What kind of world do you wish for your children to grow up in?

Goduznt Xzst

There seems to be a lot of confusion about the actual aims of Atheists in general, our ideologies and wants. It might help to make it clear what each of us sees as the end goal, and what the world we hope our children will grow up in will look like.

Personally, I don't ever think organized religion will vanish, so I don't hope for it. The same way that smokers can ignore the obvious health risks of their habit to get their nicotine fix, I find that religious people can overlook the inconsistencies of their beliefs to keep focused on their afterlife on the horizon. That being said, I would never want for an individuals right to smoke to be removed. I do however support separating their habit from affecting the air around non-smokers, and also keeping it illegal for minors to buy them.

This leads me on to Religion. My hopes would be, like most, that their would be a complete separation of religion from government, and for this to be enforced by law. Removal of Religious practices from Schools entirely and for modern religions to be taught, objectively, alongside the mythologies of previous societies.

I would not have a problem with Churches and places of worship remaining, however advertising of a religion, whether it be televangelists, billboards, radio ads, or door knocking should be made illegal.

Finally, much like the way children are not allowed to buy cigarettes until a certain age, places of worship would be required to refuse entrance of individuals under a certain age. A parent found making their child pray or perform religious actions would receive the same consequences by social services as a parent giving their child cigarettes or alcohol.

eoin5

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

There seems to be a lot of confusion about the actual aims of Atheists in general, our ideologies and wants. It might help to make it clear what each of us sees as the end goal, and what the world we hope our children will grow up in will look like.

Personally, I don't ever think organized religion will vanish, so I don't hope for it. The same way that smokers can ignore the obvious health risks of their habit to get their nicotine fix, I find that religious people can overlook the inconsistencies of their beliefs to keep focused on their afterlife on the horizon. That being said, I would never want for an individuals right to smoke to be removed. I do however support separating their habit from affecting the air around non-smokers, and also keeping it illegal for minors to buy them.

This leads me on to Religion. My hopes would be, like most, that their would be a complete separation of religion from government, and for this to be enforced by law. Removal of Religious practices from Schools entirely and for modern religions to be taught, objectively, alongside the mythologies of previous societies.

I would not have a problem with Churches and places of worship remaining, however advertising of a religion, whether it be televangelists, billboards, radio ads, or door knocking should be made illegal.

Finally, much like the way children are not allowed to buy cigarettes until a certain age, places of worship would be required to refuse entrance of individuals under a certain age. A parent found making their child pray or perform religious actions would receive the same consequences by social services as a parent giving their child cigarettes or alcohol.

Banning religious advertising is going a bit too far no?

Accountability and justification in religions is what I'd like to see more of. One thing I'd love to see is a compulsory comprehensive comparitive study done to answer what percentage money of non-profit organisations such as religions gets spent on helping people who need it.

ChocolateSauce

Realistically, I want my children to grow up in a world where freedom and human rights are respected. I've never said it here because it's never really come up, but I'll say it now:

My ultimate goal for the human race is to be liberal and moral, my goal is not to destroy religion. It just so happens that I think the destruction of religion is the best only way to attain my vision.

For this reason, my perfect world doesn't intrinsically need to be religion-free, it just needs to be free of people who would attempt to rule the lives of others with their own religiously-derived world view.

Goduznt Xzst

eoin5 wrote: »

Banning religious advertising is going a bit too far no?

Why so? Do you think its right that advertisements for cigarettes are banned?

I'd also be interested in your opinions about what balance you see between religions and society in the future. It's all well and good saying that organized religion is wrong, but you also need to imagine what you hope for to replace it where you to get your wish.

Fanny Cradock

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

Why so? Do you think its right that advertisements for cigarettes are banned?

Fortunately not everybody agrees with your religion and cigarette parallels. Thank God!

Dave!

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Fortunately not everybody agrees with your religion and cigarette parallels. Thank God!

Ahh come on, it can't be denied that religion smells !

uncleoswald

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Fortunately not everybody agrees with your religion and cigarette parallels. Thank God!

Yeah I really don't think religion and cigarettes can be casually lumped together like that. Why cigarettes in the first place? Does religion cause lung cancer now?

If parents want to raise their children religiously then they should have every right to do so and as they grow older they can believe in whatever they want.

Personally if pushed I guess my ideal would be a future in which humans have grown beyond belief in the supernatural but as the OP says this is improbable. So just a clean break of religion with school and government would just be dandy, but again I can understand why this would be unacceptable for a whole number of people.

Latchy

In economic downturns such as this one ,more and people turn to religion .Why ? because there is sod all else .But we must'nt confuse an individuals religious beliefs with the Mass hysteria of organised religious groups and organisations, which popped up everywere in the last great depression .

Overblood

I think if christianity was to become as restricted and controlled as Goduznt Xzt hopes, we'll have another 9/11, this time committed by the christians themselves. Restricting them so much would drive them together and bolster their beliefs even more, which is something I would hate to see. I think it should be allowed to just die out like the old animal it is.

The future of Ireland is it's young, from 0yrs of age to the mid twenties. I don't see many religious followers amongst us. So the future is lookin' good.

