HOME | DD

Published: 2012-12-06 11:38:42 +0000 UTC; Views: 29978; Favourites: 938; Downloads: 21
Redirect to original
Description
Before you start whining and/or reporting my stamp(s) as offensive to your sensitive little head -I do not believe that it would be morally acceptable for me (me, myself, personally) to raise whatever children I do end up having to be religious in any way. I was not raised 'forced' to believe -- slightly suggested was more like it -- and I think I turned out just fine.
Now, that's not to say I'm not going to expose my children to the many different religions out there. Religions are very interesting things. I think they're worth having a look at. I would like to show them these different faiths, while at the same time making sure they know that people all over the world believe many different things, and that while these things are interesting and fun to think and talk about, they cannot all be true.
When my kids get to an age where they can decide for themselves what they want to believe, then I'll go on from there. If the end up Christian,Hindu, Pagan, Jewish, Muslim, Atheist... then that's their decision, and I will want them to know that I support them no matter what.
So don't think that I'm an evil atheist who is going to force my children to NOT believe, just don't think that I'm going to force them TO believe anything supernatural in particular, either.
As a side note - While I was taking a shower today I had a fun little idea - Science Sunday School! There really aren't any Sunday School options for... well. Atheists. But it'd be really neat to see someone put together a Sunday School program for children interested in science and stuff -- regardless of faith. How awesome would that be?
Edit:
I should also add that NO. I am not trying to make science into a religion. I can see how my previous wording could have been mistaken by someone not really paying attention the the whole paragraph. That's okay, I'm used to people taking quotes out of context and trying to use them to justify silliness.
Science is obviously not a religion. Sunday School, as I experienced it, was mostly about creating community and friends, while still learning and enjoying something that we had a common interest in -- in that case, yes, it was God. But the difference here is that I do not worship science, and that accepting children of other faiths into whatever science club would come would NOT be about religious experience. You can enjoy science while still being of X, Y, and Z faith.
The point of said school would be to encourage an interest in science - something that America desperately will need of its youth if it wants to continue to compete in the world economy in the future. That's the way I see it.
Additionally - I could call it a "Sunday Science Club," but you know what? Nah. I'm going to stick with School. Because Christianity does not have a monopoly on Sunday activities, they do not own the words "Sunday" or "School," and you know what? S.S.S. looks way cooler than S.S.C. It even sounds more bad-ass, like a snake or something.
You know what, I'm totally going to go through with this when I move back to the US. And our mascot will be the snakes. I'll make billboards and post them on the sides of the roads so that everyone will be forced to look at them, too. And if your kid is too busy going to Church to attend this bad-ass super sweet Sunday Science School, then that's too bad. The rest of the Super Sweet Sunday Science School Snakes and I will be doing Science and not giving a single damn, because that's just how we roll.
SCIENCE SNAKES FO LYFE (But only the one life, because the majority of us will probably not believe in an afterlife. Although some might, but still, it's worth mentioning that there is probably no God, just to piss you off.)
EDIT
Adding on some fun things for certain people:
The Jefferson Bible - Thomas Jefferson's version of the New Testament wherein he removed all sections of the four gospels which contain the Resurrection, most miracles, passages indicating that Jesus was divine, and most mentions of the supernatural.
Thomas Jefferson - one of America's founding fathers. Was a Christian in name, however held deistic views. Insisted on the separation of Church and State on several different occasions.
Deism - the belief that reason and observation of the natural world are sufficient to determine the existence of God, accompanied with the rejection of revelation and authority as a source of religious knowledge. Deism became prominent in the 17th and 18th centuries during the Age of Enlightenment among intellectuals raised as Christians who believed in one god, but found fault with organized religion and could not believe in supernatural events such as miracles, the inerrancy of scriptures, or the Trinity.
Christian Fundamentalism - a movement within Protestantism upholding a literal reading of the Bible. Fundamentalists fight against things like evolution because it contradicts their warm fuzzy feelings about God popping everything into existence as-is (despite evidence that supports the Theory of Evolution), and are viewed by many as intolerant, narrow-minded, and obscurantist.
Creationism - the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural being, usually the Abrahamic flavour of God. Despite mounds of evidence that is in support of evolution, and an enormous LACK of evidence for creationism, people still cling to this way of thinking because, because God! And Jesus! Tide goes in, tide goes out! You can't explain that!
