Moralistic Therapeutic Deism: The sequel

First of all, everyone's so young, or they'd remember that MTD was the state church during the Eisenhower administration, they just didn't call it that. It was in the name of MTD that "under God" was put in the pledge of allegiance.

Second, I think that people with homosexual problems get more love in the local church than in the frat house as it is! The best option for them is to marry someone of the opposite sex; second is celibacy. BTW marrying someone of the opposite sex isn't all that problematic; you only marry one of them, so it's not a matter of learning to be "attracted" to the whole lot! There's a miscommunication here. I think they hear us saying they should become "straight," which in the world's eyes means become like Tucker Max. And most good Christians would say to that, like, no way is that what we had in mind!

Hector, @ 9:30 PM, writes:

“The responsible thing to say to gay teenagers, as with straight ones, would be to say, "we encourage you not to have sex until you are both a) an adult b) in some kind of loving, committed relationship." That doesn't equate to saying "homosex (what an ugly term, for what it's worth) is bad".

Exactly. I realize that there is something of a genetic component to homosexuality, the same way as there is a genetic component impelling some people to other unusually risky behaviors. But this is where self-control and self-discipline need reinforcement the most, especially at a time of life where physical changes render that self-control harder to attain. THIS is where the abomination lies; in that deliberate encouragement of—if not active advertising for—such behavior. The same sort of criticism would apply if the schools established Tobacco Appreciation Societies, or held wine-tasting seminars for students.

And this is what our schools utterly fail to achieve with the provision of such organizations.

Franklin Evans @ 9:05 AM writes:

“Do we (general, especially parents) validly expect our children to accept our personal spiritualities, without question, without thought? Answer that, and pay attention to the seeming lipservice given to the notion of free will. If you raise your child in your spiritual tradition, and that child makes a personal choice to seek a different path, what right do you have to judge that child, let alone chastise him or her?”

I believe the expression you’re looking for is this: “Train a child up in the way he should go, that when he is grown he will not depart from it.”.

What you’re asking is, essentially, what right parents have to direct the religious and ethical upbringing of their children. A child, almost by definition, is someone that is incapable of making such decisions by themselves. They neither have the personal experience, physical growth or psychological development to do so. Therefore, especially at the younger ages, it is not only entirely appropriate for parents to exercise such responsibilities, but indeed is required. To fail to do so constitutes parental dereliction of duty.

One may also assume that a parent, in raising a child, will raise that child in a spiritual tradition in which the parent actually believes; the tenets of which are not simply true, but Truth. Otherwise, why bother ? The effort involved in doing a proper job of it is humbling, and potentially costly in terms of both time and resources. Having done so, as a parent, one might reasonably expect that the child will follow in the parent’s spiritual footsteps, so to speak. For example: A Catholic parent who believes in his or her faith will send his or her child to CCD or Catholic school when they live in his/her house. That parent will almost certainly be disappointed and upset if the child decides to become a Hindu. It is by that right, having assumed the obligation of raising the child, and by the obligation of acknowledging and transmitting the Truth that inheres in belonging to a religious faith, that a parent may judge and reprove that child. The parent cannot coerce the adult child physically, for any of several very obvious reasons, but certainly the parent can and should remonstrate with that child in the way his or her faith permits.

Cecelia @ 4:47 PM writes:

“I can assure you - as someone with two kids and a plethora of nieces and nephews who all recently finished college as well as being someone who hands out those grades - that A's are not handed out with such ease - consider that if this was true every kid would graduate from college with a 4.0 GPA and the entire graduating class would be summa cum laude - this rather obviously doesn't happen.”

I seem to recall a study done of Harvard undergraduates a few years back that indicated that the most common grade received was an A or A-minus. I also have several current college students as clients (in both the SUNY systems and at Syracuse University) who can confirm this, in “real time”, so to speak.

Cecelia further writes:

“Do some colleges have low standards re: acceptable academic performance? Of course - but it is once again an exaggeration to claim that all schools suffer from low standards.”

I will stipulate this up to a point: any college or university that has classes in “Remedial English”, “Remedial Math” or “Remedial Anything Else” suffers from low standards by definition. Any institution that accepts students requiring such remediation is committing not only educational malpractice, but consumer fraud, and probably has no good business styling itself as an “institution of higher learning”.

Your servant,

Lord Karth

Franklin Evans @ 4:33 PM writes:

"However, I don't see an explicit acknowledgment of my free will point: While I stand firmly with you in imparting on our children the ethical components of real life, and while there is some valid and important overlap with spirituality, it still begs the question: I've witnessed Catholic parents ostracizing their older or adult children for choosing to join a Protestant congregation."

Of course the child has free will; didn't my hypothetical assume that the child chose to become a member of a different faith ? It's simply that the parent hoped that the child would exercise that free will---that trained free will, the better term might be---and actually be confirmed as a member of the Catholic Church.

I've no doubt you've witnessed that sort of ostracism. The question becomes, in that case, whether the said ostracism actually persuaded the child to return to the Catholic faith. If the answer is "no", then the free-will part of your scenario should be something close to a given. (I say "something close to" a given because it is seldom wise to assume complete knowledge of all of any individual Human's motivations, particularly in matters of faith.)

Your servant,

Lord Karth