lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Is indoctrination of children child abuse?
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 03-10-2011, 08:38 AM   #1
Chloe Ze Übermensch
Rookie
 
Chloe Ze Übermensch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: England
Posts: 17
Current Game: Empire at War
Is indoctrination of children child abuse?

I had a few thoughts recently, regarding religious indoctrination of children. It's a fairly controversial topic so I suspect there will be a large amount of negative commentary on this thread, but I really would like views from all sides.

I personally think that bombarding an uninformed mind with religious dogma is a form of abuse.

Dictionary.com defines Child Abuse as:

Mistreatment of a child by a parent or guardian, including neglect, psychological bullying, beating, and sexual molestation.

Most rational and intelligent people would agree that hitting a child is abuse. But though many places call spanking abuse, many parents believe it's not. Burning a child with cigarettes is also (obviously) considered abuse, but smoking around children - even though it is known second-hand smoke causes cancer - is not so clear. Other grey areas, such as shouting (a normal action in many households) is not abuse, but carried to extremes it can be. Calling children names or threatening them (even if the threat is not carried out), can be classed as abuse, depending on who you listen to.

But the grayest of grey areas is the teaching of children. Can religious education of children be abusive? Teaching is clearly valuable, as it prepares children for life, more so when it teaches them how to think, derive answers from evidence and make decisions, but less so when it teaches them what to think.

I've come to the conclusion that indoctrinating children with religion is abuse. Of course, it depends on what you teach them, but if you say 'Now Jimmy, the Bible says 'do X' and if you don't, 'Y' will happen.' What Jimmy is being told may be good, but he's being threatened with x, and that was the only reason given for doing what he was told.

Most parents believe that they should teach their children what they believe. In a never ending cycle, parents who were brainwashed with religious dogma in turn brainwash their own children, whether it has been helpful or harmful. Rather than teaching children that some behaviours are harmful, religion teaches that their very natures are evil, their thoughts are impure and that they are so vile they deserve to be tortured for all eternity, unless they continually beg for forgiveness. They're told that an implacable god is watching them at all times, and he knows what they're doing constantly and will punish them for it (like a Santa-esque bully).

While many adults resent the proliferation of surveillance cameras, they teach their children that a being who can see through walls is constantly watching them. It's a wonder that most people given that type of upbringing aren't schizophrenic!

Stuffing immature minds with religion when they haven't the means to sort through it critically damages the developing psyche. No amount of post-adult reasoning completely frees the subconscious from all the ecclesiastical baggage. I believe that indoctrination discourages reasoning and damages critical thought; furthermore, it fosters guilt which is NEVER a good thing.

However, while some teachings may be damaging, it doesn't constitute abuse in that the parent or teacher intends to harm the child, or is indifferent to the consequences. The end result is the finale of a cycle. Unfortunately, most adults never reason with what they've been taught, which means it carries on from generation to generation. Indeed, the whole idea of faith is to discourage thinking and foster acceptance. Anything that makes the mind worse or causes emotional pain may be characterized as harm, and its' inclusion as abuse.

I'll be very interested to hear your comments.


Commentary: It is our lot in life, I suppose, master. Shall we find something to kill to cheer ourselves up?
Chloe Ze Übermensch is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 09:02 AM   #2
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,911
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
You're making the incorrect assumption that religion is entirely negative, and that therefore teaching children religion is therefore harmful. Your conclusion follows from a false premise and is therefore invalid.

Let's put aside for the moment the obvious atheist bias here.

I'd love to know where teaching children the major themes of loving their neighbors and contributing positively to their families and society (themes in virtually every major religion) is a bad thing. I'd love to know where promoting peace and positive moral values is bad. I'd love to know where religions that encouraged the study of medicine, science, and mathematics, particularly Astronomy (Islam), developed hospitals (Christianity), schools (Christianity), encouraged literacy (Judaism, Christianity and Islam), basic food safety and sanitation (Judaism), inspired major art movements (Hinduism, Christianity), and advances in philosophical thought (Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, etc.) are bad.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 10:08 AM   #3
Sabretooth
鬼龍院皐月
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 9,361
*Hot Topics senses tingling*

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
but less so when it teaches them what to think.
The line between the phrases 'how to think' and 'what to think' is very thin. Studying mathematics clearly tells us 'what' to think when we see two objects together - it instructs to believe in the existence of an entity called 'TWO'. Similarly, learning addition teaches us to believe that adding 'TWO' to 'TWO' invariably creates 'FOUR'. If you break every logical process down, you will find that all thought and communication is based on a system of agreement to believe in certain non-concrete ideas. (Cue our local Wittgenstein-quoter)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
Rather than teaching children that some behaviours are harmful, religion teaches that their very natures are evil, their thoughts are impure and that they are so vile they deserve to be tortured for all eternity, unless they continually beg for forgiveness. They're told that an implacable god is watching them at all times, and he knows what they're doing constantly and will punish them for it (like a Santa-esque bully).
While it must no doubt make sense in your context, I should let you know that you're thinking of religion in a very Christian sense (well, Abrahamic sense). Buddhism for example, does not talk about any voyeuristic, punishing god and does not require its followers beg for forgiveness. Besides, the hell sentence in Hinduism and Buddhism isn't even eternal.
just several million years long