Atheism - the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. That's it. Seriously.
Texture Used: Knitwear 1 by ~Stocondil
Related content
Comments: 919
PeteSeeger In reply to ??? [2015-01-30 14:50:22 +0000 UTC]
So going to Church is equivalent to abuse?
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-02 19:54:03 +0000 UTC]
Not if you do it of your own volition once old enough to make that decision sensibly, no. Which is not what we were talking about here.
What's equivalent to psychological child abuse, though, is baptizing kids at a young age or indoctrinating them religiously.
I've been there, it has been done to me, and I hate the people who did it for what they did.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-03 02:35:58 +0000 UTC]
Oh boo-damn hoo. Parents make you go to Church? Splash some water on your head as a baby? Oh the horrors!
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-03 10:17:34 +0000 UTC]
Yeah, try to play it down, go ahead, try.
Fact is that such an action constitutes pissing on my sovereignty as a person, it means a violation of my right to decide for myself.
The damn catholic church will forever consider me one of their fucking members, since in their eyes baptism is irreversible. This is a choice that was taken away from me, made without my consent. It's a matter of principle.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-03 11:48:37 +0000 UTC]
I'm playing it down because you treat it like you were actually abused.
In a world where people are murdered for their beliefs, imprisoned for speaking out against the powers that be, and slaves to public opinions I'll certainly weep for the loss of your right to decide whether or not to have your soul saved.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-03 12:17:17 +0000 UTC]
The fact that other people in other situations may have it worse than me does not negate any wrongs committed against me.
This kind of argumentation is used often, but it's no more right for it. Like I said, it's a matter of principle. If rights can be taken away from individuals under the pretext of religion, that's a problem.
And you imply that my soul would need saving. It doesn't.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-03 19:51:11 +0000 UTC]
Oh yes. Having to get up early on a Sunday is absolute violation of your human rights.
What rights were taken away from you?
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-04 13:26:59 +0000 UTC]
My right of religious freedom, for one.
Where I come from, we moreover also have a right to something we germans call "freie PersΓΆnlichkeitsentfaltung", which means something along the lines of "free development of personality", roughly translated.
A decision like baptism in the catholic church is quite significant, spiritually, and therefore taking away this decision from me violates both of those rights.
I do not care how much you ridicule it, the fact of the matter is that it was a violation of my personal rights.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-04 20:01:56 +0000 UTC]
Baptism is your family agreeing to raise you within the Body of Christ, the Holy Catholic Church.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-05 22:16:49 +0000 UTC]
Precisely. A decision that was never theirs to make. Not that the government cares, they have a record of looking the other way where religion is concerned ...
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-06 02:46:47 +0000 UTC]
Oh don't even start. Anything religion does is evil incarnate to you people.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-06 11:13:59 +0000 UTC]
Not everything, no. Only when it happens to violate people's rights or something like that. Happens fairly often, though. Sadly.
Did I mention that my pastor back when I was a kid (someone I happened to like a lot, by the way .... I shudder at the thought now) turned out to be a child molester? Never did anything to me personally, but still.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-06 11:47:51 +0000 UTC]
For everyone one bad priest there are hundreds if not thousands of good priests.
Your violation of rights so far has been limited to having water splashed on your forehead as a child and having to wake up early on Sundays.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-06 16:57:03 +0000 UTC]
No, it has not. I have explained it to you before, what has been violated here is a fundamental human right.
(Not that I ever did get up early on sundays, besides ... I've always found ways around it ... )
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-06 19:55:41 +0000 UTC]
Some would say not allowing parents to raise their children in their chosen faith is a violation of their rights.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-06 23:37:59 +0000 UTC]
What right states that parents have the right to decide their child's religion, then?
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-06 23:58:25 +0000 UTC]
That's a given of the freedom of religion.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-07 10:05:32 +0000 UTC]
Actually, no. It's not stated anywhere, and it should be common sense that such a decision can only be made by each individual themselves.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-07 13:44:47 +0000 UTC]
But it's unfair to dictate to parents how they can raise their child.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-09 11:17:36 +0000 UTC]
No, it isn't. Parents cannot raise their kids however they like. They cannot legally beat the shit out of their kids, either.
And in the end ... what's more important here? Giving parents the right to do whatever they want with their kids or giving the kids the right of making fundamental life choices (because that's what religiosity - or the lack thereof - is) on its own?
