Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Arguments about teaching children god is real

1246

Comments

  • #92
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Cróga wrote: »
    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.

    As for having conversations with believers. I do on a regular basis, because a lot of my friends believe, a lot don't also. Admittedly, I also believe in God.

    As for the child abuse argument. I find it limited as it doesn't take into account the large number of conversions that occur from people who were originally raised in a secular family, or of another religion.

    Admittedly, I didn't believe for a number of years as a teenager. I decided consciously to become a Christian. This decision that I made, has contributed a lot in forming my identity as a person.

    I don't really believe that any atheist including Richard Dawkins actually believes that it is child abuse to raise their children in faith. If they did they would actively argue for removing children from the homes of Christian parents. That's really the point where you're definitely going to lose credibility with a vast majority of the population also. Why? Because it's down right non-sensical. Everyone pretty much knows that too.
    Cróga wrote: »
    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.

    The misconceptions keep rolling. Let me know do you want these clarified or are you happy living with such misconceptions?
    Cróga wrote: »
    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.

    No, I am not an atheist in respect to any god or gods.

    A theos = lack of theism.

    At no point do I lack theism. I believe in a God even when I don't believe the faiths of others.

    Geography? - Not always. In fact not in millions of cases. Most growth in Christianity for example is by conversion.

    Indeed, a billion people believing that 2+2 = 5 doesn't make it truer. I'd hold pretty much the same objection to atheism, that as a result of denying God's existence, it is denying a key part of reality. The question is who is more right? You or I? That's an argument we could have forever. The assumption that you are more right than I is unwarranted unless we can clarify this though.

    Indeed, my belief is still subject to reason and evidence. I believe because I find the evidence more convincing for Christianity than for atheism.


  • #93
    shinfujiwara
    Closed Accounts Posts: 106 ✭✭shinfujiwara


    "I don't really believe that any atheist including Richard Dawkins actually believes that it is child abuse to raise their children in faith. If they did they would actively argue for removing children from the homes of Christian parents. That's really the point where you're definitely going to lose credibility with a vast majority of the population also. Why? Because it's down right non-sensical. Everyone pretty much knows that too.

    As far as I know, Dawkins don't want to see children raised by Christian schools/homes. Why? Because they're children. The're not fully formed yet, you can't fill their heads with fear and doubt, it will have a whole different effect just because it's a child.

    Taking them away from their parents is a difficult/delicate matter. I would want to see that happening only in extreme cases. Otherwise, a huge amount of the people you know would have been orphans/adopted.

    You can watch the Dawkins's video that I posted. It's really interesting. You can also watch the mentioned Jesus Camp, it will show to you, at least in my point of view, what I consider a HUGE parenting failure. And maybe you'll agree with me. Some cases showed in that documentary are so disturbing for me that I would encourage a change of family, indeed.

    I'll post the links again for you if you're truly interested. It would be nice to discuss these videos with an openminded believer. The ones that I personally know, unfortunately, aren't.
    http://www.kickasstorrents.com/jesus-camp-2006-t489078.html
    http://www.kickasstorrents.com/the-root-of-all-evil-t118523.html


  • #94
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    shinfujiwara wrote: »
    As far as I know, Dawkins don't want to see children raised by Christian schools/homes. Why? Because they're children. The're not fully formed yet, you can't fill their heads with fear and doubt, it will have a whole different effect just because it's a child.

    Taking them away from their parents is a difficult/delicate matter. I would want to see that happening only in extreme cases. Otherwise, a huge amount of the people you know would have been orphans/adopted.

    If it is really child abuse any reasonable person would argue for taking the children away from their parents.

    If it isn't child abuse then there would be no such cause for doing this.

    Which is it?
    shinfujiwara wrote: »
    You can watch the Dawkins's video that I posted. It's really interesting. You can also watch the mentioned Jesus Camp, it will show to you, at least in my point of view, what I consider a HUGE parenting failure. And maybe you'll agree with me. Some cases showed in that documentary are so disturbing for me that I would encourage a change of family, indeed.

    I've seen both. It's absolutely ridiculous to judge all Christianity and even all belief based on Jesus Camp. The vast majority of Evangelical / Pentecostal churches aren't anywhere near this.
    shinfujiwara wrote: »
    I'll post the links again for you if you're truly interested. It would be nice to discuss these videos with an openminded believer. The ones that I personally know, unfortunately, aren't.
    http://www.kickasstorrents.com/jesus-camp-2006-t489078.html
    http://www.kickasstorrents.com/the-root-of-all-evil-t118523.html

    I've seen both of these before. The Root of All Evil wasn't all that convincing admittedly, anyone can select people with views distorted enough as to make all religion look bad. Heck I could no doubt find atheists that would do the same for atheism. What's the point?

