Pressure to baptise

Chattastrophe!

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

"But what if he dies as a baby, unbaptised!"
"Then, to be perfectly honest, the fate of his soul will be of no concern to me. But just, what. What?! You're actually asking a new mother about what will happen if her tiny new baby dies? F*ck off."

The latest doctrine is that unbaptised babies go to heaven anyway

Chattastrophe!

bluewolf wrote: »

The latest doctrine is that unbaptised babies go to heaven anyway

Woohoo for our poor little heathen babies!

Mark Hamill

Bellatori wrote: »

Absolutely I would not but then the two again are not equivalent acts. Each case on its merits...

Is the OP intending that his child should go to an Islamic school? How is this relevant to the OP. It is simply a red herring.

It is no way a red herring. You cannot expect a child baptised and educated in one religion to be able to easily make an unbiased decision on what religion they believe in when they grow up. This is why people who argue that they can do so balk at the notion of sending them to different religious schools. People, regardless of whether they like to admit to it or not, know that putting a kid through religious education biases them in favour of that religion.

The irony is if someone really wants to argue that religious conversion and education doesn't bias kids, then it shouldn't matter to them if their kids don't go through it, as according to their argument it has no effect either way anyway.

Mark Hamill

crazy cat lady wrote: »

On your first point - I don't believe this to be true. My husband is proof that if you don't buy into something, you don't have to. Its not made him any less of a person. Surely the fact that he has never been exposed to other 'religions' means that he has not really made an informed choice about what he could believe? Maybe if he focussed his interests in the Islamic faith to see what it was all about he would find that actually, religion does have a place in his life. Its just not Christianity.

On your second point - If my children wanted to go to an Islamic school and it was feasible then I would support it. Of course if they were to make that decision then I would expect them to be old enough an mature enough to explain why they were choosing that path and not buying into a fad.

@Quandary - I'm sorry that in your profession you feel obligated to make up lies. If our children were to pose these questions to us, we will give an honest answer - 'We don't know'. We won't lie, but at the same time, I will never tell my daughters that there is no such thing as God. I will tell them that I can't prove that there is a god any more than my husband can prove that there isn't one, but mummy believes in one and daddy doesn't and its ok to believe either way.

1) I didn't say it was impossible to escape the bias I just said it was very hard. Most people on this forum have, but many people do not, as evidenced by (among other things) the the fact that being catholic is seen as inherently part of being Irish, regardless of actual religious belief (according to a survey by Irish catholic bishops, 10% of catholics in Ireland do not believe in god (see page 12)).
Also, while your husband has moved on to rejecting the supernatural in general, if you really think he should have examined other religions first then an education system that is based on presenting all religions impartially would be exactly what he, and therefore your kids, need.

2) TBH it's a bit rich to expect your kids to defend their hypothetical beliefs when your first post detailed how you feel that you shouldn't have to defend yours.
That aside, while you say you would allow them to make that decision, you admit that you would only allow them to make that decision when they were old enough to show they understand it's implication. However you have no problem forcing a religion on them long before they are mature enough to even understand how to read it clearly. Do you not see the contradiction?

If we educated kids to be curious and critical, and just presented all religions impartially, then kids would arrive at informed, mature decisions in relation to their religious beliefs. What exactly is wrong with that?

Bellatori

Mark Hamill wrote: »

... You cannot expect a child baptised and educated in one religion to be able to easily make an unbiased decision on what religion they believe in when they grow up. T...

Mine did. Both of them. It is down to the parents and upbringing. If one is completely pusillanimous then of course it might do harm but those parents have the welfare of their children at heart should never have a problem with this.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

The irony is if someone really wants to argue that religious conversion and education doesn't bias kids, then it shouldn't matter to them if their kids don't go through it, as according to their argument it has no effect either way anyway.

Who is arguing for "religious conversion"? Not me. The whole point is that at age 'zero' it certainly is not that and everything that happens after is down to the PARENTS WHO DECIDE....

Please give the parents some credit for not being completely spineless.

Mark Hamill

Bellatori wrote: »

Mine did. Both of them. It is down to the parents and upbringing. If one is completely pusillanimous then of course it might do harm but those parents have the welfare of their children at heart should never have a problem with this.

Good for them. But should parenting and upbringing really have to counter the effects of their baptism and education? Would it not be better if they had no baptism and their education just made them aware of all religions instead of indoctrinated in one?