Wouldn't it be just as unfair to take such a decision from somebody?
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-09 16:30:39 +0000 UTC]
Once htye're adults they can freely choose to leave their faith or stay with it.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-09 18:36:36 +0000 UTC]
Doesn't change the fact that the decision has already been made and baptism is irreversible as far as those clergy monkeys are concerned.
Doesn't change the fact that it was never the parents' decision to make.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-09 19:31:15 +0000 UTC]
So the government should have more power over children than they're parents? That right?
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-09 20:02:14 +0000 UTC]
No. There should simply be some things that are off-limits to parents. Forcing a child into a particular religion should be classified as psychological child abuse and punished accordingly.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-09 20:57:48 +0000 UTC]
So parents should raise their children secularly regardless of their personal religious beliefs?
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-10 08:38:10 +0000 UTC]
Of course. Their beliefs are theirs. They have no right to force them onto their children.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-10 11:47:52 +0000 UTC]
I think you blame religion for all the crappy stuff that has happened to you in your life.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-10 11:55:00 +0000 UTC]
Actually, I don't. There isn't much crappy stuff that has happened to me.
I do, however, blame religion for a fuckton of crappy stuff that has happened all across history and continues to happen today.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-10 20:08:34 +0000 UTC]
If not for religion people would do just as much shit but for different reasons.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-10 21:40:50 +0000 UTC]
I highly doubt that. Sure, some deranged people who now use their religion to justify atrocities they would've committed anyway would still do it, but just look at the conflicts in the islamic world alone, how many young people are brainwashed into killing "unbelievers" and ultimately themselves ... those aren't all bad people per sΓ©. Their religion is what makes them do these things.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-10 22:26:42 +0000 UTC]
If you honestly believe people need religion to be evil you are one stupid kraut.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-11 20:44:30 +0000 UTC]
You should read what I actually say instead of putting words in my mouth.
No, obviously people do not need religion to be evil. That doesn't change the fact that religion can (and does) cause otherwise decent people to do evil. That's a very obvious thing, one need only look around in the world today to see this. Religion is and always was a tool for the powerful to control the weak-minded.
And we're down to racial slurs already? That escalated quickly ... might as well go all the way and call me a nazi, go ahead.
Show me your bigotry in all its ugliness, go on.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-11 20:47:10 +0000 UTC]
You just don't want to admit some people are just evil. If religion makes them evil, then they are above all else stupid.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-11 21:04:51 +0000 UTC]
It must be nice to live in a world where everything is clearly black and white.
Thing is, reality isn't black and white. Reality consists of shades of grey, and I assure you that it has more than fifty ...
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-11 21:10:58 +0000 UTC]
I didn't say things were all black and white.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-11 21:14:13 +0000 UTC]
No, but you implied it.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-11 22:53:47 +0000 UTC]
Oh yes.
See, there is no such thing as someone being "just evil". Reality is more complex than that. So if you think that some people are "just evil", your worldview is very binary.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-11 23:47:47 +0000 UTC]
So there is no evil in this world?
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-12 00:22:10 +0000 UTC]
Did I say that? Read again.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-12 00:34:30 +0000 UTC]
Everyone, no matter what they've done, has some excuse? That what you're saying?
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-12 12:56:34 +0000 UTC]
It's not about excuses. It's about the world not being as simple as you make it out to be.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-12 19:49:02 +0000 UTC]
I don't make it out to be simple whatsoever.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-12 20:41:36 +0000 UTC]
Your previous comment implies otherwise.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-13 08:52:40 +0000 UTC]
I'm not going to quote it to you. The great thing about the internet is that you can go look at what you wrote yourself.
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-13 11:42:03 +0000 UTC]
I know what I wrote but I don't understand why you perceive it as advocating black-and-white morality.
π: 0 β©: 1
VonRabenherz In reply to PeteSeeger [2015-02-13 12:51:31 +0000 UTC]
We weren't talking about morality ...
π: 0 β©: 1
PeteSeeger In reply to VonRabenherz [2015-02-13 20:02:23 +0000 UTC]
So what did you interpret as being black and white then?
π: 0 β©: 0
ToastyBrain In reply to ??? [2014-11-13 19:20:50 +0000 UTC]
If I have kids, those scrappers wouldn't go near a church, unless they want to go willingly. As long as I don't have to hear about god from 'em, I'm good.
π: 0 β©: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>