Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 UW 5/3/83; site uw-june Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!uw-june!emma From: emma@uw-june (Joe Pfeiffer) Newsgroups: net.singles,net.kids Subject: Re: Parents' "rights" and responsibilities Message-ID: <1734@uw-june> Date: Tue, 14-Aug-84 01:55:46 EDT Article-I.D.: uw-june>.1734 Posted: Tue Aug 14 01:55:46 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 9-Aug-84 03:06:16 EDT References: <906@pyuxn.UUCP> <8035@umcp-cs.UUCP> <936@pyuxn.UUCP> Organization: U of Washington Computer Science Lines: 21 Let's see here. I see that I have a responsibility to raise my child to be an independent, functioning member of society. I have no "right", and, I assume, no responsibility, to teach my son anything else. I have a responsibility to teach him to be honest and not to steal. Not because of any moral obligation, but only to better serve society. Apparently I am to accept the social contract as morally binding, but not teach any morals... I assume that I should teach him that the earth is round (to a first approximation). However, I should not teach him that God exists. I don't see the difference. After all, the Flat Earth Society has at least as compelling a position as the atheists... You've taken a completely untenable position, my friend. You are arguing that there is a set of beliefs which are "acceptable" to teach children, and another set that is not. Sorry, you can consistently argue either that I have an obligation to teach my son beliefs, or that I don't (moral behavior such as honesty or independence is, at its root, a moral belief). You can't claim a distinction between beliefs I can teach and beliefs I can't. -Joe P.