Talking to kids about Atheism.

NothingMan

So I was in my kitchen last Friday and a lot of my family were over. Someone, not me, brought up the fact that I had recently defected from the Catholic Church and a little discussion began about how, why, what's the point etc...

Anyway my 12 year old niece heard us and said out right that she wanted to be an Atheist but was not allowed. I tried to tell her that you can't not be allowed to be an Atheist, it's about what you believe or not believe etc.. the usual spiel. But one of my sisters cut across me saying I shouldn't be telling her this, she's too young and basically just cut me off.

I didn't argue back as my nieces mother was out of the room and I felt it would be a little unfair to discuss that with her daughter without her consent, or at least her presence.

It turned out my nieces mother had no problem with me telling her about my stance on religion or Atheism and I think the whole "i'm not allowed to be an Atheist" was just the usual 12 year old exageration "My Mam won't let me do anything" milarky.

So do you think that it should be ok to teach or talk to younger children, not your own, about what Atheism is? Not in a "How can you believe in something so silly" way, which I would probably do with friends, but just in a "this is what I believe and why" way.

Zillah

If they're quite young I'd keep it to "Oh well I don't believe in any of that" sort of talk. If your account is accurate then I think your sister was being a little over bearing. I would guess, however, that your niece was perhaps referring to having to take part in religious affairs such as going to mass rather than describing her philosophical position on the question of God.

By the sounds of it she is well on her way to atheism and will no doubt make a reasonable adult in a few years :pac:

cavedave

I know religious people hate god being compared to santa or the tooth fairy but for young children they probably are quite similar. Would you tell a child you dont believe in santa? There is a difference between saying something doesnt exist and that you dont believe in it.

A 12 year old is not a young child, hearing someone does not believe in god is not something that should freak them out too much.

MrPudding

My 11 year old now considers herself to be a atheist. I tried very hard not to push my views on her, but she was asking questions that I felt I had to answer honestly. She has a little group of atheist friends at school who get a good laugh out of their religious studies class, taught by an atheist by the way, wondering how people can believe this rubbish.

MrP

NothingMan

Zillah wrote: »

I would guess, however, that your niece was perhaps referring to having to take part in religious affairs such as going to mass rather than describing her philosophical position on the question of God.

Unfortunately I never got to clarify what she meant, as indeed that sister can be extremely over bearing, luckily I have 6 others to fall back on! Fine catholic family there so

By the sounds of it she is well on her way to atheism and will no doubt make a reasonable adult in a few years :pac:

She's a smart kid and i'm sure she'll be a sensible logical adult, but it would have been nice to be able to explain my opinion, instead of her just hearing my family asking "why would you do something like that", and then being basically told to shut up before explaining my reasons behind it.

Do you not think it's a unfair to the children that they are being taught, primarily about Catholiscism/christianity and increasingly more about world religions in school, but Atheism still is completely ignored.

By 12 a kid a typical Irish kid will know plenty about their church and basics about Muslims and other world religions but you only learn about Atheism outside class or school, like it's some drug that will corrupt their fragile minds.

Dades

If somebody else's 12 yr overhears a conversation and asks - you shouldn't lie to them. But that's as far as talking to other people's kids about it should go, imo.

Your kids - your rules!

Goduznt Xzst

NothingMan wrote: »

Anyway my 12 year old niece heard us and said out right that she wanted to be an Atheist but was not allowed. I tried to tell her that you can't not be allowed to be an Atheist, it's about what you believe or not believe etc.. the usual spiel.

Well I think the issue here is not what was being discussed but how you where discussing it. It appears to be a case of undermining the parents authority to set guidelines for their own child.

Regardless of if the parents had actually said "You are not allowed to be an Atheist", by saying "you can't not be allowed" you are saying to your niece "You're parents are wrong". If you think the subject you where discussing would not of been worded the same had the parents been in the room then you already know the answer to your question.

For me there are 2 subjects I will never broach with another parents children, and they are sex and religion due to the fairly subjective nature of opinions around both and the emotional sentimentality attached by the parents. But always, regardless of question, I imagine how I would answer it if their parents where standing right next to me, this usually stops me from ever saying anything that could be understood by the child as "what your parents have told you is false"

philologos

Isn't this royally hypocritical? I thought this kind of stuff was "indoctrination"?

