Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Religion
 Stop your child from becoming an atheist
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf

USA
1461 Posts

Posted - 09/18/2011 :  14:17:32  Show Profile  Visit ThorGoLucky's Homepage Send ThorGoLucky a Private Message  Reply with Quote
What is the best way to stop your child becoming an athiest?

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090208040536AAHBrYH

Do not educate them, or expose them to critical thinking, logic or science.

Lie to them constantly about how the world works. Feed them a steady diet of mumbo jumbo dressed up like real knowledge - the jumbo jet in the whirlwind for example - and pretend that it is deep wisdom.

Make them loathe their own natural bodies and functions. Convince them they are small and weak and worthless and need redemption. Tell them everything enjoyable is grievously wrong to even think about, and that their only fun should be in grovelling to an invisible friend.

Ensure that they resent anyone who is not like them in every way - skin color, nationality, political opinion but especially creed. Make such people out to be evil and vile and give them - impotent minorities all - the fictional power to somehow oppress and persecute the vast majority who do think like you.

Teach them to laugh at and dismiss out of hand any faith but their own. Early - early mind you - make sure they are taught the difference between superstitious deadly error - that one raving lunatic in the desert told the truth about a vicious god who killed people, and divine eternal truth - that another raving lunatic in the desert told the truth about a vicious god who killed people.

Instruct them with all severity and import to never question for themselves - to never think for themselves - to never live for themselves - but to seek answers only in one - just one - particular set of semi-literate bronze age folk tales.

Above all - and this cannot be overemphasized - make sure they cannot spell, use correct grammar, or understand basic English words.

That should do the trick.

Edited by - ThorGoLucky on 09/18/2011 14:18:41

H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard

USA
4574 Posts

Posted - 09/18/2011 :  14:23:40   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send H. Humbert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Sounds about right.


"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman

"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie
Go to Top of Page

sailingsoul
SFN Addict

2830 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  10:41:29   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send sailingsoul a Private Message  Reply with Quote
That's a very good answer. It is fairly easy and is almost guaranteed if you start the programing before a child can walk and talk. Start the programing at 6 months or sooner with theist rituals. Continue weekly if not daily. Mold and hard wire the brain before any other and all other learning is started. That's the method that was used on me. I was programed starting with baptism at three months. With that brain washing had no problem seeing how foolish it was for anyone today in believing in Zeus, Loki or Vishnu, what have you. I was programed to see how useless and wrong it is kissing the feet of a statue of Ra, praying and making offerings to an invented (false) made up God. However kissing the Popes ring when he came and giving money weekly was a requirement and a privilege. It took decades for me to break my programing, to work the blinders off and see what they kept covered. Like trying to stop smoking or shake a drug addiction it was a crutch. It was very hard to break the belief in that one last God. When I placed my belief in "a God" next to all the other beliefs in Gods throughout time I had to admit there was no difference. Clearly millions before me have definitely been scammed with all the crap they been sold about all their false Gods.

I no longer believe in what is indistinguishable from what is clearly false, just because others can or must. SS

There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  11:14:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
This is very funny. Until I got to the last point, I kept thinking stuff like, "But if you lie to them and take the indoctrination to such an extreme, that is just as likely to backfire when they grow up and realize their parents were so obviously full of shit!" Then I got to the part about making sure they grow up not able to fully comprehend or use language.

This is why I don't worry too much about religious people indoctrinating their kids. Unless they live in secluded communes their whole lives away from the rest of the world, there are just so many little things they can be exposed to that will be a catalyst for critical thinking. And once Pandora's box is opened...

I think I might have inadvertently served as such a catalyst for a little girl in Kentucky 4 years ago. I was doing an artist residency out in a very sparsely-populated, rural area. Part of my work exchange was to teach a printmaking class to kids. After the class, one little girl's mom was late picking her up. She was about 10 years old, and we got to chatting. She did most of the talking, and she was telling me some story that involved mentioning that one of the people in the story was Catholic, and another was Protestant (she herself was of course Protestant), and then she paused and asked me, "Are you Catholic or Protestant?" At first I sort of froze like a deer in headlights. As a teacher I am very uncomfortable discussing my personal worldview with minors. But I also strive to be honest with kids and believe in answering their questions. So I said, "Neither. I'm a secular humanist." She looked quite confused, as if she'd just encountered something very exotic, and asked, "What's that?" I gave my stock super-short answer: "Humanists aren't religious, but we believe in being good to each other because we think that will make us all happier." She paused to process this. Then she asked, "So what do you believe about heaven and hell?" I swallowed hard and sought a way to answer so I was talking more about my philosophy rather than my own personal specific beliefs: "Humanists don't have an opinion. They don't think that is an important question since nobody can know those answers for sure." Boy, you should have seen the gears turning in that kid's head at that! I started to get afraid that she was going to go straight home and start talking to her parents about this secular humanist teacher, so I then elaborated, saying, "I mean, there are lots of different religions in the world. And they are all different. Like Buddhists - they don't believe in heaven or hell, but they believe in Enlightenment. And Hindus believe in reincarnation and Nirvana, which is sort of like Heaven, but not really." The girls asked, "Do all those religions have their own book, like the Bible?" I replied, "Yes, most of them do. The Hindu Vedics, and the writings of Buddha and Confucius for example. Confucianism is a Chinese religion."