In the Christian context, you have to remember that this is something the parents themselves likely believe. They may be trying to scare their kids, but this is probably something they believe in too. So how can it be said to be damaging the psyche, if you have no "normal" frame of mind to compare against? We know a schizophrenic by comparison to a normal person, so who is the "normal" person to contrast against (the very wide-ranging) crowd of people afflicted by religion? And how is the religious person's psyche affected compared to Mr. Normale?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
While many adults resent the proliferation of surveillance cameras, they teach their children that a being who can see through walls is constantly watching them. It's a wonder that most people given that type of upbringing aren't schizophrenic!
Neat observation, but God isn't human and won't be jacking off watching someone naked, or laughing at someone while, they, erm, ahem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
Stuffing immature minds with religion when they haven't the means to sort through it critically damages the developing psyche. No amount of post-adult reasoning completely frees the subconscious from all the ecclesiastical baggage.
Doubtful, there's plenty of people around who've turned atheist after growing up in religion while they were adults.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
I believe that indoctrination discourages reasoning and damages critical thought; furthermore, it fosters guilt which is NEVER a good thing.
Again, this is a very Christian thing. Besides, indoctrination without critique is actually discouraged many religions (and not just the Buddha, whom I'd be quoting right about now if it weren't for Tysy's thread earlier). Islam for example, developed a highly sophisticated science of inquiry, criticism and information verification that the West embraced so tightly in the Reformation.

Religious teaching is different from religious indoctrination. It's about as different as a person converting of his own free will to a person being forced to convert. Whether parents are teaching kids their religion, or indoctrinating them is not something the State can dive into and inspect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
Indeed, the whole idea of faith is to discourage thinking and foster acceptance.
I disagree, I think the 'whole idea' of faith, as it were, is to instil hope where there would otherwise be none. It isn't about discouraging thinking at all. Scientists throughout history have held faith, and yet never given up on their work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
Anything that makes the mind worse or causes emotional pain may be characterized as harm, and its' inclusion as abuse.
Emotional pain can only occur if one chooses to be emotionally pained. If that isn't true, then by god, I'd have jailed a bazillion people by now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi View Post
...here be words...
Jae, she's talking about religious indoctrination specifically. We're talking fundies and Wahabbis here.

march on atheist brigade chairman mao stands by you


Sabretooth is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 10:39 AM   #4
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,911
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
Jae, she's talking about religious indoctrination specifically. We're talking fundies and Wahabbis here.
Right, but her premise appears to be that religious teaching of any kind=indoctrination. Taking my kids to church, reading the Bible, instilling faith in them to better their lives and give them hope in a hopeless world, and discussing religion (including questions about other religions, which I try to answer as accurately as possible) in order to help them develop a moral and religious framework for their lives and learn to love their neighbors and develop some healthy morals is hardly abuse.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 10:52 AM   #5
Chloe Ze Übermensch
Rookie
 
Chloe Ze Übermensch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: England
Posts: 17
Current Game: Empire at War
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi View Post
Right, but her premise appears to be that religious teaching of any kind=indoctrination. Taking my kids to church, reading the Bible, instilling faith in them to better their lives and give them hope in a hopeless world, and discussing religion (including questions about other religions, which I try to answer as accurately as possible) in order to help them develop a moral and religious framework for their lives and learn to love their neighbors and develop some healthy morals is hardly abuse.
I didn't mean to imply that all religious teaching is bad - sorry if it did - I meant that if you're going to back up your Christian morals with threats (and that is what they are) of eternal damnation, rather than an explanation of the consequences - that is abuse.


Commentary: It is our lot in life, I suppose, master. Shall we find something to kill to cheer ourselves up?
Chloe Ze Übermensch is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 11:03 AM   #6
Sabretooth
鬼龍院皐月
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 9,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
I meant that if you're going to back up your Christian morals with threats (and that is what they are) of eternal damnation, rather than an explanation of the consequences - that is abuse.
But then this eternal damnation will only occur post-death, and hence does not constitute any mortal threat. It's about the equivalent of someone threatening to hex someone else. I'd probably chuckle if someone did that me, but if they threatened to cut every vein in my body with a rusty knife, then I'd probably be spooked.


Sabretooth is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 11:14 AM   #7
Chloe Ze Übermensch
Rookie
 
Chloe Ze Übermensch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: England
Posts: 17
Current Game: Empire at War
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
But then this eternal damnation will only occur post-death, and hence does not constitute any mortal threat. It's about the equivalent of someone threatening to hex someone else. I'd probably chuckle if someone did that me, but if they threatened to cut every vein in my body with a rusty knife, then I'd probably be spooked.
That may be, but Matthew 10:28 says "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell."

Assuming the child has been taught that the soul lives on after death, I'd still be pretty scared.


Commentary: It is our lot in life, I suppose, master. Shall we find something to kill to cheer ourselves up?
Chloe Ze Übermensch is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 11:16 AM   #8
Pho3nix
#rekt
 
Pho3nix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,365
Forum Veteran 
There are no religious children, only religious parents.

