bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,422
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
Really? Could you give an example of this?
-
Features
Why is it so important for atheists that God does not exist?
- Thread starter Tigers!
- Start date
Really? Could you give an example of this?
braces_for_impact
Veteran Member
Yep. I'll bite. Let's go.
Atheos
Veteran Member
Tell you what, I'll start with an example of Christians forcing me to live according to their beliefs and Tigers can respond with atheists forcing (or demanding) him or her to live according to their beliefs. I think the polite thing to do would be to allow Tigers to respond first and not turn this into a dogpile. But hey we atheists are nothing if not total anarchists, so feel free to dogpile if that's what cranks your tractor.
Here in the deep South Christians have forced me to have to pay extra money for a "Vanity Tag" if I don't want to go around advertising belief in a god. Otherwise I'd have to drive around with "In God We Trust" on the back of my car. I'm the type of person that doesn't put bumper stickers on his car because (for me personally) what I believe about various subjects is my own business and nobody else's. I even remove dealer decals because I don't want my automobile to be used as a source of advertisement.
But there it is, bigger than shit: Pimping for the "Big Guy" any time I'm driving around in my car. Or ponying up over twice what I'd ordinarily have to pay for a vehicle registration for the privilege of not having to advertise for Christians.
Here in the deep South Christians have forced me to have to pay extra money for a "Vanity Tag" if I don't want to go around advertising belief in a god. Otherwise I'd have to drive around with "In God We Trust" on the back of my car. I'm the type of person that doesn't put bumper stickers on his car because (for me personally) what I believe about various subjects is my own business and nobody else's. I even remove dealer decals because I don't want my automobile to be used as a source of advertisement.
But there it is, bigger than shit: Pimping for the "Big Guy" any time I'm driving around in my car. Or ponying up over twice what I'd ordinarily have to pay for a vehicle registration for the privilege of not having to advertise for Christians.
PyramidHead
Contributor
I too would like an example of this. I think I may be able to anticipate one, based on your last sentence. It may be the case that atheists have told you that you should abandon your belief in God. Indirectly, you could interpret this as a demand to change your way of life. But when you unpack it, it turns out that we're just saying you shouldn't have unjustified or false beliefs. This is actually a universal epistemological norm, and not something unique to atheism. The fact that your lifestyle is founded upon a set of beliefs that atheists believe are false makes any attack on the beliefs seem like a demand that you change your life. I can't speak for any other atheists, but I would rather more people had fewer false beliefs, and I don't feel that I'm placing unreasonable demands on you or anyone else's by preferring that, even if one of those beliefs happens to be one that affects every aspect of your life. The 'demand' to be critical and skeptical in one's beliefs does not become a draconian imposition just because one has prior emotional investment in one's beliefs.
JCS60
New member
Which atheist did this? Which atheist church did they say you should attend? They didn't push any of that poly atheism on you did they, damn bastards trying delegitimize the mono atheistic church.
Atheist / no belief. Nothing to follow no magical texts, dogmas, or rituals. So what exactly were these atheists expecting you to do?
T.G.G. Moogly
Traditional Atheist
All the cash I have says "God" on it, and that we trust in this thing called a god. Even if you want to live by the strained argument that it's merely ceremonial deism it's certainly expressing a belief in a religious entity. That counts as forcing religious belief onto a person.
You can pay using your debit card.
Tigers!
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,453
- Location
- On the wing, waiting for a kick.
- Basic Beliefs
- Bible believing revelational redemptionist (Baptist)
Sorry lads/lassies been away for a few days with work. Just thought that I'd pop my head to see if anyone is awake.
1. The insinuation/allegation that teaching children about God or religious beliefs is 'child abuse' (from dear friends Dawkins, Hitchens et al ) is one that I found most disturbing. It will be claimed that is not public policy yet but it well be in the future.
2. In Australia the calls are out for parliamentarians to not be allowed to 'allow their religious beliefs to influence public policy or laws'. Would it be that atheists had the same burden.
1. The insinuation/allegation that teaching children about God or religious beliefs is 'child abuse' (from dear friends Dawkins, Hitchens et al ) is one that I found most disturbing. It will be claimed that is not public policy yet but it well be in the future.
2. In Australia the calls are out for parliamentarians to not be allowed to 'allow their religious beliefs to influence public policy or laws'. Would it be that atheists had the same burden.
DrZoidberg
Contributor
Depends what you're teaching them. If you tell them they're going to hell forever unless they're good, that's child abuse. Kids can't handle that. Conditional love is passive aggressiveness and emotional child abuse. If you're a parent who believes in hell, well keep your mouth shut about it until the kid is old enough to handle it.
Telling them that there's a God spying on them all the time, isn't necessarily child abuse. It could be clever parenting. You don't have to admit that you aren't sure until they're adults at which point it's moot.
And finally, Christian theology is complex philosophically. Most adults seem to have problems getting their heads around it. Clearly not suitable to teach children. Why not wait until they're fully adults? The world is full of idiot Christians who were brainwashed with belief in God growing up who's beliefs rest on an extremely weak foundation. Do you think those adults would be more or less anxious if somebody had taken the time to explain Christian theology properly? Perhaps when they're old enough to understand it?
