First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last
Teaching Christianity is Child Abuse
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 4/18/14

FlyinDumpling wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:

No. Just that we should place more emphasis on educating the population, in order to prevent them from being gullible and ignorant enough to actually believe in religion in the first place.

Banning things never solves anything. It just shoves the problem under the rug. Where it thrives.
We should educate the population that god is not real.


That's not what I said. Please stop putting words in my mouth.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 4/18/14

crazykl45 wrote:

I think it's equivocation to pretend like Christianity and creationism are the same things. Christianity is a religion and creationism is just a small subset of beliefs held by those who disagree with what they feel are the implications of the theory of evolution.



No. Creationism is a belief held by those who have been indoctrinated into believing in it and who are ignorant of scientific evidence.
There are no implications with evolution. And even if there were, it still has a lot more evidence to support itself than creationism. Which has none.
I've been a christian. I've comefrom a denomination that teaches creationism. I've seen how it works both with adults and young ones alike. I know this shit.




crazykl45
Just leave the values at the door and teach the science. How things work, why phenomena happen the way they do, and the process we used to arrive at those conclusions.


You need to stop narrowing in on single elements of things. Single subjects in school. Single aspects of religion. Single aspects of science. You're being intellectually dishonest. We're talking about the entire picture, not just small parts of it.




crazykl45
There's a lot of stuff like that in school and academia. Stuff that has no immediate application to anything. Like geometry, music, and history. As such, I wouldn't use this as an argument to keep biology out of schools. Hell, schools are basically useless following this logic because the best way to get bread to eat and other useful things is to be working from day one.



Except that schools are not just to provide competence, but also to expose children to different ideas and various fields of study.
17205 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 4/18/14

Syndicaidramon wrote:

That's not what I said. Please stop putting words in my mouth.
I'm reading what is there. You suggested doing something that we all should be agreeing on, but with an ulterior motive.

we should place more emphasis on educating the population, in order to prevent them from being gullible and ignorant enough to actually believe that there is no god in the first place.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 4/18/14 , edited 4/18/14

FlyinDumpling wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:

That's not what I said. Please stop putting words in my mouth.
I'm reading what is there. You suggested doing something that we all should be agreeing on, but with an ulterior motive.

we should place more emphasis on educating the population, in order to prevent them from being gullible and ignorant enough to actually believe that there is no god in the first place.


Educating children and teaching them to be sceptical with the hopes that they aren't decieved by ignorant, bigoted superstition is quite different from teaching them "don't believe in religion".
One is indoctrination, while the other is giving them the tools and the knowledge to thing for themselves and not fall victim to indoctrination.
65319 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Atlanta, GA
Offline
Posted 4/18/14 , edited 4/18/14

Syndicaidramon wrote:


crazykl45 wrote:

I think it's equivocation to pretend like Christianity and creationism are the same things. Christianity is a religion and creationism is just a small subset of beliefs held by those who disagree with what they feel are the implications of the theory of evolution.



No. Creationism is a belief held by those who have been indoctrinated into believing in it and who are ignorant of scientific evidence.
There are no implications with evolution. And even if there were, it still has a lot more evidence to support itself than creationism. Which has none.
I've been a christian. I've comefrom a denomination that teaches creationism. I've seen how it works both with adults and young ones alike. I know this shit.

This comes across as argumentative without reason, especially since it should be clear I largely agree with you. Whatever creationism and intelligent design are, I don't care for them. And they don't belong in public schools period because they're not science.



crazykl45
Just leave the values at the door and teach the science. How things work, why phenomena happen the way they do, and the process we used to arrive at those conclusions.


You need to stop narrowing in on single elements of things. Single subjects in school. Single aspects of religion. Single aspects of science. You're being intellectually dishonest. We're talking about the entire picture, not just small parts of it.

If you want to throw around claims like intellectual dishonesty and be taken seriously, you need to stop agreeing with over-the-top analogies between teaching creationism and child abuse.



crazykl45
There's a lot of stuff like that in school and academia. Stuff that has no immediate application to anything. Like geometry, music, and history. As such, I wouldn't use this as an argument to keep biology out of schools. Hell, schools are basically useless following this logic because the best way to get bread to eat and other useful things is to be working from day one.



Except that schools are not just to provide competence, but also to expose children to different ideas and various fields of study.

Again, was there even a reason to post this? I already covered this in the paragraph below. We just have stuff we want to teach people in public schools and it doesn't happen to include any religion or religious ideas.