NothingMan wrote:

Do you not think it's a unfair to the children that they are being taught, primarily about Catholiscism/christianity and increasingly more about world religions in school, but Atheism still is completely ignored.

I learned all about atheism, agnosticism, reductionism, humanism, existentialism and other secular philosophers when in school.

Dades

Jakkass wrote: »

Isn't this royally hypocritical? I thought this kind of stuff was "indoctrination"?

I don't agree telling your kids what you believe is indoctrination.

When we start sending our kids to atheist ethos'd educational institutions to be taught the truth of atheist dogma, that will be indoctrination!

philologos

So I take it you don't agree with Dawkins that mere teaching in the home, is indoctrination in itself?

ArthurDent

NothingMan wrote: »

So I was in my kitchen last Friday and a lot of my family were over. Someone, not me, brought up the fact that I had recently defected from the Catholic Church and a little discussion began about how, why, what's the point etc...

Anyway my 12 year old niece heard us and said out right that she wanted to be an Atheist but was not allowed. I tried to tell her that you can't not be allowed to be an Atheist, it's about what you believe or not believe etc.. the usual spiel. But one of my sisters cut across me saying I shouldn't be telling her this, she's too young and basically just cut me off.

I didn't argue back as my nieces mother was out of the room and I felt it would be a little unfair to discuss that with her daughter without her consent, or at least her presence.

It turned out my nieces mother had no problem with me telling her about my stance on religion or Atheism and I think the whole "i'm not allowed to be an Atheist" was just the usual 12 year old exageration "My Mam won't let me do anything" milarky.

So do you think that it should be ok to teach or talk to younger children, not your own, about what Atheism is? Not in a "How can you believe in something so silly" way, which I would probably do with friends, but just in a "this is what I believe and why" way.

I think a balanced approach is useful - and def wouldn't want my kids told what your parents believe is rubbish (not that I'm suggesting you would). My parents often have chats with my kids about catholicism, we are not bringing them up catholic, and mostly they manage to remain respectful of how we are bringing up our kids and I have no problem with them hearing about what their granny and grandad believe. Kids should know that not everyone else believes the same things they do.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

So I take it you don't agree with Dawkins that mere teaching in the home, is indoctrination in itself?

I think his point stands quite well on the "taught the truth of atheist dogma" part. Where it's done isn't as important as how it's done

And of course there's the point that me telling my kids what I believe isn't really the same as you telling your kids what you believe because there's no part of my "beliefs" that says that my kids will burn for eternity if they don't accept it

philologos

I see, so if I was taught about Christianity in certain contexts and if I gained faith through that teaching it wouldn't be indoctrination?

Mark Hamill

Jakkass wrote: »

Isn't this royally hypocritical? I thought this kind of stuff was "indoctrination"?

Telling a child what you believe is not indoctrination. Telling a child what to believe is.

D4RK ONION

Jakkass wrote: »

So I take it you don't agree with Dawkins that mere teaching in the home, is indoctrination in itself?

Believe it or not, not all atheists/agnostics etc. believe in the word according to the "great" Dawkins.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

I see, so if I was taught about Christianity in certain contexts and if I gained faith through that teaching it wouldn't be indoctrination?

It entirely depends on the context. The context of a faith school where most people around you including your teacher and your family all believe in it and you're being told that you might just burn for eternity if you don't accept it and other religions are mentioned as an after thought in a "this is what these guys believe" kind of way isn't really conducive to an objective decision making process

Sam Vimes

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Telling a child what you believe is not indoctrination. Telling a child what to believe is.

It will of course be argued that no one is told what to believe. Instead the children are told that their parents and authority figures believe it, that they can't be fully moral unless they believe it and they'll be punished by god if they don't believe it.....but it's entirely up to them.

Goduznt Xzst

Jakkass wrote: »

So I take it you don't agree with Dawkins that mere teaching in the home, is indoctrination in itself?

It is, and I think if a parent teaches their child that God definitely does not exist it is equally indoctrination.

However, I think you will find that a lot of Atheists try to raise their children to be free thinkers and not Atheists (i.e. to ask their own questions and not only to listen to the answers, even those from their parents). Atheism/Agnosticism just tends to be a natural bi-product of free thought.