Pho3nix is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 02:38 PM   #9
Ctrl Alt Del
Uncreative User
 
Ctrl Alt Del's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Posts: 3,814
Current Game: Dishonored
Forum Veteran 
I like to think that parents are allowed to teach them whatever they feel right as long as they don't violate a set of rules established where they live. Children are in formation and don't have the means to assess what they really want to do. When they mature enough to think for themselves they may either embrace of shun what they were taught. Religious teaching is not indocrination as long as it respects children and teenagers regulations (whih here include religious freedom).


Inspiration

.Bioshock inspiration.
Ctrl Alt Del is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 04:40 PM   #10
urluckyday
Up all night to get lucky
 
urluckyday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Beautiful USA
Posts: 2,754
Current Game: Red Orchestra 2
10 year veteran! Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pho3nix View Post
There are no religious children, only religious parents.
So at what age do these children become "religious" to you?



If I die today, I'm happy how my life turned out
urluckyday is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 05:36 PM   #11
Tommycat
º¿º>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,577
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
I didn't mean to imply that all religious teaching is bad - sorry if it did - I meant that if you're going to back up your Christian morals with threats (and that is what they are) of eternal damnation, rather than an explanation of the consequences - that is abuse.
You seem to make the assumption that the religion is false. You assume that belief in eternal damnation is incorrect. As there is no way of knowing whether that damnation is true or not(religion being about faith instead of provable fact) then you cannot determine that such beliefs are harmful. In fact it may be viewed as abuse to not teach about the failures to follow the religious doctrine should such damnation exist.

Oh and if trying to instill guilt guilt is a form of abuse, then I'm suing a few dozen advertisers for abuse.


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson

Last edited by Tommycat; 03-10-2011 at 05:43 PM.
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 06:01 PM   #12
Working Class Hero
Rookie
 
Working Class Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommycat
In fact it may be viewed as abuse to not teach about the failures to follow the religious doctrine should such damnation exist.
So I should teach my children the consequences of not giving any money to Ron Hubbard once Lord Xenu returns?
Working Class Hero is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 06:12 PM   #13
Tommycat
º¿º>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,577
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Working Class Hero View Post
So I should teach my children the consequences of not giving any money to Ron Hubbard once Lord Xenu returns?
I make no claims that any religion is correct. In fact I believe most to have no real logic involved. However, if your beliefs are such that you believe in damnation of some form or another, then how can I tell you not to teach your children how to avoid such damnation. There is no evidence to the contrary(because it's purely faith, and as such cannot be proved to be false any more than it can be proven true). So we cannot tell people not to practice their religious beliefs any more than they should be able to force you to believe in theirs.


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 06:15 PM   #14
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
But then this eternal damnation will only occur post-death, and hence does not constitute any mortal threat. It's about the equivalent of someone threatening to hex someone else. I'd probably chuckle if someone did that me, but if they threatened to cut every vein in my body with a rusty knife, then I'd probably be spooked.
Yes, but, irregardless of the validity of that threat of eternal damnation, telling a child that they may burn for eternity unless they do this, this, and that is most definitely psychological abuse when taken to the extremes it sometimes is.

It's one thing to tell a child your religious views and how to live right according to those views, but it's an entirely different situation when you are exposing a young person to the often draconian punishments espoused in many religious texts. In the same way that I wouldn't show a young child an explicitly violent or pornographic movie or story, I also wouldn't expose them to the more extreme and blatantly immoral passages of some religious texts. The fact that these stories are religious in nature is no reason to differentiate them from secular displays of violence, especially if you are implying these acts of violence may one day happen to them.

In short, I fully support the right of parents to teach their children their religion and protect them from any sort of divine punishment they may perceive, however, just as anything else, this can be done to a degree which may cause serious psychological trauma. This is especially true in the long term, such as one's entire childhood.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 07:11 PM   #15
VeniVidiVicous
Rookie
 
VeniVidiVicous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi View Post
I'd love to know where promoting peace and positive moral values is bad.
Peace? You do realise that there have been many wars started in the past over which religion was praising God the right way right?
When you say positive moral values which bible are you referring to? If (for example) you think what the old testament was proposing was good moral values then i'd strongly disagree. But I keep forgetting that the church can review their "Papal infallibility" and change their views to keep up with society whenever it suits them.

@ Topic: Yes, it is child abuse. If you're religious the decent thing to do would be to not poison your childs mind.


VeniVidiVicous is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 07:25 PM   #16
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,094
Current Game: Dragon Ball Z: Budokai 3 HD
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeniVidiVicous View Post
Peace? You do realise that there have been many wars started in the past over which religion was praising God the right way right?
Wars are made by men. Not religion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeniVidiVicous View Post
@ Topic: Yes, it is child abuse. If you're religious the decent thing to do would be to not poison your childs mind.
What poison is that, may I ask?



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 07:58 PM   #17
Qui-Gon Glenn
Necessary Roughneck
 
Qui-Gon Glenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Thessia
Posts: 1,464
Current Game: ME3MP, Arkham Origins
Folder extraordinaire Helpful! Forum Veteran Veteran Modder 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi View Post
You're making the incorrect assumption that religion is entirely negative, and that therefore teaching children religion is therefore harmful. Your conclusion follows from a false premise and is therefore invalid.

