|
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2011 : 15:35:13 [Permalink]
|
| Hello all just checked in to see everyone is still having fun with this topic.Still keeping a rabid eye on it. |
 |
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2011 : 15:37:32 [Permalink]
|
ps I will keep stirring the shit so to speak as and when I deam fit. By for now . As you Americans say: have a nice day.
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 07/27/2011 : 18:52:19 [Permalink]
|
Dave: | What I know about Epicopalianism I could have read in a book. No need for me to have experienced it. |
If you can't even acknowledge that there is a difference between gaining knowledge through experience and gaining knowledge through books (I would say there is a difference and a value in both) then I really don't know what to say. The difference between the two things seems so obvious to me, it would take a lot of time and effort for me to even mount an argument that clearly and simply spells out all the reasons why experience is a valuable way to gain knowledge.
| If we want to consider religious indoctrination to be psychological abuse, that'd be fine by me. I'm sure there are many different specific subsets of psychological abuse that have names, and "religion" could be one of them. It doesn't have to be either/or. |
I'm sure some methods of religious indoctrination could and should be considered psychological abuse. But anyone advocating that society consider all religious indoctrination to be abuse has gone out on the deep end as far as I can tell. It's like when someone claims that religious belief is a mental illness (which I've heard said more than once.) It stretches the definition of a word that has very useful and important meaning to the point where it is practically meaningless. "Child abuse" is a rather strong term that inspires often severe action, both social and legal, and it should. I notice you haven't responded one bit to the concerns I've raised about the unavoidable harm done when people take social and/or legal action against what is labeled as "child abuse." If something as common as raising kids to believe in the religion of their parents and community is going to be included under that label, I want to see some damn good explanations of the supposed good which will come of such labeling, and how that good will be greater than the harm that will certainly be done to the children if society begins to view their families that way.
| Then the only solution is to wait for them all to die. I'd rather look for a more pro-active route. |
Solution to what problem? I'm still not convinced that the vast majority of religious indoctrination of children is even harmful. At least to the degree that it could be labeled child abuse! Plenty of religious kids grow up to be secular or to convert to a different religion. Plenty of kids raised without religion adopt a religion. It seems to me that the kids are just fine.
| If we accept that the beating of children is inevitable for some segments of society... |
For fuck's sake, are you just going to ignore everything else that was tied to my statements? I can't believe I even have to respond to this stupidity. But okay. Beating children results in clear harm. Nobody disputes that. I guarantee a majority of people, including probably a majority of nonreligious people, will dispute the idea that religious people raising their kids to believe that religion is true should automatically be considered a form of psychological abuse.
| Inevitability shouldn't dictate tolerance. |
But it does when the thing which is inevitable isn't considered harmful, or at least isn't considered to do more harm than the harm that would be inflicted by being intolerant of it. That's, again, why we have freedom of religious written into our laws in the first place.
| Does socially regarding these people as child beaters, rapists and bullies make the situation for their victims worse?! |
In a word, yes. Obviously being labeled a victim of abuse carries consequences of its own. Prosecuting people for these crimes costs resources. And prisons aren't famous for their power of reforming criminals. However, in the cases of beating children, raping, and the more extreme kinds of bullying, the consequences of ignoring these forms of abuse are far worse than the harm which comes with taking action against them. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 07/27/2011 : 19:59:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marfknox
If you can't even acknowledge that there is a difference between gaining knowledge through experience and gaining knowledge through books (I would say there is a difference and a value in both) then I really don't know what to say. The difference between the two things seems so obvious to me, it would take a lot of time and effort for me to even mount an argument that clearly and simply spells out all the reasons why experience is a valuable way to gain knowledge. |
A way to gain knowledge, yes. Not always as or more valuable than other methods. I don't see anything about experience or religion that would indicate that experience is generally a better way to learn about religion than simple instruction. Your personal preference isn't data.| I'm sure some methods of religious indoctrination could and should be considered psychological abuse. |
Brilliant. Let's talk about that, instead of this:| But anyone advocating that society consider all religious indoctrination to be abuse has gone out on the deep end as far as I can tell. |