NothingMan

I don't see how it's hypocritical at all. I wasn't telling her that what her parents believe is wrong, I was merely telling her what I believe.

Regardless of if the parents had actually said "You are not allowed to be an Atheist", by saying "you can't not be allowed" you are saying to your niece "You're parents are wrong".

But it is not the same as telling them their parents beliefs are wrong. It is telling them a factual statement that noone can tell you you are not allowed be an atheist, that's not how it works.
I consider that closer to telling them that an equation their parents told them is wrong. It's a clear black and white statement. If I had have said there is no God, your parents are wrong then I would understand and agree with your point.

If you think the subject you where discussing would not of been worded the same had the parents been in the room then you already know the answer to your question.

I don't know where you read that in what I said. I said I would be MORE comfortable discussing the issues with her mother present so she could judge wether her child should hear what I had to say. My wording would have been the same.

Goduznt Xzst

NothingMan wrote: »

I wasn't telling her that what her parents believe is wrong

I never said you where. I was commenting on your remark that her parents could not disallow her from being an Atheist, not that their beliefs where wrong.

NothingMan wrote: »

It's a clear black and white statement. If I had have said there is no God, your parents are wrong then I would understand and agree with your point.

It is not comparable because you are dealing with subjectivity here, not black and white (if you still believe such a thing exists in society). A parent is fully within their rights to disallow their child from being an Atheist. It IS possible.

Tell me, if a child came up to you and said "my parents told me I'm not allowed to have sex until I'm married"... would you, harboring your own subjective opinion on the matter, feel it would be perfectly acceptable to tell this 12 y/o girl that in fact, they don't need to be married to have sex and can engage in it as soon as they are legal in the eyes of the law.

It's a fact right, and you are only kindly passing on your opinions to this child even if they are in disagreement with what they've been taught by their parents.

robindch

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Telling a child what you believe is not indoctrination. Telling a child what to believe is.

+1.

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

So I take it you don't agree with Dawkins that mere teaching in the home, is indoctrination in itself?

I love the way you separate what Dawkins actually say completely from any context of what they are being taught and how it is being taught :rolleyes:

Would you think that a parent who gets their child up every morning to swear allegiance to a picture of Hitler, and then spends the rest of the day teaching them about how the Jews run the world and are plotting to over throw the white race, are not indoctrinating their children into neo-Nazism, they are merely "teaching in the home"?

What would you consider indoctrination into a particular set of beliefs?

philologos

Wicknight wrote: »

I love the way you separate what Dawkins actually say completely from any context of what they are being taught and how it is being taught :rolleyes:

Would you think that a parent who gets their child up every morning to swear allegiance to a picture of Hitler, and then spends the rest of the day teaching them about how the Jews run the world and are plotting to over throw the white race, are not indoctrinating their children into neo-Nazism, they are merely "teaching in the home"?

What would you consider indoctrination into a particular set of beliefs?

I don't believe that teaching people about God is comparable to Nazi ideology.

I believe that parents have the right to teach their child about the fundamentals of Christianity including God's existence in the world, Christian morality, and how Christians are meant to respond in a world that often seems opposed to Christianity. I feel that is important, I feel that community is also important, and I feel that the church can offer a lot to children (I mean this broadly, as in the community of followers who happen to be Christian). Whether or not children choose to continue in faith is up to them. I personally would also welcome criticism of a Christian worldview. Valid criticism helps people to learn and grow in their faith. There are many times when I have doubted elements of my faith only to become stronger in it afterwards.

I personally don't think what the OP is describing is indoctrination, but I certainly believe it is hypocritical given what many atheists think is indoctrination (I think they abuse the term but that's neither here nor there).

Of course your example of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party is very different to what I have described above. Indoctrination is a system that encourages belief without question, I don't think Christians generally encourage such a belief. Of course in a minority of cases they do, but I would argue this is the same of atheists who would prohibit their child to adopt faith in Jesus Christ (they do exist, even on this forum if I remember past discussions) without question.

NothingMan

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

A parent is fully within their rights to disallow their child from being an Atheist. It IS possible.

I disagree. A belief or non belief in God is based on what you personally believe. Her parents can tell her she's not allowed defect from the Catholic Church, they can make her go to mass on Sunday and they can stop her from declaring her Atheism, but if she doesn't, in her own mind, believe in the existence of a God, then she is an Atheist/Agnostic (whatever she wants to be), no matter what her parents tell her or allow her to be.

