Autism, Religion and God

Post Reply New Topic

What are your thoughts about teaching an Autistic child to follow a religious faith? I only agree with it if it is used to teach respect and compassion for others.

Please feel free to leave a comment on here or directly on my blog.

https://dwarren57.wordpress.com/2015/05 ... religion2/

Why pollute a young mind with creation mythology when you can mold him or her into a rational thinking individual...
You don't need religion to teach good morals and ethics...

Helping others sound be driven by philanthropy and the charity of the more fortunate. Fate f*cks some harder that others.
You're supposed to a philanthropist because you're human, not because or your disillusions of a "life after death." If those delusions are all real, what's baby cancer? The devils work or genetics?

Some people will always create something either ugly or beautiful out of their beliefs, no matter what their specific faith may be.

Why would this particular issue be any different for autistic vs. neurotypical kids?

You would teach a faith if you believe in it and not just only for the reasons you mentioned

All parents, regardless of their beliefs, pass on their beliefs to their children. That can be good or bad, but is a necessary part of parenting. I can't think of a way that one could parent without doing that- you'd have to never see or interact with your kids- in which case, you're not really a "parent", are you? When you believe something, it means you think it is correct (otherwise you don't believe it), so in doing this, they intend it in a good way, although of course sometimes it turns out badly. I am not religious, so I am not teaching my children to worship a god or gods, but that is not because I am opposed to teaching kids to believe in god, it's because I happen to not believe in god myself. If I did, then I would teach them to believe in god. A large part of parenting (of any child) is teaching them what YOU believe is how life should be lead. Personally, I think there are good and bad ways to teach a child to be religious, but I'm also sure that there are good and bad ways to teach a child in a non-religious way. Just because I don't believe in god doesn't mean I don't believe in anything at all- and you can bet I am teaching my kids to live life how I think it should be lead (just like religious people are). And not everyone would agree with my way of leading life (just like they wouldn't with religious people's ways of leading life).

My family was fairly religious. My grandmother was a fundamentalist and very nasty about it. My mother had serious hang ups around religion. I was expected to follow their religious beliefs. That didn't work out very well. I have really never been capable of the kind of religious belief most people have.

Because I didn't fall in line even at a very young age (preschool) I got in a lot of trouble. My mother used my inability to "believe" as reason to punish me, reject me and was angry that it embarrassed her. My other siblings all were dutiful as kids to follow the whole religion thing to a T and do so as adults. They follow the veneer but it certainly hasn't made them all good moral people in any way.

I hated being forced to go to church as a kid. I hated religious preschool and got kicked out for blasphemy. I hated Sunday school and refused to go after the first day some nasty old woman yelled at me for not knowing who all the apostles were. I was four.

There is a difference between sharing a religious belief with your child and forcing compliance to it as a parent.

Is it safe to assume that respect and compassion for others are values quite dear to you? Then you're not so different from a fundamentalist - you approve only of instilling your own values. It's only the values themselves which differ.

I would not teach any child in my charge to follow a religious faith, nor would I allow them to remain ignorant about such matters. I tend to think there's more to be learned of faith in Euclid than in the Bible, and better lessons on anti-faith in the hyperbolic and elliptic planes than Dawkins and Hitchens.

Actually, if you want your kid to learn compassion and respect; don't show them religion.
most religions, christianity first, are full of bigotry, discrimination and superiority.
sure, they tell you to treat your fellow humans with respect and all, but in the next chapter, it defines "fellow humans" as "those who share your religion"...

For some, growing up with your religion chosen for you by your parents is just another group you're expected to assimilate with, whether you truly believe or not. I used to think my religion would protect me from all of the things I was afraid of. When I began to question it, I started realizing just how much of my fear was actually coming from the religious belief itself. I was especially certain that Hell was incompatible with a loving/good/just god, but like the cruel trick that it is, the fear of eternal torture enforces itself and it took a while before I could act upon my disbelief.

If someone is religious, that's fine with me to a point. I think though that it's immoral to push your beliefs onto your kids. If you have to be raised into a religion to believe in it, then that doesn't sound like faith. As far as autistic children being raised in religion vs NT children, I do think it can be worse. My break-up with religion seemed a lot more drawn out and mentally taxing than it was for my brother. Sure I'm much happier without religion now, but it was difficult to escape its gravity.
Raised w/o Religion -> Continue Disbelief => No Added Anxiety
Raised w/o Religion -> Gain Belief => No Added Anxiety
Raised w/Religion -> Continue Belief => No Added Anxiety
Raised w/Religion -> Disbelief => Anxiety
I would also be wary because some parents might tell their autistic kids that God will cure them, as many do with LGBTQ kids. That road leads nowhere good. Religion can also assign you enemies without them having ever done anything to you. That's counterproductive to what I want in life.

Thou shalt love the Lord thy God. Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Thou shalt love thyself.

If this is all that a child learns concerning 'religion', then it is a Good Thing.

It's all that other crap that poisons their minds.

Take out the middleman and simply teach the second half. If you leave God in it, you are asking one to believe nonsense...

Is it safe to assume that you're implying that the existence of a neighbor isn't nonsense? Then obviously you must be able to provide a deductively certain proof of the invalidity of solipsism, yes?

Accepting the claim that my neighbors are not merely figments of my imagination requires at least as much faith as accepting some (certainly not all) claims about God.

Edit: Not to mention, to be taught to love thyself and to love thy neighbor as thyself, without connecting that love to anything greater than one's immediate surroundings, sounds like a recipe for xenophobic nationalism.

You want to make this complicated. So, I'll simplify for you. First, I can prove that your neighbor exists. I could physically present him to you. If you have a concern the neighbor is a figment, I could have him hit you over the head to demonstrate. No God exists, so you can't physically produce it. Atheists have good morals and we need not be threatened by Hell to have them. Ever hear of the Golden Rule. Love requires respect. I can respect people for who they are without superstitious beliefs. To accept the existence of a God requires total faith in the supernatural as there can be no evidence in support of such nonsense. And lastly, I use the term nonsense intentionally...

No, you can't, and if you believe otherwise you do not understand what the word "prove" means, let alone the problem of induction.

You can provide evidence to support the assertion that my neighbor exists. You can provide evidence which any reasonable person would agree is conclusive in support of the assertion. But proof is not a matter of evidence, which is why actual scientists truly and sincerely do wish people like you would stop misusing the word "proof".