Can we know for certain anything about God and what he plans for us?

[RJM]

The point is, who says what's warped and radical? Hare Krishna? Scientology? Hasidic Jew? Jehovah's Witness? Catholic?

 

[Devils' Advocate]

I think Wil stated that those kids raised to believe in a warped or radical religion are the ones that could be described as child abuse. I would agree with that statement. And it wouldn't be religion alone. Kids raised in an extremely racist household could be described as abuse. Or a political one. It's not the subject, it's the extremism.

 

[RJM]

I think Wil stated that those kids raised to believe in a warped or radical religion are the ones that could be described as child abuse. I would agree with that statement. And it wouldn't be religion alone. Kids raised in an extremely racist household could be described as abuse. Or a political one. It's not the subject, it's the extremism.

But who decides? The Protestant or Catholic? The Suni or the Shia? Meantime what about gay married couples adopting children? Who decides?

You can raise children in a home where daddy and daddy are both guys, but not take them along to church? Or let them say the Lord's Prayer at school?

Sorry. I feel strongly ...

 

[Namaste Jesus]

warped or radical religion

Definition please.

 

[RJM]

You can raise children in a home where daddy and daddy are both guys, but not take them along to church? Or let them say the Lord's Prayer at school?

I quite understand this is not wil's meaning. But I'm trying to show where the 'religion = child abuse' argument ends up.

 

[BigJoeNobody]

I quite understand this is not wil's meaning. But I'm trying to show where the 'religion = child abuse' argument ends up.

it happens nearly every time I talk to my atheist friends. The debate seem so clear to both sides as well. Atheists tend to despise the "do good or your afterlife will be marred with torture" idea. I'm going to assume it stems from a lack of belief that they "can" go the other way. The shear fact that they consider it "child abuse" is also one of the most telling reasons from a religious aspect that the idea needs to be there. A man can prepare for a bit of torture, till death even. But an eternity of suffering is something no one is capable of handling. The fear of that drives many to do as they believe they should do, while also scaring many into not believing in fear they might end up in the bad area.

I'm a bit tired at the moment. So if this is incoherent, I will attempt to refresh my statement tomorrow.

 

[Thomas]

Yup...and millions of.kids are brought up with warped senses of reality that many maintain and then pass on the same to their children...

Yes, happens in all times and all places. It's a cultural thing.

Most if not all of the problems with 'religion' you express are US-based. That tells me it's a cultural bias, not a religious one.

Me thinks that applies across the board, with all religions and many religious education teachers and preachers...

I'd say to single out religion is to miss the point.

It is to the point with those that believe a particularly warped or radical religion...could easily be described as child abuse.

My dad believed in Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, in short everything ... probably he'd fall into your 'child abuse' sector. He also gave me a rock-solid moral foundation and compass. A sense of responsibility and self-worth. I've seen my own and my kids contemporaries f*cked up by the liberal values of their parents ... It's all a matter of perspective.

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

I'm going to assume it stems from a lack of belief that they "can" go the other way.

I'm going to suggests that perhaps atheism is very far from what you can relate too because that doesn't sound like any atheist I ever heard.

EDIT: I just noticed that I straight copied the first part of your sentence, I probably just got stuck in my head and I wasn't trying to be funny or anything. I'm. Never. Funny.

 

[Devils' Advocate]

But who decides?

Well the 'simple' answer is that everybody decides based on their own beliefs, prejudices, preferences, etc. That is not a very useful answer though. It is the most honest answer though, and the one we live with every day in our societies. Which is why there is so much strife between ideologies. Still, the extremes of an atheist saying teaching any religion and the religious extremist teaching Hellfire and damnation are both too extreme. Which leads to:

The 'equivocal' answer is that the norms of a society as a whole should point to the dividing line between appropriate and unacceptable. In Western culture what is unacceptable, would be considered abuse, is a structure that infringes of the rights of individuals who have moderate differences of opinion versus those who would teach extremism. Again I accept that 'moderation' is in the eye of the beholder, which is why I reject the individual and defer to the society's moral base.