Tell me, if a child came up to you and said "my parents told me I'm not allowed to have sex until I'm married"... would you, harboring your own subjective opinion on the matter, feel it would be perfectly acceptable to tell this 12 y/o girl that in fact, they don't need to be married to have sex and can engage in it as soon as they are legal in the eyes of the law.

First of all I wouldn't discuss sex with a 12 year old. But if you disregard age here, I wouldn't tell anyone that they can have sex before marriage. I would tell them I believe that it is perfectly acceptable for 2 consenting adults to have sex when they are both of legal age.

The difference is I am telling them what I believe and why, not that they should believe the same as me. It may only seem like a slight difference, but as they say, the difference is in the detail.

Goduznt Xzst

NothingMan wrote: »

First of all I wouldn't discuss sex with a 12 year old.

Why?

NothingMan

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

Why?

Correction / I wouldn't discuss sex with my sisters 12 year old. Or any 12 year old that wasn't my own son/daughter.

robindch

NothingMan wrote: »

Anyway my 12 year old niece heard us and said out right that she wanted to be an Atheist but was not allowed. I tried to tell her that you can't not be allowed to be an Atheist, it's about what you believe or not believe etc.. the usual spiel. But one of my sisters cut across me saying I shouldn't be telling her this, she's too young and basically just cut me off.

If the 12yo is too young to hear that there's no god, then presumably she's too young to hear that there is one too?

Anyhow, I think your sister was well out of order here and while it's largely her parents' decision to let her hear (or not hear) one thing or another, it's certainly not your sister's call to say how you should respond to fairly normal and straightforward questions from somebody else's kid.

Though if your niece heard the "She's too young to deal with this" comment, then I'm sure that she took away something worthwhile from the conversation after all -- kids aren't dumb and she'll be able to see what's what

Goduznt Xzst

NothingMan wrote: »

Correction / I wouldn't discuss sex with my sisters 12 year old. Or any 12 year old that wasn't my own son/daughter.

Again, why? Please elaborate as much as possible as to why you believe this is a topic you wouldn't discuss with someone else's child.

NothingMan

robindch wrote: »

If the 12yo is too young to hear that there's no god, then presumably she's too young to hear that there is one too?

Agreed. I was arguing the case with my brother. He was saying that as I defected my kids could now not be baptised. Although he said he doesn't believe in God, he didn't understand why I didn't want my kids baptised.

I told him I will let my child be educated about different religions. Explain to them my beliefs and if they come to any conclusion on their own then I would fully support them in any religion, or lack of, they chose. I do not think it is fair to sign up your child to a religion when they can't even speak let alone rationally or spiritually come to that decision for themselves. And if 12 is old enough to be baptised, communionised and confirmed in one religion, be circumcised and considered a man in another religion, why does my lack of belief come under the umbrella of "Adult conversation" not suitable for a 12 year old?

Dades

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

Again, why? Please elaborate as much as possible as to why you believe this is a topic you wouldn't discuss with someone else's child.

What? Why would anybody want a random relative discussing sex with their 12 yr old? Why would you even think it's reasonable for someone to do this?

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't believe that teaching people about God is comparable to Nazi ideology.

That isn't the point. The point is that you wouldn't think that a parent can teach their children anything they like and it can't be indoctrination. It matters what they are teaching.

Which makes these "Oh so you think it is ok to teach your child about X, you guys are such hypocrites" claims so annoying.

It comes down to what you are teaching, not that you are merely teaching something to your kids.

Jakkass wrote: »

I believe that parents have the right to teach their child about the fundamentals of Christianity including God's existence in the world, Christian morality, and how Christians are meant to respond in a world that often seems opposed to Christianity.

So do I, and as everyone seems to agree teaching children about Christianity is not indoctrination. Teaching your children that Christianity is true is.

Jakkass wrote: »

Of course your example of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party is very different to what I have described above. Indoctrination is a system that encourages belief without question, I don't think Christians generally encourage such a belief.

I don't think parents "generally" encourage their children to worship Hitler but that doesn't mean I excuse it when it does happen.