She didn't ask any more questions. She was too busy thinking really hard. I'm convinced it was a conversation that will stay in her memory. I felt pretty awesome about how I handled it.

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Edited by - marfknox on 09/20/2011 11:17:27
Go to Top of Page

marfknox
SFN Die Hard

USA
3739 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  11:19:22   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit marfknox's Homepage  Send marfknox an AOL message Send marfknox a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I don't have time to look it up just now, but I remember reading some time ago that porn stars are more likely to have had a conservative Christian upbringing.

"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong

Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com

Go to Top of Page

Hal
Skeptic Friend

USA
302 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  11:34:56   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Hal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by marfknox

This is why I don't worry too much about religious people indoctrinating their kids. Unless they live in secluded communes their whole lives away from the rest of the world, there are just so many little things they can be exposed to that will be a catalyst for critical thinking. And once Pandora's box is opened...


This, this, THIS! The world provides so many opportunities for the parent who merely wishes for her children to have good rational faculties and a suitable degree of socialization. It's much more challenging, on the other hand, to the parent who wishes to indoctrinate their children into a specific world-view.

This list pretty much describes my own upbringing (except for the spelling/grammar part - Mom was a schoolteacher). Without a doubt, I still carry some of these constraints around with me (it's true -- my body and its functions are foul and loathsome), but I was never strongly sequestered from the world at large, and that's made all the difference.

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King Jr.

Go to Top of Page

H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard

USA
4574 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  12:26:33   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send H. Humbert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by marfknox
This is why I don't worry too much about religious people indoctrinating their kids. Unless they live in secluded communes their whole lives away from the rest of the world, there are just so many little things they can be exposed to that will be a catalyst for critical thinking. And once Pandora's box is opened...
Right. That's why there are so few creationists in this day and age. Oh, wait...

Really, I find this attitude bizarre coming from you. You more than anyone should know that a person's individual abilities or aptitudes are often not sufficient to overcome environmental pressures and social norms, otherwise racism and sexism wouldn't be the problems they are. If the indoctrination was something other than religion, would you be saying "I don't worry too much about sexist males indoctrinating their daughters. Unless those girls live in secluded communes their whole lives away from the rest of the world, there are just so many little things they can be exposed to that will be a catalyst for developing a positive self image. And once a woman becomes employed..."

You would think someone who minimized the affects of childhood indoctrination in such a manner was off their rocker, and rightly so. And we can't forget that racist and sexist beliefs are very often part and parcel of a sheltered religious upbringing. So why do you give religious indoctrination a pass? Because it didn't work on you? I don't get it.


"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman

"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie
Edited by - H. Humbert on 09/20/2011 12:44:49
Go to Top of Page

Hal
Skeptic Friend

USA
302 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  13:25:07   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Hal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by H. Humbert

Originally posted by marfknox
This is why I don't worry too much about religious people indoctrinating their kids. Unless they live in secluded communes their whole lives away from the rest of the world, there are just so many little things they can be exposed to that will be a catalyst for critical thinking. And once Pandora's box is opened...
Right. That's why there are so few creationists in this day and age. Oh, wait...

Really, I find this attitude bizarre coming from you. You more than anyone should know that a person's individual abilities or aptitudes are often not sufficient to overcome environmental pressures and social norms, otherwise racism and sexism wouldn't be the problems they are. If the indoctrination was something other than religion, would you be saying "I don't worry too much about sexist males indoctrinating their daughters. Unless those girls live in secluded communes their whole lives away from the rest of the world, there are just so many little things they can be exposed to that will be a catalyst for developing a positive self image. And once a woman becomes employed..."

You would think someone who minimized the affects of childhood indoctrination in such a manner was off their rocker, and rightly so. And we can't forget that racist and sexist beliefs are very often part and parcel of a sheltered religious upbringing. So why do you give religious indoctrination a pass? Because it didn't work on you? I don't get it.




