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

"no, I'm actually an athiest"

Options
1…4142444647…71

Comments

  • Options
    #1292
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    prinz wrote: »
    accuse me of child abuse if I include future kids in my religious beliefs is not

    Do you have a problem with people like the Westboro Baptist Church teaching their particular brand of hate to their children?


    I'm just trying to clarify if you think people should be free to teach their children whatever they believe. Would you consider what the WBC do to their children...dare I say it...child abuse?


  • Options
    #1293
    Shenshen
    Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    prinz wrote: »
    Call me deluded if you want, water off a duck's.... accuse me of child abuse if I include future kids in my religious beliefs is not. Insult my intelligence is not.

    That's good to know, since Dawkins did not to my knowledge say that.
    He called religious indoctrination on par with child abuse.

    So unless you intend to indoctrinate your children to turn them into "Jesus' little soldiers", he wasn't referring to you.

    Interesting how you felt addressed by it, though.


  • Options
    #1294
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    prinz wrote: »
    Appears to me that he has no interest in doing it, and doesn't paticularly understand the driving force behind some people who seem to have an interest in doing little else.

    Right but he's not actually saying there's anything wrong with it no?

    I don't particularly understand the drive behind hardcore fans of football but that's not to say that I think there's something wrong with it


  • Options
    #1295
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    robindch wrote: »
    Not unremarkable until you notice that the majority of the blanket insults are coming from the "god" side of the debate.

    That is only if one can agree that this is the case. I think it's a mixed bag.
    robindch wrote: »
    This is to be expected, since the god-side continually tell themselves and each other that they are on the side of the angels, have access to perfect information, infinite intelligence, perfect morals etc, etc, etc.

    On my own do I have access to anything? No. Indeed, it isn't by any faculty of my own, it is by God's power. This is equally accessible for all men. When I say that God is infinitely good, this is no reflection on me as a person. Indeed, when I say that Christ is an exemplar, and that I seek to follow Him, it says nothing about how "great I am".

    Personally, I don't think there is any case for trumpeting about how great I am based on my beliefs. I do believe there is a case for proclaiming about how great God is though.
    robindch wrote: »
    Atheists make no claims to such preposterously arrogant intellectual positions and do not display -- as Cardinal Murphy-O'Conner did -- the inevitable consequences of taking religious beliefs seriously.

    Again. This really just fits into some X do Y. The same is true of both parties in said debate.


  • Options
    #1296
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    optogirl wrote: »
    Why shouldn't he?! Your analogy really doesn't stand up - you cannot compare the Angelus to an informative documentary or any program for that matter.

    If the bible is to be believed Jesus spend half his life pontificating and telling others what to believe.

    As I just said, not going there. As Marco said that's not for this thread.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1297
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Do you have a problem with people like the Westboro Baptist Church teaching their particular brand of hate to their children?

    Yes, that's it. Go to the outermost extremes to try to find a loophole.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    I'm just trying to clarify if you think people should be free to teach their children whatever they believe. Would you consider what the WBC do to their children...dare I say it...child abuse?

    Involving kids in ridiculous publicity stunt protests is something different. Teaching them hatred is something different. Care to make a point without resorting to the WBC? You may as well argue that parents shouldn't ever discuss their political stance in the upcoming general election with their kids because of indoctrination of kids by the Nazis.(No intention to Godwin but it's about as outlandish a comparison)


  • Options
    #1298
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Do you have a problem with people like the Westboro Baptist Church teaching their particular brand of hate to their children?


    I'm just trying to clarify if you think people should be free to teach their children whatever they believe. Would you consider what the WBC do to their children...dare I say it...child abuse?

    Do you equate a parent teaching their child about how Jesus loved everyone and taught them to do the same, which is what the vast majority of childrenl learn nowadays, to some-one who rapes or beats a child? Do you see new parents christening their baby in that way? What about a parent helping their child get ready for communion or confirmation?


  • Options
    #1299
    Shenshen
    Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    prinz wrote: »
    Yes, that's it. Go to the outermost extremes to try to find a loophole.



    Involving kids in ridiculous publicity stunt protests is something different. Teaching them hatred is something different. Care to make a point without resorting to the WBC?

    Certainly. What other example of indoctrination would you wish to discuss?


  • Options
    #1300
    optogirl
    Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭optogirl


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    As I just said, not going there. As Marco said that's not for this thread.


    What? Not for this thread? Convenient.


  • Options
    #1301
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    prinz wrote: »
    Yes, that's it. Go to the outermost extremes to try to find a loophole.

    Involving kids in ridiculous publicity stunt protests is something different. Teaching them hatred is something different. Care to make a point without resorting to the WBC?

