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.