Speaking only from my own experience, I think my kids have been well served by their exposure to such dogmatic social norms. It's not simply because it gives them some sympathy for why people believe the things they do, but more importantly, it's made them aware that they are no less susceptible to such influences.

In my own childhood, I was actively discouraged from seeking any sort of rational understanding of people with opposing viewpoints, or who differed from the 'norm' in even the most minor ways - they were just wrong (and somehow physically unclean - not sure how that association was made). Fortunately, I found opportunities to have my "native" assumptions challenged.

I certainly won't speak for marf, as she's much more articulate on her own, but I think there's a case to be made that a child's exposure to, say, racist indoctrination, can actually help to inoculate them against such viewpoints.

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King Jr.

Go to Top of Page

H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard

USA
4574 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  13:39:55   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send H. Humbert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Hal
I certainly won't speak for marf, as she's much more articulate on her own, but I think there's a case to be made that a child's exposure to, say, racist indoctrination, can actually help to inoculate them against such viewpoints.
This is upside-down thinking. Just because a few rare individuals manage to overcome their childhood indoctrination with varying degrees off success, that hardly makes the indoctrination itself justifiable. We can all find examples of racists or homophones who changed their prejudices after sufficient experience and reflection, but how many more never do? I agree that some people are able to overcome their own indoctrination eventually, but how many more people would benefit by not being indoctrinated in the first place? It's ridiculous to argue that indoctrination somehow results in a net positive. If that were the case, we would never have to work to change bigotry. It would be a self-correcting problem.


"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman

"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie
Edited by - H. Humbert on 09/20/2011 13:44:02
Go to Top of Page

Hal
Skeptic Friend

USA
302 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  14:01:57   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Hal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by H. Humbert

Originally posted by Hal
I certainly won't speak for marf, as she's much more articulate on her own, but I think there's a case to be made that a child's exposure to, say, racist indoctrination, can actually help to inoculate them against such viewpoints.
This is upside-down thinking. Just because a few rare individuals manage to overcome their childhood indoctrination with varying degrees off success, that hardly makes the indoctrination itself justifiable. Anyone can point to a successful minority who overcame the adversity of their circumstances, that doesn't mean racism isn't an obstacle to success. I agree that some people are able to overcome their own indoctrination eventually, but how many more people would benefit by not being indoctrinated in the first place?




I understand your point, but here's my problem:

a few rare individuals manage to overcome their childhood indoctrination with varying degrees off success


I'd argue that nearly all "free-thinkers" get that way by overcoming their childhood indoctrinations, because none of us are ever free from these influences. And more importantly, I think that through their experience, they become better thinkers, because they're not simply replacing one closed world-view with another (witness the unfortunate example of the "agnostic atheists" thread).

I know that I probably didn't articulate my point very well, but I do have to disagree with you're characterization of my argument as "upside-down." You'd be right, if I'd said that we should deliberately indoctrinate our kids against our own values, just so they can learn from the experience of having to change their minds later. Now that really would be borderline abusive. What I actually said, however, is that uncritical exposure to "alternative" viewpoints provides the opportunity for rational reflection - everything I learned about religious fundamentalism I learned at home, and in Sunday School. The result, for me, is that I have a pretty solid understanding of why I reject this world-view, and a much better grasp of what that world-view actually is than many people I know who did not have this experience.


Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King Jr.

Go to Top of Page

Ebone4rock
SFN Regular

USA
894 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  14:41:13   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ebone4rock a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Hal
I'd argue that nearly all "free-thinkers" get that way by overcoming their childhood indoctrinations, because none of us are ever free from these influences. And more importantly, I think that through their experience, they become better thinkers, because they're not simply replacing one closed world-view with another (witness the unfortunate example of the "agnostic atheists" thread).



Hmmm...Not sure if I agree with this. I only have my own anecdotal example to use because I am the only one that I know of that had my type of experience.

I was raised without any religion what-so-ever. I only knew church as the place where people were going on Saturday evenings after they came to our restaurant for dinner and where they were coming from on Sundays for lunch. I heard people talk about god and stuff but it really meant nothing to me. I was pretty young, probably seven or eight, when I started questioning my Granny about god. She didn't want to touch that subject so she sent me with one of her friends to a Catholic service. That was the best possible choice she could have made. I clearly recall listening to service and thinking "You've GOT to be kidding me, people really beleive this?!" An atheist was born right at that moment. Even at that tender age I could clearly tell that it was nonsense. I beleive it is because I was never indoctrinated as a very young child.