But then...| It's like when someone claims that religious belief is a mental illness (which I've heard said more than once.) It stretches the definition of a word that has very useful and important meaning to the point where it is practically meaningless. |
Religious faith and mental illness share a bunch of qualities. If religion did not have such a privileged position in our societies, I have little doubt that it would be treated instead of praised.| "Child abuse" is a rather strong term that inspires often severe action, both social and legal, and it should. |
Yes, we know this already, so I'm trying to move the discussion along.| I notice you haven't responded one bit to the concerns I've raised about the unavoidable harm done when people take social and/or legal action against what is labeled as "child abuse." |
Because you haven't seemed to be willing to acknowledge that faith and its promotion as a virtue is a problem for society. If we ever get to that point, we can talk about the risk/benefit ratio of various possible interventions. Until then, we can't even propose a measure for net harm or net good, because you won't address half of the equation.| If something as common as raising kids to believe in the religion of their parents and community is going to be included under that label, I want to see some damn good explanations of the supposed good which will come of such labeling, and how that good will be greater than the harm that will certainly be done to the children if society begins to view their families that way. |
Cart before the horse.| Then the only solution is to wait for them all to die. I'd rather look for a more pro-active route. |
Solution to what problem? I'm still not convinced that the vast majority of religious indoctrination of children is even harmful. At least to the degree that it could be labeled child abuse! |
You're hung up on harm meeting the threshold of "child abuse" before something can/should be done about it. Do you think you'll ever spank your child? It's definitely not "child abuse."| Plenty of religious kids grow up to be secular or to convert to a different religion. Plenty of kids raised without religion adopt a religion. It seems to me that the kids are just fine. |
How much time and money is wasted by those kids? How much better could those kids be without religion hogging resources and cluttering up minds?| For fuck's sake, are you just going to ignore everything else that was tied to my statements? I can't believe I even have to respond to this stupidity. But okay. Beating children results in clear harm. Nobody disputes that. I guarantee a majority of people, including probably a majority of nonreligious people, will dispute the idea that religious people raising their kids to believe that religion is true should automatically be considered a form of psychological abuse. |
But we can't even have that discussion because you're too freaked out by the word "abuse." I tried to change the subject (since nobody is worried any longer about showing Bromley to be wrong), but you keep dragging us back to a non-dispute over the word "abuse."| But it does when the thing which is inevitable isn't considered harmful, or at least isn't considered to do more harm than the harm that would be inflicted by being intolerant of it. That's, again, why we have freedom of religious written into our laws in the first place. |
But why isn't it considered harmful?!| Does socially regarding these people as child beaters, rapists and bullies make the situation for their victims worse?! |
In a word, yes. |
Then that's another human stupidity that needs to be changed. There is no fault in being a victim. I know it's a common problem among victims - that they think they deserved it, or otherwise caused the behavior - but it needs to stop. And we need to show victims that they won't be re-victimized by idiots who think that their victimhood is a fault any longer.| However, in the cases of beating children, raping, and the more extreme kinds of bullying, the consequences of ignoring these forms of abuse are far worse than the harm which comes with taking action against them. |
So you've done the calculus for the more extreme harms, and determined that the benefits outweigh the risks. Now, let's do that with something that everyone will agree is less extreme but much, much more common: faith. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 02:55:00 [Permalink]
|
My my we have been busy little boys and girls. Maybe we should all calm down a little after all its only a discussion forum .
Dave W. said | but we can't even have that discussion because you're too freaked out by the word "abuse." I tried to change the subject (since nobody is worried any longer about showing Bromley to be wrong), but you keep dragging us back to a non-dispute over the word "abuse." |
Oh dear ad hominem attacks . I thought this site was better than that .Remember children may be present .Surely we should be setting them a good example and at least attempt to debate the subject rationally?
I have no problem with religious instruction where all religions are taught about . I don't agree with religion as it is taught, in certain faith schools over here in the UK, as the one and only true religion. It is so socially divisive and we have enough racial problems over here anyway. We should be coming together as one human race not placing obstacles in our path.
I'm sure someone will, once again, try to pull me up on what I've said and say how can faith schools lead to racial division. The fact is that more faith schools are being set up by certain religious and ethnic groups.
