Arguments about teaching children god is real

Cróga

EDIT: I got banned for bringing up this topic in Parenting. My posts were moved to here.

Ever try to have a conversation with someone religious? They can never be reasoned out of it, because they were never reasoned into it. Religion = child abuse.

Telling a child that there's a man in the sky keeping an eye on them, watching their every move, listening to every thought and telling them that they will spend eternity burning in fire if they dont believe in this man or doing something "wrong" is abusive. Because childrens brains arent developed its no different than someone going into a mentally handicapped home and telling them there's a man in the sky watching everything they do and is going to send them to burn them forever after they die. Someone would be arrested for doing this.

alex73 wrote: »

Because its what I believe, what my parents, grandparents and great grand parents believed. I'm proud that my Children believe.

If you want to call it superstition... that's your decision. I am happy to educate my children in the faith I was educated in.

This is a good thing? You're an atheist to 9999+ other Gods why not go one more? If you grew up in a place where a talking fish was God. You'd look to it as being virtuous. The popularity of something has no effect on the truth value of a proposition. A billion people believing that 2 + 2 = 5 doesnt make it any truer. Im sorry but it's not my decision. The belief in God is not based on any reason or evidence making it superstition. You can believe anything you want, im not saying you cant, but your belief is still subject to reason and evidence.

Cróga

Joey the lips wrote: »

I bring my kids to mass every week. Like my parents did with me. I am not here to debate the morals of religion.

I bring my kids to mass becuase i choose to raise my kids a certain way. When they are old enough they can decide if they wish to continue down this road.

I do not understand why people are so critical of those who bring their kids to mass. I use the sugar and sweets analagy..

Kids love sugar kids love sweets. Kids would eat sugar all day long. Kids would attempt to survive on nothing but sweets.

If we gave kids the option they would choose to eat sweets all the time and nothing else however as parents we choose to protect them and limit their intake of sugar. We teach them the wrongs by doing this.

When they are off an age they are free to eat all the sweets they want...However through there education they know this not to be the wise choice.

I have never seen a situation where a parent attempting to religion there chid has done any harm. However i have seen where free will has.

I agree that you should limit a kids sugar intake because it has bad effects on their health. But i dont see how you can compare free will (kids eating sugar) and force (parents bringing kids to mass) as if they're the same. What reason is there to bring kids to mass?

I bring my kids to mass becuase i choose to raise my kids a certain way.

Please watch the bomb in the brain the effects of child abuse video series

Cróga

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I really don't think parenting is the appropriate forum to cast aspersions or knock anyone else's parenting choices - whether that be having a faith or lack there of.

Why do you think that?

Cróga

bad2dabone wrote: »

well, I hope I articulate myself properly here, I feel that this forum (parenting) isn't the place for anyone to try and enforce their religious views on others and from the manner of your posts its coming across that you are championing atheism and judging those who choose to bring their kids to mass. (even though I concur with some of your assertions!)

Put it this way, I hate when religious people try to force religion on me or mine. I assume you feel the same way.( correct me if i'm wrong) It just seems to me that in this thread you're trying to force your views on the religious.

In my experience that never works and just makes you look like the fundamentalist. And that's never a good thing imo

Thanks for explaining.

I dont mean to force my views on anyone, and if i am i apologize. Im just trying to raise the topic that teaching children God is real is abusive. I might be wrong in that assertion but that's why i want to discuss it.

Cróga

bad2dabone wrote: »

it's the right of parents to bring up their children in the belief system which they see fit though (within reason of course!). Although you consider it child abuse (which is a very very strong term and bound to provoke a strong reaction) parents who themselves were brought up in a religious environment and found it beneficial will want to pass those experiences on to their children.

Telling religious people that they're abusing their children by taking them to mass is only going to provoke anger i think. If you worded it a different way you might have more success in provoking rational thought and reasoned debate.

I have no problem with parents who teach their children about God, or any other belief system, the problem i see is teaching them that its real. Children have undeveloped brains and a belief that there is a man in the sky, watching their every move, listening to their every thought, and that if they dont be "good" they will be punished and sent to place full of burning for the rest of their lives, is abuse, especially when the God doesnt exist. My organs (liver, kidney etc) exist but God doesnt.

Also, kids are very smart they go through their lives using the scientific method why do they need to be taught that God is real? Only way they can believe this is through guilt and obligation. This is emotional abuse.