Jakkass wrote: »

Of course in a minority of cases they do

How could you possibly determine it is in the minority of cases?

NothingMan

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

Again, why? Please elaborate as much as possible as to why you believe this is a topic you wouldn't discuss with someone else's child.

Well it's probably not really for this thread, but I do think a 12 year old should learn about sex. Be it from their parents or school through sex ed or science. But not from their uncle, especially without the parents consent. Now if there was a discussion about sex around the family table that included the 12 year old and her parents, then I would not be against the 12 year old being involved, if it wasn't against the parents wishes.

Or the conversation didn't turn towards a much more filthy sex humour type of conversation, which with my family, it would.

Goduznt Xzst

NothingMan wrote: »

Well it's probably not really for this thread...

Agreed, but I wasn't asking you about your opinions on how and when to teach children about sex

NothingMan wrote: »

But not from their uncle, especially without the parents consent.

I need you to explain this. Clearly you believe your opinions on sex should not be shared with a 12 y/o without their parents being present or without their consent, regardless of how factual you believe your opinions may be. I need you to explain why you believe this. What is wrong with talking to a 12 y/o about sex without their parents consent?

NothingMan

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

What is wrong with talking to a 12 y/o about sex without their parents consent?

A lot is wrong with it. But as I said and you agreed, not for this thread.

pH

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

What is wrong with talking to a 12 y/o about sex without their parents consent?

I guess it's just one of those things - that if you don't understand why yourself, no amount of telling you what's wrong with it is going to make it clear to you.

philologos

NothingMan: What is so more taboo about discussing sexuality with a 12 year old than discussing about religion?

Personally, if I were in your shoes, I feel I would have a place to discuss about both if I felt so inclined. Whether or not I would undermine a parents teaching is another thing though.

I feel you did nothing wrong with discussing about faith. I probably would have explained that I am a Christian, and that there is basis for what we believe and that my faith plays a role in my life etc.

Goduznt Xzst

NothingMan wrote: »

A lot is wrong with it. But as I said and you agreed, not for this thread.

pH wrote: »

that if you don't understand why yourself, no amount of telling you what's wrong with it is going to make it clear to you.

wow, two excellent examples of deflection being used to effectively avoid answering the question.

I am not asking the question because I don't know the generally understood answer, rather I will not be so presumptuous to assume an answer from the OP. It is relevant to this thread in establishing a baseline of understanding.

However if deflection is being used this early on I doubt I will get anywhere. I think you are merely looking to selectively read opinions that tell you you where justified in your actions, not honestly looking for an opinion.

In review my opinion is:

1. You where out of line, imo, for correcting an opinion the child had been taught by her parents without her parents being present to defend themselves
2. Your sister was also wrong in assuming guardianship of this girl

doctoremma

Jakkass wrote: »

I feel you did nothing wrong with discussing about faith. I probably would have explained that I am a Christian, and that there is basis for what we believe and that my faith plays a role in my life etc.

Sorry for jumping in. Isn't it this type of statement that might be the objectionable one, the implication that it is you who are right in the position of faith. Shouldn't you simply stick to what your basis for faith is, rather than speaking collectively in order to assume a position of authority?

NothingMan

Jakkass wrote: »

NothingMan: What is so more taboo about discussing sexuality with a 12 year old than discussing about religion?

I never said it was taboo, just not an uncles place to do so, especially without the parents consent. But as I said earlier I wouldn't exclude a 12 year old from a family discussion about sex either, as long as it was a mature conversation.

Personally, if I were in your shoes, I feel I would have a place to discuss about both if I felt so inclined. Whether or not I would undermine a parents teaching is another thing though.

I completely agree, I was not intending to undermine the parents teachings. I was merely explaining what Atheism was, and as it turned out the actual parent had no problem with what I was discussing.

I feel you did nothing wrong with discussing about faith. I probably would have explained that I am a Christian, and that there is basis for what we believe and that my faith plays a role in my life etc.

Once again, I completely agree. I think it is important for a person to get a well rounded view about different belief systems. Then decide for themselves what they believe in. I am not going to dismiss billions of peoples beliefs just because I do not share them. But I will also put across my point as to why I don't believe in them.

NothingMan

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

wow, two excellent examples of deflection being used to effectively avoid answering the question.