Bellatori wrote: »

Who is arguing for "religious conversion"? Not me. The whole point is that at age 'zero' it certainly is not that and everything that happens after is down to the PARENTS WHO DECIDE....

Please give the parents some credit for not being completely spineless.

We are talking about baptising kids and putting them through religious schools.
And you are proving my point - if baptising at age zero amounts to nothing and parenting and upbringing will just undo religious indoctrination in schools, then why bother baptising and indoctrinating?

Bellatori

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Good for them. But should parenting and upbringing really have to counter the effects of their baptism and education? Would it not be better if they had no baptism and their education just made them aware of all religions instead of indoctrinated in one?

You pick the school and if there is an issue then YOU deal with it. Where is the problem... For concerned parents there is not one.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

We are talking about baptising kids and putting them through religious schools. And you are proving my point - if baptising at age zero amounts to nothing and parenting and upbringing will just undo religious indoctrination in schools, then why bother baptising and indoctrinating?

Sorry but I have dealt with the indoctrination issue several times above... this is called parenting. As for the baptising... again I have dealt with that several times.

Indoctrinating... ? Only if the parents acquiesce and are not paying attention. What fo you think parents are for?

crazy cat lady

I just have a couple of things to say and then I'm done with this thread and you's can argue it out amongst yourselves if you so wish.

1. This was never a discussion about entering our child into the Catholic church, but a Christian faith.

2. The title of this thread is misleading. I'm not actually putting pressure on my husband to have our daughter baptised. I've expressed that I would still like her baptised, but I know how he feels about it (although its mostly the Catholic church he doesn't approve of) so I haven't pushed the idea. The discussion only came to light as our eldest is starting school in September and I wanted to know where he stood if baptism was a requirement of acceptance into the school.

3. Our daughters are going to be brought up with a religious education. It is compulsory in the school that they are going to. My husband may not want them educated within a certain religion, but he doesn't feel so strongly about it that he will commit to driving them the 15 miles a day to the local ET school...

Mark Hamill

Bellatori wrote: »

You pick the school and if there is an issue then YOU deal with it. Where is the problem... For concerned parents there is not one.

The problem is that there shouldn't be a possibility of an issue in the first place. And many parents do encounter issues with schools, many examples in this thread and throughout the forum. Early in the thread there have even been examples of teachers in the schools having issues because of religious control of the schools.

Bellatori wrote: »

Sorry but I have dealt with the indoctrination issue several times above... this is called parenting. As for the baptising... again I have dealt with that several times.

Indoctrinating... ? Only if the parents acquiesce and are not paying attention. What fo you think parents are for?

You haven't dealt with my question at all, so I'll ask again:
if baptising at age zero amounts to nothing and parenting and upbringing will just undo religious indoctrination in schools, then why bother baptising and indoctrinating?

Mark Hamill

crazy cat lady wrote: »

I just have a couple of things to say and then I'm done with this thread and you's can argue it out amongst yourselves if you so wish.

1. This was never a discussion about entering our child into the Catholic church, but a Christian faith.

2. The title of this thread is misleading. I'm not actually putting pressure on my husband to have our daughter baptised. I've expressed that I would still like her baptised, but I know how he feels about it (although its mostly the Catholic church he doesn't approve of) so I haven't pushed the idea. The discussion only came to light as our eldest is starting school in September and I wanted to know where he stood if baptism was a requirement of acceptance into the school.

3. Our daughters are going to be brought up with a religious education. It is compulsory in the school that they are going to. My husband may not want them educated within a certain religion, but he doesn't feel so strongly about it that he will commit to driving them the 15 miles a day to the local ET school...

1) Your husband specifically references catholicism in his OP, so which christian faith were you thinking of baptising your kids into if not catholicism? Regardless it changes very little of what has been said to you.

3) I'm sure your husband has nothing better to do than to drive an extra 15 miles a day in peak times :rolleyes:.

Bellatori

Mark Hamill wrote: »

You haven't dealt with my question at all, so I'll ask again:
if baptising at age zero amounts to nothing and parenting and upbringing will just undo religious indoctrination in schools, then why bother baptising and indoctrinating?

Yes I did, I'm guessing that you haven't bothered to read the whole thread. Were you to do so you would find that I have responded to the baptising at least twice.

Perhaps I can repeat a previous post which you seem to have missed

Indoctrinating... ? Only if the parents acquiesce and are not paying attention. What fo you think parents are for?

Sheesh...