Why should i word it a different way? Im saying it how i see it. It's impossible to provoke rational thought to those who believe in God especially if their belief came from their own abusive parents. They wernt reasoned into it, and wont be reasoned out of it. It's like a soldier who comes back from Iraq, walking down the street he hears the noise of a car's exhaustion going off. His reaction is its a gun shot and jumps to the ground for cover. You cant sit down with him and reason him out of it because he wasnt reasoned into it. The war had disastrous effects on his brain. This is actually nothing compared to what a child who's brain is still developing goes through.

If it causes anger thats actually a good thing, its touching a part they dont want to go. The anger is a protector of the trauma. The anger at me is only a proxy of where the anger is really directed at - the people who abused them - "but my parents loved me, they would never abuse me" kinda thing. If you're comfortable in your belief you dont get angry.

bad2dabone

Cróga wrote: »

I have no problem with parents who teach their children about God the problem i see is teaching them that its real.

but of course religious people are going to teach their kids that god is real

Cróga wrote: »

Children have undeveloped brains and a belief that there is a man in the sky, watching their every move, listening to their every thought, and that if they dont be "good" they will be punished and sent to place full of burning for the rest of their lives, is abuse, especially when the God doesnt exist. My organs (liver, kidney etc) exist but God doesnt.

I agree with you here, a childs brain is set up to believe what
an adult tells them is fact. Of course not every parent teaches the fire and brimstone brand of religion but creating the myth of a god in a childs mind is wrong in my opinion too.

Cróga wrote: »

Also, kids are very smart they go through their lives using the scientific method why do they need to be taught that God is real? ....

I certainly don't think that kids should be taught that god is real, but as discussed before its the parents right to teach them that he is.

Cróga wrote: »

This creates guilt and obligation. This is emotional abuse.

Why should i word it a different way? Im saying it how i see it.

Fair enough, but nobody will take kindly to the assertion that they are emotionally abusing their kids. I think people would respond to your posts if you perhaps didn't tell them they were abusing their children you know what i mean?

Cróga wrote: »

It's impossible to provoke rational thought to those who believe in God especially if their belief came from their own abusive parents.

Difficult, agreed, not impossible. If its impossible to change their minds then why engage in debate with the religious folks? I think you know its extremely frustrating but not impossible! Again, terming someones parent as "abusive" is hardly going to bring them around them to your point of view.

Cróga wrote: »

If it causes anger thats actually a good thing, its touching a part they dont want to go. The anger is a protector of the trauma. Plus, the anger at me is only a proxy of where the anger is really directed at - the people who abused them - "but my parents loved me, they would never abuse me" kinda thing. If you're comfortable in your belief you dont get angry.

the last paragraph of your post is one i'm still digesting tbh - it is late after all!

Cróga

bad2dabone wrote: »

the last paragraph of your post is one i'm still digesting tbh - it is late after all!

This video might give you some idea of what im trying to say

shinfujiwara

alex73 wrote: »

Because its what I believe, what my parents, grandparents and great grand parents believed. I'm proud that my Children believe.

If you want to call it superstition... that's your decision. I am happy to educate my children in the faith I was educated in.

Your proud that your children believe in it? They are just children, they will believe anything you say, why would you be "proud" of it? When they are in their 30's you'll know them as a fully-formed person, not now. Then you would have reasons to feel pride, don't you agree?

I dont mean to force my views on anyone, and if i am i apologize. Im just trying to raise the topic that teaching children God is real is abusive. I might be wrong in that assertion but that's why i want to discuss it.

I must agree with Cróga, because till today I've never met a faithful that truly respect their children. If the child says "I don't think that's true" - "I don't believe that jesus will do this to me" - "I don't want to do this." They just try to change the kid, they won't just say "OK son, I respect your beliefs."

About 99% of the times they will just force the kid to change and believe in what they believe. If you are religious and don't do that, then you're part of a minority. So, for me, it is indeed child abuse. Why would anyone be proud because they have successfully done their job of scaring their children to death with stories? Don't you feel awful when you see a kid all sad, doing nothing, then you ask them why the sadness and they say "mommy screamed at me because I didn't want to go to mass, and she said I can't have fun for today as a punishment, and that god is sad because of me."

WTF?! How can a grown up person say that to a child? How on earth would you consider this fanatic act as a good thing? It's like parents of mine in Brazil, I've seen my uncle beating his little boy because he was saying the name of a "enemy football club" repeatedly. Just another form of fanatism and religion it's the same kind of thing for me. You can't question it, you're forced to believe and forced to do the same with your children, and you just need to do whatever other people say to you. If that's not fanatism, what is this?

