Religious Children

[Andy_Copland 0]

Quote

Just
as feminists wince when they hear 'he' rather than 'he or she', or
'man' rather than 'human', I want everybody to flinch whenever we
hear a phrase such as 'Catholic child' or 'Muslim child'. Speak of a
'child of Catholic parents' if you like; but if you hear anybody
speak of a 'Catholic child', stop them and politely point out that
children are too young to know where they stand on such issues,
just as they are too young to know where they stand on economics
or politics. Precisely because my purpose is consciousness-raising,
I shall not apologize for mentioning it here in the Preface as well
as in Chapter 9. You can't say it too often. I'll say it again. That
is not a Muslim child, but a child of Muslim parents. That child is
too young to know whether it is a Muslim or not. There is no
such thing as a Muslim child. There is no such thing as a Christian
child.

This is part of a book im reading (if you want it feel free to PM me) and although im only a couple of chapters in, its an interesting read even if i wouldn't call myself an Atheist.

Anyone else flicked through "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins? Thoughts?

1338

People aint made of nothin' but water and shit.

Until morale improves, the beatings will continue.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Anyone else flicked through "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins?

You know, I keep thinking I'd like to read one of his books, but there is something just so annoying about the dude that I can never be bothered.

And I'm curious about what age of "child" he is referring to. If he's talking about a five-year-old, then I'd agree. But much older than that and children do begin to think about these things for themselves. And I think that when they are old enough to know whether they are a Muslim (or whatever) or not depends on the person, but for quite a few people it would be before the age of 18.

[Andy_Copland 0]

I thought the same thing, when is the child old enough in his opinion to be a free thinker.

1338

People aint made of nothin' but water and shit.

Until morale improves, the beatings will continue.

[DZJ 0]

I had a friend at school, the son of two Christian parents, who was more than a little bit keen on evangelical Christianity. When I voiced the view that if he'd been born to Catholic or Muslim or Hindu or Jewish or Sikh parents he'd probably be as equally keen a Catholic/Muslim/Hindu/Jew/Sikh, he regarded this as totally and utterly impossible because his faith was the true one. Obviously.

[br0k3n 0]

I thought it was an excellent read, and I agree the involuntary indoctrination of children into there parents religion is utterly disgraceful; children are vulnerable enough with out adults programming them with there own superstitious rubbish.

We don’t send out children to a Labor/Liberal or democratic schools. You ask any parent what there 5/6/7/8 9 year olds political views are and they will explain that they are far you young to understand politics.

I was the same, my parents took me to church every Sunday, and had my baptised etc, and i don’t think it was until i was in my 20s that i was mature enough to fully evaluate religious belief for what it really is, and actually question it, and discover that there is absolutely no evidence what so ever to support any of the mainstream brands of god.

I think certainly a person will be well into there teen years before they are in a position to make an educated decision about there own particular belief systems.

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[crozby 0]

Its a very interesting book but Dawkins is a patronizing bastard.

[birdlike 0]

I don't get around to reading much nonfiction, but I may have to pick this one up. It sounds like it's right up my alley. It's a weird coincidence, but just a few days ago I was pondering the subject of kids being raised to be religious, and thinking that it was a disgusting thing.

Yes, a disgusting thing. It warps kids, like Chinese foot-binding distorts Chinese women's feet. Kids will absorb and adopt whatever religion that the parents put before them (and force them to learn about). If Child X is raised by Christians, he will be taught Christian doctrine and then when he's about 12 or 13 years old he will be able to stand on his own and tell others that Christianity is the way, and Christ died on the cross for man's sins, etc.

But if Child X had been orphaned at 6 months old, then adopted and raised by Chinese Buddhists, do you think he would reach age 13 and be telling people--and believing--that Christ dies on the cross for man's sins? Of course not. This pretty much proves to me that the child is a blank slate, and it is unfair to boost the enrollment of any given religion by simply indoctrinating children from birth. It's an illegitimate way to get believers to adhere to a faith. A child who believes in a given religion because he was taught it from birth through adolescence is not proof that he really believes it; it's all he's known.

Now, if an adult was brought up through childhood with NO religion, and then as an adult checks them all out and then goes with a certain one and becomes an adherent, that's a much more legitimate choice. In fact, the other way is not a choice at all--clearly.

I must close by saying that I feel that anyone who chooses to believe any religion is ... well, I won't seek to insult here, so I'll just say "is making a mistake."

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[birdlike 0]

Quote

Its a very interesting book but Dawkins is a patronizing bastard.

Patronizing, or condescending?

Spirits fly on dangerous missions
Imaginations on fire

[Squeak 17]

Quote

I thought the same thing, when is the child old enough in his opinion to be a free thinker.

There are a hell of a lot of adults who are yet to develop that skill

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

Quote

I thought the same thing, when is the child old enough in his opinion to be a free thinker.

There are a hell of a lot of adults who are yet to develop that skill

I was thinking the same thing. My 11 y/o son has asked me some pretty insightful questions re: religion. Heck, I think he's probably more thoughtful about it than I am. What's kinda funny is that I have rarely taken him to church, but sometimes he wants to go...to the church that I was raised in. I didn't put that in his head. He's figuring it out for himself. Kinda cool.

:)
linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

Its a very interesting book but Dawkins is a patronizing bastard.

Patronizing, or condescending?

You just sit and have your milk an cookies, and I'll explain it without using too many big words. Oh, and don't forget to wash your hands!



Now was that patronizing or condescending?

[crozby 0]

Quote

Now was that patronizing or condescending?

To patronize is to treat someone in a condescending manner.

I thought everyone knew that.

Back on topic, the problem I have with Dawkins is he behaves like a "fundamentalist" athiest - he's rude and disrespectful to people who don't deserve it.

There are plenty (the majority?) of religious people in the world who cause no harm to anyone and benefit greatly from the practice of religion, but Dawkins dispises all believers in all faiths regardless.

After reading Dawkins I bought "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart D. Ehrman. It describes how the bible as we know it is very different to the original documents (for example the "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" passage was not in the original documents at all, it was added by a scribe centuries later). It is a less-rabid, but just as interesting read.

[cam 0]

I read his book and didn't think he was "fundamentalist" (did you read the passage where he discussed the charge?).

Clearly many religious people do see it as rude and disrespectful to say their religion is based on myth, but why is that necessarily a bad thing? it was a big part of why he wrote the book - there is way too much "respect" paid to religion, and he details some of the harmful consequences that arise from that. Why should someone 'respect' views that don't have any evidence to support them? ("respect" because I can't see how, having arrived at the conclusion that believing in god/gods is rather like believing in invisible green fairies, you can honestly respect the belief of someone who does - however much you might like them as a person, or admire their other qualities)

as I recall, the arguments Dawkins raises in his book are aimed at the beliefs - it's "this is why I have come to the conclusion that X belief is without good foundation", not "you're stupid"

anyway, glad to see this thread - have just finished reading the book, found it very worthwhile

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

We don’t send out children to a Labor/Liberal or democratic schools. You ask any parent what there 5/6/7/8 9 year olds political views are and they will explain that they are far you young to understand politics.

I don't know. I think a lot of people grow up listening to their parents' political beliefs and then just keep those same beliefs without questioning them too much. I've talked to people who vote either Democrat or Republican because "that's how they've always voted, since that's how their parents always voted."

Quote

I think certainly a person will be well into there teen years before they are in a position to make an educated decision about there own particular belief systems.

I was around eight years old when I realized that my beliefs were different from the Baptist church I had always gone to. I think the age is going to be different for everyone.