Let's put aside for the moment the obvious atheist bias here.

I'd love to know where teaching children the major themes of loving their neighbors and contributing positively to their families and society (themes in virtually every major religion) is a bad thing. I'd love to know where promoting peace and positive moral values is bad. I'd love to know where religions that encouraged the study of medicine, science, and mathematics, particularly Astronomy (Islam), developed hospitals (Christianity), schools (Christianity), encouraged literacy (Judaism, Christianity and Islam), basic food safety and sanitation (Judaism), inspired major art movements (Hinduism, Christianity), and advances in philosophical thought (Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, etc.) are bad.
And, can we please put aside your obviously Christian bias? Just being fair Jae, but please, let's call an apple an apple.

I was raised Christian, Lutheran to be precise, and although I learned a great number of valuable morals from that upbringing, I also had an irrational fear of doing evil due to the repercussions of an angry God.

I wouldn't go so far as the OP and say that any religious "indoctrination" is irresponsible or abusive, but I would agree with much of the original post. A good parent teaches concrete things concretely: 2+2=4. A good parent teaches things that are not absolute or certain with a grain or two of salt: No daughter, all Muslims are not bad and are not destined for Hell for believing in a different version of the same God that we(sic) do. No son, President Reagan is not trying to blow up the planet or start world war, he is trying to draw a hard line.

The second example is an actual discussion I had with my Dad as a child: my grandmother and mother were staunch Democrats and had planted that seed in my head, that Reagan was sending us to Armageddon with his policies. My Dad was and is a staunch republican, but for one time in his life he treated me like a young intelligent mind rather than the idiot he has generally assumed me to be, and gave me a good answer.

Parents more than anyone else need to be critical thinkers, and be accutely aware of the difference between what they know for fact, and what they believe, and also be aware of the great divide between those two places.


Want to play a game of ME3MP?
Qui-Gon_Glenn on the software of which we shall not name.... add me and the enemy shall fall in chunks of crimson salsa
Qui-Gon Glenn is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 08:07 PM   #18
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
Wars are made by men. Not religion.
Would you not agree, though, that men act on their beliefs?



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-10-2011, 08:37 PM   #19
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,094
Current Game: Dragon Ball Z: Budokai 3 HD
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
Would you not agree, though, that men act on their beliefs?
I would. Science brought us the study of nuclear energy, and men made nuclear weapons which brought death to many people. Is science to blame? I wouldn't say so. Same with religion.



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 06:46 AM   #20
Pavlos
Scruffy Englishman
 
Pavlos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The real world/ivory towers
Posts: 1,974
Current Game: Viking Warrior Poets
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeniVidiVicous View Post
Peace? You do realise that there have been many wars started in the past over which religion was praising God the right way right?
I imagine something in mankind's baser substance would find many things in even an eggshell to war over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
I would. Science brought us the study of nuclear energy, and men made nuclear weapons which brought death to many people. Is science to blame? I wouldn't say so. Same with religion.
View page
YouTube Video


StarWarsKnights.com -- News and features will be returning shortly...

I 'gin to be a-weary of the sun,
And wish the estate o' the world were now undone.
Pavlos is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 06:55 AM   #21
Drunkside
Satan´s little helper
 
Drunkside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The land of snow and sorrow
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
Wars are made by men. Not religion.
Religion was made by men, not god(s), to advance whatever the founders thought was important. I won´t go as far as to say that there definetely are no gods or such, but those possible beings had nothing to do with the birth of any religion. Religions were born from man´s curiosity and will to explain what was around him, and to teach others their views.

I see indoctrinating children with religion as a form of abuse because the parents teach the child to limit their thinking. But religious indoctrination is different from religious upbringing, which teaches the child to treat others the way the religion sees fit, and familiarises the child with the theory of the religion. Most people taking part in this conversation don´t seem to separate these two...


Saivo´s New demo, A Cruel Northern Land is out! Listen to it on our mikseri.net bandpage.

http://www.mikseri.net/artists/?id=117610
Drunkside is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 07:23 AM   #22
Liverandbacon
I'm only worth a piano?
 
Liverandbacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 650
Forum Veteran LF Jester Folder extraordinaire 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommycat View Post
You seem to make the assumption that the religion is false. You assume that belief in eternal damnation is incorrect. As there is no way of knowing whether that damnation is true or not(religion being about faith instead of provable fact) then you cannot determine that such beliefs are harmful. In fact it may be viewed as abuse to not teach about the failures to follow the religious doctrine should such damnation exist.

Oh and if trying to instill guilt guilt is a form of abuse, then I'm suing a few dozen advertisers for abuse.
Full disclosure: I'm what I suppose is an apathetist. Not an agnostic, they wonder, but are indecisive; I've come to the conclusion that whether or not there is a god, my actions would be the same, and thus due to a complete lack of any effect on my life, I simply don't care. (Cue Kreia: Apathy is death)


Ok, with that out of the way. I agree with Tommycat. Let us consider a world where God does exist, as does the Christian conception of Hell.

