Atheism:believe in no God or disbelieve in God

How to think intelligently. It's not ideology dependent.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Should we make it illegal for stupid people to reproduce?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You don't think the legal system is overloaded already?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Going right off topic now, but...
No, I don't think so.

 

Actually, I think the term "stupid people' is essentially meaningless.
Thoughts can be stupid.
Actions can be stupid.
But people? I don't think the adjective is applicable.

 

Then clearly we are at an impasse about what is to be done with all the parents not teaching their children to think intelligently.

 

Tell them 'god' made them do it?

 

Education, Sam.

 

That again begs the question: what education?

Should we close down the faith schools? Ban religious teaching at home or in the community?

 

Education on critical thinking skills. How to think, not what to think.
Both for children and for adults.

I don't know how it could or should be implemented. I don't have all the answers. I certainly don't advocate closing down schools, or imposing bans on religious institutions.

Thoughts...
I think that school curriculums should be free of religious doctrine, and include a strong focus on critical thinking skills.
I think that the idea of parental ownership of children and their beliefs is deeply ingrained in society, that it is not a good thing, but that any radical "cure" would be far worse than the problem. An effective remedy would take generations.

 

There's nothing wrong with teaching the various religions if people wish to learn about myths and superstitions. Why would they bother?

 

Why is it that athiests always somehow end up delegitimising the stabilising influences of family and community?

What makes them think a society can function in the long term if the family unit is considered incidental?

 

you're really jumping around tonight, Sam.

Why do you imply that I have done so?

What makes you think it can't?

I don't necessarily think that it can. Or if it could, that it would be desirable. I do think that if a society not strongly focused on the *traditional* family unit were possible, then long-term social preparation would be necessary.

Like I said, any radical change at this level would be very bad.

 

Why do theists think they are the only ones who can possibly have social values?

 

Not too articulate, I'm afraid.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You clearly think of current system of parental rights as ownership.
It sounds extremely odd to me.

Because of the effect that breakdown of the family structure is having on kids today. They'll soon be having shorter lifespans because less parental intervention has essentially led to less healthy kids, in both physical and psychological sense.

Farm them out, you mean? A kibbutz?

Clearly.

 

The idea of child ownership is a small and unnecessary part of the family construct. It's an ancient and odious notion.
It's changing, slowly.
It's not all that long ago in western society that a parent could kill a recalcitrant child without fear of the law.

That's because there's no effective replacement in place. It doesn't mean it can't be done in principle.

That might be a viable alternative social model.

 

Because athiests have yet to prove that their actions can benefit society in the long term.

As soon as they get some power, their entire focus appears to be wiping out religion without contributing anything to society, though some of them are catching on.

http://nymag.com/news/features/46214/index2.html

 

Right back at you!

Even if I did accept your contentious premise, how does it relate to the question?

 

Yes, to a point where people are becoming psychologically adrift.

So just keep breaking up the family unit and see where it goes?

There is some data on this from studies in Germany during WWII.

You;re here, aren't you?

See repost above

 

Whereas some theism taking credit for the family, human love, decency and tolerance and all the good in the world is proof of great benefit from their Deity du jour ?

I would think the example of North Korea would be a wakeup call - the adoption of a Deity by the local tyranny seems to have been almost deliberate. Clearly there's a benefit in Deity for some folks.