BF2S Forums Religious Indoctrination

1. Most high-level conceptual study is kept for when people are older, not for when they are children.

2. I think having ~three major religions in the world where the believers blindly believe their religion is the only way, that their god is better than everyone elses, that they have the right to trample, slaughter or dispossess the heathens/infidels/goyim is in general terms a bad thing.

3.

You assume that everybody who believes in a higher power is retarded, gullible, a loon.

Not far off. If sane, intelligent educated adults choose to believe thats one thing, drumming it into kids who can barely read or write let alone construct arguments is another.

4. Just making the point the bible does support theories which are as loopy as they are improbable and unsupported by evidence

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-09-08 23:16:23)

Dilbert_X wrote:

1. Most high-level conceptual study is kept for when people are older, not for when they are children.

2. I think having ~three major religions in the world where the believers blindly believe their religion is the only way, that their god is better than everyone elses, that they have the right to trample, slaughter or dispossess the heathens/infidels/goyim is in general terms a bad thing.

3.

You assume that everybody who believes in a higher power is retarded, gullible, a loon.

Not far off. If sane, intelligent educated adults choose to believe thats one thing, drumming it into kids who can barely read or write let alone construct arguments is another.

4. Just making the point the bible does support theories which are as loopy as they are improbable and unsupported by evidence

1.  You know when children get older, they form their own opinions.  Just because you teach them religion doesn't mean you will be stuck with it for the rest of your days. 

2.  Really?  Last time I checked, those three religions don't teach to trample, slaughter, and dispossess.  Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism all teach to love one another, regardless of race/creed/background.  Of course, there are those who manipulate what their religion teaches for their own selfish gain.  This hardly is based on religion.  This is not just limited to theists.

3.  All the people that I know that teach their children religion, give them reasons why they should follow that course of life.  They reason with their children.  Saying that religious parents "drum" it into them, is hardly the case.  Once again, children, when they reach a certain age, decide for themselves what they want to believe.  Regardless of religion being "drummed" into them.


Before giving your obviously misinformed opinions about religion, perhaps you should read this article.  http://www.cracked.com/article_15663_go … ee-on.html   Those who have misinformed opinions about atheists too should read this article as well.

Dilbert_X wrote:

2. I think having ~three major religions in the world where the believers blindly believe their religion is the only way, that their god is better than everyone elses, that they have the right to trample, slaughter or dispossess the heathens/infidels/goyim is in general terms a bad thing.

Your perception of the vast majority of the believers of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity is unbelievably flawed. You are equating extremists to the majority...which is exactly what you excoriate lowing for.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Raimius wrote:

So, if we cannot tell the effects of "indoctrination," how can you?

Usually you can reason with the non-indoctrinated.

You must've been indoctrinated, then.

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Raimius wrote:

So, if we cannot tell the effects of "indoctrination," how can you?

Usually you can reason with the non-indoctrinated.

You must've been indoctrinated, then.

Was thinking the exact same thing.

No, they just shouldn't be filled with mumbo-jumbo about imaginary omnipotent beings who refuse to prove they exist.
That and dangerous dogma.

Basically, children are only allowed to be indoctrinated with what Dilbert believes, although he can't prove it anymore than those crazy religious folk, hence why you avoid making the claim about existence of a deity.

Basically, children are only allowed to be indoctrinated with what Dilbert believes

When did I say that?

Uzique wrote:

desert i think the considerable difference here is that the non-theist approach does have SOME evidence that actually exists for their views.
the theists rely on mumbo-jumbo, superstition and the supposed infallibility of a bunch of weed-smoking desert dwellers from 2000 years ago.

That is a typical arrogant atheist argument.

I'm sure there's no weed-smoking atheists, either.

FEOS wrote:

Uzique wrote:

desert i think the considerable difference here is that the non-theist approach does have SOME evidence that actually exists for their views.
the theists rely on mumbo-jumbo, superstition and the supposed infallibility of a bunch of weed-smoking desert dwellers from 2000 years ago.

That is a typical arrogant atheist argument.

I'm sure there's no weed-smoking atheists, either.

I think you missed his point. He meant weed smoking in a derogatory sense that it's so whacked out than they must've been on weed when they thought it up. And how it's less of a case when it comes to non-theism as it's based on a more structured approach, although at the end of the day you can't exactly prove for definite if there is or isn't a god(s) but you can only prove that so and so isn't the work of some divine deity and infact just a natural process.

what the fuck does that have to do with anything?

when i become a father it's not going to suddenly make me want to go and buy a bible so i can have a 'raise your child' instruction manual.

Uzique wrote:

teaching your child how to live his life by the instructions of a book is just demeaning your own responsibility as a parent. as i said before: morals, ethics and personal values can be instilled without relying on old parables and superstitious hoodoo about omnipotent deities and evil red-men under the ground that threaten to hurt you if you're naughty. there is no excuse for passing on religious belief doctrinally. religion and spiritualism should be deeply personal choices, not something prescribed to you by the choices of your (fore)fathers.

1. How is it demeaning if you believe in what you are teaching?
2. Nice straw-man.

well if that's the case bovine, why do you want some jew from a dustbowl 2000 years ago telling you what is 'right' to teach your children?

these arguments you use are pretty ambiguous

Dilbert_X wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

Militant atheists piss me off just as much as Jehovas Witnesses, or anyone else that goes around trying to convert everyone

But you have no problem with people converting their kids?
Can you imagine what it would be like to have Jehovah's Witnesses for parents?

I have several friends who were raised Jehovah's Witness. They were pretty normal, tbh. Didn't go around randomly knocking on doors and handing out literature or anything.

Same could be said for my Mormon friends. They don't bring up religion, don't engage in religious discussion unless asked directly and even then are quite rational and non-indoctrinated sounding.