Child abuse is teaching your children that the loving God of the Abrahamics, which is the God of most of these countries of the Western world, would teach hatred, intolerance, racism. etc. Child abuse is home schooling children and teaching them that Creationism is real and science is false. Creationism is not only completely false, it is supported by lies and half truths at best. Teaching a child this can in no way prepare them for going on to live in the 'real' world they must eventually blend in to.

Now the equivocal answer has its problems. In extremist countries where the norm is extremism. Teaching extremism would not considered to be child abuse in such places because the social norm is extremism. This part I do not have an answer for yet.

Summation though. Belief structures that are meant to raise healthy, well adjusted children are what is the good. Protestant or Catholic is not inappropriate; rather how those religions are taught. Theism and atheism is not inappropriate, rather how those philosophies are taught. Believing the Bible is literal and being raised that way is not inappropriate, rather how they are taught.

And to again highlight my definitions, it is those teachings, of any of the above, that would raise a child to be a tolerant and productive of the society when they become an adult. That is the societal desired outcome I would think no one would argue with.

I close by saying that this post is very much a work in process. Many of you will find holes in my thinking, some of which I will agree with, some of which I will not. Nothing posted here is set in stone in my head (it's hard enough as it is!) but merely the first effort to define the answer to the question when is teaching considered child abuse.

 

[RJM]

Well the 'simple' answer is that everybody decides based on their own beliefs, prejudices, preferences, etc. That is not a very useful answer though. It is the most honest answer though, and the one we live with every day in our societies. Which is why there is so much strife between ideologies. Still, the extremes of an atheist saying teaching any religion and the religious extremist teaching Hellfire and damnation are both too extreme. Which leads to:

The 'equivocal' answer is that the norms of a society as a whole should point to the dividing line between appropriate and unacceptable. In Western culture what is unacceptable, would be considered abuse, is a structure that infringes of the rights of individuals who have moderate differences of opinion versus those who would teach extremism. Again I accept that 'moderation' is in the eye of the beholder, which is why I reject the individual and defer to the society's moral base.

Child abuse is teaching your children that the loving God of the Abrahamics, which is the God of most of these countries of the Western world, would teach hatred, intolerance, racism. etc. Child abuse is home schooling children and teaching them that Creationism is real and science is false. Creationism is not only completely false, it is supported by lies and half truths at best. Teaching a child this can in no way prepare them for going on to live in the 'real' world they must eventually blend in to.

Now the equivocal answer has its problems. In extremist countries where the norm is extremism. Teaching extremism would not considered to be child abuse in such places because the social norm is extremism. This part I do not have an answer for yet.

Summation though. Belief structures that are meant to raise healthy, well adjusted children are what is the good. Protestant or Catholic is not inappropriate; rather how those religions are taught. Theism and atheism is not inappropriate, rather how those philosophies are taught. Believing the Bible is literal and being raised that way is not inappropriate, rather how they are taught.

And to again highlight my definitions, it is those teachings, of any of the above, that would raise a child to be a tolerant and productive of the society when they become an adult. That is the societal desired outcome I would think no one would argue with.

I close by saying that this post is very much a work in process. Many of you will find holes in my thinking, some of which I will agree with, some of which I will not. Nothing posted here is set in stone in my head (it's hard enough as it is!) but merely the first effort to define the answer to the question when is teaching considered child abuse.

I was taught hellfire, Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, the lot: by old fashioned Irish Jesuits. And you know what? I sat there thinking: 'I'm not too sure of all this sh*t.'

In my experience kids often decide to believe and do exactly the opposite of what they're told to believe and do -- as they discover 'themselves'.

 

[Namaste Jesus]

Creationism is real and science is false. Creationism is not only completely false, it is supported by lies and half truths at best.