    These aren't an objective view of the reality. I guess probably since I know quite a lot of people in Christian circles I can see that it is really much more of a mixed bag than anything else. Two words come to mind, scale and perspective.


  • #95
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Well there's degrees of this. Personally I was sent to a Catholic school, and my parents just dodged the question with us most of the time because they didn't want to influence us, I think the most concrete thing they ever told us was not to judge people on their beliefs and not to talk to people about ours if they didn't want to hear about it. When I first went to school I got very into the Catholic thing, saying my prayers and the whole lot, but once I got to about seven or eight and began to be able to reason things out properly I arrived at atheism pretty quickly and I've stayed there. I imagine that would have worked out much the same if my parents had been Catholic, or if I'd been sent to a Jewish school, but who knows.

    Using God as some kind of parenting tool (which does happen a lot "Lies make the baby Jesus cry!"), or imposing massive restrictions on your child's life and happiness by pushing the fire and brimstone thing is bad, but I'd wager those are just bad parents and would have been anyway. Catholic dogma can be very damaging, especially in its obsession with sex, and I can think of one person I know who ended up cut off from his family when he left the Jehovah's Witness faith, but I don't think this is the reality in the vast majority of cases these days. If you do believe in God and teach kids about that-that we have been created by someone, that we continue to live in a different way after we die, that someone loves us, then I don't see what possible harm that can do. The kids will believe whatever you tell them up until a certain age, and then they will most likely make up their own mind after that. I certainly don't believe that not raising your kids as militarily secularist Atheists automatically constitutes child abuse, and unhelpfully derogoratory and dismissive language "a big man in the sky" doesn't exactly imply that a person is looking for a reasoned or considered exchange of opinions.


  • #96
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Speaking as some-one who was brought up in a Catholic home, I can honestly that I haven’t been affected negatively in any way by my upbringing. I am quite happy and well adjusted and in no way indoctrinated.

    I was never thought anything like what people here seem to believe is taught. My parents certainly never said that I would burn in hell if I were naughty or any of the other silly things being mentioned here.

    I was simply taught, as I’d wager the vast majority of those I know would have been that God loves us all equally no matter who we are or what we do and that he is always there to guide and protect us.

    I really don’t see the problem with teaching children those kinds of lesson.

    I think that suggesting that if you are a parent with religion and you decide to raise your children in that faith you are a kin to those who beat/neglect/sexually abuse their children is rather irrational and actually quite demeaning to good religious parents, like mine.

    Certainly to suggest or infer that such parents should have their children taken away is really going way too far.

    That kind of intolerence scares me because we've seen many times in history the disasterous consequences of trying to force people to change their beliefs and punishing or removing those who refuse to do so.

    It also imo demonstrates a lack of understanding of what the Catholic faith is really about i.e. loving thy neighbour as thy self.

    I also think that raising your children in a way where you teach them all religion is wrong and unhealthy is not a good thing either. You don’t have to teach them to believe but you do need to teach them to respect those that do.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    What about those religions, catholicism included, which are inherently misogynistic and/or homophobic...I presume you see nothing wrong with raising a child to think all gay people are banned from sexual activity if they want to go to heaven? That is part of the catholic churches innocent and healthy teaching, after all.


  • #98
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    What about those religions, catholicism included, which are inherently misogynistic and/or homophobic...I presume you see nothing wrong with raising a child to think all gay people are banned from sexual activity if they want to go to heaven? That is part of the catholic churches innocent and healthy teaching, after all.

    Please don't presume anything about me, it only makes you look petty and cheapens your argument.

    I have absolutly no respect for anyone that would deny gays/lesbians the right to be together.

    As I said those types of lessons are not what is taught anymore, at least in my experience. No child is taught such awful things at home or at school nowadays.


  • #99
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    Lol, I was presuming nothing, I asked a rhetorical question. You are the one who is taking a general and generic statement and attempting to argue it based on personal rhetoric. You defend catholicism and yet completely ignore some of it's main tenets just because you personally were not subjected to them - that was my point, nothing petty about it. To claim catholicism isn't misogynistic or homophobic because your parents happened to ignore those parts of the churches teaching is a non-argument.


