Is taking children to church a form of child abuse?

[Monster Energy]

4 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@Monster Energy please don't make any more character judgements.

Stick to arguing points.

 

👍🏻

[Monster Energy]

55 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

Broaden your definition. Can you define religion?

By religion I mean belief in the supernatural or a god, often with rituals and worship.

 

[Hatfort]

3 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

Like I said, you don’t understand deep things. I know exactly what you meant, so stop twisting it. And you have not shown why my arguments are wrong, you just say they are wrong. You sound like this: ‘Why is the Bible true? Because it is true!’ Do you see how stupid that sounds? And somehow you’ve made religious people seem more thoughtful than you, which should be impossible, because your arguments and responses are worse than the Bible and I use the Bible as toilet paper. If you respond with something cringe again, then our conversation is over.

I understand things better than you, you don't even understand the meaning of words, basic communication. Then you twist other people's comments, saying they what say or mean, which they have not, so stop that too.

Your biggest flaw in this discussion is the expanded meaning of abuse. Parents deciding on a certain education for their children may be good or not, and there may be better ways, but is not abuse. Which brings us to the second flaw in your approach? What's your alternative? Kidnap the kids from all religious parents? Forbid religions? I can agree to a certain degree that religious upbringing has flaws, but that's not abuse, and I put value in the freedom of parents to raise their children as they think is best in society, all within reason of course, as long as there is not abuse or neglect, in which case I think it's fine we act as society and protect children.

[Human Mint]

1 hour ago, Monster Energy said:

For example, if a parent says school is important and the child asks why, and the parent replies that it is important for a good life, I think that can be wrong if it shuts down further questioning.

Yeah, exactly. And notice that a curious child will always try to understand. It's adults that kill that.

Forcing someone against their will is generally bad. Parenting is really more about guidance than forcing. Guidance is a broader concept. 

 

[Monster Energy]

2 minutes ago, Hatfort said:

I understand things better than you, you don't even understand the meaning of words, basic communication. Then you twist other people's comments, saying they what say or mean, which they have not, so stop that too.

Your biggest flaw in this discussion is the expanded meaning of abuse. Parents deciding on a certain education for their children may be good or not, and there may be better ways, but is not abuse. Which brings us to the second flaw in your approach? What's your alternative? Kidnap the kids from all religious parents? Forbid religions? I can agree to a certain degree that religious upbringing has flaws, but that's not abuse, and I put value in the freedom of parents to raise their children as they think is best in society, all within reason of course, as long as there is not abuse or neglect, in which case I think it's fine we act as society and protect children.

Let’s start over, I have said that it is wrong not to allow children to question things they learn from others, it is not wrong that children go to church or to a Buddhist temple, but it must be questioned, and in churches, I hope you know what a church is, there is over 80 percent discouragement of questioning their beliefs, please try to understand what I’m saying, you say so much but still very little wisdom comes out of you.

 

[Monster Energy]

6 minutes ago, Human Mint said:

Yeah, exactly. And notice that a curious child will always try to understand. It's adults that kill that.

Forcing someone against their will is generally bad. Parenting is really more about guidance than forcing. Guidance is a broader concept. 

 

Spot on

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Hatfort do you think one can abuse another by having power over them, and misusing this responsibiy? 

Or do you disregard this based on age of consent (which is a made up rule by society)? 

I personally think your definition of abuse is too narrow. While @Monster Energy energy may define abuse under a larger umbrella of acts, the truth is somewhere in between. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Human Mint]

14 minutes ago, Hatfort said:

Forbid religions?

Yes. Sending kids to church should be illegal. Same way we ban alcohol to underage individuals.

[Monster Energy]

Just now, Human Mint said:

Yes. Sending kids to church should be illegal. Same way we ban alcohol to underage individuals.

Amazing 

[Hatfort]

2 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@Hatfort do you think one can abuse another by having power over them, and misusing this responsibiy? 

Or do you disregard this based on age of consent (which is a made up rule by society)? 

I personally think your definition of abuse is too narrow. While @Monster Energy energy may define abuse under a larger umbrella of acts, the truth is somewhere in between. 

Yeah, misusing power over people could be abuse. 

But there are literally millions of people with religious upbringings that turn out well as adults, regardless of whether they put aside those beliefs for others or not once adults, which a lot do, and a lot don't. 

Globally speaking, there's a big chunk of the population that has put religion behind them, which I think is a trend that is going to continue and increase, and that's fine. But living in the current reality, acceptance of those who are not there yet is necessary, and also not pointing them out as things they are not, in this case, abusive.

[Monster Energy]

@Hatfort 

Just because millions of people come out of it fine doesn’t make it right. People survive bad ideas all the time that doesn’t mean the ideas deserve a free pass. The real question is whether it’s true, and whether it teaches people to think for themselves or just obey.

And yeah, you can call it ‘acceptance’ all you want, but if you teach kids not to question or feed them fear like eternal punishment, that still leaves a mark, even if it doesn’t break everyone.

 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Monster Energy

[Hatfort]

4 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

@Hatfort 

Just because millions of people come out of it fine doesn’t make it right. People survive bad ideas all the time that doesn’t mean the ideas deserve a free pass. The real question is whether it’s true, and whether it teaches people to think for themselves or just obey.

And yeah, you can call it ‘acceptance’ all you want, but if you teach kids not to question or feed them fear like eternal punishment, that still leaves a mark, even if it doesn’t break everyone.

It makes it not wrong though, or acceptable in the lack of any way that doesn't involve mass scale prohibitions or similars, which would be worse. If you wanna put in question some of the harmful approaches of religions, I don't oppose those, and probably agree to some degree. But with that scale, anything that is bad for a portion of people should be put into question, not only religions.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 hour ago, Hatfort said:

Yeah, misusing power over people could be abuse. 

But there are literally millions of people with religious upbringings that turn out well as adults, regardless of whether they put aside those beliefs for others or not once adults, which a lot do, and a lot don't. 

Globally speaking, there's a big chunk of the population that has put religion behind them, which I think is a trend that is going to continue and increase, and that's fine. But living in the current reality, acceptance of those who are not there yet is necessary, and also not pointing them out as things they are not, in this case, abusive.

Can you see how on one hand you concede religious indoctrination could constitute abuse, then you backtrack into justifying based on outcome? 

We then move to the line of questioning - do means justify the outcome?

There's some cognitive dissonance here. I am not trying to convince you out of your opinion - merely illustrating inconsistency in applying concepts.