I'm also sure someone will say I've strayed off the point or that my ramblings are those of a madman.
Anyway have a nice day all . At least over here the sun is shining and the weather fair. Plus I'm looking forward to the weekend and a long, or not so long, cycle ride.
Best wishes Judge Edward Bromley circa 1612 ( feeling much happier for the fine weather)
|
|
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 02:56:41 [Permalink]
|
| Sorry should have said lessons instead of instruction, which implies indoctrination. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 07:48:16 [Permalink]
|
Dave, I do not consider faith inherently harmful. I do not agree with you that the broad regard of faith as a virtue is a scourge on humanity that must be obliterated. Not to say I have concluded the opposite, but I don't think we have nearly enough knowledge about religion, its various functions in societies and the minds of individuals, its origins and history to make such a determination. I think to come to that conclusion with such certainty is a bit of arrogance.
When I acknowledge that some forms of religious indoctrination are a form of psychological abuse, I am referring to cults and truly demented individuals who use their religious beliefs as a cover for abuse.
You think I'm hung up on "child abuse". Maybe that is because nobody here has actually made ANY suggestions of what actions society might or should take in order to combat this supposed scourge of religious parents instructing their children in their beliefs. So I have been left to speculate on the various actions which might be taken. So I'll stop that.
Also, I'm not a roadblock to you continuing the conversation in the direction you want to go. This isn't a one on one conversation. If you want to move on, then ignore my comments that you think cause the conversation to stagnate, and just move on. Don't bitch at me about how I'm somehow keeping us stuck. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 07/28/2011 07:49:40 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 08:15:27 [Permalink]
|
Bromley| Oh dear ad hominem attacks . |
Not really.
| I thought this site was better than that .Remember children may be present .Surely we should be setting them a good example and at least attempt to debate the subject rationally? |
I don't think Dave is discussing anything irrationally. I have great deal of respect and experience engaging in forum discussions with him, and I assume he also respects me, and I'm enjoying a spirited discussion on this thread. You, on the other hand, are an annoying troll who seems to just want to stir shit up for the fun of it. Are you even interested in this topic or did you just start it in the hopes of getting people in a tizzy and then poking fun?
| I have no problem with religious instruction where all religions are taught about . |
Sounds like a lot of Unitarian Churches. But that's not really religious instruction so much as it is a survey course for kids on world religions.
| I don't agree with religion as it is taught, in certain faith schools over here in the UK, as the one and only true religion. It is so socially divisive and we have enough racial problems over here anyway. We should be coming together as one human race not placing obstacles in our path. |
And as a possible solution to this problem, you propose...
I'm sure someone will, once again, try to pull me up on what I've said and say how can faith schools lead to racial division. The fact is that more faith schools are being set up by certain religious and ethnic groups.
I'm also sure someone will say I've strayed off the point |
Yeah, 'cause you have. Are you going to relate it to anything in the natural progression of this conversation or are you just throwing out small bits slightly relevant musings?
| or that my ramblings are those of a madman. |
With statements like this you are leading me, again, to believe that you don't actually want to have a conversation. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 07/28/2011 08:15:52 |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 09:06:12 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Judge Bromley circa 1612
My my we have been busy little boys and girls. Maybe we should all calm down a little after all its only a discussion forum .
Dave W. said | but we can't even have that discussion because you're too freaked out by the word "abuse." I tried to change the subject (since nobody is worried any longer about showing Bromley to be wrong), but you keep dragging us back to a non-dispute over the word "abuse." |
Oh dear ad hominem attacks . I thought this site was better than that .Remember children may be present .Surely we should be setting them a good example and at least attempt to debate the subject rationally? |
Not ad hom. Statement of fact. We have brought up salient criticisms of your rationale which you have yet to defend and instead have changed the subject, moved goalposts, and in another post of yours admit to shit-stirring. It is clear from these argumentation tactics that you are uninterested in actually having the discusssion and instead have the "I'm bored so lets kick the beehive" attitude. Not cool, fellah.