My wife barely have contact with her family anymore because she married me, an atheist. Her family also would spank her if she didn't want to go to mass or something like that. When we fell in love she actually believed that she was going to hell because of the relationship with a non-believer. We are together for some years now and she feels much better not having to worry if what she is doing with her life is "right" or not. She cries sometimes remembering how brainwashed she was and because of the current relationship with her parents.

You want to educate your children? Give them lots of books about all sorts of matters, including religion, and access to the internet. Then let them figure out their own beliefs. Don't you think that's better than say to them that Zeus and Apollo will strike them down if they don't brush their teeth? I still remember how good I felt in my adolescence, having contact with this kind of information that I never had in my childhood. And realizing that I could do whatever I wanted to.

Joey the lips

Cróga wrote: »

I agree that you should limit a kids sugar intake because it has bad effects on their health. But i dont see how you can compare free will (kids eating sugar) and force (parents bringing kids to mass) as if they're the same. What reason is there to bring kids to mass?



Please watch the bomb in the brain the effects of child abuse video series

you have missed my point and made the thread what i though you would... I go to mass because i choose to i bring my kids because i choose to. Is there something in that your missing.

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

i have to say, joey the lips, the analogy is not clear to me

do you mean that bringing your kids to mass instills morals and without mass the wouldn't know the difference between right and wrong?

No i mean that i choose to bring my kids to mass because i know it to be right. When they come of a certain age i will be happy for them to make there own decision. In otherwords if i let them choose now they would eat sweets all day. I think this to be wrong where as they think it perfect.

Cróga

Joey the lips wrote: »

you have missed my point and made the thread what i though you would... I go to mass because i choose to i bring my kids because i choose to. Is there something in that your missing.

OK help me understand your point.

You're saying you stop your kids from eating sugar all day because of the effects. The effects are bad on the health. You could also argue that if they were eating vegetables all day you could also make the decision to stop them but you know that this is a good effect on their health so you dont. I see what you're saying here and I agree. I think we both can agree that as parents we are responsible for our kids and their wellbeing.

But, what is the effect of bringing a kid to mass and teaching them that god is real is what we're discussing.

Ickle Magoo

Cróga wrote: »

Why do you think that?

Because it's against the forum charter for starters, presumably why you got a ban. There are multiple discussion fora for having a meaty debate about all manner of things but some fora are specifically for support and therefore have a much heavier degree of moderation - parenting is one of those. If you read the charter stickied at the top of the forum you'd know that.

For what it's worth, I am no fan of organised religion but calling peoples choice to indoctrinate their children child abuse is stretching the term for the sake of making a tasty sound-byte and I think it disingenuous to those who have actually suffered child abuse.

I don't really care if people want to take their kids to church and teach them about a particular religion, while I disagree with it on a personal and state education level - and a quick read of PI or RI highlights a whole raft of issues stemming from religious teaching - the only issue I really have is when people make reference to not having faith like it's impossible to have morals or be nice or a good person unless you follow some archaic allegorical book - which is just ridiculous.

someoneok

Joey the lips wrote: »

you have missed my point and made the thread what i though you would... I go to mass because i choose to i bring my kids because i choose to. Is there something in that your missing.



No i mean that i choose to bring my kids to mass because i know it to be right.

You say you bring your kids because you chose to. Where is the negotiation in that or do your children not get any say in the matter? Or is negotiation not a value you would like to pass onto your children which is a fundemamental and invaluable lesson for a child to learn for future dealing in the world imho.

Also you say you know it to be right. I would ask how you know this to be right?

Cróga

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Because it's against the forum charter for starters, presumably why you got a ban. There are multiple discussion fora for having a meaty debate about all manner of things but some fora are specifically for support and therefore have a much heavier degree of moderation - parenting is one of those. If you read the charter stickied at the top of the forum you'd know that.

When i read the charter i saw nothing about discussing child abuse being against the rules.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

For what it's worth, I am no fan of organised religion but calling peoples choice to indoctrinate their children child abuse is stretching the term for the sake of making a tasty sound-byte

Im calling it child abuse because it is child abuse.

Ickle Magoo

Cróga wrote: »

When i read the charter i saw nothing about discussing child abuse being against the rules.

If you can't read the charter and see where you obviously breached it then there is little point in continuing this conversation. Just because the particular behaviour you indulged in isn't mentioned specifically doesn't mean your posts didn't break any number of the more general rules - not to mention the generic boards mantra "don't be a dick".

