Home > Philosophy > Teaching our children about morality is not optional

Teaching our children about morality is not optional

January 4th, 2011

Here is a thoughtful article by Friend of Ruth, Rev. Dr. Dale Kuehne. He starts with this example, to illustrate how morally unglued we are becoming:

I recently had a discussion with a Middle School student in which s/he shared that s/he was bi-sexual.

Having done a fair amount of research on sexual orientation, my reading of the scholarly literature tells me that a person won’t fully understand their sexual orientation until their late teens or early 20’s. Hence, I was surprised to hear such a discovery from someone of such a young age.

When I thanked the student for trusting me with such an intimate revelation, I asked how s/he had come to this self-understanding?

It seems that the Middle School at which s/he attends is divided into 3 cliques: Straight, Gay/Lesbian/Transgendered, and Bi. S/he determined that if you are “bi” you could get along with everyone.

As I questioned the child I realized s/he had little comprehension of sexual orientation, was not sexually active, and was not planning any sexual experiments.

Being a people pleaser I can understand why this child would embrace a sexual orientation that would allow them to better get along with their classmates. Yet I was troubled that the sexualization of their school was so acute as to lead a child to embrace a sexual identity in order to ”get along with everyone.”

The main thrust of the article is not about sexuality at all, but about the fact that we have no standards for judging good or bad choices. This child decided to be “bi” for purely social reasons, not rational reasons, not as the result of personal reflection on the self, but just to get along with others. Dr. Kuehne concludes:

To tell a child to make good choices without telling them the meaning of good is literally non-sense. It breeds insanity. For what is an insane person, but a person who cannot make sane moral judgments?

And when a child, so educated, makes a choice we deem to be bad and incarcerate them for it, I believe that child ought to have the right to sue us for moral malpractice.

And I believe we would be found guilty.

Categories: Philosophy Tags:
  1. Jamie
    January 4th, 2011 at 17:33 | #1

    So she made a mistake? I really do not see the problems with her identify as bi for the wrong reasons at such a young age. Either she comes around, or shes so dumb that she would have fallen to something more inane anyway.

    What is the meaning of good?

  2. chrisse
    January 4th, 2011 at 23:33 | #2

    @Jamie
    What is the meaning of good?
    The best place I know to start is with the golden rule : do unto others as you would have done to yourself.

    Of course, this assumes an ordered mind. So, for example, a masochist would not be doing good following this principle.

    In the example in this article, adults are indoctrinating children with concepts that are outside the child’s ability to comprehend with all their complexity. This is causing confusion. The adults in this example have failed.

    In the issue of same-sex marriage, redefining the essential purpose of marriage is to suit adults whims, moving it’s purpose away from the naturally produced children of the marriage union to whatever the adults decide works for them. It is also a fail.

  3. Mark
    January 5th, 2011 at 04:42 | #3

    I agree, Jamie. If our society would stop vilifying homosexuality, this wouldn’t be an issue. The child would feel free to make the decision that is right for the child, NOT what society feels is right for him / her.

    And he ends his article by evoking the golden rule. I agree with him on this issue, which is why it is necessary to support SSM. I can not tell two people who or how to love just as I do not want anyone telling me who I can or cannot love.

  4. Sean
    January 5th, 2011 at 07:19 | #4

    No standards for judging good or bad? What an odd observation! Of course there are standards: don’t harm others (hint, hint) is a good place to start.

    That the student decided to hang out with the “bi” clique, in order to get along with everyone seems rather virtuous. How can you criticize someone who wants to get along with everyone, if only as a goal, even if it proves to be an impractical reality?

    I sense that the author actually grieves that gradual loss of judging others, not the loss of morals.

  5. January 5th, 2011 at 11:36 | #5

    Sean :
    don’t harm others (hint, hint) is a good place to start.

    Indeed, Sean! It would certainly harm children to be created from experimental artificially created gametes, even if they did tons of animal testing and embryonic testing and fetal testing, (ie, lots of precautionary abortions before letting one be born) and were pretty confident that the baby would come out healthy. Just being the subject of such an experiment is harmful. And leaving it legal harms everyone’s reproductive rights, and the research harms everyone’s environment, and costs everyone lots of money. And it harms young people by confusing them about their reproductive options, because if they grow up to believe they might be able to reproduce with someone of their same sex, or as the other sex, they might lose the chance to procreate and be rendered infertile. And it harms same-sex couples and their families to demand same-sex procreation rights and equal marriage rights, because it prevents them from getting protection of their relationship in all the states and recognition by the federal government.

