Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ampersand]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouKeepUsingThatWord?from=Main.YouFailSemanticsForever

[Idiom]

¿ rents, and our agreement includes usage of my computer. I heard him typing more than usual the last couple nights and decided I might as well see what he's up to. Stirring up religion topics. Hmm. I daresay I am as disappointed in whoever actually let themselves be dragged down by it as I am in him.

I do technically have the ability to revoke his internet access, if anyone thinks he's too much.

Let's see if I can screw up his hard work and salvage this thread. I am wondering:
Should impressionable minds be allowed to be exposed to serious religious (or anti-religious) influence (Such as this TV show or the many religious equivalents)? Or should it be taboo until a certain age much like sex?

I personally think it should non-existent until they are more capable of their own thinking, rather than being programed, so they can find whatever actually works for them, and for the other half of you, whatever was meant to work for them. The intolerances are so deep seated I think they result from early exposure.

¿ is glaring at me so hard I can feel it boring into the back of my skull. Here he is again. I've got to go and get some work done.

[¿]

Hey I'm not THAT bad. It's your own fault if you ever respond to someone who's trying to make you.

If we let people grow up forging their own conclusions about life, we'd just end up with a bunch of people with mushy beliefs that float between agnostic and atheistic, and be mainly centered around the "eh whatever" ideology. Worse case you'd have people as dull as Wiles and LegoLord.

[Ampersand]

I say revoke his access for insulting Wiles and LegoLord.

[G-Flex]

If we let people grow up forging their own conclusions about life, we'd just end up with a bunch of people with mushy beliefs that float between agnostic and atheistic, and be mainly centered around the "eh whatever" ideology. Worse case you'd have people as dull as Wiles and LegoLord.

Are you seriously saying that letting people choose their own beliefs is a *bad* thing?

[¿]

I'm saying people wouldn't have much of what you could even call a belief.

[G-Flex]

Tell that to all the people who are religious or otherwise have a solid belief structure, yet don't share the ones of the parents/community which raised them.

Also, do you really EXPECT, say, adolescents, to think they know everything about the world? Hell, they shouldn't.


Also, there's the case that having somewhat-underdeveloped/uncertain beliefs is a lot better than having solid ones that are completely arbitrary and not the result of actual reason.

[Deathbane]

 

Stop the athiest baiting, you wont get anywhere with them just like you wont get anywhere with fanatical christians.

Just accept that for the most part, that those who have abstracted from the 'errorless' scientific method 'flawless' assumptions and dogma will not be swayed by any arguement, and keep your own corner.

Its really a pointless arguement and only causes these kind of pissing contest threads.

Yes i made a generalisation. No i didnt make a straw man. No, i cant be arsed to use apostraphes. I cant be bothered to type out an explanation, as its a waste of energy.

For why i find athiesm in the majority annoying, see all the well thought out arguements made in the anencaphaly child thread.

I quote from a poster there.

'Euthanize that baby. It is a lower form of life. Less than any household pet. Keeping it alive is a waste of resources. You can always make another. Eventually one wont have this disease.'

Yawn. Thanks for your time.

[LegoLord]

I'm saying people wouldn't have much of what you could even call a belief.

Hey man, I believe in my God.  I just don't think I have any call trying to tell people that they believe the wrong thing (some might have poor reasons, though, which is not a bad thing to talk to a guy about).

[Zangi]

Let's see if I can screw up his hard work and salvage this thread. I am wondering:
Should impressionable minds be allowed to be exposed to serious religious (or anti-religious) influence (Such as this TV show or the many religious equivalents)? Or should it be taboo until a certain age much like sex?

I personally think it should non-existent until they are more capable of their own thinking, rather than being programed, so they can find whatever actually works for them, and for the other half of you, whatever was meant to work for them. The intolerances are so deep seated I think they result from early exposure.

Well its not possible, seeing as religious minded parents will always try to teach their kids about their own religion.(Convert em now... or they may go to hell later mindset.  Parents have ALOT of influence in this sort...) 
Hypothetically, if it is possible...  exposure to serious religion... ... can't say that is possible either... unless the kid lives and hangs around community place/whatever... where people just don't talk about or mention religion.  (Sooner or later, someone is going to open their mouth and be serious about it...)

So yea, hypothetically if kids get no 'serious exposure' or anything... they would be clueless sods when they get to 18.  It would be like...  teaching abstinence to kids.  When them rebellious/adventurous/curious kids actually try at it.  They will screw up bad.  Who hasn't done stupid stuff as a kid?  Oh how cults will be ever so popular.  Just like Scientology, but worse!
... My mind boggles at this hypothetical world.  It just isn't possible...  Maybe someone else can make sense of it...

Though, I have a better alternative.  Teaching kids about all 'major' religions 'equally'.  (Considering how biased things can be... I wouldn't count on equality that much.)  Then, with knowledge in hand...  the brats can decide where to go from there.
(This probably will never happen in America.  There will be too much legal and political fighting for it to ever happen...)

[G-Flex]

Stop the athiest baiting, you wont get anywhere with them just like you wont get anywhere with fanatical christians.

Just accept that for the most part, that those who have abstracted from the 'errorless' scientific method 'flawless' assumptions and dogma will not be swayed by any arguement, and keep your own corner.

I'm not in that category and neither are most of the atheists I know.

Anybody who thinks that scientific process is "errorless" or "flawless" or involves any sort of "dogma" needs to realize that they aren't scientifically-minded people at all.

[Zangi]

The basis of all science....   is trial and error.  Experimentation.

No idea or fact is absolute.  We may one day learn something new that may change what is commonly accepted by the scientific community of how virus' or whatever else works.

[LegoLord]

Well its not possible, seeing as religious minded parents will always try to teach their kids about their own religion.(Convert em now... or they may go to hell later mindset.  Parents have ALOT of influence in this sort...) 
Hypothetically, if it is possible...  exposure to serious religion... ... can't say that is possible either... unless the kid lives and hangs around community place/whatever... where people just don't talk about or mention religion.  (Sooner or later, someone is going to open their mouth and be serious about it...)

So yea, hypothetically if kids get no 'serious exposure' or anything... they would be clueless sods when they get to 18.  It would be like...  teaching abstinence to kids.  When them rebellious/adventurous/curious kids actually try at it.  They will screw up bad.  Who hasn't done stupid stuff as a kid?  Oh how cults will be ever so popular.  Just like Scientology, but worse!
... My mind boggles at this hypothetical world.  It just isn't possible...  Maybe someone else can make sense of it...

Though, I have a better alternative.  Teaching kids about all 'major' religions 'equally'.  (Considering how biased things can be... I wouldn't count on equality that much.)  Then, with knowledge in hand...  the brats can decide where to go from there.
(This probably will never happen in America.  There will be too much legal and political fighting for it to ever happen...)

I don't know about that.  Really, I'm only 16 and even with a lot of religious teaching at a young age (I went to a Catholic school), I developed the complex and independent view you may have seen here earlier.  I used to talk about religion a lot.  It really depends on the parent, the child, age, maturity (not always the same as age), and all kinds of other things on whether you get an independent thinker or a blind follower.