Indoctrination = bad, especially in the formative years of a young person.
That said, religion is one of the largest influences in history and civilization and a lack of understanding of religion is a large problem in society. Something like 80% of what you might call "Bible-thumping" Americans can't quote famous verses or understand how they are supposed to be used in context.
Thusly, you get ignorance, fear, hatred...and even silly things like that jury that brought a Bible in to argue that a man should be given the death sentence because they found some random "An Eye for an Eye" quote.
Given so many conflicts that religion causes in this world, even the staunchest secularists need a good religious education in order to conduct a proper dialogue and argue their side.
There are growning numbers of highschools in the US that actually have Bible Studies courses. These are designed to be secular religious studies courses for that goal, not for prosetylizing...but that's certainly a difficult thing to maintain. It's not exactly easy finding a highschool teacher educated enough in religion, yet dispassionate enough about it to be objective. If you want to understand society and the forces that shaped it and history and philosphy, etc. in the western context...you are going to encounter the Bible whether you like it or not.
one thing with raising your kids based on your religion(whatever that may be) is that if both parents are strong believers in it then why wouldnt they logically teach their kids about it and live a christian(or muslim, hindu etc) life and that would influence the kids. they would raise them that way becuase they truly believe that is the way, while knowing that at some point(in the teen years most likely) the kids will come into contact with others and begin to question what they believe and why they believe. ie make it thier own faith, not just thier parents. as long as parents allow that to happen at some point it is healthy, not forcing an 18 year old to go to church if they truly believe in something else. its just like anything else in that you raise your kids towards what you want them to be(ie respectful, considerate etc) and at some point you let them out there and hope they make the right decisions. but thats just my opinion
__________________
GO FLAMES, STAMPEDERS, ROUGHNECKS, CALVARY, DAWGS and SURGE!
It is not out of the question to raise your children without God as a corner stone. If it's not obvious by now, but I am an atheist. The most I talk about God is in this forum. Not every atheist is "preaching" so to see speak about their beliefs in God. And calling for an end of religion. For the most part in my day to day life I don't think about religion or God. Parents are very capable raising their children without forcing their beliefs on their children. Influence one way or the other is unavoidable. But an atheist upbringing doesn't mean anti-god, rather it means that god doesn't come up.
Absolutely... I would even suggest that though I was 'raised Christian' God was NOT a cornerstone in my childhood. We went to Church on Sundays... up until my brother started playing hockey on Sundays. And really, as a 6 year old, did I pay attention in Sunday school? Did I care? Or was it just another group of kids that I hung out with? I'm well aware of your religious beliefs, and I would say that this is also the most I talk about God, believe it or not. I also do not think about God in my day to day life. Ask me when the last time I picked up my Bible was... Parents are capable of raising children without forcing their beliefs, but that's the point... they will still influence them. I would however suggest that an athiest upbringing would mean that if God comes up, parents would suggest they don't believe in one. It's difficult to not have God come up at all during an upbringing.
Quote:
Religious vacuum is not quite what I am after. I said earlier that I am not sure if schools should teach religion or not. But the more I think about the more I am leaning toward schools teaching all kinds of religion. Now this could be my own jaded opinion but I think if that happens we will have more atheists.
I guess we could take a page out of South Parks book and replace religious words with science.
Instead of god damnit it would be science damnit.
Christ be praised would be science be praised.
And so forth...
I think that teaching all religions would lead to much more tolerance and peace in the world. Less hostility as people would know where the other side was coming from. I think more than having more athiests, it would lead to having more people feel comfortable in making their own decisions about religion, and being comfortable in that they would be able to defend them as well. The biggest issue would be the lack of time spent on each religion. You just can't properly teach all religions to the point where a person could make an educated decision with a one hour class, even if it's 5 days a week. I mean heck, there are people who go to church daily and have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to their religion.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbl420
I can wash my penis without taking my pants off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneyhands23
If edmonton wins the cup in the next decade I will buy everyone on CP a bottle of vodka.
Absolutely... I would even suggest that though I was 'raised Christian' God was NOT a cornerstone in my childhood. We went to Church on Sundays... up until my brother started playing hockey on Sundays. And really, as a 6 year old, did I pay attention in Sunday school? Did I care? Or was it just another group of kids that I hung out with? I'm well aware of your religious beliefs, and I would say that this is also the most I talk about God, believe it or not. I also do not think about God in my day to day life. Ask me when the last time I picked up my Bible was... Parents are capable of raising children without forcing their beliefs, but that's the point... they will still influence them. I would however suggest that an athiest upbringing would mean that if God comes up, parents would suggest they don't believe in one. It's difficult to not have God come up at all during an upbringing.