Mark Hamill

Bellatori wrote: »

Yes I did, I'm guessing that you haven't bothered to read the whole thread. Were you to do so you would find that I have responded to the baptising at least twice.

Perhaps I can repeat a previous post which you seem to have missed



Sheesh...

Your previous posts on baptising (like this one) don't answer my question, they just shirk responsibility to the wife. The question applies to both of you, as equal parents. All you are saying is that parenting can counter indoctrination. I'm asking why should it need to? Why not remove all the indoctrination?

crazy cat lady

Mark Hamill wrote: »

1) Your husband specifically references catholicism in his OP, so which christian faith were you thinking of baptising your kids into if not catholicism? Regardless it changes very little of what has been said to you.

3) I'm sure your husband has nothing better to do than to drive an extra 15 miles a day in peak times :rolleyes:.

My husband also states that I don't mind which religion the child is baptised into. I have also stated on a couple of occasions that this is not about having our daughter baptised into Catholicism.

It seems that you are so blindsighted by your own views on the Catholic church that there is nothing that anyone could say that would sway you to believe that a little bit of religion could actually have a positive effect on a child's life.

As for my husband not driving 15 miles to the nearest ET school, my point is that if he really was so 'anti-religion', he would commit to that.

Like you, he's really just making a stand against Catholicism. And I support that. However, the Catholic education I grew up with was a lot more liberal than here in Ireland, and my experiences were good! Why wouldn't I want the same for my children? Whether the teachings come from Catholicism, the protestant church or Allah, if the message is positive and its going to have an enriching effect of my childrens upbringing, then bring it on.

ryan101

Quandary wrote: »

If your child grows up to have a keen and sharp mind and then asks you why the Catholic God she was brought up to believe in hates gay people even though you are telling her to be accepting of them, isn't that going to cause a very fundamental conflict?

This is just one tiny example btw.

I am a primary school teacher who teaches in a catholic school and I get difficult questions from children constantly when science contradicts their faith.

Here are some of the difficult questions I have had to answer this year

Why did God let the Tsunami happen?
How can the bible stories be true, if the old parts are not really true how do we know the new parts are true?
Is the devil real? I can't sleep because I keep having dreams about him getting me
How do we know the bible is Gods word when real people wrote it?
Why does God want us to pray? How does he know if I forget to say my prayers?
Will I go to hell if I forget to say my prayers?
My friend is from China and he doesn't believe in God so will he go to hell?
How do we know that God is real?

You know what I have to do? I have to lie to them. I have to make up lies to try and fit God into the equation. Basically I turn on what I like to call priest mode and say vague things like "well that's just Gods plan for us"

Let me tell you, it feels very fcuking d1rty making up fantastical and nonsensical stories for 10 year old children when every fibre of my existence and very being knows them to be lies.

Please, for the sake of your child's rational curiosity and budding young thirst for scientific answers, don't indoctrinate her into a religion that tries to constantly pull the wool over her eyes.

Just out of interest, if it's so against your principles, why do you want to teach in a Catholic School ?

shruikan2553

ryan101 wrote: »

Just out of interest, if it's so against your principles, why do you want to teach in a Catholic School ?

There isnt exactly a lot of choice if you are a teacher. They would probably prefer to work in a ET but its tough getting a steady job in teaching.

eyescreamcone

Positive message my arse!

What about my kids gay aunt?
The RCC have some very positive messages about gays

I'd rather piss on my kids head then let a priest try and "cleanse" them of some imaginary sins - inherited from Adam and Eve eating the wrong apple!

If you analyse what baptism is all about you'd never let your children near it.

the reality is that baptism is just a scheme to get the numbers up for the RCC - more numbers equals more money!!!

iguana

Chattastrophe! wrote: »

"Sure you might as well, isn't it a day out?"
"A day out where I stand up in front of my family and friends and admit that my gorgeous little baby has been born with original sin, and needs to be absolved of it, is not my idea of a fun day out. My baby is perfect and innocent, I don't feel the need to clean him of any sins."

Or; So you are telling me that if I want a day out, introducing the wonderful newest member of my family to all the important people in my life isn't a good enough reason for me to do so, unless I first gather them all to watch a man in a dress wash the imaginary sin from his imaginary soul with real water with imaginary powers?

Bellatori

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Your previous posts on baptising (like this one) don't answer my question,{/QUOTE]

Firstly... yes they did. I'm guessing you did not agree with the answer which is a different thing all together.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

they just shirk responsibility to the wife.