In that world, telling a child that bad actions will send them to Hell might scare them, or even cause a bit of psychological harm. However, it would be irresponsible to not warn the child of the dangers in such a situation, as that would be risking their eternal torment. It would be like living in a world where eating chicken would get you summarily executed, and not telling your child not to eat chicken. In fact, not 'indoctrinating' the children would be the most abusive act possible in this case.

One must recognize that the world where God and Hell exist is the world that the truly religious (not to be confused with those exploiting religion for their own gain) believe this world to be. From their perspective, they would be abusing their child if they did not 'indoctrinate' them.

One might claim "Well, they're delusional, and delusions are no excuse to abuse children.". However, that would be making the judgment that your understanding of the universe is inherently superior to theirs, based on very little factual evidence. That sounds like the action of a zealot.

Note: I'm using the word 'indoctrination' here as the thread has defined it; a synonym for any upbringing portraying religion as truth. I place it in quotes because I'm not convinced that this is the true definition.



--Too Dumb to Quit--
Liverandbacon is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 08:57 AM   #23
Pho3nix
#rekt
 
Pho3nix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,365
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by urluckyday View Post
So at what age do these children become "religious" to you?
Tough question, It is very individual. And some never grow up. But if I'd have to give you an age - then probably 16-18.

Pho3nix is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 09:14 AM   #24
Tommycat
º¿º>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,577
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeniVidiVicous View Post
@ Topic: Yes, it is child abuse. If you're religious the decent thing to do would be to not poison your childs mind.
What if their religion is correct then? Not saying any religion is correct, BUT to them it is. To the parents the religion is the truth. A failure to teach your kids that playing on the freeway will get them killed would be borderline abusive behavior. Would it be wise to tell your kids never to listen to what a cop tells them?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liverandbacon View Post
Full disclosure: I'm what I suppose is an apathetist. Not an agnostic, they wonder, but are indecisive; I've come to the conclusion that whether or not there is a god, my actions would be the same, and thus due to a complete lack of any effect on my life, I simply don't care. (Cue Kreia: Apathy is death)
We're probably close to the same page. Though my belief is there is a god(or gods), but that the belief structures we have created are most likely incorrect. I still try to live my life as I want though as I feel that if he(they) does(do) exist, chances are he(they) want me to live as I have, otherwise I would be struck down somehow.


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson

Last edited by Tommycat; 03-11-2011 at 09:21 AM.
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 11:07 AM   #25
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
I would. Science brought us the study of nuclear energy, and men made nuclear weapons which brought death to many people. Is science to blame? I wouldn't say so. Same with religion.
Sorry, but the two cannot be equated, as any modern, reputable scientific text doesn't contain commandments related to who should be put to death for what. Science simply is; it is the amalgamation of facts based on what we as a species can perceive about our universe. Religion is a doctrine based, not on fact, but faith, that, in certain cases, calls for the deaths of people who by modern ethical and legal standards are completely innocent.

I agree with Pavlos that man is inherently prone to conflict, however it cannot be denied that religion -- or any other belief system that commands acts of violence be committed -- can incite violence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommycat View Post
What if their religion is correct then? Not saying any religion is correct, BUT to them it is. To the parents the religion is the truth. A failure to teach your kids that playing on the freeway will get them killed would be borderline abusive behavior. Would it be wise to tell your kids never to listen to what a cop tells them?
There is a difference, however, between telling a child that if they play on the freeway they'll get hurt and telling a child if they play on the freeway they'll die in a fiery wreck and suffer for all eternity.

In addition, if a schizophrenic raised their child to believe that everyone was out to get them and shirts were demons, and that child ending up having some "issues", the parent's belief in those things is no excuse.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite

Last edited by Det. Bart Lasiter; 03-11-2011 at 11:18 AM.
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 11:29 AM   #26
Alexrd
Senior Member
 
Alexrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2,094
Current Game: Dragon Ball Z: Budokai 3 HD
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
however it cannot be denied that religion -- or any other belief system that commands acts of violence be committed -- can incite violence.
That's placing every religion on the same bag.



Star Wars: In Concert - Lisbon - Some pictures of the exhibition accompanying the event.
Alexrd is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 12:13 PM   #27
Sabretooth
鬼龍院皐月
 
Sabretooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 9,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
That's placing every religion on the same bag.
He's referring to religion as a general concept, and not as specific religions taken as a whole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
There is a difference, however, between telling a child that if they play on the freeway they'll get hurt and telling a child if they play on the freeway they'll die in a fiery wreck and suffer for all eternity.
The first case is a consequence of an action, the second is a punishment tied to an action. If John Smith deals drugs, he may not suffer any direct consequences himself, but there is still a strong punishment for his act.

Taking religion to be a rudimentary constitution/rule book, wouldn't it then be reasonable to believe that modern penal codes are frightfully scary for children as well? Being told that killing someone will cause you to be locked up in a dank prison cell for the rest of your life doesn't sound like it's all that different from suffering in hell. And that's if you're in the First World - Third World prisons can be as good as hell...

But instead of driving us crazy with fear, these laws only help us bounce away from illegal behaviour and stay in the legal zone. Religion does more or less the same thing, but exaggerates a bit.