I disagree with teaching intelligent design or giving it any air time in public schools, but I'm just not willing to liken it to some form of child abuse. The ideas and beliefs are wrong, but it's not like we're allowing some kind of irreparably damaging action to take place. It's just some people passing on dumb beliefs.
16093 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 4/18/14
i dont think its abuse, i think it perfectly healthy for children to learn religion like i am now. but its not only religion that could be healthy like humanism, science and stuff so they can be given a choice when they can make them on their own.
7193 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Cardiff,Wales
Offline
Posted 4/18/14 , edited 4/18/14
Teaching your child whatever you believe in causes no harm. Essentially all you are doing is giving the kid a set of morals/standards to go by, whatever you believe in, and it really doesn't matter since they will make up their mind about their belief themselves. When parents fail to recognize that then you can call it child abuse as you are forcing it to believe in something that it may not do. Calling it abuse is stupid, if you raise your child without any particular type of belief in God then why is that not abuse? It does not mean that you are teaching your child anything scientific, it simply means that you are not teaching the child that there may or may not be a God (You can't prove it either way so yeah).
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 4/18/14

crazykl45


crazykl45
Just leave the values at the door and teach the science. How things work, why phenomena happen the way they do, and the process we used to arrive at those conclusions.


You need to stop narrowing in on single elements of things. Single subjects in school. Single aspects of religion. Single aspects of science. You're being intellectually dishonest. We're talking about the entire picture, not just small parts of it.


If you want to throw around claims like intellectual dishonesty and be taken seriously, you need to stop agreeing with over-the-top analogies between teaching creationism and child abuse.






crazykl45


crazykl45
There's a lot of stuff like that in school and academia. Stuff that has no immediate application to anything. Like geometry, music, and history. As such, I wouldn't use this as an argument to keep biology out of schools. Hell, schools are basically useless following this logic because the best way to get bread to eat and other useful things is to be working from day one.


Except that schools are not just to provide competence, but also to expose children to different ideas and various fields of study.


Again, was there even a reason to post this?


Yes. Because it feels to me like you're missing an important part of the picture.




crazykl45
I disagree with teaching intelligent design or giving it any air time in public schools, but I'm just not willing to liken it to some form of child abuse. The ideas and beliefs are wrong, but it's not like we're allowing some kind of irreparably damaging action to take place. It's just some people passing on dumb beliefs.


3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 4/18/14 , edited 4/18/14

aGreekSudaneseGerman wrote:

Teaching your child whatever you believe in causes no harm.
Essentially all you are doing is giving the kid a set of morals/standards to go by, whatever you believe in, and it really doesn't matter since they will make up their mind about their belief themselves.


That depends entirely on what it is you are teaching your child. And even if not them specificly, it may still hurts others, which would make it at the very least, child abuse by proxy.

And really, when it reaches that point, it IS child abuse for real, because it also prevents the child from functioning properly in a normal society.

And whether they will make their own minds up about their beliefs is not at all something you can take for granted. I've heard many people say things based not on their own pursuit for knowledge, but based on the indoctrination they've grown up with.
I've even heard on several occations people justify their beliefs with "that's how I was raised". Once here on Crunchyroll even.

7193 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Cardiff,Wales
Offline
Posted 4/18/14 , edited 4/18/14

Syndicaidramon wrote:


aGreekSudaneseGerman wrote:

Teaching your child whatever you believe in causes no harm.
Essentially all you are doing is giving the kid a set of morals/standards to go by, whatever you believe in, and it really doesn't matter since they will make up their mind about their belief themselves.


That depends entirely on what it is you are teaching your child. And even if not them specificly, it may still hurts others, which would make it at the very least, child abuse by proxy.

And really, when it reaches that point, it IS child abuse for real, because it also prevents the child from functioning properly in a normal society.

And whether they will make their own minds up about their beliefs is not at all something you can take for granted. I've heard many people say things based not on their own pursuit for knowledge, but based on the indoctrination they've grown up with.
I've even heard on several occations people justify their beliefs with "that's how I was raised". Once here on Crunchyroll even.


I understand what you mean, yeah I personally know some people like that, I think personal belief should always be what it is, personal. It should not come from 'I was raised like this'.

