|
| | 
LUNATIC ATHEIST!!11!!!
Last Seen:
Yesterday @ 12:54 PM
Posts: 3,364
Visits: 11,080
|
| I agree that they should find it on their own eventually. Practically speaking, I'm not going to leave my 3 and 5 year olds at home while the wife and I are at church. In addition I don't agree that you don't present them with options. Also, children don't vote for a reason. We wait until they have been brainwashed right?
-No, I wouldn't leave the kids home alone if I went to church either, that wouldn't be.... right. But you are dragging it out to extremes here as well, seeing as the scenario you put forth is a necessity for a responsible parent. But when it's unnecessary.....
Well, you said evil, not me. Hanging out on the streets generally means they will be exposed to things which I don't want them exposed to. Drugs, sex, and other things which I don't believe teenagers should be engaged in.
-Errr..... Yeah. I was merely exhagerrating to underline the point. Drugs, sex and "other things" don't float around on the streets, if there were the US would be in a bad shape . But then, I'm not sure ignorance(An extreme term, but...) is the best path to take either. When it comes to drugs I can't really say much because I am for legalizing everything, I'll not preach about that. Sex, on the other hand, is something that I don't think it's wise to shelter your kids from(When they're teens....). But these topics are more of a moral question devoid of religion so I don't think it's relevant either. By the way, did you know that porn lowers sexual crime? It sems that all the things fundamentalists think are destructive to society are actually good.
Brainwashed is quite a loaded term. Would you call it brainwashing children if you instill in them a good work ethic? Is it brainwashing if you teach your children to keep away from drugs? Is it brainwashing children if you teach them to brush their teeth everyday? If it is, I vote yes to brainwashing children.
-But these are practical implementations, if you have a good work ethic you generally get better jobs, quicker promotions, etc. If you tell them to stay away from drugs I say..... Errrr, well.... Hmmmmm.... We'll skip that one! If they don't brush their teeth it'll hurt, alot. You won't have a very pleasing smile either. If you tell them that you believe there's a god up in the sky that's not brainwashing either, but if you start giving it off as truth then you're lying.
Of course faith is promoted in a church youth group.
-Interesting. The local church youth group here in Aure doesn't do that, it merely gives kids an arena where they meet and do things together. It's not a given that a church youth group promotes it's religion, heck I attended that for a few years myself, noone ever mentioned god. Well, the US is a backwards country . *Runs*
Couple of questions to find out where you stand and I think I'm done (feel free to ask me simiilar questions). Would you rather your child go to a church youth group or a violent gang? Would you rather your child go to a church youth group or hang out with friends unattended? Would you rather your child attend a religious church group or have no friends. Ah here's one. If your child wanted to go to church and convert to a religion, would you allow them to, assuming they were under age (say 12 years old)?
-Oh, questions!
1: I'd rather he make up his own mind. If he's meddling with violent gangs then I haven't done my job, have I now? But as for the question, "neither" is my answer. You have to take remember that this involves two different personalities and so you cannot choose one or the other as the personality hanging out with gangs would not join a church youth group and vice versa.
2: I would actually prefer him hanging out with friends unattended. This differs depending on the culture and location but generally I'd choose the latter. I don't think that childhood should be experienced inside some safe bubble, my childhood was not spent that way. Constant adult supervision is not good for children in my opinion.
3: Well, I place social interaction above any negative emotions towards religion. I would rather he be in any community, religious or otherwise rather than be asocial. This does beg the question if he chose to be asocial himself, though. I guess you'd rather have an atheist child than a child with no friends?
4: I'd tell him he was stupid but should do with his life as he pleased. I certainly wouldn't disown him or anything like that but I'd make my view on religion quite clear.
Whoops, missed this one. Ah, but you even make my position sound simplistic but as I stated earlier, I said my faith doesn't take a fundamentalist position on how it was made, though some opinions are stronger held than others. I can come to accept the complexities of evolution so my view is not simplistic.
-It's not that I find simplistic, it's the universe creation. Just because we don't know what initiated the big bang there's no reason to say goddidit. That's the simplistic part, I'd rather leave it open.
Okay, I think I've found the fundamental difference between you and I. You don't believe that people can disagree given the same information. If someone disagrees with you, you think it a stupid argument or a stupid opinion/belief. You think my views are stupid and do not allow for the possiblilty that intellegent people can disagree. Two people given the same information, who are equally intellegent can come to two different conclusions and they may see the other side as being illogical. While I disagree with almost every assesment you make, I don't think of you as stupidly coming to that conclusion. Anyway, I'd like to say I'm done but I don't want to eat my words.