No they don't. That is just you stirring things.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

The question applies to both of you, as equal parents. All you are saying is that parenting can counter indoctrination.

Isn't it amazing what GOOD parenting can do

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I'm asking why should it need to? Why not remove all the indoctrination?

Different question again. I would have thought the answer was self evident given the education system in Ireland...

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Why not remove all the indoctrination?

I look forward to your campaign and election to the Doyle with interest.

Bellatori

The last few posts have been very interesting. Somehow people (I include those applauding underneath the post) feel that baptism has some mystical value attached to it.


The thing is I am talking about atheists here and not christians!! It hasn't. It is total mumbo jumbo. It does not scar or mark the infant at all. It is not, as someone suggested, some kind of tattoo that is visible for all to see either. Everything else is in the minds of those who think it has some property or other. The only worry I have about baptism is whether the water used meets the necessary water quality standards.

The Black Oil

The day out thing is rather amusing. People moan about nobody going to mass these days, lifestyle choice Catholics and then try to sell baptism as 'ah sure, it's grand'. An excuse for a piss up.

Good old Irish logic.

gctest50

Bellatori wrote: »

The last few posts have been very interesting. Somehow people (I include those applauding underneath the post) feel that baptism has some mystical value attached to it.


The thing is I am talking about atheists here and not christians!! It hasn't. It is total mumbo jumbo. It does not scar or mark the infant at all. It is not, as someone suggested, some kind of tattoo that is visible for all to see either. Everything else is in the minds of those who think it has some property or other. The only worry I have about baptism is whether the water used meets the necessary water quality standards.

One downside is it "artificially" jacks up the numbers

crazy cat lady

I'm sure those of you who are worried about the permanent effects of a religious education have no worries about letting your children believe that a fat man with a beard comes into their bedroom one night every year.

Somehow most chilren manage to stop believing in Santa tho, and usually without any lasting side effects as far as I'm aware.

Seems a bit hypocritical to say its ok to let your child believe in one thing that isn't real but not another.

And in my opinion, its far worse to let a child believe that its ok to let a strange man into their room at night than to have them believe that there's a man in the sky watching over them and keeping them safe (just an example, I know its more than that)

eyescreamcone

I can't remember Santa being homophobic unlike the big cloud fairy.

shruikan2553

eyescreamcone wrote: »

I can't remember Santa being homophobic unlike the big cloud fairy.

The reindeer were a metaphor for unmarried mothers and gay people. They were shunned by their peers so Santa took them and made them work.

Bellatori

crazy cat lady wrote: »

I'm sure those of you who are worried about the permanent effects of a religious education have no worries about letting your children believe that a fat man with a beard comes into their bedroom one night every year.

My Santa stops at the Xmas tree downstairs and has to drink a glass of sherry and eat a mince pie. No wonder I, oops I mean he, is putting on weight.

Interestingly a lot of research has been done into children and invisible friends. Firstly it appears to be a sign of higher intelligence and, amongst other things, the children DO know that they are not real.

I have never told my children that santa, the tooth fairy or anything similar is real. I have (as a confessed hypocrite,) not told them they are not real until they specifically asked (in the case of my younger daughter, 30 this year, she has made it absolutely clear that not only is she not asking she does not want uninvited commentary and DOES want a santa sack at Xmas!). Same thing with god and Gods. Interestingly (?) reading about the stories of greek gods in late primary school elicited a lot of interesting questions about what was real.

iguana

Bellatori wrote: »

The last few posts have been very interesting. Somehow people (I include those applauding underneath the post) feel that baptism has some mystical value attached to it.


The thing is I am talking about atheists here and not christians!! It hasn't. It is total mumbo jumbo. It does not scar or mark the infant at all. It is not, as someone suggested, some kind of tattoo that is visible for all to see either. Everything else is in the minds of those who think it has some property or other. The only worry I have about baptism is whether the water used meets the necessary water quality standards.

Nobody thinks it has any mystical powers but we all know it gives the RCC very real political powers. Powers they use to maintain a status quo where our unbaptised children or children of different religion are routinely denied their human rights. Powers which insure that despicable events like those in Tuam are not immediately investigated when they come to light. Powers which see those who covered up the rape of children still not only free but in positions of power over children. It's bloody disgusting and anyone who goes along with baptism, solidifies their power and slows down it's wane, and is complicit in allowing some of the worst criminals in the country to stay free.

robindch

crazy cat lady wrote: »

I'm sure those of you who are worried about the permanent effects of a religious education have no worries about letting your children believe that a fat man with a beard comes into their bedroom one night every year. Somehow most chilren manage to stop believing in Santa tho, and usually without any lasting side effects as far as I'm aware.