    It's a valid form of argumentation called reductio ad absurdum. Do you think that people should be allowed teach their children their beliefs or don't you? From your response it looks to me like you don't, that just like Dawkins you find it objectionable for people to teach their children certain things. You just disagree on which things.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1302
    Shenshen
    Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Do you equate a parent teaching their child about how Jesus loved everyone and taught them to do the same, which is what the vast majority of childrenl learn nowadays, to some-one who rapes or beats a child?

    "Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with a rod, he will not die.
    You shall beat him with a rod, and deliver his soul from hell."

    Proverbs 23 somewhere, I believe.


  • Options
    #1303
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    optogirl wrote: »
    What? Not for this thread? Convenient.

    No, not on topic.


  • Options
    #1304
    shampon
    Registered Users Posts: 580 ✭✭✭shampon


    PAULWATSON wrote: »

    Are you a smug little athiest?

    About as much as your a smug little science denying papist eejit.


  • Options
    #1305
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Shenshen wrote: »
    That's good to know, since Dawkins did not to my knowledge say that.
    He called religious indoctrination on par with child abuse..

    Where does he draw the line between expression and indoctrination? I'd suggest the line is not very far away, given some other comments about labelling children..


  • Options
    #1306
    optogirl
    Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭optogirl


    Shenshen wrote: »
    Certainly. What other example of indoctrination would you wish to discuss?


    Cool - why don't we discuss stuff like, dressing children up in white dresses as little brides of christ when they are far too young to understand what is happening. Or, telling children that they are born with sin and only a man in a black dress can absolve them. Or, manipulating children with wonderful tales of baby jesus (aaaaw) and how it's thanks to him that Santa is coming


  • Options
    #1307
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Shenshen wrote: »
    "Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with a rod, he will not die.
    You shall beat him with a rod, and deliver his soul from hell."

    Proverbs 23 somewhere, I believe.

    Erm....what's that got to do with the examples I gave? I think I made clear I don't agree with anyone beating a child.


  • Options
    #1308
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    optogirl wrote: »
    Cool - why don't we discuss stuff like, dressing children up in white dresses as little brides of christ when they are far too young to understand what is happening. Or, telling children that they are born with sin and only a man in a black dress can absolve them. Or, manipulating children with wonderful tales of baby jesus (aaaaw) and how it's thanks to him that Santa is coming

    Brides of Christ.....where did that come from?

    And since does anyone tell a child that they are born sinners and only a priest can take it away. I've never once heard or told a child anything like that?

    And Santa and Jesus are two separate things completely.


  • Options
    #1309
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,414 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    prinz wrote: »
    It's like this, let's say there are two boxes on a table, one blue one red one of which you could choose. It would admirable enough for someone to come along and tell people to think for themselves, not to be influenced etc. That's fine. If Dawkins did that I would have no issue with the man.

    What's disingenuous is to claim that that is what Dawkins does, when concurrently with telling people not to be swayed to either red and blue, he informs you that people who choose red are deluded, misguided, blinkered fools.
    A lousy analogy.

    Imagine there's one box on the table and it's blue. Then a bejewelled priest resplendent in the finest silken and golden drapes, topped by ruffled flounces and a pointy hat, intoning everything in a Very Serious Voice, standing in his lectern ten feet above you to teach that you can only be "fully human" if you can really, really believe that there's a red box beside the blue one, and that if you think that the red box isn't there, that the box is going to make you burn in a lake of sulfur for all eternity (but the box still loves you all the same). And, of course, the Keepers Of The Red Box need lots of money. Now.

    And Dawkins comes along and suggests that the priest should be asked to justify his views?

    No wonder the priest gets pissed off.


  • Options
    #1310
    Shenshen
    Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    prinz wrote: »
    Where does he draw the line between expression and indoctrination? I'd suggest the line is not very far away, given some other comments about labelling children..

    I can't speak for him there, but the general definition of indoctrination is :

    "teach (a person or group) to accept a set of beliefs uncritically"

    (askoxford.com)

    Expression and education allows for critical thinking, indoctrination doesn't.


  • Options
    #1311
    Shenshen
    Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Erm....what's that got to do with the examples I gave? I think I made clear I don't agree with anyone beating a child.

    So you disagree with a very clear and unambiguous biblical statment? Interesting...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1312
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Do you equate a parent teaching their child about how Jesus loved everyone and taught them to do the same, which is what the vast majority of childrenl learn nowadays, to some-one who rapes or beats a child? Do you see new parents christening their baby in that way? What about a parent helping their child get ready for communion or confirmation?

    Um, the WBC don't rape and beat children, they just teach them that god hates fags. But anyway...

    I don't have a problem with anyone teaching their childen to love others but I don't see why you should have to bring up an itinerant Rabbi from bronze age Palestine to do it. And really if that's all that people teach their children about christianity then I don't have much of a problem with that either, an awful lot of people throughout history taught the very same. But if you're going to actually teach christianity and not just the nice bits you have to tell the child that they were born deserving of eternal torture and that they have to believe an old story about a man raising from the dead or they can't be a good person and will burn forever for it. Oh and, among other things, that if they're gay their urges are an abomination unto the Lord and they have to fight them their whole lives.


