recedite wrote: » So are you are now in agreement that a country does not have to have "a secular society" to have a secular education system? I'm assuming you mean "a predominantly non-religious society" by that phrase.
Help!!!! wrote: » OP what would you do if your child comes home & says they want to go to church every Sunday? Would you let them? You are willing to send your child to a religious school but you refuse to let them experience all parts of the school due to your own beliefs. Do you not see the irony in that you don't want anybody to push their beliefs on you but you are more willing to push your beliefs on your child. You can be an Atheist but you also have to let your child make their own mind up I am not religious but my parents are, they understand I will not go to church but I will also not disrespect their beliefs
One eyed Jack wrote: » That's not really irony though, that's the whole point of being a parent to a child, is that we guide our children. It often involves trade-offs and sacrifices for what we believe are in our children's best interests. It doesn't mean that we should allow ourselves to be dictated to by other people as to what they believe is in our children's best interests.In fairness to them, the OP also acknowledged that they don't want their child interfering in the beliefs that other parents choose to instill in their children, and that is to be commended IMO.
Tasden wrote: » Parents are able to be objective and explain atheism to their children without forcing their own (lack of) beliefs on the child. I'm atheist, my child isn't participating in the religious sacraments, although she partakes in religious education and attends church, this was her decision not mine and i fully respect it. I will allow her to be baptised and confirmed when she is old enough to fully understand and explain why she is doing so. She knows my opinion on religion and I respect hers. Works perfectly fine.
Help!!!! wrote: » OP what would you do if your child comes home & says they want to go to church every Sunday? Would you let them?
Kenny Bania wrote: » I can't imagine any kid wanting to voluntarily go to mass unless they're a major dork. But no - I wouldn't let her be part a horrible cult that's riddled with systematic abuse, hides paedophiles, abuses unmarried mothers, buries babies in mass graves, hates gays, hates women, endorses slavery, denies contraception, and preaches against materialism whilst wearing Versace shoes & living in a palace full of gold. Not to mention an organisation that lies about the origin of our species and at it's very core is fundamentally full of dumb ideas like virgins being able to have babies & people rising from the dead. What sane parent would allow any of that? None of those beliefs are to be "respected". With my dying breath, I'll protect my kids from that organisation.
One eyed Jack wrote: » In fairness Kenny, that sort of rhetoric rings fairly hollow when you're placing your child in a school with a Catholic ethos.
Shrap wrote: » Jack, kids have to be educated one way or another. Have a bit of heart for those of us who can't logistically send our kids to any school but a religious ethos one, whether we like it or not.
Kenny Bania wrote: » No, because it's a bit of fun for a few years & an exciting time for a kid. They make no religious connection to it. A guy called Santa just comes & brings toys to good boys & girls because he's nice. It's harmless. Unlike systematic & compulsory indoctrination they receive in national schools for 14 years.
TheQuietFella wrote: » But it's all lies like I assume the argument regarding religion isn't it? Or are you just picking & choosing parts of Christianity that suits? If the class teacher stood before the class & said that Santa was not real how would the parents react to that? Wouldn't the teacher would be correct in stating the truth without the indoctrination of the children into the Myth of Christmas?
Help!!!! wrote: » Or one that hates people of faith, who expects their children to follow their father/mother?? It takes many different people to make up the world
Help!!!! wrote: » Or one that hates people of faith, who expects their children to follow their father/mother??
looksee wrote: » I am not quite following that, but I would point out that there is no connection between Santa and Christianity (apart from the very tenuous St Nicholas link, which most children would not be aware of).
Shrap wrote: » The only thing I taught my children to believe, is that their beliefs will be thoroughly questioned in my house. If they turn up to me telling me that the Spaghetti monster/Pineapple god is their go-to deity of choice, I will want to know why. I will want to see proof. I will want to see logical thinking. I will also never turn them away if they believe something that I find profoundly ridiculous, but so far, so good and I haven't had much to argue with them about. I don't think atheism means what you think it means, tbh.
Tasden wrote: » Is a belief not just that though? A belief. There is no proof so it seems a little unfair imo to expect proof from them. Their reasoning/logic/whatever else, sure, but proof?
looksee wrote: » Maybe it's my imagination, or should I just go and get some sleep, but this discussion seems to have turned into a series of somewhat garbled circular arguments.
one that hates people of faith, who expects their children to follow their father/mother
Shrap wrote: » The basis for my atheism is that there is no reason to have faith in something that isn't provable. I have told my kids that this is my logic. Occasionally we agree to differ, and I say that I would have trouble getting past that and agreeing with a belief without evidence. And no. I believe gravity exists, because there is evidence of gravity. Not all beliefs require faith. It's having faith in the absence of evidence that I have difficulty with, not that I would deny anyone their right to believe whatever the fcuk they like. But in my house, this will be questioned. Fair enough?
Tasden wrote: » Well yeah, I would question why my child would believe and would debate/argue points etc. but if she did believe (which she currently does) I wouldn't expect proof, when I know there is none, hence my own lack of belief.
Kenny Bania wrote: » I don't follow your logic, but I'll indulge you. Santa is as much a "lie" as showing a kid a magic trick or the classic "got your nose" gag. There is no malice - all 100% harmless & temporary fantasy. Whereas religion is malicious & evil, for all of the reasons I listed on the previous page.'You'll indulge me' Well aren't I blessed! Religion is like all things in life, it isn't perfect and too many crooks oops... cooks have spoiled the broth but I believe in Jesus Christ. Religion is not malice or evil! There is quite an amount of good in this world being done by many a faith and to tar them all with one sweep of a brush is just not right.
Shrap wrote: » Well, I see what you're saying. I suppose the difference between what I meant and what you took me up to mean is that I require proof in order to believe in something and they know that is the case, not that I require them to give me proof for what they believe in. I may have worded it wrong in the first place Still, like I said, they have accepted this as a logical way to think on things so thus far we've had little disagreement!