I have no problem with religious instruction where all religions are taught about . I don't agree with religion as it is taught, in certain faith schools over here in the UK, as the one and only true religion. It is so socially divisive and we have enough racial problems over here anyway. We should be coming together as one human race not placing obstacles in our path. |
Hence why they are called parocial schools where the religious instruction portion is implied. Several religions (since they were started in the bronze age) have an exclusionary component. Others do not.
I'm sure someone will, once again, try to pull me up on what I've said and say how can faith schools lead to racial division. The fact is that more faith schools are being set up by certain religious and ethnic groups. |
Some parocial schools can do that. You don't want your kid brought up that way, don't send them there. Might be an advantage to focus on improving the public schools so there is an advantage to going there instead of private parocial schools.
I'm also sure someone will say I've strayed off the point or that my ramblings are those of a madman. |
Because you have strayed off your original points and make no attempt to defend the points you make. Devoid defense of the point, I can dismiss your claims as unfounded. Dave, however, is actively defending his position. You may want to try that.
Anyway have a nice day all . At least over here the sun is shining and the weather fair. Plus I'm looking forward to the weekend and a long, or not so long, cycle ride.
Best wishes Judge Edward Bromley circa 1612 ( feeling much happier for the fine weather)
|
Don't get run over. Just offering some practical advice. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Judge Bromley circa 1612
New Member
United Kingdom
43 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 11:58:39 [Permalink]
|
I suppose you mean parochial and not parocial I will give you the benefit of the doubt. | Hence why they are called parocial schools where the religious instruction portion is implied. Several religions (since they were started in the bronze age) have an exclusionary component. Others do not. |
If I could really understand what you people are going on about maybe I could respond to it but everyone here seems so agitated that whatever points i make and whatever links I give to support my case are just ignored .
Just what evidence do I need to give to show that child abuse has , and probably, still occur to children who undergo religious instruction in certain denominations?
[/quote]I don't think Dave is discussing anything irrationally. I have great deal of respect and experience engaging in forum discussions with him, and I assume he also respects me, and I'm enjoying a spirited discussion on this thread. You, on the other hand, are an annoying troll who seems to just want to stir shit up for the fun of it. Are you even interested in this topic or did you just start it in the hopes of getting people in a tizzy and then poking fun? [quote]
I don't really think much of you either Martha. No I didn't start this thread just to anny or irritate as you suggest but to try to understand what everyone thought about it.
[quote]Don't get run over. Just offering some practical advice. [/quote]
Sorry Valiant I don't think I need your advice on this or anything else.
Best wishes all
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 12:22:25 [Permalink]
|
Bromley: | If I could really understand what you people are going on about maybe I could respond to it... |
You can't figure out what we're going on about, and yet somehow we are able to understand and continue discussing things with each other. That sounds like your problem, not ours. | but everyone here seems so agitated that whatever points i make and whatever links I give to support my case are just ignored . |
I commented extensively on your link to the Dawkins article. And Val responded on page one to your initial links. You never responded back! Right from the get-go people were responding to your arguments with criticisms such as that you were making generalization fallacies, being too vague, and using sloppy rhetoric. You never bothers to refine or defend your argument. Instead you cranked up the smarm and claimed to be leaving, but didn't really leave.
You constantly make smarmy comments such as:
Oh dear I seem to have upset OFFC not sure if I should feel glad or sad.
Oh dear I seem to have stirred up a real hornet's nest here, so to speak.
Best wishes to all on this site especially atheists, agnostics and humanists and all religious zealots posing to be such.
I will keep stirring the shit so to speak as and when I deam fit.
My my we have been busy little boys and girls.
|
And then you have the audacity to complain about us being agitated with you?
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 12:37:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Judge Bromley circa 1612
I suppose you mean parochial and not parocial I will give you the benefit of the doubt. |
Yup. Ignore the point and focus on spelling. Doesn't matter that this forum doesn't have a spell checker.
| Hence why they are called parocial schools where the religious instruction portion is implied. Several religions (since they were started in the bronze age) have an exclusionary component. Others do not. |
If I could really understand what you people are going on about maybe I could respond to it but everyone here seems so agitated that whatever points i make and whatever links I give to support my case are just ignored . |
You point to examples of extremist sub-sects. When this is pointed out as a generalization fallacy, you come back with this. We don't ignore your links, we merely point out that this is the actions of extremists. Composition fallacy as well.
| Just what evidence do I need to give to show that child abuse has , and probably, still occur to children who undergo religious instruction in certain denominations? |
Again, pediophiles use any position of authority they can get into to gain access and power over children. Teaching professions have the same problems without the religious aspect. It severely weakens your argument over causation.
