certain sense. 

That’s just collapsing everything into one big cynical narrative.

If everything is child abuse, then nothing is. You’re blurring all distinctions. There’s a massive difference between imperfect systems and actual harm, and pretending it’s all the same is just intellectual laziness.

Yes, society is flawed. Obviously. Competition, pressure, lack of awareness all of that shapes people in ways that can lead to suffering. No disagreement there.

 

 

[Monster Energy]

12 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Them being born is then a form of abuse, taking them to school is a form of abuse, letting them watch TV, YouTube, the news, joining a youth political party. Nobody has any idea what they are doing when they are born and are just exposed to things outside their control. That's life.

Yes, a child doesn’t choose to be born. Yes, they’re exposed to things outside their control. That’s literally what being human is. But calling all of that abuse just empties the word of any meaning.

 

[Monster Energy]

8 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:

This is kind of a slippery slope because we can say lying to kids that Santa Claus exists is not right, but this kind of lying is seen to be innocent.  

Not all “lies” are equal.

Telling a kid Santa exists is usually temporary, culturally understood, and doesn’t shape their entire view of reality long-term. It’s more like play or imagination that eventually gets corrected.

If a belief is presented as absolute truth and not open to questioning, that’s very different from a harmless, temporary story.

So yeah, it’s not really a slippery slope.

 

[Monster Energy]

8 hours ago, Hojo said:

@Monster Energy The beliefs dont matter, if there is no harm being done, a church can have a community for the child to grow into a human being.

A church can believe whatever the fuck it wants.

But what the church does that is important is a place for human being to come together and form a community to worship God.

You’re separating beliefs from harm like they’re unrelated, but they’re not.

Beliefs shape how a child sees reality, themselves, and other people. That’s not neutral. Even if it looks harmless on the surface, it’s still conditioning.

Yes, community is valuable. No one’s denying that.

 

 

[Monster Energy]

6 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

The only type of abuse this could fall under would be abuse of power. 

Age of consent, and consent in general, is central to this line of argument. 

Due to just how entrenched and permanent some beliefs can be - especially while we are still developing - it is almost a permanent psychological belief tattood in an unseen way. We see this again and again with users here even, who leave their religion, have some trips or spiritual breakthroughs - and remix/interpret it as Christ or Jesus (just an example). Thus returning to their past indoctrination. 

Physical circumcision performed on infants without consent (barbaric imo).

Only a circumcision for the mind.

You’re not wrong about the power part.

But beliefs aren’t permanent like that. People question them, break them, change them.

You’re putting ideas into a mind that doesn’t even know it can question yet.

 

 

[Monster Energy]

4 hours ago, gettoefl said:

Until you are of age, everything you do is imposed.

That’s an overstatement.

 

[gettoefl]

2 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

That’s an overstatement.

 

They have no agency or standing. If they go off-piste for 5 seconds, parents call the police. Only a slight overstatement there. Source: I was that child.

Edited 1 hour ago by gettoefl

[Monster Energy]

2 hours ago, Human Mint said:

Making them pray, memorize the chants and making them assist church is an insult to the infant's intelligence.

And yes, kids need to be imposed rules so they don't die. But not everything imposed is equally harmful/healthy.

You’re still flattening everything into one category.

Kids need structure. That’s not abuse, that’s development.

 

[Monster Energy]

5 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

They have no agency or standing. If they go off-piste for 5 seconds, parents call the police. Only a slight overstatement there. Source: I was that child.

I get that this is your experience, but it doesn’t apply to all kids.

Some grow up in strict environments, but saying children have no agency goes too far.

Most kids still have some freedom in how they think and respond, even with rules.

 

 

 

[gettoefl]

38 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

I get that this is your experience, but it doesn’t apply to all kids.

Some grow up in strict environments, but saying children have no agency goes too far.

Most kids still have some freedom in how they think and respond, even with rules.

 

 

 

Child only does what parent rubber-stamps. Childhood is sanitised slavery, Be a good monkey and you'll be treated well. Schools are glorified baby-sitting warehouses. Churches are legalised brain-washing cults. Am I wrong?

Edited 19 minutes ago by gettoefl

[trenton]

I had a friend named Noah who hated his name. He was an atheist born into a religious family. He had to go to church for things he didn't believe in. If a child wants the approval of their parents, then they might silently act like everything is fine while internally dreading everything. So, if you took your child to church and they acted like everything was fine, how would you know if they were acting this way because they liked church or if they are acting this way for the parent's approval?

If religion becomes evidence of conditional love, then the child might hide their true feelings from the parent. I guess my question is, if taking a child to church is considered immoral, then what kind of information should we expose children to? Are we not ultimately shaping children based on what we think is right due to our limited understanding of child psychology?