-No, the "scenario" I gave that you quoted didn't state anything about different amounts of information(Though I may have said something of the sort previously in another arguement). I said that just because we lack a solution to a problem, atheists don't jump to the conclusion that it must be god. It's got nothing to do with information, just how you interpret the lack of it. |
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
-- Albert Einstein (1879-1955) "The belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary; men alone are quite capable of every wickedness."
-- Joseph Conrad (1857-1924) With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
--Steven Weinberg(1933- )
       
 |   |  |
| |
| | 
Elite Pathogen
Last Seen:
Today @ 7:47 PM
Posts: 4,494
Visits: 11,167
|
| -No, I wouldn't leave the kids home alone if I went to church either, that wouldn't be.... right. But you are dragging it out to extremes here as well, seeing as the scenario you put forth is a necessity for a responsible parent. But when it's unnecessary..... Well I don't agree about your premise to begin with but I admit it was an extreme answer I gave? -Errr..... Yeah. I was merely exhagerrating to underline the point. Drugs, sex and "other things" don't float around on the streets, if there were the US would be in a bad shape. But then, I'm not sure ignorance(An extreme term, but...) is the best path to take either. When it comes to drugs I can't really say much because I am for legalizing everything, I'll not preach about that. Sex, on the other hand, is something that I don't think it's wise to shelter your kids from(When they're teens....). But these topics are more of a moral question devoid of religion so I don't think it's relevant either. By the way, did you know that porn lowers sexual crime? It sems that all the things fundamentalists think are destructive to society are actually good. Er uh, okay. I wonder what porn does to other aspects of life. To say that porn makes a society better because of one aspect is also simplistic, though I don't get the point of bringing it up. On drugs, I don't think they should be illegal necessarilly either but I don't want my kids trying them. I've got two brothers who have ruined their lives because of drugs. They're both in early twenties and still act like early teenagers. Both not in college. Perhaps I'm biased because of this. Sex, I don't think is good for teenagers but I don't think I'm going to change your mind on this. You are right that they are irrelevant to this discussion. -But these are practical implementations, if you have a good work ethic you generally get better jobs, quicker promotions, etc. If you tell them to stay away from drugs I say..... Errrr, well.... Hmmmmm.... We'll skip that one! If they don't brush their teeth it'll hurt, alot. You won't have a very pleasing smile either. If you tell them that you believe there's a god up in the sky that's not brainwashing either, but if you start giving it off as truth then you're lying. Ah but some religions help to teach practical things like work ethic, steering away from drugs, etc.
-Interesting. The local church youth group here in Aure doesn't do that, it merely gives kids an arena where they meet and do things together. It's not a given that a church youth group promotes it's religion, heck I attended that for a few years myself, noone ever mentioned god. Well, the US is a backwards country. *Runs* Perhaps  . But not because of religion. Church groups I suppose don't have to teach faith. All the ones I've been to have. The one in my church does to a small extent but the majority is spent doing fun things as well as service activities. The questions/answers: 1. You'd rather him make up his own mind? What if he did and he chose the violent gang? Would you let him hang with them? You say neither so would you equate them as equally undesireable? 2. Fair enough. When I was a youth, I did both and honestly I don't mind my kids doing the same so long as they don't get into too much trouble. 3. I'm glad to hear that and yes, I'd send my kid to an atheist youth group if there was no other option. Luckilly there are.  4. So you'd push your ideas on him? Oh the horror. You'll share your thoughts and beliefs with your child and I'll do the same with mine. No, the "scenario" I gave that you quoted didn't state anything about different amounts of information(Though I may have said something of the sort previously in another arguement). I said that just because we lack a solution to a problem, atheists don't jump to the conclusion that it must be god. It's got nothing to do with information, just how you interpret the lack of it. No (I think I quoted you with one thought in mind and went off in another; my bad) you have not said that but that is the impression I get from conversations with you. Is it correct? Well I think I can say I at least understand where you stand. I hope you can understand where I stand as well. Feel free to ask me any questions you like as well but I think I'm done. We're not going to change each others minds but I hope that you can respect me whether I choose to believe or not. |
--
-A government that is powerful enough to do anything for us is powerful enough to do anything to us. -Fred Thompson
-There are two races of people, the decent and the indecent. - Victor Frankel
-They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security. - Benjamin Franklin
Consequences
Edited: 11/8/2006 5:58 PM by jerm |  | |
| |
| |
LUNATIC ATHEIST!!11!!!
Last Seen:
Yesterday @ 12:54 PM
Posts: 3,364
Visits: 11,080
|
| Er uh, okay. I wonder what porn does to other aspects of life.