I am not deflecting anything. You go start a thread about discussing sex with a 12 year old who you do not have any guardianship over, and I will respond.

You where out of line, imo, for correcting an opinion the child had been taught by her parents without her parents being present to defend themselves

As I tried to explain earlier. I was not correcting the parents opinion, I was correcting her belief that you can be told what you believe.
ie. You can't "not be allowed be an Atheist".

I know that's a double negative but I hope you get my meaning.

philologos

NothingMan wrote: »

I never said it was taboo, just not an uncles place to do so, especially without the parents consent. But as I said earlier I wouldn't exclude a 12 year old from a family discussion about sex either, as long as it was a mature conversation.

Couldn't this also be argued for religion?

NothingMan wrote: »

Once again, I completely agree. I think it is important for a person to get a well rounded view about different belief systems. Then decide for themselves what they believe in. I am not going to dismiss billions of peoples beliefs just because I do not share them. But I will also put across my point as to why I don't believe in them.

I'd do the same the other way around, so I guess there is no issue with arguing for secular approaches to life with family members.

NothingMan

Jakkass wrote: »

Couldn't this also be argued for religion?

Yes, I would also not discuss my particular beliefs with a 12 year old without the parents permission. However I would not lie to a 12 year old either.

However I don't think even with the parents permission I would discuss sex with a 12 year old. Mainly because I think it's important for that to come from a parent. However a parent may not have my atheistic review and I would be happy to fill the child in on something they may otherwise not hear from anyone.

I know it sounds a little hypocritical, but I do think sex and religion are different.

philologos

NothingMan wrote: »

Yes, I would also not discuss my particular beliefs with a 12 year old without the parents permission. However I would not lie to a 12 year old either.

I thought you didn't have the parents permission.

NothingMan wrote: »

However I don't think even with the parents permission I would discuss sex with a 12 year old. Mainly because I think it's important for that to come from a parent. However a parent may not have my atheistic review and I would be happy to fill the child in on something they may otherwise not hear from anyone.

A lot of people regard religion as crucially important in developing character, and in developing moral awareness and in developing ones responsibilities to the world. If your justification about sexuality is justified, it is also justified in respect of religion.

I'm engaging a bit in rhetoric more than anything of substance though. I wouldn't have any qualms in discussing with any of my relatives about Christianity and it's importance.

NothingMan wrote: »

I know it sounds a little hypocritical, but I do think sex and religion are different.

The issue isn't whether or not you think they are different, but whether or not the parents involved think they are differing in importance if we are to use your justification on sexuality.

robindch

NothingMan wrote: »

why does my lack of belief come under the umbrella of "Adult conversation" not suitable for a 12 year old?

Because many religious assume that they can feed religion to kids without interference. Suggesting that there isn't a god can be viewed as interference with that assumed right, at which point it can be conveniently kicked into touch by saying that such chatter is "not suitable" for kids.

There's a thread here which shows how questioning this assumed right can lead to all kinds of unnecessary rattiness.

Goduznt Xzst

NothingMan wrote: »

You go start a thread about discussing sex with a 12 year old who you do not have any guardianship over, and I will respond.

The point is lost on you. I don't care why it is wrong to talk to someone elses child about sex. Rather I was looking to establish a baseline to avoid backtracking in the discussion later on.

NothingMan wrote: »

I was correcting her belief...

This is why you where wrong. If the child has a belief regarding Religion and God that needs correcting you broach it with her parents and let them know her belief is incorrect. It is not your place to correct the beliefs of a child that is not your own, even if they are wrong, in your opinion.

I would not presume to tell someone elses child that:

you can't "not be allowed to have sex before marriage",
you can't "not be allowed to eat meat" or
you can't "not be allowed be an Atheist".

If a child approached me and said "My parents won't allow me to be an Atheist" I wouldn't even get into the subject with them, I'd merely say "well that's your parents call to make", regardless of how factual the statement is.

NothingMan

The point is lost on you. I don't care why it is wrong to talk to someone elses child about sex. Rather I was looking to establish a baseline to avoid backtracking in the discussion later on.

The point obviously is lost on me, I still am not sure what point you're trying to make.

This is why you where wrong. If the child has a belief regarding Religion and God that needs correcting you broach it with her parents and let them know her belief is incorrect. It is not your place to correct the beliefs of a child that is not your own, even if they are wrong, in your opinion.