When I got a little older, maybe like 10 or so, I started spending some weekends with my little buddy. His parents would take us to church on Sundays. I remember how angry I would get listening to the service. It was just such bullshit that I could not fathom how supposedly respected people could live beleiving this crap. I still feel the same way today whenever I have to sit though a service during a baptism or a funeral.

My point being that if you keep a kid's mind free from that bullshit early on then critical thinking is easier to develop. There is nothing to fight against.

Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring
Go to Top of Page

H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard

USA
4574 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  14:55:26   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send H. Humbert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Hal
I'd argue that nearly all "free-thinkers" get that way by overcoming their childhood indoctrinations, because none of us are ever free from these influences.
And for a great many free-thinkers, that journey out of indoctrination was horrendously painful. Why wouldn't we do work to try and stop such indoctrination before it occurs and avoid needless suffering?

And more importantly, I think that through their experience, they become better thinkers, because they're not simply replacing one closed world-view with another (witness the unfortunate example of the "agnostic atheists" thread).
Free-thinkers are not better critical thinkers because of failed indoctrination attempts. They became critical thinkers despite indoctrinations attempts, usually through self-education. Officiant is a good example of what happens when this self-study goes wrong. He likely doesn't have the skills required to be a good critical thinker because he grew up in a culture that values emotion and faith statements over reason and rationality. Had he been taught correctly from childhood, he might not have developed into the irrational person he is today.

I know that I probably didn't articulate my point very well, but I do have to disagree with you're characterization of my argument as "upside-down." You'd be right, if I'd said that we should deliberately indoctrinate our kids against our own values, just so they can learn from the experience of having to change their minds later. Now that really would be borderline abusive.
But that seems to be a natural extension of your argument. Why wouldn't you advocate this if you really felt it was the better path to developing critical thinking skills?

What I actually said, however, is that uncritical exposure to "alternative" viewpoints provides the opportunity for rational reflection...
Why must the exposure be "uncritical?" Why this insistence on letting children "figure it out for themselves" on religious matters but not other subjects? Critical thinking is a learned skill. It needs to be taught and developed. It really doesn't come naturally for most people.


...everything I learned about religious fundamentalism I learned at home, and in Sunday School. The result, for me, is that I have a pretty solid understanding of why I reject this world-view, and a much better grasp of what that world-view actually is than many people I know who did not have this experience.
How many people of those you grew up with ended up rejecting the worldview you were indoctrinated into? Would you say your development into a critical thinker was the norm or the exception?


"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman

"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie
Edited by - H. Humbert on 09/20/2011 15:14:11
Go to Top of Page

Hal
Skeptic Friend

USA
302 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  15:17:29   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Hal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Ebone4rock

Originally posted by Hal
I'd argue that nearly all "free-thinkers" get that way by overcoming their childhood indoctrinations, because none of us are ever free from these influences. And more importantly, I think that through their experience, they become better thinkers, because they're not simply replacing one closed world-view with another (witness the unfortunate example of the "agnostic atheists" thread).



My point being that if you keep a kid's mind free from that bullshit early on then critical thinking is easier to develop. There is nothing to fight against.


I obviously can't, and won't, disagree with your personal experience, except to say that in many places, your secular upbringing would, alas, be exceptional. My point was that, regardless of our best intentions, or most earnest desires, our lives will never be "free from bullshit." In the case of my own family, the fact that I am personally 100% rational and bullshit-free doesn't mean that everyone else they encounter is equally enlightened. In fact, I'm probably the only non-churchgoer, not to mention the only atheist, my kids ever encountered before they graduated from high school. Now, I am an extremely non-confrontational person (this is a function of my personality, rather than my philosophy), and when my kids came home with stories of their various experiences, I was simply not inclined to openly scorn the things I disagreed with. I would, however, encourage them to consider if there were alternative ideas that made more sense, or were simply more agreeable. As far as I'm concerned, that worked out OK, in that they all seem perfectly comfortable now, in the secularist skins they adopted for themselves.

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King Jr.

Go to Top of Page

Hal
Skeptic Friend

USA
302 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  16:00:00   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Hal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by H. Humbert

Originally posted by Hal
I'd argue that nearly all "free-thinkers" get that way by overcoming their childhood indoctrinations, because none of us are ever free from these influences.
And for a great many free-thinkers, that journey out of indoctrination was horrendously painful. Why wouldn't we do work to try and stop such indoctrination before it occurs and avoid needless suffering?