Last edited by Sabretooth; 03-11-2011 at 12:21 PM.
Sabretooth is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 01:12 PM   #28
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexrd View Post
That's placing every religion on the same bag.
No, it's placing religions that advocate violence into one group of 'things with the potential to incite violence' and religions that don't into another group of 'things that have less potential to incite violence'. Both of these groups fall under the category of 'things that divide people', however, and this, by nature, is prone to cause violence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
The first case is a consequence of an action, the second is a punishment tied to an action. If John Smith deals drugs, he may not suffer any direct consequences himself, but there is still a strong punishment for his act.
The point I was trying to make is that teaching caution is one thing, but teaching fear is quite another. However, I'm okay with debating semantics if you are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
Taking religion to be a rudimentary constitution/rule book, wouldn't it then be reasonable to believe that modern penal codes are frightfully scary for children as well? Being told that killing someone will cause you to be locked up in a dank prison cell for the rest of your life doesn't sound like it's all that different from suffering in hell. And that's if you're in the First World - Third World prisons can be as good as hell...
In the case of the legal system, I'd be against telling a child about the specifics of being in prison, and last I checked, society agrees with me. Feel free to walk up to a child and talk them about the awful conditions in jail, prison rape, and beatings if you'd like, however, I wouldn't recommend it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth View Post
But instead of driving us crazy with fear, these laws only help us bounce away from illegal behaviour and stay in the legal zone.
That's debatable, as labeling something as illegal or taboo can draw some to it.

To sum up: I'm opposed to the entire idea of morality and law being enforced by threats. Education and rehabilitation are far more effective and humane tactics.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 03:26 PM   #29
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,971
It's probably helpful to acknowledge that not everyone divides up morality and reality into separate areas of inquiry. Eg. Thomism, which acquired this idea from Aristotle. Hence the idea of punishment in some religious views is seen rather as the natural, unavoidable consequence of certain behaviors.

In this case, one would have to show that the parents are being remiss in their duty to protect and nurture their children. But to do that, one has to have a moral theory which at once makes it a duty to behave toward the children in that manner and also means that certain acts like indoctrination are incompatible with itself. But I don't know how it is possible to have morality without a social structure that includes something akin to indoctrination, even if it doesn't happen to be about any gods. In fact, I would suggest that such a "morality" would merely be a disguised emotivism, a social fiction masquerading as a moral system.

Personally I really don't feel like having the state decide who has the monopoly on "good" indoctrination.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 05:43 PM   #30
jonathan7
Exiled Jedi...
 
jonathan7's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 3,676
Contest winner - Modding LFN Staff Member Veteran Modder Helpful! 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe Ze Übermensch View Post
I personally think that bombarding an uninformed mind with religious dogma is a form of abuse.
To take an entirely different line to everyone else, I shall reveal what I spent my day doing. I am currently privileged to be in Turkey touring with one of Yales Philosophy Professors, who is giving lectures and seminars on several aspects of Kant's philosophy. I was in discussion with an atheist philosopher at one of these events when I posed the following question;

"One of the main reasons Sir Anthony Flew lists for having recanted his atheism and taken up theism is the failure for the former theory to adequately answer the following question; Do you think their a logicically coherent explanation for morality from an atheistic point of view?"

The professor I was having this discussion with answered that it is meaningless to ask if their is rationality behind our ethics as they are derived from the evolution, as such ethics are arbitrary.

I returned with with the question, "Is killing babies, in the grand scale, removed from your personal opinion actually evil?" - His response was honest, in that he answered "No".

Do not mis-understand me, I am not saying that their are no moral atheists (as in individuals who are atheist and behave in a "good" way), just pointing out that in reality they have no logical reason for their morality, nor do I think do they have a rational argument for why humans should behave morally, and as such cannot compel others to act in a "moral" way.

All that is to point out, that as an atheist its meaningless for you to moan about "Religious Doctrination" being a form of child abuse, given that you have no rational explanation as to why child abuse is wrong.

With regards child abuse it seems to me religion doesn't really pay much a part in it, as some people are good parents and others bad... Some atheists are good parents others bad, ditto Muslims, Agnostics etc etc. Furthermore, this paranoia over religious indoctrination seems greatly over stated given there is no psychological evidence that individuals can be brainwashed, and generally from my observance often children rebel against strict religious parenting (at least in the west).



"Love is the only reality and it is not a mere sentiment. It is the ultimate truth that lies at the heart of creation." - Rabindranath Tagore

"Many a doctrine is like a window pane. We see truth through it but it divides us from truth." - Kahlil Gibran

