Teaching Religion To Children?

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='21 October 2009 - 12:46 PM' timestamp='1256143563' post='1989030']
You can only justify the OP in the rejection of objective truth. Since we reject the premise, we reject the conclusion.
[/quote]

Action failed: You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='21 October 2009 - 04:29 PM' timestamp='1256156970' post='1989133']
If someone started instructing my kids in Atheism or Zoroastrianism, any other ism except Catholicism, then there would be trouble.
[/quote]

[Anomaly]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='21 October 2009 - 01:44 PM' timestamp='1256143453' post='1989025']
Absolute silliness.
One would be creating little monsters, because one would be precluded from teaching right from wrong.
[/quote]Religion does not have an exclusive hold on morals, values, or ethics. To claim so would deny Natural Law, now wouldn't it?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='21 October 2009 - 09:53 PM' timestamp='1256180030' post='1989389']
Religion does not have an exclusive hold on morals, values, or ethics. To claim so would deny Natural Law, now wouldn't it?
[/quote]
In my opinion, if one is consistently atheist, then it should lead them to reject Natural Law as an irrelevant evolutionary construct, which one could freely break whenever one so desired.

i.e., We are prohibited in all cultures to murder. If I were a consistent atheist, I would see this as a product of compounded cultural conditioning, which is ultimately good for the human race, but not necessarily good for me. Therefore if I thought I could have a more pleasurable life by breaking that rule, I could do so with no justification. Why should I sacrifice my own happiness for the good of a whole race, considering there's nothing after death anyway?

[Varg]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='21 October 2009 - 11:53 PM' timestamp='1256183615' post='1989426']
i.e., We are prohibited in all cultures to murder. If I were a consistent atheist, I would see this as a product of compounded cultural conditioning, which is ultimately good for the human race, but not necessarily good for me. Therefore if I thought I could have a more pleasurable life by breaking that rule, I could do so with no justification. Why should I sacrifice my own happiness for the good of a whole race, considering there's nothing after death anyway?
[/quote]So what you're saying is that people don't commit sins because they're afraid of not going to heaven?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Varg' date='22 October 2009 - 04:02 AM' timestamp='1256202166' post='1989582']
So what you're saying is that people don't commit sins because they're afraid of not going to heaven?
[/quote]
No, I'm saying that without God, morality is irrational and unnecessary.

[Varg]

Riiiiiight...

[Sojourner]

Realistically, I don't think you can prevent people from talking to your kids about what they believe, whether it's active proselytizing on an individual level or your kids seeing people expressing their beliefs in the public forum -- television, street protestors, friends who believe differently, displays of non-Catholic religious icons, etc. And frankly, I value free speech enough that I'm willing to allow for those influences to be part of my childrens' lives.

As a parent, though, you are responsible for helping your child learn the truth, and learn how to discern truth from falsehood. Solid foundation at home is essential, along with talking through things your kids see and hear from others. That is my theory, at least. I'll let you know in 20 years how it works out.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Varg' date='22 October 2009 - 11:04 AM' timestamp='1256227486' post='1989643']
Riiiiiight...
[/quote]
If you disagree, then develop why.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Varg' date='21 October 2009 - 12:37 PM' timestamp='1256143026' post='1989017']
I personally think it's wrong to preach any form of religion (including atheism) to young children. They should be left until they are old enough to make the descision for themselves.

What do the people of the good ship Phatmass think of this issue?
[/quote]
Considering that many people later change their religious, political, philosphical views, I'd condemn your idea as asinine.

Better that we teach them to think. Imagine how much easier your life would be if you had been taught the rudiments of logic.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Varg' date='22 October 2009 - 04:02 AM' timestamp='1256202166' post='1989582']
So what you're saying is that people don't commit sins because they're afraid of not going to heaven?
[/quote]
Either that or they are afraid of going to jail, getting a ticket, getting fired, divorcing, or just being caught and embarrassed. A sin is something that hurts our relationships, like with God, our friends, family, neighbors. Each has its own consequence.

[Winchester]

If you pretend hard enough, you can convince yourself we're completely simple and thus dismiss us. Wearing Ruby slippers can't hurt, either.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Varg' date='22 October 2009 - 12:04 PM' timestamp='1256227486' post='1989643']
Riiiiiight...
[/quote]
It's not our fault you adopted a position simply to outrage people.

Don't turn into a troll, Varg. Learn.

[Anomaly]

[b][/b][quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='22 October 2009 - 12:53 AM' timestamp='1256183615' post='1989426']
In my opinion, if one is consistently atheist, then it should lead them to reject Natural Law as an irrelevant evolutionary construct, which one could freely break whenever one so desired.

i.e., We are prohibited in all cultures to murder. If I were a consistent atheist, I would see this as a product of compounded cultural conditioning, which is ultimately good for the human race, but not necessarily good for me. Therefore if I thought I could have a more pleasurable life by breaking that rule, I could do so with no justification. Why should I sacrifice my own happiness for the good of a whole race, considering there's nothing after death anyway?
[/quote]Many altruistic actions do not come from structured religious up-bringing. Even a child has a sense of right or wrong. A conscience is not just a creation of Religion.
And what's a 'consistent atheist? Is that kinda like a perfect christian?

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='22 October 2009 - 06:16 PM' timestamp='1256253377' post='1989845']
[b][/b]Many altruistic actions do not come from structured religious up-bringing. Even a child has a sense of right or wrong. A conscience is not just a creation of Religion.
And what's a 'consistent atheist? Is that kinda like a perfect christian?
[/quote]
Oh yea, I don't deny any of this. You miss my point.

I believe that this sense of right and wrong that every person has is Natural Law. I also believe that if one is a consistent atheist (I'll address that below), then they should reject natural law. The only way to explain its existence is by more or less "what's best for humans as a race", if you know what I'm getting at. A consistent atheist should see no particular value in the human race as a whole surviving- why should he? If after his death everything is over, who cares what he does? He might as well be as happy as he could possibly be. If that means killing someone that gets in his way, or abusing people, or stealing, then why not? It's not like there's consequences. It should be essentially opportunistic- do whatever will make him happiest in the long run. If he won't get caught, or if the consequences don't outweigh the benefits, then go for it., but there isn't an inherent value for him in doing what he's been conditioned to think is 'right', since right and wrong are arbitrary.

By consistent atheist, I basically mean intellectually honest. An atheist who fully understands the implications of his beliefs and never contradicts himself. Obviously most people aren't intellectually consistent like this, but it's the assumption we make so that we can model behaviour.