I may have suffered a bit myself (although I'm loathe to compare my mental angst with the serious anguish many other people experience), but I don't believe that this process has to be painful. My personal impulse is to try and remove the drama from these dilemmas, as much as I can, simply by championing the "rational alternative," as, well, a rational alternative. I really do believe that simply knowing that one has the liberty to decide between the irrational doctrine and the alternative goes a long way toward easing the pain. In my case (which I don't claim to be universal), I was never troubled by having to choose between God and Hellfire, because I didn't believe in either one. What did give me a lot of grief was not being allowed any other alternative. So, for me anyway, the choice was simply between reality and make-believe. Whereas my parents weren't always able to give me that choice, it was trivially easy for me to offer it to my own kids.


And more importantly, I think that through their experience, they become better thinkers, because they're not simply replacing one closed world-view with another (witness the unfortunate example of the "agnostic atheists" thread).
Free-thinkers are not better critical thinkers because of failed indoctrination attempts. They became critical thinkers despite indoctrinations attempts, usually through self-education.


I'm not sure if I get the distinction here. "Because of failed indoctrination attempts" vs "Despite [failed] indoctrination attempts"? It sounds like we're saying the same thing. And I don't think you need to regard every exposure to some belief/POV as an "indoctrination attempt". Most of the time, it's just, "Oh, look what that person believes."


Officiant is a good example of what happens when this self-study goes wrong. He likely doesn't have the skills required to be a good critical thinker because he grew up in a culture that values emotion and faith statements over reason and rationality. Had he been taught correctly from childhood, he might not have developed into the irrational person he is today.


No argument there! I sincerely hope he grows out of it, and I hope that the rejection he received here will, someday, fuel some of this introspection that he lacks.

I know that I probably didn't articulate my point very well, but I do have to disagree with you're characterization of my argument as "upside-down." You'd be right, if I'd said that we should deliberately indoctrinate our kids against our own values, just so they can learn from the experience of having to change their minds later. Now that really would be borderline abusive.
But that seems to be a natural extension of your argument. Why wouldn't you advocate this if you really felt it was the better path to developing critical thinking skills?


Because such deception/manipulation is antithetical to the goal of encouraging free thought?

What I actually said, however, is that uncritical exposure to "alternative" viewpoints provides the opportunity for rational reflection...
Why must the exposure be "uncritical?" Why this insistence on letting children "figure it out for themselves" on religious matters but not other subjects? Critical thinking is a learned skill. It needs to be taught and developed. It really doesn't come naturally for most people.


I'll give you this, because it's largely just a personality thing with me, as I noted in my response to ebone. "Uncritical," to me, simply means saying "I disagree with grandma," rather than, "Grandma is wrong." Most people, with stouter constitutions, don't retreat into the passive voice as readily as I do.


...everything I learned about religious fundamentalism I learned at home, and in Sunday School. The result, for me, is that I have a pretty solid understanding of why I reject this world-view, and a much better grasp of what that world-view actually is than many people I know who did not have this experience.
How many people of those you grew up with ended up rejecting the worldview you were indoctrinated into? Would you say your development into a critical thinker was the norm or the exception?


Actually, I've been delighted to discover that my experience isn't really all that exceptional. The social sequestration I've mentioned had the effect of denying me the knowledge that others were experiencing the same challenges. Many of my peers are "out of the closet," in one form or another. The world is a lot more accessible than it used to be!

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King Jr.

Go to Top of Page

Officiant
Skeptic Friend

166 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  16:39:35   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Officiant a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Dear Hal, perhaps you could expand on just what you mean by, "they become better thinkers, because they're not simply replacing one closed world-view with another (witness the unfortunate example of the "agnostic atheists" thread)."

I agree with Humbert that the indoctrination of children is a crime and is never a good idea. You think lying to children is okay because it makes them cynical?

I am an atheist. In what way is that irrational and based on faith? Humbert says I am not a critical thinker because I think agnosticism is Victorian garbage. It has been my experience that agnostics are indistinguishable from Christians.
They both support the God hypothesis and are equally dogmatic and cruel in silencing those who do not agree with them. Agnostic Humanist Canada broke two of their by-laws to silence me for example.

The following will both educate you and might even make my stance on agnostics a little more palatable.

Open-mindedness - YouTube

www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI10 min - 31 Mar 2009 - Uploaded by QualiaSoup
A look at some of the flawed thinking that prompts people who believe in certain non-scientific concepts to advise others who don't to be more ...
Go to Top of Page

Hal
Skeptic Friend

USA
302 Posts

Posted - 09/20/2011 :  16:50:55   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Hal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Officiant
I agree with Humbert that the indoctrination of children is a crime and is never a good idea. You think lying to children is okay because it makes them cynical?


For some definitions of "lying," yes. That would be, if we assert that exposing children to the beliefs of others is the same as "lying" to them. I wouldn't say that, would you?

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King Jr.

Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.45 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000