That would be an idiotic law. Our beliefs will always influence public policy or laws, religious or otherwise. What this law does is that religious policy makers have to say "I believe this" rather than say "I believe this because it says in the Bible". But the policies will be the same, and will make it harder to have adult conversations about it. If our elected politicians are Christian then obviously the electorate wants the Bible to influence policy. If they didn't they'd vote for a more secular politician
I dont agree. Since christianity is so widely believed it is hard for children to realize the falsehood.
Santa is something else. Everybody agrees that santa doesnt exist so that is safe.
The bullshit abot gods on the other hand...
DrZoidberg
Contributor
But you're arguing as if the end goal is to make all children grow up to be atheistic adults, and if we don't we've failed in educating them? Surely the end goal is that kids should have all available information to make an informed decision? Whatever the belief it leads to.
Devils advocate, how is that any different from Christians raising their kids to be Christian?
PyramidHead
Contributor
You're misquoting Dawkins here. He never said teaching children about religion and God is child abuse (and has in fact many times suggested that religious education should be compulsory in public schools). What he refers to as child abuse is specifically the labeling of children according to the religion of their parents.
And what burden is that? Atheists don't have religious beliefs. That's the meaning of the word. Do you think parliamentarians should be allowed to let their lack of belief in the tooth fairy influence public policy? Shouldn't they recuse themselves from any conversations about dental care regulations, and share the burden cruelly imposed on lawmakers who still put molars under their pillows?
Easy. Because parents telling their children that there are gods are telling the children lies.
PyramidHead
Contributor
Yeah, I don't have any problem with parents teaching their kids to believe in their particular religion, as long as society itself (as Dawkins advocates) ensures that the child gets all sides of the story as part of a basic liberal education. As soon as they are old enough to go to church or synagogue, they should also be old enough to learn about mosques, Hindu temples, and the whole slew of other faiths that have come and gone, in addition to the existence of people with no faith. If the process is truly impartial, at the end of it they may very well decide to stick with what their parents taught them, or they might go with something else.
James Brown
Veteran Member
I'm not sure that:
is compatible with:
Maybe someone did indeed argue in no uncertain terms that teaching your own kids about your own religion is child abuse (doubtful, but possible). Still, that's just one person's opinion, not a legal demand that you cease and desist.
When a parent physically abuses a child, it's called 'child abuse' and that parent is legally punished, up to and including jail time. There have been instances where parents have been punished for withholding medical treatments from their children based on the parents' religious beliefs.
But has there been any occurrences of legal action taken against a parent for merely teaching her children her religious beliefs?
is compatible with:
Maybe someone did indeed argue in no uncertain terms that teaching your own kids about your own religion is child abuse (doubtful, but possible). Still, that's just one person's opinion, not a legal demand that you cease and desist.
When a parent physically abuses a child, it's called 'child abuse' and that parent is legally punished, up to and including jail time. There have been instances where parents have been punished for withholding medical treatments from their children based on the parents' religious beliefs.
But has there been any occurrences of legal action taken against a parent for merely teaching her children her religious beliefs?
JCS60
New member
Babies are born not knowing religion they have to be infected with whatever the religious tenets their guardians prefer. Religious beliefs for the most part are local not global, just try and count the differences in each groups claims and that's just for Christians. So yeah convincing them that what they believe is far more important than what we have learned is problematic.
No one has to be brought to atheisim you're born that way that's the difference.
Elixir
Made in America
I agree. I was brought up in an agnostic environment, and was sent to every kind of church, mosque and temple imaginable. I was encouraged - indeed almost forced - to read their scriptures and about the history of the major religions. It didn't take long to realize that they couldn't all be right. I settled on the idea that whatever they all had in common was probably true, and the rest, probably not. As I got into my teens it dawned on me that the only thing they all had in common was some transcendent powerful entity that was responsible for the existence of the universe, and to which we owed a great debt (which could be paid to an intermediary - the church) , utter obedience (to its mouthpiece - the church) and reverence. The next logical step was to eliminate the middle-men (the churches) and see what was left. At the end of the day, what was left was NOTHING. Except the reverence part, which naturally emerges from observing that which exists. That's something that every atheist scientist experiences.
So my opinion is that yes - kids should have all available information to make an informed decision. Unless they are logically deranged, the end result will be the same as "making" them grow up to be atheists.
***yawn***
DrZoidberg
Contributor
I think you are wrong. Humans if left alone will develop animist faiths. I think we have an instinct to endow inanimate objects with a sense of agency. I think it's just a natural side effect of... well... it's safer than wrongly assuming that a deadly animal doesn't have agency. So nature steers us into supernaturalism.
I think it has to actively be unlearned. But I think both monotheism and atheism is as unnatural for people to believe. Both have to be learned.
Elixir
Made in America
Of course they will. They do. They always have. Until recently that is, when most of the stuff attributed to deities (or whatever concept serves as such) has rendered those deities obsolete by scientific explanation. If they are given ALL AVAILABLE INFORMATION, not only that information that regards human superstitions, children will remain as atheistic as they were born.
JCS60
New member
What do you mean by left alone?
Atheism is not unnatural it's what you are when you're born, no beliefs required. My kids weren't exposed and guess what? Now their children are growing up and only 1 of the 4 has been exposed and that 1 likes the idea of eternal life, not having to say goodbye has an appeal to her but the bunk it's built on makes it seem "stupid". The other grandma put this in her head against the wishes of the parents.
So I don't agree with you. Maybe years ago you know before toilet paper humans might have assigned agency to objects but I don't see it now unless their infected.