I think if parents were to teach the basics and then let the child decide (Like my parents did) then it would solve the problem and by basics I mean how the religion explains creation/morals/social structure and other easy to grasp concepts and then the child can decided for itself and by child I mean once it has reached puberty since the child will understand more logically. The time period before that should be the time period those basics are taught.
16093 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 4/18/14
if teaching Christianity is abuse then anything else would be abuse. the only way that teaching and or raising could be abuse is if your teaching a known lie for example the tooth fairy , Santa , the Easter bunny ex. that would be considered abuse because there not there, its a lie. that also includes some science, for the longest time scientists believed pluto was a planet , now we know its just a ball of ice and gas. for the longest time scientists believed that it was impossible for the human body to regenerate, but five or six years ago they concluded your heart regenerates every five years. see where im getting at ? a lot of scientists try to prove religion wrong by throwing THEORIES curve balls, not exactly a "scientific" way of proving something wrong. now im not saying that religion is the only "truth" per say, some science and humanism, atheism, and hundreds more philosophies are fine, but niether one can prove each other wrong making it almost impossible to find the "right" one. it all depends on YOUR belief.

that being said raising your children on religion is not abuse, but if you teach a lie then yes that is abuse.
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 4/18/14 , edited 4/18/14

michaeldeska wrote:

if teaching Christianity is abuse then anything else would be abuse. the only way that teaching and or raising could be abuse is if your teaching a known lie for example the tooth fairy , Santa , the Easter bunny ex. that would be considered abuse because there not there, its a lie.


So how exactly is creationism any different from that?




michaeldeska
that also includes some science, for the longest time scientists believed pluto was a planet , now we know its just a ball of ice and gas. for the longest time scientists believed that it was impossible for the human body to regenerate, but five or six years ago they concluded your heart regenerates every five years. see where im getting at?


There's a difference between teaching something, and then adjusting one's views and teachings as new knowledge comes along, and teaching ideas that has been long since debunked for the purpose of upholding and SPREADING one's superstitious delusion. Teaching children to be closed-minded and that science is wrong and cannot be trusted in the process.





michaeldeska
a lot of scientists try to prove religion wrong by throwing THEORIES curve balls, not exactly a "scientific" way of proving something wrong.


You don't seem to understand what the word "theory" means in a scientific context. Let me enlighten you:

"A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method, and repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

A scientific theory is only the way of explaining a naturally observable phenomena. That is why gravity is ALSO a theory. We observe gravity, and we form a hypothesis around it. Then we test it. If that testing confirms the hypothesis and stands up under scrutiny, it is promoted to its final stage, which is as a scientific theory. It will never go beyond that.

Hope that clears things up for you.





michaeldeska
now im not saying that religion is the only "truth" per say, some science and humanism, atheism, and hundreds more philosophies are fine, but niether one can prove each other wrong making it almost impossible to find the "right" one. it all depends on YOUR belief.


While we cannot prove or disprove the existence of a deity in general, we CAN disprove religions, by examining their teachings and doctrines and see if they hold up under scrutiny. By testing whether or not they are scientificly accurate or not.

Like, say, if your religion teaches that the earth is only 6000 years old. Or that dinosaurs lived at the same time as man did. Or that all animals alive today stems from two individuals of their "kind" from 4000 years ago.

If your religion teaches that, then we CAN disprove it. And we have.
17205 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 4/18/14

michaeldeska wrote:

if teaching Christianity is abuse then anything else would be abuse. the only way that teaching and or raising could be abuse is if your teaching a known lie for example the tooth fairy , Santa , the Easter bunny ex. that would be considered abuse because there not there, its a lie. that also includes some science, for the longest time scientists believed pluto was a planet , now we know its just a ball of ice and gas. for the longest time scientists believed that it was impossible for the human body to regenerate, but five or six years ago they concluded your heart regenerates every five years. see where im getting at ? a lot of scientists try to prove religion wrong by throwing THEORIES curve balls, not exactly a "scientific" way of proving something wrong. now im not saying that religion is the only "truth" per say, some science and humanism, atheism, and hundreds more philosophies are fine, but niether one can prove each other wrong making it almost impossible to find the "right" one. it all depends on YOUR belief.

that being said raising your children on religion is not abuse, but if you teach a lie then yes that is abuse.
To many atheists, believing in God is like believing in a wizard. If you can't prove wizards exist, it's only reasonable to not assume they do. It's like how you can't exactly prove that your current self isn't in a dream, you wouldn't assume that you are in a dream right now because you can't prove it. Other people like using flyingpigs, spaggettimonster, tooth fairy. shitmonster but I have a feeling they are just trying to spite people, religious people more specifically. However, I understand why someone would believe in a creator deity, which to me is fine, with some exceptions as I have mentioned.