I would not presume to tell someone elses child that:

you can't "not be allowed to have sex before marriage",
you can't "not be allowed to eat meat" or
you can't "not be allowed be an Atheist".

If a child approached me and said "My parents won't allow me to be an Atheist" I wouldn't even get into the subject with them, I'd merely say "well that's your parents call to make", regardless of how factual the statement is.

Ok, you just quoted a small part of my paragraph saying I was "correcting her belief". When I was saying the exact opositte. That's unacceptable and I won't argue with someone who stoops to that level.

As I said many times. I was not correcting her belief, I was correcting her on what the definition of belief was.

I thought you didn't have the parents permission.

@ Jakkass, You're right the parent was out of the room. And I wasn't getting into a debate with her about religious beliefs, just merely pointing out that nobody can tell you what to believe or not. Which I don't think there is anything wrong with. Be it their belief in religion, non belief in Atheism or anything else. I was merely defining a word, and would not have entered into a more detailed discussion about atheism without her mothers permission.

Dades

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

The point is lost on you. I don't care why it is wrong to talk to someone elses child about sex. Rather I was looking to establish a baseline to avoid backtracking in the discussion later on.

If you don't care what the answer to something is - don't ask the question. Especially if it drags people off-topic only to establish some dramatic baseline.

Goduznt Xzst

NothingMan wrote: »

That's unacceptable and I won't argue with someone who stoops to that level.

lol, as opposed to stooping to the level of quoting everything I posted and responding to none of it.

NothingMan wrote: »

As I said many times. I was not correcting her belief, I was correcting her on what the definition of belief was.

Yes and, like I said, this is where you where wrong. I do not believe I quoted you out of context. What I have an issue with is that you felt it was your place to correct her opinion at all, whether it was her religious belief or her belief about religious belief. I gave examples, which you conveniently side stepped over, to try and dissuade any confusion about what I quoted.

NothingMan wrote: »

just merely pointing out that nobody can tell you what to believe or not

So if a child that had been raised a vegetarian said she'd like to try some meat but couldn't because her parents taught her to believe that eating meat was bad, you'd have no problem with telling her that "nobody can tell you what to believe". If her parents came to you fuming upon seeing her eating a piece of meat would you feel vindicated in your decision to nominate your own correction to their childs understanding.

doctoremma

Jakkass wrote: »

I wouldn't have any qualms in discussing with any of my relatives about Christianity and it's importance.

Finding someone talking to your child about why they happen to be Christian is a different premise to discovering them talking to your child about about why Christianity is important. Discussing why you believe Christianity is important is more acceptable, although, to be fair, I'd still blow a fuse.

NothingMan

The whole point of a belief or lack of belief is that it is unique to that person. My niece felt she wasn't allowed to be an Atheist. I told her that noone can tell you you're not allowed to be an Atheist as it is a personal belief. Your parents can only stop you practising Atheism (if you really "practice" atheism).

Yes I feel the same about vegetarianism. A parent can hold the belief that eating meat is bad and stop a child from eating meat, but they can't tell the child to believe that eating meat is bad, that is something they have to come to on their own. Although with vegetarian parents they may be lead to that belief more easily, same as having Catholic parents leads to Catholic children.

This is exactly what indoctrination is. People not just teaching their kids what they believe in, but telling them they have to believe it to.

I feel I was perfectly justified in telling my niece that her parents are wrong and you don't have to believe what your parents tell you. I was not telling her that God doesn't exist, I told her she can believe whatever she feels is right.

Goduznt Xzst

Dades wrote: »

Especially if it drags people off-topic only to establish some dramatic baseline.

dramatic? What?

I was interested in what the OP's answer would be and the reasoning behind it, not what the answer is. It was relevant to the topic of whether it is acceptable for an Atheist to explain Atheism to other parents children, to establish a baseline of what would make a topic unacceptable to be discussed with a minor

NothingMan wrote: »

I feel I was perfectly justified in telling my niece that her parents are wrong and you don't have to believe what your parents tell you. I was not telling her that God doesn't exist, I told her she can believe whatever she feels is right.

Please, I implore you, say this to your niece the next time you are around her and her parents and post back with the reaction you receive.