-Well, my view on sex hasn't been warped in any way, I don't go around raping women(Or men ), etc, etc. No negative effects have been observed though some people attempt to make it look so. Pornography is a massive industry and there's been no social breakdown because of this. I'm sure it has some negative effect on a few individuals but that happens with everything.
To say that porn makes a society better because of one aspect is also simplistic, though I don't get the point of bringing it up.
-I just thought you might see it as bad and so just threw it in there. Not too much relevance but I find it to be an interesting statistic.
On drugs, I don't think they should be illegal necessarilly either but I don't want my kids trying them. I've got two brothers who have ruined their lives because of drugs. They're both in early twenties and still act like early teenagers. Both not in college. Perhaps I'm biased because of this. Sex, I don't think is good for teenagers but I don't think I'm going to change your mind on this. You are right that they are irrelevant to this discussion.
-I'm sorry to hear that.
Ah but some religions help to teach practical things like work ethic, steering away from drugs, etc.
-And I don't refute that, it's just the additional baggage that I don't like.
You'd rather him make up his own mind? What if he did and he chose the violent gang? Would you let him hang with them? You say neither so would you equate them as equally undesireable?
-The point I was trying to make was that if he decided to get involved in a violent gang, what possible control do you think I would have over him when I've let it slip that far? The question you posed doesn't allow a choice on my part, it's up to the child in question.
So you'd push your ideas on him? Oh the horror. You'll share your thoughts and beliefs with your child and I'll do the same with mine.
-Here's the thing, I would not push my ideas on him, I would inform him of my view on it. I would share my thoughts and beliefs(Political and so forth) with him, I would not make them out to be fact. I don't assume that you do that but when you are exposed to a religion from birth it is often difficult to make a rational decision as you are already on the inside, often unable to look at it from an outside perspective.
No (I think I quoted you with one thought in mind and went off in another; my bad) you have not said that but that is the impression I get from conversations with you. Is it correct?
-I believe that many people have very poor reasons for believing in a god, such as "Because it's in the bible" or something similar. But when it comes to people who examine their faith I do not necessarily equate that the religious person is lacking in information, just that they read into the gaps too much. |
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
-- Albert Einstein (1879-1955) "The belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary; men alone are quite capable of every wickedness."
-- Joseph Conrad (1857-1924) With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
--Steven Weinberg(1933- )
| | | |
| |
| |
Elite Pathogen
Last Seen:
Today @ 7:47 PM
Posts: 4,494
Visits: 11,167
|
| | |
| | 
sweetP
Last Seen:
1/4/2009 12:11 AM
Posts: 4,812
Visits: 8,435
|
| | |
| |
LUNATIC ATHEIST!!11!!!
Last Seen:
Yesterday @ 12:54 PM
Posts: 3,364
Visits: 11,080
|
| -Sorry psweet, I got a bit preoccupied with jerm's replies.
Also, your logic that he is responsible because he created the seeds that grew into the diseases is faulty. A parent gives birth to a child... Is that parent responsible for what their grandchildren do, after they are dead and buried (completely removed from a position of influence in their grandchildrens' lives)? Apparently, you would think so. God did not specifically intend for bacteria to evolve into pathogens. The fact that he brought the parents, so to speak, of the pathogens into the world does not make him responsible. That is what I'm trying to say.
-You're ignoring the omnipotence of god. He can remove disease, he can remove all ails(sp?). To compare a human to a god just doesn't work.
I do understand what you're saying. I respectfully disagree. Again, I point to the definition of malevolent. God does not introduce disease with the intention of causing pain and suffering. If he did, I would agree with you, that is malevolent. I do not believe he did so. Because he did not do it with the intention of causing pain, because he does not specifically WANT pain, he is not malevolent.
-Inaction is just as destructive as negative action and as an omnipotent god he should know that. As Epicurus says; "If he is able but not willing then he is malevolent." Therein it is, that is the point I'm trying to make and malevolence is innate in an omnipotent god that does not intervene to stop "evil." Also, the fact that you think he made this universe with the intent to test us then he is responsible for the various means in which we are tested. Therefore if he does not want suffering to be part of the test then he should remove it, the opposite being that he wants us to suffer as a "test." Maaaa-levolence. |
--
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
-- Albert Einstein (1879-1955) "The belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary; men alone are quite capable of every wickedness."
-- Joseph Conrad (1857-1924) With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
--Steven Weinberg(1933- )
| | | |
| |
| |
sweetP
Last Seen:
1/4/2009 12:11 AM
Posts: 4,812
Visits: 8,435
|
| | |
|
|
|