Firstly, my kid doesn't believe in Santa since she figured the wheeze out herself at age four, never having been told in the first place, by me or mrs robindch, that he exists.

Secondly, Santa doesn't tell her to fear herself and other people, fear non-existent demons, blame demons instead of accepting responsibility for her own actions, nor to hate people. When Santa is alleged to appear, just once per year, he leaves behind things that actually exist. And I don't tell her that Santa will burn her in hell for eternity if she doesn't believe he exists. Santa and Jesus are really not comparable, though I don't deny that people would do well to remember about Santa when they hear adults tell them about Jesus.

Finally, and this is just a personal thing here, I don't think it's good to lie to children.

gctest50

crazy cat lady wrote: »

I'm sure those of you who are worried about the permanent effects of a religious education have no worries about letting your children believe that a fat man with a beard comes into their bedroom one night every year.

Somehow most chilren manage to stop believing in Santa tho, and usually without any lasting side effects as far as I'm aware.

Seems a bit hypocritical to say its ok to let your child believe in one thing that isn't real but not another.

And in my opinion, its far worse to let a child believe that its ok to let a strange man into their room at night than to have them believe that there's a man in the sky watching over them and keeping them safe (just an example, I know its more than that)

The difference is though Santas elves haven't ever abused kids.


.

robindch

^^^ gctest50, go easy on the excitable prose, please.

Thanking you.

Bellatori

robindch wrote: »

^^^ gctest50, go easy on the excitable prose, please.

Thanking you.

You could reasonably tell iguana the same thing. Intemperate outbursts do not replace argument as Tom Dunne will explain...

[EDIT]

I found "It's bloody disgusting and anyone who goes along with baptism, solidifies their power and slows down it's wane, and is complicit in allowing some of the worst criminals in the country to stay free. " quite offensive...

eyescreamcone

Bellatori wrote: »

I found "It's bloody disgusting and anyone who goes along with baptism, solidifies their power and slows down it's wane, and is complicit in allowing some of the worst criminals in the country to stay free. " quite offensive...

I disagree with your "quite offensive" comment.

I think the truth hurts!

Bellatori

eyescreamcone wrote: »

I disagree with your "quite offensive" comment.

I think the truth hurts!

Firstly you are not me...

and secondly its total lavatory cistern water regulation flotation device.

eyescreamcone

Bellatori wrote: »

Firstly you are not me...

and secondly its total lavatory cistern water regulation flotation device.

Thank gods I'm not you

I'd hate to be confused with someone of your ilk.

Bellatori

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Thank gods I'm not you

I'd hate to be confused with someone of your ilk.

Glad you have got the attack the post not the poster down pat... :rolleyes:

robindch

Bellatori wrote: »

You could reasonably tell iguana the same thing.

While it's not explicitly mentioned in the forum charter, four-letter words are frowned upon and, in the main, to be avoided.

If you believe that a post violates the forum charter, then report the post by clicking on the little warning triangles to the left of the post panel. Any queries about forum moderation should be made in the feedback forum.

lazybones32

If you don't want to baptise them, don't. Talk to your wife and source her reasons and fears regarding baptism. Your parents had their opportunity to baptise their kids but you have responsibility for your kids.
I don't understand how people have problems with not telling family-member to keep their nose out of personal affairs? If people ask me a too personal question, I let them know they ask too much.

iguana

Bellatori wrote: »

I found "It's bloody disgusting and anyone who goes along with baptism, solidifies their power and slows down it's wane, and is complicit in allowing some of the worst criminals in the country to stay free. " quite offensive...

It is offensive. Extremely so. Offensive that people keep on propping up that vile, criminal organisation despite knowing what they have done and are still covering up. But that's the fact of the matter. It's not just an excuse for a lovely day out, it's solidifying the power of child abusers, child murderers, the people who profiteered from such actions and their protectors.

Mark Hamill

crazy cat lady wrote: »

It seems that you are so blindsighted by your own views on the Catholic church that there is nothing that anyone could say that would sway you to believe that a little bit of religion could actually have a positive effect on a child's life.