  • Options
    #1313
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    It's a valid form of argumentation called reductio ad absurdum.

    Thanks for that Sam, it seems you are following the Dawkins school of insulting the intelligence of people who disagree with you.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Do you think that people should be allowed teach their children their beliefs or don't you?

    Yes I do. However those beliefs should be judged on their merits. Do you? Do you think there is a difference between indoctinating your kids into far right extremism and telling them you vote for Labour, with reasons why?


  • Options
    #1314
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Shenshen wrote: »
    So you disagree with a very clear and unambiguous biblical statment? Interesting...

    Don't start that again please!!!!!


  • Options
    #1315
    optogirl
    Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭optogirl


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Brides of Christ.....where did that come from?
    em - brides of christ is a term used to describe nuns.

    And since does anyone tell a child that they are born sinners and only a priest can take it away. I've never once heard or told a child anything like that?
    What is confession for and what is the concept of original sin that we are taught in school?
    And Santa and Jesus are two separate things completely.


    No sh!t! My point is that children are taught that it's because of Jesus' birthday that this festival is happening when really it has existed since long before that day.


  • Options
    #1316
    Bookworm85
    Registered Users Posts: 247 ✭✭Bookworm85


    Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »
    Who's saying you should aspire to be like him?

    I don't want to be like him, I just happen to agree with a lot of his beliefs and admire his reasoning.

    Again, apologies. I'm not very good at getting a point across in my writing :o

    I'm not trying to say that atheists 'aspire' to be him, but to theists it certainly appears that Richard Dawkins is the spokesperson for the atheist community, and I don't like that.

    The main thing about Dawkins that annoys me is his belief that religious people are deluded or have some sort of mental problem is atrocious. I come from a religious family both my parents are believers in the God, but I suppose they would be 'a la carte' believers. They believe in God, Jesus, afterlife etc. Are they mentally unstable? - heck no. They are the ones who raised me, and encouraged me to form my own opinions and to form my own beliefs etc. To suggest that the two people I have the utmost admiration and respect for are deluded crazies really annoys me.

    And for others (non theists) to think that as an atheist I hang on Dawkins' every word pisses me off big time. The media has portrayed him as the poster child for atheism, and therefore his opinions are the opinions of all atheists.


  • Options
    #1317
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Um, the WBC don't rape and beat children, they just teach them that god hates fags. But anyway...

    I don't have a problem with anyone teaching their childen to love others but I don't see why you should have to bring up an itinerant Rabbi from bronze age Palestine to do it. And really if that's all that people teach their children about christianity then I don't have much of a problem with that either, an awful lot of people throughout history taught the very same. But if you're going to actually teach christianity and not just the nice bits you have to tell the child that they were born deserving of eternal torture and that they have to believe an old story about a man raising from the dead or they can't be a good person and will burn forever for it. Oh and, among other things, that if they're gay their urges are an abomination unto the Lord and they have to fight them their whole lives.

    And I don't see why it's such a big deal to bring him into to it tbh.


  • Options
    #1318
    optogirl
    Registered Users Posts: 2,978 ✭✭✭optogirl


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Don't start that again please!!!!!


    Hang on here Audrey - without being rude, we are having a discussion here and every time you are challenged you decide that 'this is not the place for this' or 'let's not get into that' etc. How much more interesting it will be if we DO tackle the thorny issues.


  • Options
    #1319
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    prinz wrote: »
    Thanks for that Sam, it seems you are following the Dawkins school of insulting the intelligence of people who disagree with you.
    It really wasn't meant to be insulting or offensive. I was backing up my argument by showing the arguing technique I was using. Perhaps it's more that you're easily offended than that people are deliberately being offensive?
    prinz wrote: »
    Yes I do. However those beliefs should be judged on their merits. Do you? Do you think there is a difference between indoctinating your kids into far right extremism and telling them you vote for Labour, with reasons why?

    Yes absolutely I do. I also think there's a difference between telling your children you vote for Labour, with reasons why, and telling them that you believe that if they don't follow the religion you believe in they will go to hell. you can't deny that that is one of the fundamental beliefs of christianity


  • Options
    #1320
    Shenshen
    Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Brides of Christ.....where did that come from?

    Catholic tradition
    And since does anyone tell a child that they are born sinners and only a priest can take it away. I've never once heard or told a child anything like that?

    From the moment I got religious instructions.
    And just to make sure we understood, it got repeated and repeated and repeated in every single Catholic mass....
    What do you think the church thinks baptism is?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1321
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    optogirl wrote: »
    brides of christ is a term used to describe nuns

    Nuns....grown women who have made a concious descision to become nuns, not as you suggest little girls who are forced into it.


Advertisement