Dawkins Choice: Abuse and Religion

Dawkins quotes (approvingly) in his book a speech by Nicholas Humphrey:


"We should no more allow parents to teach their children to believe, for example, in the literal truth of the Bible or that planets rule their lives, than we should allow parents to knock their children's teeth out."

So what do people who share Dawkins "consciousness raising" believe?

1. Should we treat child abuse as we treat religion and allow people the right to physically abuse their own children? Or,

2. should we treat religion the way we treat child abuse, and take children away from parents who attempt to raise their children in a religious setting?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't quite understand how you can relate the two. Should we treat a scientific environment like abuse? :shrug:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

HAHAHAHA!

Another stupid Dawkins thread. Wow! He must really have an effect on you, Sam.

Yet, you won't go to his website and engage him or anyone else there.

Again, HAHAHAHAHA!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Its an question that I address to those who subscribe to Dawkins philosophy. I'm interested to know what their notions are on the matter.

Please vote.
I recall that you vehemently support the "religion is child abuse" argument.

What is your choice from the poll options?

 

I voted neither.

For the most part Dawkins is the kind of atheist that makes the rest of us look bad.

 

Stack mob mentality on top of humanistic ideals and ..Presto!
You've got homicidal/suicidal lemmings.

US public education is a joke considering we're throwing record amounts of money at it every year and can't turn out kids that can read.

How's that for evidence? proof is in the pudding.

 

I think Dawkins knows there is no chance of changing how people raise their children, and the methods that would be required to do it would not be good for anyone. Ideally, this is a value that parents should adopt voluntarily. He's not a politician, he's a scientist. As usual, religious people cannot interpret statements in anything but a literal manner. What one may theorize should happen ideally, becomes the rule one must impose. That is exactly how Jesus' statements became misinterpreted.

 

Let me reiterate:

"We should no more allow parents to teach their children to believe, for example, in the literal truth of the Bible or that planets rule their lives, than we should allow parents to knock their children's teeth out."

So he does not really mean that religious people should not be allowed to bring up children in their religion?

That if given the chance he would not advocate it?

 

:wtf:.

Are you not aware that homeschooling has been in the crosshairs of the educated left for..well, ever?

California just deemed it illegal. These lonely sadists will not stop until everyone on earth is as miserable and guilt ridden as they are.

 

My brother was homeschooled by an "educated left" mother. She also happens to have a teaching degree. The concern was that kids get a real education. It's not illegal in California.

 

I advocate it too, but advocating it isn't the same as imposing it. It's hyperbole.

 

Advocacy precedes change in any direction.

So what is your position? Do you believe that if it were possible, children should be removed from the custody of parents who want to bring them up in their religion?

 

Due to appeals court,,, again.

 

Not at all. Having a flawed parent is better than no parent, but I know what Dawkins is saying. Mental abuse takes all different forms, making kids grow up in bleak uninspiring suburban conditions, being raised by strangers while both parents have to work, going to an overcrowded school where they teach to the test, having to live on crappy processed fatty sugary food... There are many, many aspects of our society that "shouldn't be allowed", but it's impossible to enforce anything like that.

 

You don't understand the law. It will always be possible to be homeschooled, as long as the schooling meets certain minimum standards. The thing that is no longer allowed is being homeschooled by someone without the credentials to teach.

 

Its only impossible until there are enough athiests in power.

Haven't you heard of re-education camps?

 

I wouldn't dream of taking away the opium of the masses, they could get violent in the name of God.


hy·per·bo·le [hahy-pur-buh-lee]–noun Rhetoric.
1. obvious and intentional exaggeration.
2. an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.”

 

Dawkins really puts you in estrus, eh, Sam.

 

The re-education camps are not a hyperbole. In fact, they were instituted for re-educating believers away from religion, among other such noble motives.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You mean like how religions are allowed, even encouraged to "reform" criminals in prisons all over the USA? Naw, we don't want to adopt the techniques of the enemy.