I think that teaching all religions would lead to much more tolerance and peace in the world. Less hostility as people would know where the other side was coming from. I think more than having more athiests, it would lead to having more people feel comfortable in making their own decisions about religion, and being comfortable in that they would be able to defend them as well. The biggest issue would be the lack of time spent on each religion. You just can't properly teach all religions to the point where a person could make an educated decision with a one hour class, even if it's 5 days a week. I mean heck, there are people who go to church daily and have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to their religion.
So thats it..Firefly was raised on the religion of "hockey"! I knew it!
If my child asks about God, I tell them what the belief system is/was for that particular version. I dont say...well Zeuss was this and "dont believe in him". I think the kids are generally pretty quick at understanding rational things...given that opportunity. Hell they understand that the Easter Bunny and Santa arent real pretty quick. Moral upbringing does NOT need the word church in it.
As to your final comment about...the world being a better place if all religions were taught...well Ill bet ya a fiver that wouldnt happen...at least not anywhere in the middle east or the southern portion of North America.
That Chuck Missler guy is really quite hilarious. Completely misunderstands/misrepresents science and fundamental truths/laws in science time and time again.
Well, he's basically a businessman turned preacher after he lost all his money in a bad investment. His "Doctorate" is from the same unaccredited religious university that he speaks at.
I really wish that religious speakers would be forced by law to append their credentials with something to indicate that they are doctors of theology and therefore, not an authority on other matters like biochemistry, archeology, astrophysics, etc... It's misleading and to a degree, dishonest.
Please evolution was already disproven by the banana.
You know something you guys TOTALLY MISSED?
The guy on the right is Valeri Bure's brother in law. Yes, that's Kirk Cameron. Valeri has disappeared from the NHL, but I think he is going around with Candace on her various Christian speaking tours. That family overall, is very religious.
Well, he's basically a businessman turned preacher after he lost all his money in a bad investment. His "Doctorate" is from the same unaccredited religious university that he speaks at.
I really wish that religious speakers would be forced by law to append their credentials with something to indicate that they are doctors of theology and therefore, not an authority on other matters like biochemistry, archeology, astrophysics, etc... It's misleading and to a degree, dishonest.
One problem with that statement...what University or College actually has the facts about any religion and gives a theological degree, and doesnt base their teachings on fantasy?
So thats it..Firefly was raised on the religion of "hockey"! I knew it!
Yes I was!
Quote:
If my child asks about God, I tell them what the belief system is/was for that particular version. I dont say...well Zeuss was this and "dont believe in him". I think the kids are generally pretty quick at understanding rational things...given that opportunity. Hell they understand that the Easter Bunny and Santa arent real pretty quick. Moral upbringing does NOT need the word church in it.
As to your final comment about...the world being a better place if all religions were taught...well Ill bet ya a fiver that wouldnt happen...at least not anywhere in the middle east or the southern portion of North America.
Kids are pretty quick, absolutely. You're right about morals... they don't need to be taught in/by church. Too many parents rely on others to teach their kids how to behave.
I don't think all religions would be taught either, but I can dream. I have a utopian vision for society that only human nature gets in the way of... we all want to be right.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbl420
I can wash my penis without taking my pants off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneyhands23
If edmonton wins the cup in the next decade I will buy everyone on CP a bottle of vodka.
I'm referencing the achievement test results that are published every year. My former High School (Bishop Carroll) was consistently in the top 10 in the province, as was St. Mary's and another Catholic high school. The private schools were the best, but the Catholic ones were close behind, and then public schools.
Sorry man but I call bull. Having attended Western
(a public school) it consistently outperformed private and Catholic schools alike in the province. I'm not advocating one school system or the other, but it is a gross generalization to say that Catholic schools consistently achieve better.
I think that teaching all religions would lead to much more tolerance and peace in the world. Less hostility as people would know where the other side was coming from.
It'd be nice, but I doubt it.
The more I learn about religions, the crazier I think they are. The Christian myth of creation, the reason for the rift between Shias and Sunnis, the incredible story behind Mormonism, the wild stories in the old testament... all this stuff just blows my mind.
The more I know about it, the less tolerant I become, I'm afraid.
One problem with that statement...what University or College actually has the facts about any religion and gives a theological degree, and doesnt base their teachings on fantasy?
Please read posts before before interjecting your anti-religious bent. Heck, I'm arguing your side that theological degrees are useless in these areas and that people who claim to be authorities on scientific matters hiding behind a doctorate in front of their name should be made to indicate what their credentials really represent.
BTW, every Ivy League school in the United States has religious studies doctorates. Harvard even has a divinity school. You seem to misunderstand the difference between a disapassionate/objective study of religion and theology in general versus that of ministering, prosetylizing, or apologetics. Theological degrees however, have their own merit as you fail to recognize that religion, culture, society, politics, and history are intertwined and you can't study those things without understanding the theological basis of those religious which have been a fundamental force of influence in civilization.