    That’s lots of harm, all of it a direct result of sticking with an insane demand. Give up the Transhumanism, help same-sex couples instead.

  6. January 5th, 2011 at 11:41 | #6

    We’ve got to stop schools from teaching kids that science can allow people to change sex and they’ll be able to have kids as whichever sex they prefer. There are some people who are intersexed, but everyone has only one sex which they can most likely reproduce as, and we should help people be that sex, not make it difficult.

  7. Ruth
    January 5th, 2011 at 11:43 | #7

    “For what is an insane person, but a person who cannot make sane moral judgments?”
    That is a good question, and it has important implications for a society, as well.

  8. Mark
    January 5th, 2011 at 11:52 | #8

    chrisse: “In the example in this article, adults are indoctrinating children with concepts that are outside the child’s ability to comprehend with all their complexity. This is causing confusion. The adults in this example have failed.”

    I do not see where it is adults indoctrinating children at all. The school was divided up into cliques – usually this is done by students themselves. If you are criticizing adults for “indoctrinating” children with an idea that different sexual orientations are normal, then you are again showing ignorance as sexual orientation has a range not just heterosexuality. Showing kids that it’s OK if they do not have feelings for the opposite sex is not indoctrination, it’s speaking truth. Assuming all children are heterosexual does a disservice to those who are not. A child who is straight, gay or bi will outgrow their confusion and settle in as they get older.

  9. chrisse
    January 5th, 2011 at 13:21 | #9

    @Mark
    I am equating adults with the surrounding culture, which includes the school’s curriculum, which I consider pornographic and barbaric to a degree that the ancient Romans could only dream about.

    I have serious concerns with adults indoctrinating children with the latest pseudo-scientific theories that are all the rage in the psychiatric arena and using them as guinea pigs in their social experiment; with theories that in all probability will be debunked with the next generation of pseudo-scientific chatterers.

    To teach children basic human biology, for example reproduction, is good. Adult concepts of sexual pleasure are for adults, not children.

    Now, please understand that I think the sexualisation of our society has gone too far. It is everywhere in our public space and should be removed. That children are aware of these issues far too early in their development is the fault of our pornified society, not the natural development of the child.

    If we’re talking about children in the 15-18 age range, then there is a stronger argument; unfortunately I do not have confidence in the ability of teachers to do so in an ethical and responsible manner and would resist this.

    What age range is middle school? I’m Aussie, our terminology is different, not sure if the age range equates exactly. We have primary 4/5-11ish, secondary (or high school) 12-17/18, and university (18ish+) educational divisions.

  10. Mark
    January 5th, 2011 at 14:20 | #10

    chrisse: “..which includes the school’s curriculum, which I consider pornographic and barbaric to a degree that the ancient Romans could only dream about.”

    Do you have access to this school’s curriculum? Or are you just making things up again?

    “To teach children basic human biology, for example reproduction, is good. Adult concepts of sexual pleasure are for adults, not children.”

    OMG, we actually agree! I am STRONGLY supportive of age-appropriate, comprehensive sexual education.

    “unfortunately I do not have confidence in the ability of teachers to do so in an ethical and responsible manner and would resist this.”

    What, exactly, do you think teachers are not ethically able to do?

    Middle school varies somewhat here in the states but is usually the 12-14 yr. old range.

  11. Sean
    January 5th, 2011 at 14:26 | #11

    “Adult concepts of sexual pleasure are for adults, not children.”

    That’s fine, except that adult concepts of human sexuality, mostly heterosexuality, permeate society at all levels and realms. To craft a world that isolates and excludes a minority is unkind and cruel, in some ways. I leave it to the experts to determine age-appropriate times to introduce topics about human sexuality but I insist it be done and in ways that don’t favor one kind of sexual orientation over another. There is simply no reason perpetuate the notion of straight supremacy and/or homophobia.

  12. Heidi
    January 9th, 2011 at 17:02 | #12

    I knew that I was bisexual from about the age of 11. I just never had a word for it until I learned the word bisexual in college.

Comments are closed.