Last edited by jonathan7; 03-11-2011 at 05:51 PM.
jonathan7 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 06:16 PM   #31
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis View Post
But to do that, one has to have a moral theory which at once makes it a duty to behave toward the children in that manner and also means that certain acts like indoctrination are incompatible with itself.
Not necessarily. As I mentioned before, indoctrination always carries with it the possibility of negative effects on the child if taken too far. However, in the area between a detrimental level of indoctrination and none whatsoever, there lies a point at which indoctrination becomes both protective and nurturing by way of allowing the child to survive in both society and the world. In this way, a moral code that dictates both the protection and indoctrination of children is in no way at odds with itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis View Post
Personally I really don't feel like having the state decide who has the monopoly on "good" indoctrination.
So then, who should draw that line between 'good' and 'bad' indoctrination and enforce it? In addition, if a society is the sum of its individuals, why shouldn't society have the right to ensure that the indoctrination of the individual doesn't become detrimental to the society as a whole?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonathan7 View Post
All that is to point out, that as an atheist its meaningless for you to moan about "Religious Doctrination" being a form of child abuse, given that you have no rational explanation as to why child abuse is wrong.
On the other hand, the atheist is free to choose his own moral code, and it's been made clear that question assumes child abuse is immoral, so while your circle of friends is impressive, your argument is, at best, irrelevant.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite

Last edited by Det. Bart Lasiter; 03-11-2011 at 06:43 PM.
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 06:41 PM   #32
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,971
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonathan7 View Post
To take an entirely different line to everyone else, I shall reveal what I spent my day doing. I am currently privileged to be in Turkey touring with one of Yales Philosophy Professors, who is giving lectures and seminars on several aspects of Kant's philosophy. I was in discussion with an atheist philosopher at one of these events when I posed the following question;

"One of the main reasons Sir Anthony Flew lists for having recanted his atheism and taken up theism is the failure for the former theory to adequately answer the following question; Do you think their a logicically coherent explanation for morality from an atheistic point of view?"

The professor I was having this discussion with answered that it is meaningless to ask if their is rationality behind our ethics as they are derived from the evolution, as such ethics are arbitrary.

I returned with with the question, "Is killing babies, in the grand scale, removed from your personal opinion actually evil?" - His response was honest, in that he answered "No".

Do not mis-understand me, I am not saying that their are no moral atheists (as in individuals who are atheist and behave in a "good" way), just pointing out that in reality they have no logical reason for their morality, nor do I think do they have a rational argument for why humans should behave morally, and as such cannot compel others to act in a "moral" way.

All that is to point out, that as an atheist its meaningless for you to moan about "Religious Doctrination" being a form of child abuse, given that you have no rational explanation as to why child abuse is wrong.
An interesting parallel is the discussion between Socrates, Polus and Callicles in Plato's Gorgias. Polus maintains a fragmented idea of what constitutes goodness, and hence Socrates is able to trap him into realizing he was inconsistent. But Callicles divorces his ideas completely from recieved notions of justice, etc, and Socrates is unable to force him to find fault with his system (Callicles being the counterpart of the atheist you met).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
Not necessarily. As I mentioned before, indoctrination always carries with it the possibility of negative effects on the child if taken too far. However, in the area between a detrimental level of indoctrination and none whatsoever, there lies a point at which indoctrination becomes both protective and nurturing by way of allowing the child to survive in both society and the world. In this way, a moral code that dictates both the protection and indoctrination of children is in no way at odds with itself.


So then, who should draw that line between 'good' and 'bad' indoctrination and enforce it? In addition, if a society is the sum of its individuals, why shouldn't society have the right to ensure that the indoctrination of the individual doesn't become detrimental to the society as a whole?
As you may note, I am not against indoctrination as such, and I even suggested that it is a necessary part of morality. I simply object to the idea that the state (or any other entity) presenting one type of indoctrination as "the truth"-- when in fact there can be no such determination. Hence I tend to object to any heavy-handed approaches like the original post, where one type of indoctrination is replaced by another wholesale and it is presumed that by doing so moral advancement has been achieved. This can hardly be so when it suffers from exactly the same problem that supposedly precipitated the previous system's removal (that it "indoctrinates"). As free individuals we shouldn't have to deal with that sort of thing.

In this case there is probably something else which makes the offending system unappealing. For example, if you're not religious you're unlikely to think much of religious explanations. But there are plenty of other ways to argue against raising children religiously than that there is some type of indoctrination going on.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein

Last edited by Samuel Dravis; 03-11-2011 at 06:47 PM.
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 06:59 PM   #33
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis View Post
As you may note, I am not against indoctrination as such, and I even suggested that it is a necessary part of morality. I simply object to the idea that the state (or any other entity) presenting one type of indoctrination as "the truth"-- when in fact there can be no such determination. Hence I tend to object to any heavy-handed approaches like the original post, where one type of indoctrination is replaced by another wholesale and it is presumed that by doing so moral advancement has been achieved. This can hardly be so when it suffers from exactly the same problem that supposedly precipitated the previous system's removal (that it "indoctrinates"). As free individuals we shouldn't have to deal with that sort of thing.

In this case there is probably something else which makes the offending system unappealing. For example, if you're not religious you're unlikely to think much of religious explanations. But there are plenty of other ways to argue against raising children religiously than that there is some type of indoctrination going on.
I'm not suggesting that 'good' indoctrination instills morality x and 'bad' indoctrination instills morality y. What I asked was who decides whether either x or y is harmful to the child given the intensity or method of indoctrination.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 07:09 PM   #34
Pho3nix
#rekt
 
Pho3nix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,365
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonathan7 View Post
All that is to point out, that as an atheist its meaningless for you to moan about "Religious Doctrination" being a form of child abuse, given that you have no rational explanation as to why child abuse is wrong.
I'm sorry, but it seems to me you're one of those people who instigate that there would be no morals without religion... my rational explanation as to why child abuse is wrong is, well, common sense. And I know you can counter that with some clever Einstein quotes or pseudo-intellectual pretentious philosophical terms, but I think it's extremely ignorant to assume a person is void of any decency without religion.