Cróga wrote: »

Im calling it child abuse because it is child abuse.

Fortunately your word is neither law nor truth. You THINK it's child abuse - fine, I hope you never have to experience anything relating to an abused child. It does your arguments no favour and make your point sound little more than hysterical flaming to use such terminology. The same point can easily be made in a much more succinct and rational manner and wouldn't come across as mere reactionary theatrics.

Cróga

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Fortunately your word is neither law nor truth. You THINK it's child abuse - fine

I agree, my opinion is subject to reason and evidence. I made my case above, so lets discuss it?

Nevyn

It was pointed out at Cróga why they were banned and if they want to appeal it they can via www.boards.ie/dispute, but it's not fair to discuss a ban from a different forum in this one.

Nevyn

Cróga please explain how it is child abuse and what type of child abuse exactly and the impacts.
In your own words if you can with out swaths of Dawkins being paraphrased.

BluesBerry

Ill give you a scenario 2 kids have just made the communion and have been begging me to bring them on Sundays
They have NEVER been brought to mass but now they have joined the choir and want to go every week
These kids have made up their own mind and have requested that they wish to attend I wont be stopping them I will attend with them only purely because I don't want to have them alone in a church with priests They know my views and that I don't believe but Im not going to let that rub of on them I will respect their wishes and let them figure out themselves
Im not religious I believe schools should take it of the curriculum but this is what they are learning at school and then being contradicted at home about god is more damaging with their teacher telling them one thing and parents telling them another
Religion should be taken of the curriculum and a sunday school should be set up for parents who wish their children to be educated in religion

metrovelvet

You think Santa, the tooth fairy, fairies, and the Easter bunny is child abuse?

If reality is the only thing you can teach kids well then you can charge cbeebies and the Den [RTE2] with child abuse too.

What a boring world you want us to live in.

Joey the lips

Edit... You did not get banned for bringing the topic up...You got banned for ignoring warnings to stop being annoying...

Judging by where this thread has gone its going to repeat itself...


For the unofficial record if you personally can prove that god is not real i will listen but by the same right you have to quote records i have the same right to quote my own....

Ickle Magoo

Cróga wrote: »

I agree, my opinion is subject to reason and evidence. I made my case above, so lets discuss it?

You think YouTube is evidence? How about articulating in your own words rather than posting links to someone elses?
For the record, you are preaching to the converted, other than the objection to the use of unnecessary hyperbole and hi-jacking someone else's thread - I agree with much of what you say.

metrovelvet wrote:

You think Santa, the tooth fairy, fairies, and the Easter bunny is child abuse?

Last time I looked their is no burning in hell as a sinner when it comes to santa or the tooth fairy, etc - neither do they have such an odd obsession with sexuality nor masturbation - I haven't heard too many (any?) people say they can't have a fulfilling sex life due to bunny guilt...

metrovelvet

IM-

We get a very different version of things in the American RC. Italians and French also get a very different version of things. As do Jews, who also teach their kids about God.

When I read the thread title I thought he was talking about God or G-d, not hell and masturbation. I would agree that teaching all those punitive crappy things about masturbation and hell is child abuse.

Ickle Magoo

I don't know very much about all the different sects other than the bible they share but I'm assuming the general; "be good unto others" and "there's a god looking out for us" spiritual reference isn't what is being referred to when people throw "child abuse" around - I imagine it is all the threat laden, homophobic, misogynistic, sexually repressed, stifling of critical thinking that so often goes hand-in-hand with organised religion.

we'llallhavetea_old

Joey the lips wrote: »

No i mean that i choose to bring my kids to mass because i know it to be right. When they come of a certain age i will be happy for them to make there own decision. In otherwords if i let them choose now they would eat sweets all day. I think this to be wrong where as they think it perfect.

hi joey, just seen this now, didn't know how i got all the way over here in humanities. *scratches head*

i understand what you mean now, even though you're analogy is a bit dodgy, sweets all day long are bad for you yes, but not going to mass does not deter your health imo.

Greyfox

Cróga wrote: »

...especially when the God doesnt exist. My organs (liver, kidney etc) exist but God doesnt.

...why do they need to be taught that God is real?

The way I see it you can't prove god doesn't exist theirfor it's possible that god could exist. you can't actually say parents are wrong for teaching their children about god as their is a possibility (although I think it's a very small one) that what their teacing their kids is right.

Virgil°

Greyfox wrote: »

The way I see it you can't prove god doesn't exist theirfor it's possible that god could exist. you can't actually say parents are wrong for teaching their children about god as their is a possibility (although I think it's a very small one) that what their teacing their kids is right.