In science, a theory is defined as an idea that has been thorough researched and tested before reaching a conclusion, using the scientific method, which is using the scientific way of proving things. (turns out your thread is pretty useful Lethargic_leopard_Seal).It's not just a hypothesis like: I was a tree in the previous life. If anything that we know in science is false, it's because we haven't researched and done enough tests. BUT scientist are always in the process of trying figure what are those things are that are false. Where as religion does not require people to test the existence of god.

Beside that, I completely agree with you in this point: Parenting is indoctrination. If teaching Christianity is abuse then parenting is general would be abuse since people have subjective views on what is right or wrong. Some might even say telling your child out right that there is no santa is abuse because you are "taking their childhood away". Which is debatable.

And in response to Syndicaidramon, I do agree with your point. I think schools should be promoting free thinking. However I often see many atheist say if there is free thinking, it would definitively follow that people would not be religious….while missing the part it also definitely would result in religious people. There are smart religious people too
16093 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M
Offline
Posted 4/18/14


a theory is something that has not been completely proven, such as gravity, where we know a force is pulling us toward the surface of the earth but the source is not known, we hypothesize that there is a bunch of lava and shit with a core but we have no way of proving it unless someone digs of course witch would take a very long time. hence gravity is still a theory because we are unsure of the source.

we also have no way of proving how long the world has actually been around, yeah some scientists say 4000 million years ago but it could have been around longer than that or shorter, but that is not a part of religion philosophy, they tell stories like adom and eve to portray how humans came to be, and there is a science behind adom and and eve all human DNA lead to one female ,one. that includes all the blacks,asians mexicans and white people, one female. that being said then there must be some truth to religion right?

science does not know anything about spirit and soul, hence thats why they cant figure out why we are the way we are, yes we have a brain that enables us to think but to them the brain in every being would be thinking the same thing the same way the same behavior. so they ask themselves Why are we think differently than others? what would we be if we took our physical body away what would be left? the answer is soul, and science cant touch it, why? because you cant see it.

the way religions are is not something science cant just disapprove because its not "scientific" thats like me saying science is not right because its just not religious, it goes back and forth see? religion is a way of life, a way discipline, and a way to be closer to god or any other deity. what does science have to do with that?
3910 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Pandemonium
Offline
Posted 4/18/14 , edited 4/18/14

michaeldeska
a theory is something that has not been completely proven, such as gravity, where we know a force is pulling us toward the surface of the earth but the source is not known, we hypothesize that there is a bunch of lava and shit with a core but we have no way of proving it unless someone digs of course witch would take a very long time. hence gravity is still a theory because we are unsure of the source.


No. A theory will never move past the stage of "theory". "Theory" is as high as it goes and will ever go.




michaeldeska
we also have no way of proving how long the world has actually been around, yeah some scientists say 4000 million years ago but it could have been around longer than that or shorter, but that is not a part of religion philosophy, they tell stories like adom and eve to portray how humans came to be, and there is a science behind adom and and eve all human DNA lead to one female ,one. that includes all the blacks,asians mexicans and white people, one female. that being said then there must be some truth to religion right?


If you're implying that the story of Adam and Eve is even the slightest bit plausable... No. No, it's not.
Also, no, human DNA doesn't lead to just one female. And CERTAINLY not a female human.




michaeldeska
science does not know anything about spirit and soul, hence thats why they cant figure out why we are the way we are, yes we have a brain that enables us to think but to them the brain in every being would be thinking the same thing the same way the same behavior. so they ask themselves Why are we think differently than others? what would we be if we took our physical body away what would be left? the answer is soul, and science cant touch it, why? because you cant see it.


We know why we don't all think the same. All brains function differently. All have different neurons that fire differently to certain stimuli. There is no room, nor need, for a soul when it comes to the topic of the human mind or the field of neurobiology.
In fact, the mere idea of a soul being needed to form one's personality and thoughts is ridiculous, as we continually observe changes in personality and behaviour resulting from brain damage. If the soul was determining the thoughts and personality, then such would not happen. But it does. Thus eliminating the need for a soul.




michaeldeska
the way religions are is not something science cant just disapprove because its not "scientific" thats like me saying science is not right because its just not religious, it goes back and forth see? religion is a way of life, a way discipline, and a way to be closer to god or any other deity. what does science have to do with that?


No. Because science is a method used to observe reality and obtain knowledge, where as religion is a set of stories , rules and dogmas.
They are not the same in any way, and comparing them the way you're trying to do is absolutely ludicrous.

As for what science has to do with a person's wish to be closer to god -- nothing. But science can determine whether or not the beliefs that that person has chosen to believe in is accurate or not. Not whether his WISH to be closer to god is real, but whether the stories he believes, and thus by proxy, his religion is real or not.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.