Is forcing religion on children equivalent to abuse? One professor says so!

In the United States, child abuse is a crime punishable by years in prison. Heinous acts, ranging from physical abuse to neglect, are looked down on by the great majority of society. But, according to one evolutionary scientist, another much more common act should fall under the category. In the case you agree with him, then it’s likely you know dozens of child abusers. That’s because Richard Dawkins claims that forcing religious beliefs on a child is akin to abuse.

“Horrible as sexual abuse no doubt was, the damage was arguably less than the long-term psychological damage inflicted by bringing the child up Catholic in the first place,” Dawkins, a former Oxford professor and best-selling author, said during an interview with Al Jazeera.

Dawkins, an atheist, specifically mentioned the case of an American woman who wrote to him about two trauma she suffered when she was just seven years old: In one instance, she was molested by a priest while in his car. A short while later, a schoolmate died. She was told that her friend had gone to Hell and will be roasting in Hell forever just because she was Protestant.

“She told me of those two abuses, she got over the physical abuse; it was yucky but she got over it,” Dawkins said. “But the mental abuse of being told about Hell, she took years to get over.”

Not one to mince his words, Dawkins repeated in the same interview that telling a child that he or she is one specific denomination is “child abuse.” Rather, parents should simply explain religion exists and the children should be allowed to draw their own conclusions.

“There is a value in teaching children about religion. You cannot really appreciate a lot of literature without knowing about religion. But we must not indoctrinate our children,” he said.

Even among his peers, Dawkins has previously faced criticism for his other theories on religion and society who have called him “attention seeking.” At the very least, he seems like a provocateur, who enjoys getting a rise out of others.

Do you think Dawkins has a point?