>I have a Polish girlfriend who insists that the
>teachings of the Catholic Church are necessary - no wait -
>of all religions - are necessary to 'educate' children;
>that is to say to socialise children with ethics and moral
>norms, in order that they may have some solid foundation in
>life.

Congratulations on your girlfriend and thanks for putting the 'educate' word in quotation marks. It is parents' not churches' responsibility to give children this foundation. She says that because that what she has been told though her childhood and adolescence. Most of us went through this involuntary brainwash, as well as our parents and grandparents. Religions build their foundations on shaky ground, covering cracks with a stinky mud, is that what we want for growing generation?

> I feel that
>without ramming religion down the throats of children, they
>would still be able to accord each other with the same
>levels of respect and appreciation that [supposedly]
>children brought up in religious environments would.

I kinda feel the same. I suspect that social order could appear kind of naturally, without any religious guidance, if someone could arrange such experiment. Kids can be cruel, but they also have unexpectedly well developed sense of justice. They express pure emotion, they feel empathy, they tend to appease conflicts. Is the bad influence that makes them bad people.

best regards

---

Si Hoc Legere Scis Nimium Eruditionis Habes

>I have a Polish girlfriend who insists that the
>teachings of the Catholic Church are necessary - no wait -
>of all religions - are necessary to 'educate' children;
>that is to say to socialise children with ethics and moral
>norms, in order that they may have some solid foundation in
>life.

You can do that without any reiligous structures. It can be achieved by secular means, too - but whether imprinting anything in a young psyche is necesary (or even morally acceptable) is highly debatable. And the moral norms that ARE being force fed are very, very relative.

>In a 'religious vacuum' she postulates that societal order
>would break down and that chaos would subsequently reign.

Typical. It's a non-argument. "Societal chaos" isn't a function of morality, religion, any norms whatsoever and/or lack thereof. It just takes a more in-depth look into the history of civilisation.

>My opinion is quite the opposite of hers. I feel that
>without ramming religion down the throats of children, they
>would still be able to accord each other with the same
>levels of respect and appreciation that [supposedly]
>children brought up in religious environments would.

Children brought up in reiligious environments aren't very respectful when it comes to relations with children from other environments (the same is true for other hermetic groups, too). It's a very animalistic behaviour pattern, and it takes quite a lot of effort to unlearn.

Hi,
You have a polish girlfriend, yoy are lucky lad. Take care of her and, I' m sure, she'll do the same. Good luck for you both.
>I feel that without ramming religion down the throats of children, they would still be able >to accord each other with the same levels of respect and appreciation that [supposedly] >children brought up in religious environments would.
I feel the same. Frankly I doubt that any religion "teach" children ethics and moral norms. I had been catholic for 18 years (it obvious, I was born in catholic family).
I' ve made head that if mine religion ramed something down mine throat it was befief that I am sinful and, of course, there is remedy...
From rational point of view, religion sucesfully use children's magical thinking.
('Magical thinking' is the interpreting of two closely occurring events as though one caused the other, without any concern for the causal link). It's typical for children, you know. And I think most "teaching" rely on provading them legends. Simply...teaching them legends.

Parents are only "contributory factor" in growing young psyche. I hear that the most important factor is childern's society. It is logical, isn't? I have some experience, I am father of one. I know something about this.

>In a 'religious vacuum' she postulates that societal order
>would break down and that chaos would subsequently reign.
Acoording to this theory, on would expect anarchy and chaos to rule (for example) Czech Republic (~60% atheists in 2002). Somehow it is not the case.

I admit the comparison of Czech to Poland shows it is quite possible there is a correlation between religion and order (or disorder). I would be just a lot more careful than your girlfriend to claim the correlation is positive.