And yes I'm aware that you will probably accuse me of misinterpreting your words, but the fact is there's a clear divide between people in this thread;

those who are religious and cling to whichever denomination they've chosen or been chosen for by their parents, and those who see past the bull**** and can actually look at this issue without any (for example) christian bias.

Therefore, I don't think this discussion will lead anywhere, just a bunch of words thrown at each other.

Pho3nix is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 07:22 PM   #35
Tommycat
º¿º>^..^<
 
Tommycat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,577
Current Game: Real Life 1.0(BETA)
Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pho3nix View Post
...there's a clear divide between people in this thread;

those who are religious and cling to whichever denomination they've chosen or been chosen for by their parents, and those who see past the bull**** and can actually look at this issue without any (for example) christian bias.
No, there's a clear divide between people who believe all religion is inherently wrong and therefore bad, and those who see past the BS and acknowledge that there may be a god and that we cannot say for certain that such teaching is wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pho3nix View Post
Therefore, I don't think this discussion will lead anywhere, just a bunch of words thrown at each other.
And yet you posted here.


"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson
Tommycat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 07:39 PM   #36
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pho3nix View Post
I'm sorry, but it seems to me you're one of those people who instigate that there would be no morals without religion... my rational explanation as to why child abuse is wrong is, well, common sense. And I know you can counter that with some clever Einstein quotes or pseudo-intellectual pretentious philosophical terms, but I think it's extremely ignorant to assume a person is void of any decency without religion.

And yes I'm aware that you will probably accuse me of misinterpreting your words, but the fact is there's a clear divide between people in this thread;

those who are religious and cling to whichever denomination they've chosen or been chosen for by their parents, and those who see past the bull**** and can actually look at this issue without any (for example) christian bias.

Therefore, I don't think this discussion will lead anywhere, just a bunch of words thrown at each other.
I'd also like to point out that religion and/or faith doesn't necessarily dictate a moral code, for example, Kierkegaard's views on Abraham and a teleological suspension of the ethical demonstrates that faith can be downright immoral.




"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 07:45 PM   #37
Alkonium
Senior Member
 
Alkonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Divinity's Reach
Posts: 3,872
Current Game: Guild Wars 2
Roleplayer Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pho3nix View Post
I'm sorry, but it seems to me you're one of those people who instigate that there would be no morals without religion... my rational explanation as to why child abuse is wrong is, well, common sense. And I know you can counter that with some clever Einstein quotes or pseudo-intellectual pretentious philosophical terms, but I think it's extremely ignorant to assume a person is void of any decency without religion.

And yes I'm aware that you will probably accuse me of misinterpreting your words, but the fact is there's a clear divide between people in this thread;

those who are religious and cling to whichever denomination they've chosen or been chosen for by their parents, and those who see past the bull**** and can actually look at this issue without any (for example) christian bias.

Therefore, I don't think this discussion will lead anywhere, just a bunch of words thrown at each other.
And to me, his point suggests an inability to perceive of a morality based on anything beyond fear of punishment, which is hardly morality at all, and more just greedy self-preservation without regard for others. Without this fear, any reason to behave is also gone. But, in place of fear, morality should be based on empathy and an understanding of the external ramifications of any immoral or unethical act.

Alkonium is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 07:53 PM   #38
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkonium View Post
And to me, his point suggests an inability to perceive of a morality based on anything beyond fear of punishment, which is hardly morality at all, and more just greedy self-preservation without regard for others. Without this fear, any reason to behave is also gone. But, in place of fear, morality should be based on empathy and an understanding of the external ramifications of any immoral or unethical act.
So how is that any different from a morality based on religion? Religion offers rewards for obeying certain rules and punishment for those who don't comply.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 08:00 PM   #39
Alkonium
Senior Member
 
Alkonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Divinity's Reach
Posts: 3,872
Current Game: Guild Wars 2
Roleplayer Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Det. Bart Lasiter View Post
So how is that any different from a morality based on religion? Religion offers rewards for obeying certain rules and punishment for those who don't comply.
It isn't. That's my point. I was referring to J7's post, which as an atheist with a good sense of right and wrong, I have to disagree with. I don't concern myself with how I might be punished or rewarded for what I do. What I concern myself with is how my actions affect others.

Alkonium is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-11-2011, 08:12 PM   #40
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkonium View Post
It isn't. That's my point. I was referring to J7's post, which as an atheist with a good sense of right and wrong, I have to disagree with. I don't concern myself with how I might be punished or rewarded for what I do. What I concern myself with is how my actions affect others.
Oho. Apologies for the misunderstanding, my eyes and head hurt from perusing this thread for too long.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Knights of the Old Republic > Community > Kavar's Corner > Hot Topics > Is indoctrination of children child abuse?

Tags
abuse, child, god, religion

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:25 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.