I don't think Dave is discussing anything irrationally. I have great deal of respect and experience engaging in forum discussions with him, and I assume he also respects me, and I'm enjoying a spirited discussion on this thread. You, on the other hand, are an annoying troll who seems to just want to stir shit up for the fun of it. Are you even interested in this topic or did you just start it in the hopes of getting people in a tizzy and then poking fun? [quote]
I don't really think much of you either Martha. No I didn't start this thread just to anny or irritate as you suggest but to try to understand what everyone thought about it.
[quote]Don't get run over. Just offering some practical advice. |
Sorry Valiant I don't think I need your advice on this or anything else.
Best wishes all
|
Typical troll behavior.
At least we have identified it.
OK, move along. Nothing to see here. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
alienist
Skeptic Friend
USA
210 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 13:32:28 [Permalink]
|
I think most people would agree that certain religious practices do lead to child abuse, such as withholding medical treatment or beating a child because the bible says so. A lot of people often ignore certain parts of the bible and take what they want to believe.
I think the discussion is now revolving the idea that religion can cause psychological harm. Religions do stress shame and guilt, some much more than others. Children do need to experience some shame and guilt to develop a conscience. The question is how much shame and guilt is damaging. It would be interesting to compare different believer's psych problems. I know of one study that correlates Muslims having to pray 5 times a day with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Having to pray a certain no of times may increase the likelihood of OCD symptoms.
By the way, it is time to ignore and not respond to Judge Bromley. We must treat him like a toddler. If he has something of value to say, then we can give him the attention he craves |
The only normal people are the ones you don't know very well! - Joe Ancis |
|
|
|
Hal
Skeptic Friend
USA
302 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 14:02:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by alienist
Religions do stress shame and guilt, some much more than others. Children do need to experience some shame and guilt to develop a conscience. The question is how much shame and guilt is damaging.
|
Well, I don't think that's the only question. While I tend to agree that shame is a component of socialization (that's probably not a universally held view), I think that most of us, Dave W in particular, would argue that compelled submission to an imaginary deity is inferior to, say, a desire to not cause objectively measurable harm.
|
Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King Jr.
 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/28/2011 : 15:11:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Hal
Well, I don't think that's the only question. While I tend to agree that shame is a component of socialization (that's probably not a universally held view), I think that most of us, Dave W in particular, would argue that compelled submission to an imaginary deity is inferior to, say, a desire to not cause objectively measurable harm. |
If experiencing shame is a necessary component of socialization for kids (and I don't think it is because empathy doesn't seem to need to be taught), then there are plenty of ways to shame kids without resorting to god or any other imaginary thing.
But my point is more subtle. Believing in things for which there is no evidence is itself morally bad. Religion is the only institution in which the propagation of such immorality is the goal (or at least one of the top two). It should be unthinkable for any adult human to teach anyone that believing in imaginary beings is not only fine and dandy but an exemplar of righteousness. That's what most religions do, though.
Teaching kids such things basically teaches them to be gullible, leaves them open to con-men both religious and secular, and the kids can't say "shut up" to their teachers, who are usually their own parents.
The time and money spent on religion should have been spent on any other pursuit, and it would have been more productive and thus less harmful to society as a whole. We are hundreds or thousands of years behind where we could have been had the concepts behind religion never entered our monkey brains. Billions dead from religious conflicts could perhaps have spent more time pursuing science, health care or even just decent entertainment. Quadrillions of dollars (effectively) stripped from economies. This is real harm stemming from an evil belief, and the fact that people joyfully thrust it upon their own children just makes me sick.
It may not be much of a harm to any individual child, but billions of teensy tiny harms each and every day add up fast to a huge gaping hole in civilization. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Religious indoctrination of children child abuse?