Theres a very large difference between teaching a child "about" god and teaching them he does exist and all that entails it.

shinfujiwara

They should definitely teach them about religion, it's part of history. But that's it.

They teach you about greek mythology and don't try to force you into their beliefs. Why would they do that with the "current" western god? I've never seen a teacher or mother punishing a child because he doesn't believe in Thor. So why would they do that with "their" god? Is there anyone here who ACTUALLY thinks that this is right?

Any kind of fanatism brought upon your children by you or others is child abuse. People tend to believe that the only abusive behavior is something like rape by priests, for example. That's extreme abuse, not jut "abuse". My wife and I have never suffered this extreme abuse and yet, we (mainly her) were damaged by this. The reason that I wasn't severely damaged, is because my family wasn't what I call "true believers."

If you only could see her crying because of it, maybe you would change your minds. You can say "but that's her church and her parents." Yes, but who don't follow the same behavior? I'm yet to discover a truly religious family who fully respect their children beliefs and won't force them into it.

Would you (faithful) not hit your children if they keep "blaspheming" all the time? Would you not punish them by prevent their happiness momentarily? Would you not force them to follow a strict behavior according to what the bible or your religion says? Thus preventing them to create their own life-style?

If you don't do that, then your not a really religious person. Because I've seen people like that, saying they believe in some god, never go or rarely go to church and don't truly follow it. And moreover, they don't force their children to follow the "rules" of that religion. That is not being a religious person. A catholic person, for example, "knows" he need to force their children to believe in it, and to follow the rules, otherwise their kids would end up in hell. That's a true faithful. People who claim to be catholic or evangelic and don't act like that, are NOT true believers. And by not being one, wouldn't you wind up in hell too?

If you don't have this fanatic behavior aforementioned, you're not the kind of parent that I, and maybe others, are talking about here.

Joey the lips

Greyfox wrote: »

The way I see it you can't prove god doesn't exist theirfor it's possible that god could exist. you can't actually say parents are wrong for teaching their children about god as their is a possibility (although I think it's a very small one) that what their teacing their kids is right.

No...your still missing it...it does not really matter. i am not into argueing it as i doubt it will be greated with interest

Herbal Deity

metrovelvet wrote: »

What a boring world you want us to live in.

It depresses me when people think that this world is boring, and that you have to invent impossible, magical things to make it interesting.

Watch BBC's Planet Earth series and then tell me that if we didn't tell children about Santa, the tooth fairy, fairies, or the Easter bunny, that the world would be boring.

Children find the world fascinating all on it's own. I honestly don't believe that these fake, magical beings we often tell them about really amaze them any more than other things in the world. I certainly don't recall being particularly enthralled by anything like that as a child. If I have children, I imagine I would go along with such things for cultural reasons, but I wouldn't see them as being in any way essential or particularly beneficial for my child.

shinfujiwara

Herbal Deity wrote: »

It depresses me when people think that this world is boring, and that you have to invent impossible, magical things to make it interesting.

Watch BBC's Planet Earth series and then tell me that if we didn't tell children about Santa, the tooth fairy, fairies, or the Easter bunny, that the world would be boring.

Children find the world fascinating all on it's own. I honestly don't believe that these fake, magical beings we often tell them about really amaze them any more than other things in the world. I certainly don't recall being particularly enthralled by anything like that as a child. If I have children, I imagine I would go along with such things for cultural reasons, but I wouldn't see them as being in any way essential or particularly beneficial for my child.

I find this and other documentaries amazingly entertaining today. I can imagine how "magical" it would be for me when I was a child. I was blown away with MUCH less than that.

Being stuck in a room with priests and parents doing something that I didn't understand was not my definition of "fun" or "magical" indeed.

metrovelvet

Herbal Deity wrote: »

It depresses me when people think that this world is boring, and that you have to invent impossible, magical things to make it interesting.

Watch BBC's Planet Earth series and then tell me that if we didn't tell children about Santa, the tooth fairy, fairies, or the Easter bunny, that the world would be boring.

Children find the world fascinating all on it's own. I honestly don't believe that these fake, magical beings we often tell them about really amaze them any more than other things in the world. I certainly don't recall being particularly enthralled by anything like that as a child. If I have children, I imagine I would go along with such things for cultural reasons, but I wouldn't see them as being in any way essential or particularly beneficial for my child.

The world is fascinating to them. So is the imagination.

You didnt read stories as a child?