Someone could present some evidence for that claim, then I would consider it. Of course, it's nonsense, the positive effect that "a little bit of religion" would supposedly have on a child's life has nothing to do with religion. Children can be perfectly happy and moral without religion at all, in fact they are better off without religion. The happiest countries on the planet are the least religious.

crazy cat lady wrote: »

As for my husband not driving 15 miles to the nearest ET school, my point is that if he really was so 'anti-religion', he would commit to that.

Why should he have to? Would be happy if he did commit to that if meant he had t leave his job?

crazy cat lady wrote: »

Like you, he's really just making a stand against Catholicism. And I support that. However, the Catholic education I grew up with was a lot more liberal than here in Ireland, and my experiences were good! Why wouldn't I want the same for my children? Whether the teachings come from Catholicism, the protestant church or Allah, if the message is positive and its going to have an enriching effect of my childrens upbringing, then bring it on.

See eyescreamcone's repsonse.

Mark Hamill

Bellatori wrote: »

Firstly... yes they did. I'm guessing you did not agree with the answer which is a different thing all together.

No they don't. That is just you stirring things.

Wrong. Your previous answer doesn't deal with my question about why a child should baptised. If your answer is because the wife wants it, then put my question to her.

Bellatori wrote: »

Isn't it amazing what GOOD parenting can do

Different question again. I would have thought the answer was self evident given the education system in Ireland...


I look forward to your campaign and election to the Doyle with interest.

Again, none of this answers my question of why shouldn't we remove the indoctrination in the first place. It's a pathetic hand-waving away, not because you actually support the indoctrination, but because you just don't care. Personally, I think that "not caring" is bad parenting.

Mark Hamill

crazy cat lady wrote: »

I'm sure those of you who are worried about the permanent effects of a religious education have no worries about letting your children believe that a fat man with a beard comes into their bedroom one night every year.

Somehow most chilren manage to stop believing in Santa tho, and usually without any lasting side effects as far as I'm aware.

Seems a bit hypocritical to say its ok to let your child believe in one thing that isn't real but not another.

And in my opinion, its far worse to let a child believe that its ok to let a strange man into their room at night than to have them believe that there's a man in the sky watching over them and keeping them safe (just an example, I know its more than that)

Last I checked the fat man won't torture you for eternity for disagreeing with him. Also, he is not part of any obligatory school curriculum, so parents who don't want him presented to their kids don't have to worry about it, unlike the bearded man in the sky.

Lastly, you might wonder why if there is a bearded man in the sky watching over kids, why he seemingly stood by and did nothing while 800 infants and children were killed and stuffed into a septic tank over an extended period of time in Tuam, by his own earthly representatives.

PlainP

It's indoctrination, just because they're your children doesn't mean they're going to grow up and think like you. They will grow up and choose their own path to follow.

The church would die out if it stopped baptizing babies, I doubt many adults knowing what they know today about the church would willing join it. Only babies don't have a choice.

Let them choose themselves when they get old enough to decide its something that they want for themselves.

Don't feel under pressure to baptize.

Bellatori

I find it amazing how some posters are getting so steamed up over this issue. From an atheist perspective it is a meaningless ritual of total mumbo jumbo and not worth giving another thought to. The child is totally unaffected by the issue. Totally. Not slightly, not possibly but totally unaffected. How can it be otherwise? There is no God so the whole thing has about as much significance as (insert suitable irrelevance in here)

Poor parenting is getting in a total tiz and not being calm and measured with your children. Screaming abuse at others is not good parenting, it simply makes one look a total idiot when they grow up and ask you what on earth all the fuss was about.

If your problem is with the political power of the church or with pedophile priests and abuse by nuns then stop whining about the meaninglessness of a christening that gets the family together for a bit of a shindig and get out there and do something about it.

Having the family for a get together of this sort is NOT some kind of support for criminals. That is just so puerile it beggars belief. No one is being forced to have a christening for goodness sake. It is a matter of choice.

PlainP

Bellatori wrote: »

I find it amazing how some posters are getting so steamed up over this issue. From an atheist perspective it is a meaningless ritual of total mumbo jumbo and not worth giving another thought to. The child is totally unaffected by the issue. Totally. Not slightly, not possibly but totally unaffected. How can it be otherwise? There is no God so the whole thing has about as much significance as (insert suitable irrelevance in here)

Poor parenting is getting in a total tiz and not being calm and measured with your children. Screaming abuse at others is not good parenting, it simply makes one look a total idiot when they grow up and ask you what on earth all the fuss was about.

