Turn off that Electronic Babysitter

Toddlers who watch a lot of television are more likely to have social problems at age 13, including isolation and victimization, and they are more likely to adopt violent and antisocial behavior.

A team of researchers led by Linda Pagani of the University of Montreal investigated the impact of television viewing during early childhood. They analyzed parent-reported viewing habits of 2-year-old children as well as self-reported social experiences of the same children at age 13. They used data from a study of 1,997 Canadian children born in 1997 and 1998 (991 of them girls), and controlled for other factors.

The team found that young children who watched more than the recommended number of hours of television were more likely to prefer solitude, experience peer victimization, and adopt aggressive and antisocial behavior toward their peers at the end of the first year of middle school. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends little to no screen time for children under 2, and up to one hour per day of quality programming between ages 2 and 5.

According to Pagani, social skills such as sharing, appreciation, and respect gained from others are rooted in early childhood. “In toddlerhood, the number of waking hours in a day is limited. Thus, the more time children spend in front the TV, the less time they have for creative play, interactive activities, and other fundamental social cognitive experiences,” she noted. “Active daily life at the preschool age can help develop essential social skills that will be useful later and ultimately play a key role in personal and economic success.”

PL. Pagani, et al., “Prospective associations between televiewing at toddlerhood and later self-reported social impairment at middle school in a Canadian longitudinal cohort born in 1997/1998,” Psychological Medicine, Sept. 13, 2016

Can I be a Christian and be good?

BY ANONYMOUS

When asked why he did not embrace Christianity, Mahatma Gandhi replied with this widely known remark: “I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” The sentiment resonates with me.

There are several things you should know about me before you read on. First, I am not an atheist. I cannot rule out the possibility of God or the existence of a “higher power.”

That said, neither am I a Christian. My mom took me to church when I was a child, so I’ve got a few years of Sunday school under my belt, but not much else. I met my husband in high school, and we married in our mid-20s. I am now in my 30s and have two young children of my own. We do not go to church.

If there is a God, I’m not sure the church is very much like him. Increasingly I find myself at odds with the dominant Christian worldview. To paraphrase Gandhi, I like Jesus, I just don’t want to be a Christian. I’ve read a few books that argue the case for Christianity by producing various evidences to convince the reader that Christianity is “true”—that Christianity is the “right” religion to follow. But I need to know more than that.

The question I grapple with isn’t so much whether Christianity is right but whether it is good. Can I be a Christian and be good?

I can’t seem to reconcile the Christianity I observe in my own experience with the values I want to champion in my home. I remember a conversation I had with my uncle about this. He is very active in his church and always ready to turn our family gatherings into heated religious de- bates. On one such occasion he was raging on about some issue pertaining to what he called “America’s moral slide.” He likes to talk about morals a lot, especially his position on homosexuals, LGBTQ issues, and the gay marriage de- hristians could bate. On other occasions he will launch into speeches that range from his views on young earth creationism to how Jesus would vote. He clearly views his Bible as authoritative in all matters—even when it stands in opposition to the facts. I’m pretty sure he would have had a problem with Galileo too.

During one such tirade, I pushed back. I interrupted him and said, “It is you Christians who are immoral. You’re unloving, intolerant, and judgmental— qualities I find morally offensive.” I probably came off as hostile to Christianity, but I was frustrated more than anything. For me this is a sincere and important question: Can I be a Christian and be good?

Apathy and Hostility

This is a significant issue. It is behind much of the apathy and hostility many in my generation have toward Christians and the church. So many Christians seem driven to prove they are right and everyone else is wrong. There’s an arrogance, a self-righteousness that seems to flow from the conviction that they are right on just about everything.

Non-Christians can be guilty of this too, of course. It’s human nature. But it strikes me that goodness, not just rightness, is what Jesus said mattered most— that good trees produce good fruit, that sort of thing. Honestly, I think Christians could make a stronger case for their cause if they would redirect the energy they put into being right toward being more loving. More like, well, Jesus.

I love my uncle, but I could never, in good conscience, share the values he upholds so religiously. And it’s not just my uncle. As far as I can tell, most of his Christian friends hold similar views.

He was shocked when I suggested that Christians were immoral. I’ll try to explain, but I would ask that you read with an open mind. I am not an expert. I am not a theologian. While I want to stand on reason alone, I realize that some of my conclusions are influenced by my emotions, and in reaction to the Christianity I have observed. Nevertheless allow me to speak to a few of the issues that make me question the “goodness” of Christianity.

Bad Fruit

To begin with, if a good tree bears good fruit, I think we need to be honest and admit that throughout history Christianity has produced some very bad fruit. Yes, I am aware that Christians are responsible for many great examples of charity and benevolence through the centuries. But these positive examples cannot and should not excuse the repulsive effects of bigotry and horrific violence that permeates church history.

Some have suggested that the history of violence and the history of religion are the

©Lightstock

same history. Launched by Pope Urban II in 1095, the knights of Europe united in a crusade to save the Holy Land from the rule of Islamic infidels.

One historian records the words of Raymond of Agiles, a representative of the church, upon the taking of Jerusalem:

Wonderful things were to be seen . . . in the temple and portico of Solomon, men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reigns. Indeed, it was a just and splendid judgment of God, that this place should be filled with the blood of the unbelievers, when it had suffered so long from their blasphemies.

The brutality of the Christians was not limited to the Muslims. The synagogue in which the city’s Jews were sheltered was set on fire, burning them alive.

That may be ancient history, but I was