Goduznt Xzst

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Fortunately not everybody agrees with your religion and cigarette parallels. Thank God!

I agree, I'm sure the Atheist smokers here despise having their habit associated with religious beliefs Society doesn't expect Smokers to like the Smoking ban, so I wouldn't expect Christians to like any restrictions imposed on their proselytizing and preaching.

I merely used it as an example of a human freedom that has been restricted due to its proven damaging effect on individuals, and individuals in direct contact with it. Sure it has its benefits (like Religion) but these can be achieved without addictive substances like nicotine (or the supernatural)

We set age limits on substances that are known to physically damage the body and create addictive traits in humans, yet we seem to ignore the effects that religious indoctrination has on a child's mind.

uncleoswald wrote: »

If parents want to raise their children religiously then they should have every right to do so and as they grow older they can believe in whatever they want.

So if a parent let their child smoke, bought them cigarettes and told them that it was ok to do so. Do you think that when that child became an adult and had listened to their parents and had become addicted to nicotine that (s)he would easily be able to give up smoking, break the addiction and understand it was damaging to their health?

The same is true of religion, a person trying to leave a belief system usually has to deal with a lot of emotional dependencies on their beliefs from a life of indoctrination and also has to come to the realization that their parents where wrong, people who are cornerstones in most people lifes. Having been a smoker myself and breaking that addiction I know the struggle to leave my religion and also to break my habit where very similar. In fact I found the former a lot more difficult.

Overblood wrote: »

I think if Christianity was to become as restricted and controlled as Goduznt Xzt hopes, we'll have another 9/11, this time committed by the christians themselves.

Is fear a good enough reason to decide how we move forward as a society?

Overblood

Is fear a good enough reason to decide how we move forward as a society?

Fear is a very useful evolutionary tool.

Now if I had my own way I'd have the whole middle east blown off the earth, but we live in the real world and we do have to be careful. As much as I'd love to clamp down on religion and ban it altogether, I definitely don't think it is the way forward. We should educate our children properly, get rid of religion and it's friend ignorance at the source.

Dades

Overblood wrote: »

Now if I had my own way I'd have the whole middle east blown off the earth...

But then where you get the oil for your pickup truck? :pac:

For a start, one where the majority of schools aren't owned by the church, and state schools were non-denominational.

I'd also agree with the banning children from places of worship idea, at a first thought but it wouldn't be anywhere near the top of my list. Also doesn't stop parents telling the children what they want in the privacy of their own homes however, and in USA they can take it far further by "homeschooling" them.

I also agree that raising the children with religious beliefs and the simple notion of "they can believe what they want when they grow up" is not realistic, if they grow up with their parents as figures to look up to and just accepting religious beliefs as correct all their young life, chances are they'll find it quite difficult to deal with both 1/ questioning those beliefs they've always taken for granted and 2/ coming to terms with the parents issue.
I'm not saying it doesn't happen but looking at it that way is far too simplistic.

I don't agree with the idea of banning the advertising, I think just letting them be taught the religious myths alongside standard mythology studies and just moving away from a religious based culture rather than going the other extreme would be better. In the sense of people judging for themselves if they want the religion or not.

Húrin

Most of you still seem to think that atheism improves the world in itself, indeed even that it is a step towards utopia. Do you actually think that atheism improves people, morally? That it makes them less likely to do harm?

If that is so, then why has the rise of atheism in the 20th century coincided with the elevation of warfare to unprecedented levels of brutality? If atheism makes people love and help each other, why has the rise of atheism in Ireland coincided with our society becoming more alienated and individualistic?

These views might have been credible 100+ years ago, but it takes some wilful ignorance of history to hold onto them now.

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

I would not have a problem with Churches and places of worship remaining, however advertising of a religion, whether it be televangelists, billboards, radio ads, or door knocking should be made illegal.

Finally, much like the way children are not allowed to buy cigarettes until a certain age, places of worship would be required to refuse entrance of individuals under a certain age. A parent found making their child pray or perform religious actions would receive the same consequences by social services as a parent giving their child cigarettes or alcohol.

Why on earth should religion be put into a special place whereby it's not allowed advertise?

The other policy is even more ridiculous. Would you expect a vegetarian couple not to "indoctrinate" their child into vegetarianism? Not every family that raises their child in religion uses brutal enforcement.

Your ideas aren't secular. These are the policies of an anti-theist state. They are predicated on the idea that religion is bad and thus needs to be controlled.

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

My ultimate goal for the human race is to be liberal and moral, my goal is not to destroy religion. It just so happens that I think the destruction of religion is the best only way to attain my vision.

Destroying religion is illiberal.

For this reason, my perfect world doesn't intrinsically need to be religion-free, it just needs to be free of people who would attempt to rule the lives of others with their own religiously-derived world view.

So it's not religion you wish to destroy, it's theocracy. Why do you have a hard time telling the difference?

Why is it more tolerant to rule the lives of others with your naturalist worldview than with a religious one?