If your problem is with the political power of the church or with pedophile priests and abuse by nuns then stop whining about the meaninglessness of a christening that gets the family together for a bit of a shindig and get out there and do something about it.

Having the family for a get together of this sort is NOT some kind of support for criminals. That is just so puerile it beggars belief. No one is being forced to have a christening for goodness sake. It is a matter of choice.

If the child is totally unaffected why do it in the first place? What do you get out of it?

Bellatori

PlainP wrote: »

If the child is totally unaffected why do it in the first place?

Start at the beginning of the thread... its all there.

PlainP wrote: »

What do you get out of it?

I got a chance to have a grand party with all the relatives who might not otherwise get all together etc...


..and my children are both well adjusted atheists as it happens so on a small statistical sample, no harm done then.

iguana

Bellatori wrote: »

I got a chance to have a grand party with all the relatives who might not otherwise get all together etc...

So you really think your relatives wouldn't have come if you had a party to introduce them to your new baby? Anyone who didn't think that meeting my amazing new baby wasn't worth it unless that meeting was preceded by a nonsense ritual and a bit of mass isn't someone I'd be too worried about not partying with.

Chattastrophe!

Bellatori wrote: »

I got a chance to have a grand party with all the relatives who might not otherwise get all together etc...


..and my children are both well adjusted atheists as it happens so on a small statistical sample, no harm done then.

How did you feel as you stood up in front of the people most important to you, and admitted that your baby was sinful and needed to be forgiven for their original sin?

I hope it was worth the "grand party". I prefer my integrity, personally.

Hotblack Desiato

800 little bodies thrown into a septic tank. Who would induct their child into an organisation that could do this?

Bellatori

If you want to give credibility to something then why not jump up and down, froth at the mouth, produce hysterical rants, imply all members are child murderers, paedophiles, criminals....

If you want to know why nothing changes then that would be a good example. People see the hysteria, ignore the message and turn away. Turning a discussion on whether to baptise a child into a screaming rant has simply made sure that you will be completely ignored. no one is going to listen to a message lost inside invective.

Why is it I hear these posts in the voice of Ian Paisley?

lazygal

Who's been engaged in a screaming rant?

Cabaal

Bellatori wrote: »

If you want to give credibility to something then why not jump up and down, froth at the mouth, produce hysterical rants, imply all members are child murderers, paedophiles, criminals....

Nobody's jumping up and down and screaming,

However the issue is how people want their kid to join a organization who's leaders over the decades have knowingly covered up sexual abuse of children, have then swore these children to silence and who to this day refuse to release records to the United Nations for investigations and compensate abuse victims is beyond me.

Fine believe in a christian god, but don't be a member of the catholic church and then try claim that baptising kids into the catholic faith is good for them. Its utterly sickening.

Nobody is saying that all members of the catholic church are sex abusers,

However, when several pope's over the decades have known or have actually been part of the rules created to manage cover up's then you are only supporting their handling of these abuses by joining the organization.

The very fact that men still hold powers within the catholic church in Ireland that were involved in silencing victims and nothing is being done shows little has changed,

One that comes to mind off hand is Cardinal Seán Brady...this is a man who was involved in silencing a child to silence, he never reported the abuse he knew about to the Gardai.

In addition lets not forget that Cardinal Seán Brady also had the names and addresses of children being abused by the paedophile priest Brendan Smyth, he did nothing to ensure their safety.

Dispite numerous calls for him to resign he remains in his position, the catholic church have also refused to strip him of his power and title.

Parish priests remain consistently silent when it comes to asking him to resign....these men are all part of the problem.
If or when a priest does dare speak out and says something different to what the Vatican wants then such priests are dealt with, Father Tony Flannery is a perfect example of this after he was removed from his position and it was demanded he signed an agreement not to step out of line again.

So making your kids join the catholic church with the response of "ah sure they are not all sex abusers" while may be factually true is a very poor life choice and only shows blind support to a sickening organisation thats rotten to the core.

The membership only reinforces the catholic church's power in Ireland and only reinforces their current decisions such as refusing to co-operate with the UN, compensate victims and refusing to strip people of titles who were involved in the abuses.

But then who am I to criticize an organization that is currently fast tracking a man to saint hood even though he know about sex abuse for almost 3 decades but refused to make it public and help the victims,
:rolleyes: