Teaching children religion is borderline child abuse and should be discouraged.

My opponent neglected to give a definition for child abuse, probably because that would show his resolution is either a hyperbole, or just an absurd notion. He did add 'borderline' to the resolution witch may be good enough to tolerate how strict he needs to prove 'religion' meets the qualities of child abuse, but we shall see as the debate moves on how seriously he takes his own resolution. For he must prove not only mere discouragement of teaching 'religion' but that it borders child abuse. If we see how child abuse is defined by law at this site . http://www.oregon.gov... we have a better idea for how to judge education of religion if it meets those criteria. Besides the traditional qualifications under physical abuse they are a few other ways to qualify as child abuse. Neglect:Neglect is failing to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, supervision or medical care. Now for the Jehovah's Witnesses, my opponent just might have a case hear in terms of medical neglect. . http://www.religioustolerance.org... But the resolution involves all education on religion as a whole, not a single religion in itself. as pointed out in my source, neglect can include encouragement or exposure to a particular activity, but only if its illegal. Now my opponent could start arguing that 'teaching religion' should be illegal if he wants to in the next round, but it would require he contradict his round one arguments on the rights of the individual to choose what to believe. But I would not find such a contradiction relevant because that would involve tolerating my opponents current path of thought, that an education on any given subject connects with choice of what to believe. If individual A attends all the same classes as individual B from birth and continues to attained all the same educational classes it does not follow that they will believe the same things always even if just referring to subjects pertaining to those classes. Even if your parents teach and encourage you to believe the same faith as they have, it provides next to no imposition on there child's choice of what to believe. Take resident DDO member FREEDO for example . http://www.debate.org... He is 15 right now and has very insistent parents that he believe in God yet he makes his choice with strong conviction to not believe in anything of the sort. My opponent appeals to fundamental beliefs held by the United States of America as a basis for his argument. Why my opponent does not find this beliefs as a religion I do not know, if you check the back of a penny or a 5 dollar bill you will see the image of a temple built for its God. Whether or not the USA beliefs are religious is not important though, because unless you are prepared to claim the USA a holder of only perfect views it is not authoritative on this one. I could just as easily cite the views of our Native American ancestors views to defend against his position . http://www.powersource.com... They believe it is our duty to pass on our beliefs in our children, for your children is all that is left of you when you die. To be honest that Cherokee wisdom makes a lot more since to me than your US wisdom. We must try to teach our children our own ways, for that the ultimate objective in even having a child, it is the true security you can have in making sure your life was not a waist. But my opponent of course will not care for such wisdom for that involves caring about our children, and he hates our children, he is an ageist. it is like a raciest except his prejudice is based on age. He claims Children are not mature enough to critically analyze topics like religion. Does he know I wonder that they are children as young as TWO years old in MENSA . http://www.dailymail.co.uk... . http://www.youtube.com... If we look at the video I have provided I think we should consider adults as the ones who are not able to critically analyze, not our children. I have already provided an example in FREEDO on why my opponent is mistaken about how easily intimidation decides the beliefs of ones child. If anything it would confirm for us that a little bit of Intimidation helps strengthen ones resolve in there dissenting belief. In conclusion: 1) I have shown education on beliefs are no where near 'Borderline' child abuse. 2) There is even good reason to encourage attempt at passing on your beliefs in your child, any other contribution you make to the world outside of how your child is raised can rot, but your child's character and the beliefs that drive go on forever in your child and your child's child that he passes them onto in turn. 3) The inability for children to think critically on such a simple subject is false notion. And an ageist one. 4) Being an ageist, is my opponent really the person to take any opinions from on child abuse. It is those that respect the youth that should be considered to actually care about the youth. I await my opponents response.