[idi banashapan]

Originally Posted by Chris

For a person of faith, Idi, the existence of multiple religions is not analogous to the existence of multiple motor manufacturers. I might "guide" my son as to the best choice between a VW and a Vauxhall. I would not "guide" him as to the best path up a mountain if I knew one of those paths to end in a cliff drop.

so, are you saying that as someone of faith, with children, you are indeed more bias towards getting them to follow the faith you feel suits you best without considering what they might feel best suits them, or without allowing them to stay neutral until a time comes in their life where they are mature enough to make their own choice? Would you freely accept their choice to not have a faith, or if they did have faith, to then abandon it without question?

Originally Posted by Chris

You do not have a faith; you therefore, I suspect, simply don't understand what it entails. Doubtless you would argue that I can know empirically if a mountain path leads to doom whereas I cannot know that my God exists. Faith, however, is a certainty of the truth of something unseen. To me, it is absolutely real, due to my ongoing practice of my faith and my trust in God to act towards me as promised in the Bible, and I have no hesitation in telling my children this.

You are right, I do not have faith. And again, your are correct that I do not fully comprehend how you experience that. This does not take away though, that I understand what faith is, as a concept. I have twice in this thread alone explained how I see the difference between 'belief' (which encompasses faith), 'truth' and 'fact'. as of yet, not a single person has commented, either in agreement or disagreement, to my understanding of those concepts. I therefore take the presumption that my understanding of them is not only fair, but also accepted by others here. If not, I would expect someone to tell me I am wrong. I absolutely take on board that your faith is very real to you. that is fine. I have no issue with that, provided that faith was found by you, on your terms, without an external force manipulating you into thinking it was what you should think or believe. I refer you back to my previous posts regarding the 6 main principles of influence in this thread to explain what they are and how they could work in religious settings.

Originally Posted by Chris

You may find that unacceptable, and you may attempt to give your argument a veneer of moral superiority by implying that instructing children in faith suggests a corrupt power relationship in the family, but given that North Korea is the only place on earth where the implications of your argument have come close to reaching their logical conclusion, I don't think you're ever likely to see the State stepping in and ruling against parents for taking their own children to church on a Sunday and requiring them to participate in Sunday school.

what I find dangerous (not unacceptable), is the manipulation of ANY persons into following ANY ideology. I'm not really sure how many more times in this thread alone I need to say that. Or how else I can put it. This concern is NOT limited to religion. The reason I have concern about the manipulation of others to believe something without question is because to blindly accept something as the truth, or the only way, hinders ones ability to question. and to think people then become afraid to question because of a fear of punishment, whatever is may be, means it holds back that person's progression, their learning. If we all just said "well, we have steel to build bridges from, that will do", then we would never question if we could make something better, something stronger, and we would be stuck to the physical limitations of using one thing to continue our existence. A thought process that is stuck with one single focus is much the same. People will just sit back and say "well that's what we have been told is true so there's no point it trying to think outside that 'reality'." and so they never become more.

Originally Posted by Chris

Or else what?
No matter how you dress it up and how hard you try to sound reasonable, your argument is utterly self-serving and at the same time quite lacking in self awareness. How you bring up your kids is your business. How a Christian, Muslim or Buddhist brings up his kids is his business. It is not the State's and it is not his neighbour's.

I'm sorry you feel that I am dressing up my points. I'm not trying to. But at this stage, I'm not too sure how Else I can make my point that I feel ANY manipulation of persons regarding ANY ideology is dangerous and should be discouraged.

Is that really an unfair view?
is that really so upsetting?
is it really a personal attack on those who chose to follow religion?
How is that view self-serving?
How is that view lacking self awareness?
Have I, at any stage, told anyone here that they must question their religion?
Have I, at any stage, told anyone here that they must bring up their children a certain way?