Overblood

Dades wrote: »

But then where you get the oil for your pickup truck? :pac:

After blowing the middle east up I'm sure I can claim it as my own.:pac:

OK, maybe my tactics are slightly heavy-handed. It's just the extremist muslims... they are a huge problem. So the Koran says to kill all infidels, "OK lets see... get that white engineer guy who's trying to fix our town water supply there and make a video of us chopping, wait, not chopping - sawing his head off with a blunt knife. Praise Allah!" I'm sure most people here have seen Pat Condell's "Shame on the Netherlands" video. Tis a disgrace.:mad: (<-- that smiley isn't big enough)

Hurin please don't start with that moral stuff. I don't get goodness from the bible I get goodness from me. I'm a good guy. Look, no god!

Rev Hellfire

I'd like my children to grown up in a world where others be they theists or atheists aren't attempting to restrict their choices in order to force their own particular agenda on populous.

That's me, the big romantic.

Phototoxin

I'd also agree with the banning children from places of worship idea, at a first thought but it wouldn't be anywhere near the top of my list. Also doesn't stop parents telling the children what they want in the privacy of their own homes however, and in USA they can take it far further by "homeschooling" them.

Homeschooling is a perfectly valid option. In many ways I would like to do it if I had kids of my own. However in my experience most homeshcooled kids belong to highly religious people and those kids are slightly zombified and uncritical.

The other policy is even more ridiculous. Would you expect a vegetarian couple not to "indoctrinate" their child into vegetarianism? Not every family that raises their child in religion uses brutal enforcement.

Your ideas aren't secular. These are the policies of an anti-theist state. They are predicated on the idea that religion is bad and thus needs to be controlled.

I agree, even as a nontheist/not sure

Overblood

Húrin wrote: »

why has the rise of atheism in the 20th century coincided with the elevation of warfare to unprecedented levels of brutality?

Like George Bush Jnr. & Snr. invading Iraq and Afghanistan? Both Christians by the way.

Which other wars are you talking about? Oh yeah, Israel and Palestine yeah that... wait... no that's religious too. Hmmm...

Actually, can you give a few examples of these atheist wars you're talking about? I dropped history after junior cert.:o

Dave!

Húrin wrote: »

Most of you still seem to think that atheism improves the world in itself, indeed even that it is a step towards utopia. Do you actually think that atheism improves people, morally? That it makes them less likely to do harm?

If that is so, then why has the rise of atheism in the 20th century coincided with the elevation of warfare to unprecedented levels of brutality? If atheism makes people love and help each other, why has the rise of atheism in Ireland coincided with our society becoming more alienated and individualistic?

You really do test my patience Hurin...

Overblood

Wow, pirate-ocity is directly related to global temperature-icity. Never knew that.

Dave!

Well pirates are cool, and their numbers are dwindling, so........

Use the oul' noggin' !

philologos

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

I agree, I'm sure the Atheist smokers here despise having their habit associated with religious beliefs Society doesn't expect Smokers to like the Smoking ban, so I wouldn't expect Christians to like any restrictions imposed on their proselytizing and preaching.

Thankfully most people don't encourage discrimination on such a scale as you are suggesting. This would be a violation of free speech and would be in violation of the constitution surely?

eoin5

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

Why so? Do you think its right that advertisements for cigarettes are banned?

Banning the ads without banning the product doesnt really stand to reason. Banning cigarette ads and not beer ads is another doosie. I guess all thats OT though.

uncleoswald wrote:

If parents want to raise their children religiously then they should have every right to do so and as they grow older they can believe in whatever they want.

No, thats child abuse. Whats wrong with letting children think for themselves?

philologos

eoin5 wrote: »

No, thats child abuse. Whats wrong with letting children think for themselves?

No, it really isn't. Is it child abuse to teach ones child one language over another? Evidently not. However children are predisposed to their parents all the time, infact it could be argued (not that I agree however) that it is child abuse not to raise a child in a faith as you are predisposing them to become atheists or agnostics.

Rev Hellfire

eoin5 wrote: »

No, thats child abuse. Whats wrong with letting children think for themselves?

Child abuse is clearly something different, by banding the term around willy-nilly you do a disservice to those who have actually suffered abuse.

toiletduck

Jakkass wrote: »

No, it really isn't. Is it child abuse to teach ones child one language over another? Evidently not.

Ridiculous analogy. A child must learn a language by a certain age (10 or so I think) or they will never be able to fully master one.

I would see religious indoctrination of children by parents to be equivalent to political. Wouldn't call it child abuse.

philologos

Yes they must learn a language (one must also take a stance on the God question), but what is the dictat for learning a certain language over another?

Húrin

Húrin wrote: »

If that is so, then why has the rise of atheism in the 20th century coincided with the elevation of warfare to unprecedented levels of brutality?

:rolleyes:
I was going to reply but I think the pirates picture sums it up.

toiletduck

I still don't think you get it. They're not comparable cases at all. I see where this is going (i.e. they learn the parents language, ergo why shouldn't they learn the parents religion... etc).

fitz0

In fairness there's a big difference in learning a language and being taught a religion. A language is set by the country you are in eg English in England/America etc whereas a place should have no bearing on a religion. It should be left until such an age so the child can decide if he or she actually believes in said religion.

philologos

fitz0 is that really true though? Many atheists on here have claimed that choice of religion is predominately based on geography.