I'm just saying a guy with a theology degree should not be posing as an authority on matters of science to his captive audience without informing them of that fact. It's decieving and unethical. It's like getting a botonist to explain the engineering in your car.
The more I learn about religions, the crazier I think they are. The Christian myth of creation, the reason for the rift between Shias and Sunnis, the incredible story behind Mormonism, the wild stories in the old testament... all this stuff just blows my mind.
The more I know about it, the less tolerant I become, I'm afraid.
Well then I feel sorry for you. Tolerance does not equal acceptance, but if you can't even tolerate other religions, you must be perpetually pissed off.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbl420
I can wash my penis without taking my pants off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneyhands23
If edmonton wins the cup in the next decade I will buy everyone on CP a bottle of vodka.
Well then I feel sorry for you. Tolerance does not equal acceptance, but if you can't even tolerate other religions, you must be perpetually pissed off.
I think that's the fundamental thing with a lot of secularists/atheists. They are really pissed off that in their opinion, so much of the human race is wasting their time.
Well then I feel sorry for you. Tolerance does not equal acceptance, but if you can't even tolerate other religions, you must be perpetually pissed off.
You can reserve the pity for someone else, but thanks for the kind thoughts.
I can tolerate to the level of "let 'em do what they want" but that's about it. I'm not perpetually pissed off, but now that I know some of the background to this crap I do get a little angry. When I didn't know how crazy it was, it didn't bother me.
When I see a story on the news about some moron killing a bunch of people because they have a slightly modified idea about some old story I guess I do get a little angry.
When I see another jackass yakking about some giant boat, or a man hanging out with a dinosaur, and how we should teach this nonsense in our schools, I get a little angry then.
You can reserve the pity for someone else, but thanks for the kind thoughts.
I can tolerate to the level of "let 'em do what they want" but that's about it. I'm not perpetually pissed off, but now that I know some of the background to this crap I do get a little angry. When I didn't know how crazy it was, it didn't bother me.
When I see a story on the news about some moron killing a bunch of people because they have a slightly modified idea about some old story I guess I do get a little angry.
But I'm sure not all killings are religiously based... Matter of fact, I'm pretty sure that most murders in Canada are likely not based on religion at all. I digress though, I do agree that it's frustrating to see people use religion as an excuse to kill.
Quote:
When I see another jackass yakking about some giant boat, or a man hanging out with a dinosaur, and how we should teach this nonsense in our schools, I get a little angry then.
It's a good thing then that most of this stuff happens in the US! I can't even recall the last time anyone posted a story about some religious idiot in Canada... Although that may be because whenever I see that stuff, I just assume it's a religious idiot from the US.
The only thing that irritates me is when I get painted with the same brush because I choose to believe there is a God, and that the Christian 'version' of God is the correct one. (Which oversimplifies my view of things a fair bit, but I'm not bringing that up until that thread gets started!) Not all those who believe are so inclined to believe in big boats or teaching it in schools. It upsets me that so many have such a disdain for anything religious to the point that they label me because of it, when I have done nothing to deserve the label or in any way conform to the label being given.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimbl420
I can wash my penis without taking my pants off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneyhands23
If edmonton wins the cup in the next decade I will buy everyone on CP a bottle of vodka.
But they still push God/Jesus/Mother Mary/Holy Ghost/sacrements/etc etc etc on all of the children.
Get on your knees!
Nope. I went to Bishop Carroll on one of their typical 4 year plans and nothing religious was 'pushed.' In fact, the religios studies classes (you must take 3 years of this) was not Catholic focused, or even Christian focused. I was educated in Judaism, Islam the works. Any of the religious services were optional. The religious studies course also solidified my atheism.
Yes it does. Maybe we're missing some of the more "extreme attributes" of a neo-atheist, but that list of three sure sounds like humanism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz
Am I a good Catholic? Debatable, I think I'm a good person, but I don't do everything I'm supposed to (i.e. Church and praying). But I'll tell you this, I'll definately send my kids to Catholic schools because at least there is a class that sets a moral standard, that whether it is based in belief in God or not, I feel is a good one (you know, don't kill, be good to your neighbour type of thing), and will be the same things I'm teaching them at home (though likely without the God angle).
So what you're saying is you're not a good enough parent to teach your children morals yourself? You need indoctrination and thought control to keep your kids from knifing other kids to death?
A successful person is a person who is good and just, not because he was told to be or threatened to be, but because he is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFly
Ah yes, those who interpret the Bible literally and fail to realize that it's all an interpretation. Queue Cheese with his comments about "Well if it's truely the word of God, why would He allow it to be interpreted any way but the correct one?"
