Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So what does this really mean? Does it mean that we are born without a belief in a Higher Power, or does it mean we are born with a belief that there is no Higher Power? I'm sure you'll agree that there's a real difference between these two things.
Believe what you want but it will not change the fact that introducing a child to religion is anywhere near child abuse and if you believe it is, you still have no clue what real child abuse is.
Telling a child that they will be tortured with fire after they die if they ever leave a religion is real abuse. If you do not recognize that, you have no business being a parent or being entrusted with the care of a child.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,925,051 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
So what does this really mean? Does it mean that we are born without a belief in a Higher Power, or does it mean we are born with a belief that there is no Higher Power? I'm sure you'll agree that there's a real difference between these two things.
Your first premise; we are born without belief. Period.
You're well aware that children are malleable and easily influenced. Muslim children tend to have Muslim parents, LDS children LDS parents, Hindi children have Hindu parents.
There is nothing ingrained in the human conscience that directs to one or any religion other than the parental and to some degree, societal influence.
1. Hitler youth was required by the State from 1935 onward. I hope you understand that. They took over in 1933 and were destroyed in 1945. So for the first two years it was voluntary. Two years out of 12. 17% of their reign. Fact was it WAS mandatory for 83% of the time the Nazis had control. Gosh the Camps were for much shorter % of the time. Your logic would suggest that the Jews weren't really in danger, because none of the were forced to go to the camps for a period of five years after the Nazis took over.
2. What wild speculation that I have any notion of anarchy! Tell me, upon what do you base that notion? Have we met? You seem to act as if you know me, which you don't and your speculation is quite wrong and most offensive.
As a side note it is impossible to separate societal norms from religion, since western society has a religious foundation.
A) I pointed out that before it was made mandatory, five million children had been volunteered by their parents to become Hitler Youth. You seem to be pretending that this is not relevant information. So what that it became mandatory later, all that is required for comparison's sake would be those first two years. Quit trying to weasel your way out of your error. You claimed that the distinction was voluntary vs involuntary and for two years the Hitler Youth was voluntary.
Now, would you prefer I simply altered my question to "What really is the difference between "Christian child" and a Hitler Youth from the first two years of that organization? That eliminates your distinction between voluntary and involuntary and leaves you with having to come up with something else.
I stated in my previous response that I based my conclusion about you seeing the alternative to a Christian upbringing as anarchy on what you wrote in your post. It was:
Quote:
did you let them find their values on their own at age 10. Did you just let them eat whatever they wanted when they were six?
Leaving a kid to find his or her own values, permitting a kid to eat whatever he or she wants...that certainly suggests a parent who has forfeited his or her own authority over the kid in favor of no rules at all...which is what anarchy is.
So, hardly wild speculation, you advertised it. At least take responsibility for what you write.
That is what you believe. I believe they are more in tune with the supernatural world.
Some beliefs correspond with objective reality. Others do not. Belief in "the supernatural world" falls among the latter, at least until someone gives evidence to the contrary.
It's a known fact that children are susceptible to irrational fears (a monster under the bed) and magical thinking (Santa Claus, imaginary friends, magical powers, etc). Is that what you call "being in tune with the supernatural world?"
Your first premise; we are born without belief. Period.
To me, that's an obvious statement. I can't imagine why anyone would dispute it. We're born pretty much clueless about everything. For several months after birth, infants don't really have any self-awareness.
Quote:
You're well aware that children are malleable and easily influenced. Muslim children tend to have Muslim parents, LDS children LDS parents, Hindi children have Hindu parents.
There is nothing ingrained in the human conscience that directs to one or any religion other than the parental and to some degree, societal influence.
A) I pointed out that before it was made mandatory, five million children had been volunteered by their parents to become Hitler Youth. You seem to be pretending that this is not relevant information. So what that it became mandatory later, all that is required for comparison's sake would be those first two years. Quit trying to weasel your way out of your error. You claimed that the distinction was voluntary vs involuntary and for two years the Hitler Youth was voluntary.
Now, would you prefer I simply altered my question to "What really is the difference between "Christian child" and a Hitler Youth from the first two years of that organization? That eliminates your distinction between voluntary and involuntary and leaves you with having to come up with something else.
I stated in my previous response that I based my conclusion about you seeing the alternative to a Christian upbringing as anarchy on what you wrote in your post. It was:
Leaving a kid to find his or her own values, permitting a kid to eat whatever he or she wants...that certainly suggests a parent who has forfeited his or her own authority over the kid in favor of no rules at all...which is what anarchy is.
So, hardly wild speculation, you advertised it. At least take responsibility for what you write.
I am tired of your insults.
My guess is that you really want to be right. So fine. You can be right. Much preferable than continuing with a hostile dialog.
How do you know that? Your entire post hinges on this simple assumption. How do you know?
This is like a fill in the blank exercise..Fill in newborn ability to have any sense of who or what they are_______... In other words..Babies are born innocent, unknowing, totally reliant on their caregivers. How they develop after that depends of a whole multitude of influences..Yes parents initially but eventually by social interactions, education and so on...
Child abuse is also multi-faceted...While using a parental religious views to indoctrinate is just a simplistic view..It's HOW they force their views/beliefs that could become harmful...AS someone said..Their personal experiences with parental forced views cause a lot of personal mental/emotional harms....
Bottomline..False Narrative to suggest "Child Abuse" and truly minimizes the extent and breadth of just what exemplifies "CHILD ABUSE"!!
This is like a fill in the blank exercise..Fill in newborn ability to have any sense of who or what they are_______... In other words..Babies are born innocent, unknowing, totally reliant on their caregivers. How they develop after that depends of a whole multitude of influences..Yes parents initially but eventually by social interactions, education and so on...
Child abuse is also multi-faceted...While using a parental religious views to indoctrinate is just a simplistic view..It's HOW they force their views/beliefs that could become harmful...AS someone said..Their personal experiences with parental forced views cause a lot of personal mental/emotional harms....
Bottomline..False Narrative to suggest "Child Abuse" and truly minimizes the extent and breadth of just what exemplifies "CHILD ABUSE"!!
As a Social Worker who has dealt with child abuse I can only say you have no clue.
Just because someone raises a child in a loving religious environment and you don't like that does not constitute child abuse. Read up! This from a professional.
But my guess if someone were to force atheism on their kids that would be fine by you.
My atheistic parents: "You believe in God? Your are fool or worse". "You want to go to church? Don't expect us to give you a ride". True stuff. You OK with that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