I'm of the belief that known science does not necessarily negate the idea of intelligent design and that the idea of intelligent design does not necessarily negate known science, so I don't completely agree with you here, but I do agree that on some level the way certain things are taught have the potential of being harmful. That goes for science as well as religion.

In my experience kids often decide to believe and do exactly the opposite of what they're told to believe and do -- as they discover 'themselves'.

Yup. My Grandnephew is almost 13. He therefore knows more than just about everyone!

 

[RJM]

Every child in North Korea is forced to mouth allegiance to the beliefs of him with the haircut.

So were all the Russian children under Stalin, forced outwardly to express beliefs. Adults too, of course.

(Hitler is a bit of a different story, for reasons not directly useful here).

But do North Korean children BELIEVE it? Or just mouth the catachism, to avoid punishment? That's where the abuse comes in: the physical beating, by an adult too big for you to fight, etc?

And usually, the more you try to beat your belief into someone, the more they will hate you and all that you believe?

The abuse is in the physical bullying? Includes sexual domination.

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

The abuse is in the physical bullying? Includes sexual domination.

You don't think there could be psychological torment on the level of abuse?

 

[Lux]

My dad believed in Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, in short everything ... probably he'd fall into your 'child abuse' sector. He also gave me a rock-solid moral foundation and compass. A sense of responsibility and self-worth.

This reminds me of my new Christian friends … I recently became very good friends with a super nice couple whose five children are all wonderful (all of them are involved in missions. Some went to Europe to work in an organization that rescues young girls from sex-trafficking, some others went to Africa to help build houses, one is becoming a missionary pilot.) They are the kindest sweetest commendable people you’d meet! … BUT … the parents believe the inerrancy of the Bible. Yes, they believe the earth is 6000 years old and Adam&Eve are created in the current human form by God breathing a life into doll-shaped mud, Noah’s Ark and everything …

One time over dinner, we kinda strolled into a theology discussion while kids were watching a movie … I was tempted to challenge their beliefs and said that I believe in the evolution theory … They fiercely defended Creationism … I decided not to go any further because I wanted to keep them as my friends. They are great people. They volunteer at one of those charities that provide food for the poor. I’m thinking of joining them with that more often.

But I also want to be more honest and open with them about my beliefs eventually … I just don’t know how to broach the conversation … I don’t know how to react when they quote what God did in the Old Testament, such as turning the river bloody, killing all the Egyptian infants, etc … One of those days, I’m thinking of asking their kids (the youngest is 17), if that’s what they also believe …

 

[RJM]

You don't think there could be psychological torment on the level of abuse?

Now that you pursue it, Tea, I think my opinion is probably: No, unless it's backed by physical coercion.

Children are smart. They're not the innocent, malleable little creatures they're perhaps made out to be, by those who've forgotten that they were children once, themselves.

Children have open little minds. But they're not easily fooled. At least not for long, imo.

They quickly spot the naked emperor. They're not satisfied with easy answers. They're actually contemptuous of adult fixidity. (Is that a real word?) They're always testing, learning, thinking, questioning. But they're small and physically weak and easily bullied and coerced. Imo?

The abuse is in the physical bullying, imo?

 

[RJM]

I do mean my reply to perhaps apply only to this discussion about religious education, so far ...?

 

[Lux]

The abuse is in the physical bullying, imo?

and/or not allowing children to form their own opinions?

 

[RJM]

and/or not allowing children to form their own opinions?

They will form their own opinions.
You can only disallow them to express their own opinions?

 

[RJM]

Certain opinions, like: I can hit my sister because she's stupid -- obvious require intervention?

 

[Namaste Jesus]

the parents believe the inerrancy of the Bible... Adam&Eve are created in the current human form by God breathing a life into doll-shaped mud....

If untampered with, what happens to our bodies when we die? Through a gradual putrefaction process our once living tissue decays and breaks down to it's base elements. Essentially, dirt. Is it really that far a stretch to believe God could reverse the process?