  • #100
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    What about those religions, catholicism included, which are inherently misogynistic and/or homophobic...I presume you see nothing wrong with raising a child to think all gay people are banned from sexual activity if they want to go to heaven? That is part of the catholic churches innocent and healthy teaching, after all.

    You should be arguing for putting children in Catholic families into care then to be logically consistent?

    In such conversations as these misogynistic / homophobic need more meat.

    It isn't homophobic to believe that all sexuality should be confined within a marriage. One can hold such a position and not hate / fear homosexuality. Does disagreement = hatred? Personally I strain to see so.


  • #101
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    Lol, I was presuming nothing, I asked a rhetorical question. You are the one who is taking a general and generic statement and attempting to argue it based on personal rhetoric. You defend catholicism and yet completely ignore some of it's main tenets just because you personally were not subjected to them - that was my point, nothing petty about it. To claim catholicism isn't misogynistic or homophobic because your parents happened to ignore those parts of the churches teaching is a non-argument.
    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    What about those religions, catholicism included, which are inherently misogynistic and/or homophobic...I presume you see nothing wrong with raising a child to think all gay people are banned from sexual activity if they want to go to heaven? That is part of the catholic churches innocent and healthy teaching, after all.

    :rolleyes:

    At least try be honest or reread your threads before you post if you want a decent discussion.


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    Jakkass wrote: »
    You should be arguing for putting children in Catholic families into care then to be logically consistent?

    In such conversations as these misogynistic / homophobic need more meat.

    It isn't homophobic to believe that all sexuality should be confined within a marriage. One can hold such a position and not hate / fear homosexuality. Does disagreement = hatred? Personally I strain to see so.

    If you read the thread (or perhaps it was the clone thread in A&A) you'd see I've already said I don't think religion equates to child abuse - the only logical inconsistency I see is claims of a religion/god that loves everyone and a religion that does no harm when there is reams of evidence on PI or RI that that just isn't the case at all - tho I wouldn't be so quick to call it child abuse either, a gross parenting failure perhaps.

    You strain to see so? Is it really beyond your comprehension to see how damaging it could be to tell a gay son or daughter that they can never have a sexually fulfilling sexual relationship and be deemed a good person? I'm astonished.


  • #103
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    :rolleyes:

    At least try be honest or reread your threads before you post if you want a decent discussion.

    You know what rhetorical means, right? :confused:


  • #104
    Unwilling
    Closed Accounts Posts: 275 ✭✭Unwilling


    Croga - what is your take on SANTA CLAUS then!?


  • #105
    Herbal Deity
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,397 ✭✭✭Herbal Deity


    Jakkass wrote: »
    It isn't homophobic to believe that all sexuality should be confined within a marriage.
    No, but it's a damaging, unnatural and unhealthy attitude to inflict on a child.

    I mean, if you have a child and they tell you they're gay, what is your response?

    Anger?
    Telling them that you're disappointed?
    Requesting/Advising that they do not indulge in their sexual desires?

    (If they even told you in the first place. Were I gay, I certainly would be slow to tell my parents if I knew they disagreed with homosexual acts)


  • #106
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,375 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    What about those religions, catholicism included, which are inherently misogynistic and/or homophobic...I presume you see nothing wrong with raising a child to think all gay people are banned from sexual activity if they want to go to heaven? That is part of the catholic churches innocent and healthy teaching, after all.

    Thats not what I learned. I learned we all go to heaven. We never learned anything about being gay.


  • #107
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Thats not what I learned. I learned we all go to heaven. We never learned anything about being gay.

    I did stress "those religions". As far as I know all catholic churches are in full communion with rome...again, I'm not sure what personal experience of cherry-picking edict does to negate criticism at the general tenets - are there not churches and indeed parents who do discuss hell and those hell-bound gay sinners? I'm sure we all agree for every apathetic theist there is as many right-wingers...


  • #108
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    You know what rhetorical means, right? :confused:

    Yes I know what it means.

    Nothing in your post struck me as rhetorical thb.

    What you said was you presumed that I believed homosexuality was wrong because I had said I'm Catholic.

    I merely responded to that, asked you not to make assumptions and said that I have no time for anyone who would deny gays/lesbians their rights.

    I'd teach this to my children also, just to keep on topic.


  • #109
    Truley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,628 ✭✭✭Truley


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Thats not what I learned. I learned we all go to heaven. We never learned anything about being gay.

    Same with me, was raised a catholic but parents always taught me that there was nothing wrong with sex or homosexuality. In school we were taught the Alive O curriculum which is the standard national school catholicism programme, what the vast majority of catholic schoolchildren are taught in this country. It doesn't teach anything against masturbation, homosexuality or mention hell at all for that matter.


  • #110
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Yes I know what it means.

    Nothing in your post struck me as rhetorical thb.

    What you said was you presumed that I believed homosexuality was wrong because I had said I'm Catholic.

    I merely responded to that, asked you not to make assumptions and said that I have no time for anyone who would deny gays/lesbians their rights.

    I'd teach this to my children also, just to keep on topic.

    Well just because it didn't strike you doesn't mean it wasn't so. I've witnessed the myriad of demands around what you claim you can define yourself as regardless of common definitions. I assumed you wouldn't agree with such a thing despite it being a key teaching of the catholic church you were presuming to defend - hence the rhetoric.

    You must see the obvious contradiction in claiming to have no time for anyone who would deny gays and lesbians their rights while vociferously defending the catholic church? :confused:


  • #111
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,375 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    I did stress "those religions". As far as I know all catholic churches are in full communion with rome...again, I'm not sure what personal experience of cherry-picking edict does to negate criticism at the general tenets - are there not churches and indeed parents who do discuss hell and those hell-bound gay sinners? I'm sure we all agree for every apathetic theist there is as many right-wingers...

    I don't know what to tell you. I was raised and educated as a Catholic. Didn't learn that.

    Although I grew up in NYC, which is very Jewish, so I'm probably half Jewish by osmosis.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    Truley wrote: »
    Same with me, was raised a catholic but parents always taught me that there was nothing wrong with sex or homosexuality. In school we were taught the Alive O curriculum which is the standard national school catholicism programme, what the vast majority of catholic schoolchildren are taught in this country. It doesn't teach anything against masturbation, homosexuality or mention hell at all for that matter.

    I imagine that has more to do with the education boards influence on curriculum than what the RC would prefer to be teaching tbh...
    metrovelvet wrote: »
    I don't know what to tell you. I was raised and educated as a Catholic. Didn't learn that.

    Although I grew up in NYC, which is very Jewish, so I'm probably half Jewish by osmosis.

    By osmosis, lol. I like that. This thread reminds me of some of the threads in A&A from people vigorously denying their religion does X, Y & Z just to discover it was their parents having the good sense to edit the religion rather than the religion being taught in all it's glory - which says an awful lot about religion in itself.


  • #113
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,375 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    I imagine that has more to do with the education boards influence on curriculum than what the RC would prefer to be teaching tbh...

    I wasn't educated here. American schools are not subject to the IRish education boards.


  • #114
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    I wasn't educated here. American schools are not subject to the IRish education boards.

    And you aren't Truley either, are you? :)

    I'm not sure what your point is? So some schools and religious people water down the religion to commonly acceptable levels and that negates all criticism of the religion and of those who teach it in full? :confused:

    I find it baffling that any parent would want to pass on a religion that would require watering down so as not to pass on homophobia or sexual issues but meh, what do I know.


  • #115
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,375 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    And you aren't Truley either, are you? :)

    I'm not sure what your point is? So some schools and religious people water down the religion to commonly acceptable levels and that negates all criticism of the religion and of those who teach it in full? :confused:

    I find it baffling that any parent would want to pass on a religion that would require watering down so as not to pass on homophobia or sexual issues but meh, what do I know.

    Well, you'd rather they pass down fundamentalism?

    People keep telling me the church says homosexuality brings you to hell and oddly its never been a Catholic who told me that.


  • #116
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    And you aren't Truley either, are you? :)

    I'm not sure what your point is? So some schools and religious people water down the religion to commonly acceptable levels and that negates all criticism of the religion and of those who teach it in full? :confused:

    I find it baffling that any parent would want to pass on a religion that would require watering down so as not to pass on homophobia or sexual issues but meh, what do I know.

    You'd rather we taught to be homophobic, to abstain from sex forever etc then?

    Do you not see that you can be religious and actually be able to think for yourself and know what is morally right and wrong and be able to educate children correctly?

    Or is it that you don't want to see it because it would negate your point?


  • #117
    Greyfox
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,101 ✭✭✭Greyfox


    Ickle Magoo wrote: »
    You must see the obvious contradiction in claiming to have no time for anyone who would deny gays and lesbians their rights while vociferously defending the catholic church? :confused:

    Why do you persume that all catholics think being gay is wrong? I grew up a catholic surrounded by catholics and I've never been taught that being gay is wrong, and if someone said it was wrong I just wouldn't listen to them. If you actually talk to most catholics they don't believe being gay is wrong. Like most of the Irish population been brought up a Catholic didn't do me any harm so I can't see how if I brought my kids up as one would do any harm. Yes theirs the silly going to hell if your a sinner but sure that was all forgiven by going to confession so was never a worry.

    I believe you need to differenciate between parents who teach religion but don't force it on their kids and the minority of religious fanatics that do force their religion on their kids

    In any case if we were to not allow parents to teach that god is real, how do we go about enforcing this?


  • #118
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Well, you'd rather they pass down fundamentalism?

    People keep telling me the church says homosexuality brings you to hell and oddly its never been a Catholic who told me that.

    Are you deliberately ignoring a very public catholic mandate in favour of personal rhetoric here? I was told to christen my child or if they died they'd go to hell - by a catholic, you see, personal rhetoric ftw. :)
    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    You'd rather we taught to be homophobic, to abstain from sex forever etc then?

    Do you not see that you can be religious and actually be able to think for yourself and know what is morally right and wrong and be able to educate children correctly?

    Or is it that you don't want to see it because it would negate your point?

    I'd rather consistency and honesty. If people are going to defend religion from any criticism then they should do so based on what that religion advocates rather than based on their own or their families ability not to follow said religion in anything but title. Hardly rocket science.
    Greyfox wrote: »
    Why do you persume that all catholics think being gay is wrong? I grew up a catholic surrounded by catholics and I've never been taught that being gay is wrong, and if someone said it was wrong I just wouldn't listen to them. If you actually talk to most catholics they don't believe being gay is wrong. Like most of the Irish population been brought up a Catholic didn't do me any harm so I can't see how if I brought my kids up as one would do any harm. Yes theirs the silly going to hell if your a sinner but sure that was all forgiven by going to confession so was never a worry.

    I believe you need to differenciate between parents who teach religion but don't force it on their kids and the minority of religious fanatics that do force their religion on their kids

    In any case if we were to not allow parents to teach that god is real, how do we go about enforcing this?

    I'm stating catholic mandate, I'm not presuming anything about religious parents. If people have to ignore part of their chosen churches teaching to make it more palatable then that's up to them - utterly bizarre - but entirely up to them all the same and it still doesn't negate what their church stands for or what they really "should" be teaching according to said church.


  • #119
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,375 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    ^ Look there's always a leap between officialdom and reality. Massachusettes still has a law on the books that says oral sex is wrong.

    Who listens to that? No one.

    I know plenty of Jews who dont eat Kosher.

    That's people for you.


  • #120
    Ickle Magoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,485 ✭✭✭✭Ickle Magoo


    Ignoring an archaic law is one thing - ignoring modern mandate given by a church you claim to be a member of is something else. If parents are cherry-picking which parts of religion to pass on to their off-spring according to what they consider to be worthwhile rather than the whole then they aren't passing on <insert relevant faith here> they are just passing on snippets and calling it <insert relevant faith here>.

    When people bandy about the term child abuse in relation to a specific religion, I assume they are talking about people who actually pass on that religion, the whole she-bang, warts and all, sexual repression, homophobia, the lot. That is "the religion" - not the wishy-washy tipp-ex out the bits we don't like and claim same religion is nothing but sweetness and light variety.

    I don't agree with calling it child abuse unless we're talking about harming a child btw but there is a big grey area there as to when religious indoctrination of any sort crosses into being harmful...I believe you said yourself that threat of hell would be?


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    we'llallhavetea_old
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭we'llallhavetea_old


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Although I grew up in NYC, which is very Jewish, so I'm probably half Jewish by osmosis.

    i lol'd hard :D

    i'm with ickle magoo on this one. it doesn't make a blind bit of difference if you raise your child "catholic" and tell them that being gay is not a sin, because you've branded them with the catholic badge, eventually they'll realise that the religious organisation they are a member of, thinks that being gay is a sin and is punishable in hell.

    people say they are catholic when in actual fact they're not. you can't pick and choose what to believe, you either believe it all or you believe nothing in my eyes.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement