Jump to content

no god is good...


Guest the artist
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest the artist

someday there will be a clear understanding of the uselessness of religion and the damage it has done, and continues to do to our country, and world. it is time to wake up america and understand that no god or jesus or holy spirit or any other supernatural being is going to deliver salvation and peace to you, before or after death. no god=good thinking.

take the preaching out of our schools and our country will surpass all others, once again.

www.nogoodgod.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

someday there will be a clear understanding of the uselessness of religion and the damage it has done, and continues to do to our country, and world.  it is time to wake up america and understand that no god or jesus or holy spirit or any other supernatural being is going to deliver salvation and peace to you, before or after death.  no god=good thinking.

take the preaching out of our schools and our country will surpass all others, once again.

www.nogoodgod.com

I look forward to the day when everyone realizes they don't need to create a God to believe in to make life worth living.

...I also look forward to the day when the cycle of brainwashing stops (compare the # of new Christians (just an example) who "join" the religion because their parents raised them into it vs. the # of born-agains--there is quite a difference). I think it's abusive to, whether or not one realizes it, attack an impressionable child's sense of reality and critical thinking by injecting all of these illogical and unfounded ideas about God and such into their heads before they've really gotten a chance to experience reality. I think it harms them--I don't think "freedom of religion" should excuse that, and that it should be as illegal as spanking one's child. That would be the biggest step, I think, toward removing this useless mysticism and superstition from the lives of modern human beings of the 21st century. I just can't see why anyone would cling to millenia-old superstitions like that...

Sorry, just a little rant. *chuckles*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strife767, on Dec 23 2006, 11:36 PM wrote

I look forward to the day when everyone realizes they don't need to create a God to believe in to make life worth living.

...I also look forward to the day when the cycle of brainwashing stops (compare the # of new Christians (just an example) who "join" the religion because their parents raised them into it vs. the # of born-agains--there is quite a difference). I think it's abusive to, whether or not one realizes it, attack an impressionable child's sense of reality and critical thinking by injecting all of these illogical and unfounded ideas about God and such into their heads before they've really gotten a chance to experience reality. I think it harms them--I don't think "freedom of religion" should excuse that, and that it should be as illegal as spanking one's child. That would be the biggest step, I think, toward removing this useless mysticism and superstition from the lives of modern human beings of the 21st century. I just can't see why anyone would cling to millenia-old superstitions like that...

Sorry, just a little rant. *chuckles*[/b]

Sounds like you're prepared to repeal part of the First Amendment (or at least get it reinterpreted to the point that it utterly fails to resemble what the authors seem to have intended it to mean.

Way to stand up for the Constitution, there! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strife767, on Dec 23 2006, 11:36 PM wrote

I look forward to the day when everyone realizes they don't need to create a God to believe in to make life worth living.

...I also look forward to the day when the cycle of brainwashing stops (compare the # of new Christians (just an example) who "join" the religion because their parents raised them into it vs. the # of born-agains--there is quite a difference). I think it's abusive to, whether or not one realizes it, attack an impressionable child's sense of reality and critical thinking by injecting all of these illogical and unfounded ideas about God and such into their heads before they've really gotten a chance to experience reality. I think it harms them--I don't think "freedom of religion" should excuse that, and that it should be as illegal as spanking one's child. That would be the biggest step, I think, toward removing this useless mysticism and superstition from the lives of modern human beings of the 21st century. I just can't see why anyone would cling to millenia-old superstitions like that...

Sorry, just a little rant. *chuckles*

Sounds

I fixed your tagging--you know, a closing bold tag needs an opening one.

like you're prepared to repeal part of the First Amendment (or at least get it reinterpreted to the point that it utterly fails to resemble what the authors seem to have intended it to mean.

That would be because you've already proven just how little working knowledge you have of the First Amendment. None of it would need to be repealed or reinterpreted. The First Amendment gives people the freedom to practice religion, not to tell people what to believe. That includes children.

People under the age of majority should not have to deal with indoctrination from their parents or any other figures of authority--if they want to believe in some religion or another, they can make that decision on their own once they are old enough to:

1. Realize that there are more religions out there than one's parents' (most parents will quite happily make their children feel like it's either their religion or no religion--in fact, I've seen several Christian fundamentalists equate all other religions with atheism!).

2. Make an informed, responsible decision about what they want to believe.

The fact that people like you like to pretend that atheism/agnosticism/secular humanism is a religion (likely because being religious, it's hard to imagine people who aren't religious at all, so the mind tends to want to assign them a religion, even if it isn't there--the same kind of thinking that assigns genders to inanimate objects) is irrelevant. Children should not be forced to participate in their parents' religious rituals, and they _especially_ should not be led to believe that _any_ religion has any kind of factual foundation--I hate it when people pretend their beliefs are not beliefs, but irrefutable fact. :)

You see, I wouldn't have a problem with parents telling their kids (still against forcing them to participate or be present at rituals etc., though) about their religions, if only they would keep things in the proper context. But it is rarely the case that a parent tells a child "this is what I believe" when they explain their religion. A child is much more likely to hear "this is what is." That is damaging to the impressionable child's developing sense of reality, especially when they eventually are taught something in school that directly contradicts some teaching or another of the religious "facts" they've been taught at home. Why put a child through that?

This is my opinion, but I dare say that religious indoctrination does to a child's developing sense of reality what adult/child sex does to a child's developing sexuality. Put your torches down, I am not drawing a parallel with child molestation--it's a metaphor. Religious indoctrination does the same kind of damage to a different part of the child.

In conclusion, I realize that parents would like to see their kids 'follow in their footsteps' in matters of faith. Parents also often want their kids to grow up into either their careers, or 'high-end' careers they unsuccessfully aspired to. But just because you want it, doesn't mean you have the right to impose it on your child. He/she is an individual and a human being, not a crafts project for you to mold however you like.

Way to stand up for the Constitution, there!  B)

(your sarcasm is terrible) Listen, I realize just how precious child indoctrination is to fundies--without it, your numbers would shrivel up to negligible amounts within a generation or two. Don't think I don't know how you guys work--I was born and raised on the inside of that 'little' scheme (I wish it was merely "little").

As much as I'm used to counter-arguments to this like "well, it's MY kid!" my answer is always the same: ethically, and morally, if not legally (yet), there are just some things that are just NOT in the best interest of the child. Forcing your religious beliefs onto them is one of them, imho. Simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strife767, on Dec 25 2006, 03:11 PM, wrote:

I fixed your tagging--you know, a closing bold tag needs an opening one.

Your merit badge is in the mail.

I'd have fixed it myself, given editing privileges.

That would be because you've already proven just how little working knowledge you have of the First Amendment.

Really.

None of it would need to be repealed or reinterpreted. The First Amendment gives people the freedom to practice religion, not to tell people what to believe. That includes children.

Did you skip your government classes, or what?

The Constitution doesn't give out freedoms. The Constitution give the government the responsibility for preserving inherent freedoms while restricting the government from infringing on those freedoms.

When you have a kid, you can get him to believe about Santa Claus, and the government cannot throw you in jail for it--not until your don't getting the First Amendment reinterpreted your way.

After that, maybe they can lock you up for spreading tales about a jolly old elf (to children!).

People under the age of majority should not have to deal with indoctrination from their parents or any other figures of authority--if they want to believe in some religion or another, they can make that decision on their own once they are old enough to:

1. Realize that there are more religions out there than one's parents' (most parents will quite happily make their children feel like it's either their religion or no religion--in fact, I've seen several Christian fundamentalists equate all other religions with atheism!).

2. Make an informed, responsible decision about what they want to believe.

The fact that people like you like to pretend that atheism/agnosticism/secular humanism is a religion (likely because being religious, it's hard to imagine people who aren't religious at all, so the mind tends to want to assign them a religion, even if it isn't there--the same kind of thinking that assigns genders to inanimate objects) is irrelevant.

Tell me how you define religion, and I'll have you agreeing with me after about three more exchanges (assuming that you can shake your earlier habit of dodging questions).

Children should not be forced to participate in their parents' religious rituals, and they _especially_ should not be led to believe that _any_ religion has any kind of factual foundation--I hate it when people pretend their beliefs are not beliefs, but irrefutable fact. :lol:

Is it an irrefutable fact that the beliefs of others are not irrefutable fact?

Or is that just a belief of yours that you want the government to enforce?

You see, I wouldn't have a problem with parents telling their kids (still against forcing them to participate or be present at rituals etc., though) about their religions, if only they would keep things in the proper context. But it is rarely the case that a parent tells a child "this is what I believe" when they explain their religion. A child is much more likely to hear "this is what is." That is damaging to the impressionable child's developing sense of reality, especially when they eventually are taught something in school that directly contradicts some teaching or another of the religious "facts" they've been taught at home. Why put a child through that?

Because it is unavoidable in practical terms. That's why.

Solipsism, for example, is unfalsifiable. You think you can bring up a child without discouraging his budding belief in solipsism?

This is my opinion,

Yeah, that's what I thought it was. :P

but I dare say that religious indoctrination does to a child's developing sense of reality what adult/child sex does to a child's developing sexuality. Put your torches down, I am not drawing a parallel with child molestation--it's a metaphor. Religious indoctrination does the same kind of damage to a different part of the child.

And you have placed your mountain of evidence where?

Oh, that's right--it's your opinion. Your opinion that you want the government to enforce by keeping opinions contrary from yours away from the precious children.

No hypocrisy there, no.

In conclusion, I realize that parents would like to see their kids 'follow in their footsteps' in matters of faith. Parents also often want their kids to grow up into either their careers, or 'high-end' careers they unsuccessfully aspired to. But just because you want it, doesn't mean you have the right to impose it on your child. He/she is an individual and a human being, not a crafts project for you to mold however you like.

Explain again how the First Amendment prevents me from imposing my belief in, say, the existence of an external reality apart from my child's mind (for example)?

(your sarcasm is terrible)

You probably would have ignored it if it didn't connect.

Listen, I realize just how precious child indoctrination is to fundies--without it, your numbers would shrivel up to negligible amounts within a generation or two.

Tell that to the Soviet Union.

Don't think I don't know how you guys work--I was born and raised on the inside of that 'little' scheme (I wish it was merely "little").

There's still time for you to start reading Plantinga and such and realize the error of your ways.

:)

As much as I'm used to counter-arguments to this like "well, it's MY kid!" my answer is always the same: ethically, and morally, if not legally (yet), there are just some things that are just NOT in the best interest of the child. Forcing your religious beliefs onto them is one of them, imho. Simple as that.

You've refuted your own argument, simple as that.

Earlier, you assured me that no reinterpretation of the Constitution was needed to make indoctrinating children against the Constitution.

Now you're admitting that it's not illegal ("yet").

Why didn't you just wave the white flag at the beginning instead of wasting all those words?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strife767, on Dec 25 2006, 03:11 PM, wrote:
[b]I fixed your tagging--you know, a closing bold tag needs an opening one.[/b]

Your merit badge is in the mail.  
I'd have fixed it myself, given editing privileges.

I've never had a problem editing my posts.

[b]That would be because you've already proven just how little working knowledge you have of the First Amendment.[/b]

Really.

[b]None of it would need to be repealed or reinterpreted. The First Amendment gives people the freedom to practice religion, not to tell people what to believe. That includes children.[/b]

Did you skip your government classes, or what?
The Constitution doesn't give out freedoms.  The Constitution give the government the responsibility for preserving inherent freedoms while restricting the government from infringing on those freedoms.
When you have a kid, you can get him to believe about Santa Claus, and the government cannot throw you in jail for it--not until your don't getting the First Amendment reinterpreted your way.
After that, maybe they can lock you up for spreading tales about a jolly old elf (to children!).

It's perfectly possible to be honest about Santa Claus etc. and get kids into it and enjoying it without lying to them, which is what I'd generally like to see happen. I see zero benefit from lying to a child about there actually existing a Santa Claus or tooth fairy etc. I think going to _jail_ for that is pretty extreme (but what easier way to attack your opponent than with a strawman, huh?), but it should definitely be discouraged. However, this is not nearly the same as telling a kid that they have to be good or they're going to hell, because god is watching, etc.

[b]People under the age of majority should not have to deal with indoctrination from their parents or any other figures of authority--if they want to believe in some religion or another, they can make that decision on their own once they are old enough to:

1. Realize that there are more religions out there than one's parents' (most parents will quite happily make their children feel like it's either their religion or no religion--in fact, I've seen several Christian fundamentalists equate all other religions with [i]atheism[/i]!).
2. Make an informed, responsible decision about what they want to believe.

The fact that people like you like to pretend that atheism/agnosticism/secular humanism is a religion (likely because being religious, it's hard to imagine people who aren't religious at all, so the mind tends to want to assign them a religion, even if it isn't there--the same kind of thinking that assigns genders to inanimate objects) is irrelevant.[/b]

Tell me how you define religion, and I'll have you agreeing with me after about three more exchanges (assuming that you can shake your earlier habit of dodging questions).

lol, okay, hotshot. First 'quick definition' on www.onelook.net will do fine:

"noun: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny" --http://www.onelook.com/?w=religion

Please, show me how to apply this definition to atheism, for example. I can't wait.

[b]Children should not be forced to participate in their parents' religious rituals, and they _especially_ should not be led to believe that _any_ religion has any kind of factual foundation--I hate it when people pretend their beliefs are not beliefs, but irrefutable fact. :rolleyes:[/b]

Is it an irrefutable fact that the beliefs of others are not irrefutable fact?

I'd have to say yes, since a belief in any supernatural entity or element is, by definition, not fact, much less irrefutable or not.

Or is that just a belief of yours that you want the government to enforce?

Mmm, no, that's pretty much how it really is.

[b]You see, I wouldn't have a problem with parents telling their kids (still against forcing them to participate or be present at rituals etc., though) about their religions, if only they would keep things in the proper context. But it is rarely the case that a parent tells a child "this is what I believe" when they explain their religion. A child is much more likely to hear "this is what is." That is damaging to the impressionable child's developing sense of reality, especially when they eventually are taught something in school that directly contradicts some teaching or another of the religious "facts" they've been taught at home. Why put a child through that?[/b]

Because it is unavoidable in practical terms.  That's why.

Solipsism, for example, is unfalsifiable.  You think you can bring up a child without discouraging his budding belief in solipsism?

Did you miss the part where I am specifically talking about religious things pushed onto kids by parents/authority figures? If a kid starts to believe something on his own, that's a completely different story. In fact, that's healthy, I think.

[b]This is my opinion,[/b]

Yeah, that's what I thought it was.  :)

[b]but I dare say that religious indoctrination does to a child's developing sense of reality what adult/child sex does to a child's developing sexuality. Put your torches down, I am not drawing a parallel with child molestation--it's a metaphor. Religious indoctrination does the same kind of damage to a different part of the child.[/b]

And you have placed your mountain of evidence where?

I will say I don't believe it's irreversible or near-impossible-to-reverse damage, but it slows progress down--it at the very least inhibits reality. If you tell a child that rain happens because God is crying, it will obviously interfere with his learning of the actual causes of rain, etc. Is that really so hard to believe that nothing short of a "mountain of evidence" would so anything for you?

Oh, that's right--it's your opinion.  Your opinion that you want the government to enforce by keeping opinions contrary from yours away from the precious children.

There's always got to be a dicohotomy, huh? Are you that afraid of children 'straying' that the idea of keeping religion out of their lives until they have grown old enough to choose for themselves bothers you that much? I say inject no supernatural elements into the mind of a growing child, and let them educate themselves on all the faiths around, and choose which they think suits them the best when they want. Why does that notion seem to irk you so?

[color=blue]No hypocrisy there, no.[/color]

Nope. I guess I'll never understand how _not_ teaching a kid "all about God/Jesus/Allah" is equivalent to indoctrination of something else in your mind, and the mind of every anti-atheist fundie I've ever spoken to.

[b]In conclusion, I realize that parents would like to see their kids 'follow in their footsteps' in matters of faith. Parents also often want their kids to grow up into either their careers, or 'high-end' careers they unsuccessfully aspired to. But just because you want it, doesn't mean you have the right to impose it on your child. He/she is an individual and a human being, not a crafts project for you to mold however you like.[/b]

Explain again how the First Amendment prevents me from imposing my belief in, say, the existence of an external reality apart from my child's mind (for example)?

I didn't say the First Amendment would prevent you from doing that...I just don't see how anyone could think imposing their beliefs (you even worded it that way) on their kids isn't unfair to the child.

[b](your sarcasm is terrible)[/b]

You probably would have ignored it if it didn't connect.

[code][b]Listen, I realize just how precious child indoctrination is to fundies--without it, your numbers would shrivel up to negligible amounts within a generation or two.[/b]

Tell that to the Soviet Union.

[b]Don't think I don't know how you guys work--I was born and raised on the inside of that 'little' scheme (I wish it was merely "little").[/b]

There's still time for you to start reading Plantinga and such and realize the error of your ways.
:)

Don't hold your breath. :(

[b]As much as I'm used to counter-arguments to this like "well, it's MY kid!" my answer is always the same: ethically, and morally, if not legally (yet), there are just some things that are just NOT in the best interest of the child. Forcing your religious beliefs onto them is one of them, imho. Simple as that.[/b]

You've refuted your own argument, simple as that.

Earlier, you assured me that no reinterpretation of the Constitution was needed to make indoctrinating children against the Constitution.
Now you're admitting that it's not illegal ("yet").

So, it's impossible for a new law to be created without amending the Constitution? Yeah, right, sure, whatever you say. :P:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...