A "queue" is a line. For somebody with that incredibly annoying signature, you should at least know the difference between a "queue" and a "cue". Truly as well, fwiw.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz
Did God come on down and write a book? Some people might say yes, and the're the ones taking everything literally, who I'll agree are a little crazy.
Or a rational person can see it as a teaching aide to get the ideas across, you know, about morality.
So do you use the bible to instruct your kids on how to be xenophobic, hateful and intolerant? Or do you just ignore those parts and use the "good" parts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
Only some people do that.
If all humans were like that, then science would never have developed to where it has.
In spite of religion, for the past 500 years, science has been the much bigger influence. It's also worth mentioning that many of the early scientists during the people of awakening in the Western judeo-christian world, were "indoctrinated" by religion.... yet here we are.
This is why we should watch the general statements.
Ever heard of the Great Library? We lost out on 1000(+) years of free thought and technological progress because of its loss and the corresponding dive into the dark ages. Free thought was destroyed along with the library and religion was allowed to take hold. For 1000 years humanity accomplished almost nothing. Can you imagine if the calculus was invented 1000 years before Newton and Leibniz? The steam engine? The industrial revolution? The propogation of free thought? Instead we wasted time on the ignorance of religion, witch hunts and sacrificial killings.
Religion is the most major impediment to science there is. Noting a number of theistic scientists is no more to the point than pointing out the few that exist now.
__________________
"For thousands of years humans were oppressed - as some of us still are - by the notion that the universe is a marionette whose strings are pulled by a god or gods, unseen and inscrutable." - Carl Sagan Freedom consonant with responsibility.
but isn't it comforting to know a tiger isn't going to jump out of your jar of peanut butter and pwn your ass when you're all bleary eyed in the morning?
Not really going to happen if they're still being forced to go to church.
This is why they shouldn't have to go to churches.
Here's a statement that sounds incredibly harsh at first blush but is absolutely true:
Indoctrination of children is tantamount to intellectual rape.
It is my belief that the only things that should be "indoctrinated" into children are skepticm and free thought. Doubt everything and make up your own mind.
I am fine with religion, I'm not about to stop anybody from doing it. Some thoughts though...Really how is it different from smoking or drinking or going to strip clubs? Would it not be fair to say you have to be 18 to attend a church? And facilitating underage religion would be a crime, just as it is to buy smokes or booze for minors?
I don't know, my thoughts sound extreme even to me.
But it takes something to break the chain of ignorance. Something needs to happen. I suppose we can let the "fire" just slowly go away, as it is destined to, but it sure would be great to just extinguish it all together (Do NOT take this the wrong way, I'm talking about grandfathering visors in, not making everyone wear them).
I am pretty sure that, in today's somewhat enlightened society, that if it was illegal to indoctrinate religious thoughts into children that the chain would be broken and religion would die out in a couple generations.
Here I will quote myself:
"[In the early times of human history] we are too dumb to think of anything, then we develop enough to start to question our surroundings. But at this point our brains are capable of only questioning, not answering. This is the evolutionary stage that requires religion to supply all answers. Eventually, we evolve to the stage where we begin to be able to supply some of our own answers, not from our imaginations, but via our intellects. Eventually we evolve to the point where we can supply all the answers, totally supressing the need for any imaginary answers (religion) altogether.
Today, we live in a stage of human evolution where we have sufficient scientific knowledge to begin to start casting off the shackles of religious and intellectual oppression."
__________________
"For thousands of years humans were oppressed - as some of us still are - by the notion that the universe is a marionette whose strings are pulled by a god or gods, unseen and inscrutable." - Carl Sagan Freedom consonant with responsibility.
Ever heard of the Great Library? We lost out on 1000(+) years of free thought and technological progress because of its loss and the corresponding dive into the dark ages. Free thought was destroyed along with the library and religion was allowed to take hold. For 1000 years humanity accomplished almost nothing. Can you imagine if the calculus was invented 1000 years before Newton and Leibniz? The steam engine? The industrial revolution? The propogation of free thought? Instead we wasted time on the ignorance of religion, witch hunts and sacrificial killings.
I think I am missing the point, because I don't recall the library being destroyed because the science contained within was somehow challenging religion at the time.
It was destroyed no less than 4 times, and the last (the Muslim conquest of Eqypt), was the only one that could be considered having to do with religion. But even that time, it had more to do with power than religous protectionism. Nothing I have ever read would indicate that it did. You might recall that the Muslim world was in fact a source for scientific output during the Dark Ages of Europe. Their religon was not threatened by science at all during that period.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
