Originally posted by RealOriginally posted by slosprint
I think what needs to be called into question here is not wheather or not it is within the parents rights, but wheather or not it is a violation of the childs rights. IMO, children should not be taught what to think, but how to think. But I digress. As of now it is within thier rights to build this, no matter how wicked its intentions, so long as it does not recieve a single penny of government funding. Just to clarify, it IS within thier rights to do this, but I hold it on par with child abuse.
First, if you have kids or you plan to, that scares me. Lets look at your logic a minute. It says that you do not believe in teaching a child what to think but how to think. That leaves some really important things to chance.
You fail to cover the parts where you teach your kids things you learned. You pass on beliefs or ideals you've learned that you would like your kids to also experience and believe.
I would never tell my children, if I had any what to believe. I would never say "this is true" or "this is false" unless it related to something relatively certain like mathematics. Absolute certainty is never, ever, a good thing. Sure, I would tell them my experiences, etc, but I would never require them to agree with me, nor would I even pressure them to. Kids should be allowed to reach conclusions based on what they are exposed to, so I would do my best to expose them to as much as possible.
It also doesn't really go well with the kids when they are young. Teaching an adolescent how to think makes a lot more sense. But until they are at an age where they can think on their own you HAVE to tell them WHAT to think.
I agree to a certain extent. It is important to teach them about safety, healthiness, and general good conduct (look both ways whilst crossing the street, wash your hands, treat others the way you would like to be treated etc.)
It is your right and your responsibility as a parent to make sure they make it that far barring any tragedies. I would never tell you how to raise your kids unless it involved you being completely negligent for a child's safety.
As stated before, I agree with you so far as this. When I said "how to think instead of what to think" I was more referring to the individual beliefs of the parents.
Your logic doesn't factor in those first 5 years where you teach them the basis for how they will live their life. Those are the most important years of their life and without you instructing them and setting them up for the world, well, you are basically letting them roam free and figure it all out on their own.
Again, I completely agree with you. I realize now that I should have been more specific.
See, we have the ability to share with them and help them learn what we've learned.
To the extent mentioned above, yes. However, I think it is also important to clearly specify that we can all be wrong at times and that the child can reach his own conclusion based on the evidence he is presented with.
But, I laugh at the prospect of how you would handle one of your children coming home saying they wanted to believe in Jesus. I have a feeling you would turn on your own philosophy so fast you couldn't say the world hypocrite fast enough. The hate you spew constantly pretty much sums that up.
I legitimately thank you for giving me something to think about here. While I usually try to keep my crap proportional to the crap I get, I sometimes get a bit outspoken, to say it lightly. If I ever do become a parent, and my son/daughter were to tell me that they wanted to believe in Jesus, Allah, Moses, Thor, or whatever it was, I would honestly be a bit let down, but I would do my best not to challenge them on it, but if they legitimately wanted to sit down and have a discussion, I would give them my two cents, hopefully as calmly as I could. I am 16 now, so I hope by that time I would manage to be a bit less of a rowdy hooligan.
Its that or you would teach them directly that Christianity is whatever it is you believe it is, thus, telling them what to think, not how.
In the case that they wanted a discussion I would give them my opinion, and I would back it up, but I would never feel compelled to say "this is what you believe now." that would be f*cked up, to say the least.
If you truly wanted to act that out, you would somehow have to be ok with your own children being Christians because only teaching a child how to think also lets them make ALL their own choices.
As long as they don't join the Westboro Baptist Church, that's fine. They are entitled to their opinion, and I am entitled to mine. I will save the rest of what I originally was going to say here until later, where I see you have left me a bunch of really fun things to respond to.
k
Brennan Manning quote-
"The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today... is Christians. Who acknowledge Jesus with their lips and walk out the door and deny Him by their lifestyle. That is simply what an unbelieving world finds unbelievable."
The reason I am an atheist is because there are literally thousands of denominations out there, each claiming near absolute certainty for their position, each mutually exclusive, and each carrying relatively equal amounts of loosely defined "evidence" to support their claims. Am I really the only one that sees a problem here? You are straw-manning my position and I don't like it.
This is where I can basically trace back to the beginning of every atheist Ive ever met. When it comes down to it, they knew someone who said one thing and did another. Hypocrites. And I cannot blame a single person who grew up around parents, friends or just people who witnessed people who do this. Its inexcusable and I would question the "Christians" because to me, if this is how you live, you're worse off than someone who doesn't believe in God. I would rather you just claim to believe in nothing than to say you believe one thing and do another. Just stop posing.
Sooooooo you are basing everything here on a quote. Congrats. No, I am not atheist because people don't practice what they preach, I am atheist because nobody has managed to back up what they preach, and for everyone that claims they have, there are 10 others claiming completely contradictory things to them. Atheism is nothing more than not believing in a god, which is why you can have atheists who are Buddhists, Secular Humanists, Democrats, Republicans, or pretty much anything else which does not involve belief in a deity. There is no atheist doctrine, nor does the term "atheist" tell you anything about a person other than that one facet of their lives. I do not believe in nothing, I just don't believe in the absurd. I believe in what is real, my family, my friends, the sky, the solar system. I believe in a massive universe, one in which stars the size of our sun die every couple seconds, and have been for billions of years. One in which over 98% of all species ever to exist on this planet are now extinct. If this is indeed part of a divine plan then it is quite a wasteful one. If it requires the excess baggage of believing in the divine or the supernatural to be a good person, then FML because, as stated before, there are literally thousands of mutually exclusive beliefs out there and if my eternal salvation rests in the hands of a random decision than I and everyone else on this rock are royally screwed.
Which is why I have no issues with the religions of the world until one of two things happens.
1. You pursue me with a judgmental attitude and try to convert me
2. Say what you believe but don't act it out.
Same goes for those whose religion is atheism.
Atheism is A LACK OF BELIEF IN A GOD. If atheism is a religion than there is absolutely no such thing as a non religious person, which correct me if I'm wrong is surely not what you meant to claim.
-A person's religion is the sum total of his beliefs about God and the supernatural.
I don't believe in a god or the supernatural due to the fact that no credible evidence has been presented to me so my sum total, by definition, is 0.
-something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience (taken from dictionary.com)
By this definition political parties are religions as well, so unless you can say why political parties are not religions by this I will discard it for now.
Thus, the choice to not believe in God is also a religion. There are certainly a lot of people who believe this way. I find it humorous that there is so much angst about the lack of belief in God also a religion but really when you peal away the "religious" aspect of the word, its very basic and religion can be many things. But considering how huge and devoted atheists are, and I would almost say more devoted to their cause than Christians, that its overwhelmingly a religion.
Please do not classify "atheists" as a group. As stated before you can be atheist and be anything. I already stated why atheism is not a religion, so therefore that point is invalid as of now, unless you can respond with something new. The reason I and many others are quite devoted to our cause, is because we see people trying to push through absurd laws (eg. banning gay marriage) with nothing to back up their points other than an ancient book. We see that things of this sort are clearly unjustified, and therefore do our best to stop this bigotry, to which the only justification that is given is faith.
Oh and btw, back in 2005, a court in the US ruled that Atheism is a religion, if you had any wonderings about law included with this too.
Appeal to law is a logical fallacy, plz avoid.
Extra challenge: Name one exclusive benefit of religion.
kthxbye
Boulder Dash was the only good roller coaster.
"or if you're when the hydraulic fluid was dumped out of the motor is goes 200ft up the tower and is like "LOL nope"" - CKMWM 2016
Home
Contact Us
Login
Register
Store
Exchange
Browse The Scrapyard
Forum
Donate
