Prev: Hi and welcome to my new site
Next: Yet even more...
From: Rowland McDonnell on 30 Jul 2008 23:35
Tim <timjim(a)letterboxes.org> wrote:

[snip]

> Not sure about child abuse but certainly agree children should not be
> indoctrinated with such stuff till ,as you say,they are old enough to
> decide for themselves.

I am sure it's child abuse to bring up a child to accept lunacy (aka
`religious teachings') as `higher truth'.

> I think some would be capable of doing that several years before 18 then
> again quite a few wouldn't.

I think it should be a criminal offence to indoctrinate anyone with
religion until they've reached 18, or maybe 21. One should be given the
opportunity to choose as an adult, rather than having brainwashing
forced on you.

Thing is, all social conditioning is brainwashing, and we want some
social conditioning to teach kids that murder is wrong (etc). Religions
often do a useful job in that line.

We've all been brainwashed one way or another - what brainwashing do you
want your kids to have? It's just that too many religions end up
teaching hatred and exclusion and lunacy. Just look at Northern
Ireland. It's been getting worse since the nominal start to the end of
The Troubles.

Rowland.


--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rosemary on 30 Jul 2008 23:57
"CJ Dunnaway" wrote:

<snip>

> Unless you object, I intend to plagiarize your post.

Hi, CJ - only if you correct my typos for me :-)

How are you doing?

Rosemary
From: CJ Dunnaway on 31 Jul 2008 00:10
"Rosemary" <mentally_subnormal(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9AEC326581495rosemaryharkerhotmai(a)69.16.176.253...
> "CJ Dunnaway" wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Unless you object, I intend to plagiarize your post.
>
> Hi, CJ - only if you correct my typos for me :-)
>
> How are you doing?
>
> Rosemary


Hi. I'm doing OK mostly. Thanks for asking.

I agree with Ariel that your message was brilliant and powerfully
written. It will take some time before I get around to using your
thoughts, but I'll eventually get it done.

Thanks again,
CJ

From: Rowland McDonnell on 31 Jul 2008 02:57
fergus <ferguscapewrath(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 23:42:06 +0100, Tim <timjim(a)letterboxes.org>
> wrote:
>
> >Not sure about child abuse but certainly agree children should not be
> >indoctrinated with such stuff till ,as you say,they are old enough to
> >decide for themselves.
>
> It's inevitable. You can't keep kids as a blank sheet, or give them
> equal exposure to every shade of opinion which exists. Even if that
> were a good goal to aim for it is not attainable. All sorts of "such
> stuff" is in the environment.

True, but there are forms of opinion that society takes it upon itself
to try to keep away from children - with useful success in many cases.

For example, while anti-semitic opinions were common things to
indoctrinate your children with in the 1930s, our society frowns upon
that sort of thing and has done a very good job in limiting the amount
of anti-semitic brainwashing of children in the UK to a low fraction
(sadly increased in recent years for various reasons).

Why not add organised religion to the list of `opinions which society
says should not be used to brainwash children'?

(okay, reasons for not doing so include the head of state of the UK
being the head of its established church, and that's just for starters.
Still, organised religion is not something I'm at all in favour of)

The case for such opinions being the source of a great deal of social
evil can be made. The centuries long feud between protestant and Roman
Christianity continues - with on-going violence. Islam decided to get
all war-like again in the 19th century - and got even more violent after
the establishment of the state of Israel caused such harm (still
on-going) to the people who were dispossessed at gunpoint without
consultation or compensation in order that the Jews might have the
homeland that they certainly needed - just not set up like *that*[1].

Hindu extremists in India are just as bad as the worst religious
murderers anywhere else in the world.

Even Tibetan Buddhists are talking about taking up guns and shooting
people (but that is at least in the cause of liberation from a foreign
oppressor, and so can be blamed on that other great social evil:
nationalism; Chinese nationalism in this case, and its tendency to
cultural genocide)

[snip]

Rowland.

[1] On the other hand, I've never heard an Israeli on the radio admit
that the Palestinians have a right to a home to live in. On the other
other hand, I've never heard a Palestinian on the radio admit that Jews
have human rights. I've often heard them being asked about this point,
and they refuse to admit that Jews have human rights.

Okay, the news and current affairs interviews I've heard do tend to
select out the more extreme opinions - still... The problem in Israel
is caused mostly by that damnable work of evil, the bible. `God gave us
this land' <insert bible quotation> is the excuse offered by the Israeli
settlers for why they're dispossessing the Palestinians, stealing their
water, keeping them locked up, denying them the ability to earn a
living, get an education, and so on.

I'm sorry, but I for one place no credence in a work of pro-Jewish
propaganda written several thousand years ago which explains that an
invisible immortal creature that allegedly created the universe (so much
for modern physics, then) told them that they should kill all the
inhabitants of that land just because he wanted them to obey `him'. I
don't believe a word of that - and even if it's true, the fact that you
got a land by genocide caused by - what? - some nutter listening to
voices in his head some thousands of years ago doesn't wash at all well
these days.

--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Evil_Nigel on 31 Jul 2008 07:16
x-no-archive: yes

On Jul 30, 10:16 pm, fergus <ferguscapewr...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 05:31:24 -0700 (PDT), Evil_Ni...(a)hotmail.co.uk
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >That's the idea. Once they get to 16 or so they can choose to walk in
> >front of fast-moving lumps of metal if they so wish.
>
> And how would you feel if one of your kids did that?
>
> --
>
> Fergus

Emotionally I can't even pretend to imagine. I think you'd have to
lose a child to know what it feels like and I wouldn't wish that on
anyone.

Intellectually I'd feel a failure. I have no pretensions to being a
great teacher but I should at least be able to help a kid work out for
themselves the consequences of walking in front of a fast-moving lump
of metal.

Evil Nigel
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Hi and welcome to my new site
Next: Yet even more...