Richard Dawkins says children need to be ‘protected’ from religion.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Russ

Spot on. If one of mine decides they want to follow a particular belief system there are those who will either accuse me of pressurising them in to believing or that I should have done my bit to discourage such beliefs.

Madness.

and what if you walk into the room and their all enjoying a read of the god delusion by Richard Dawkins and agreeing with it .

[idi banashapan]

Originally Posted by Russ

Spot on. If one of mine decides they want to follow a particular belief system there are those who will either accuse me of pressurising them in to believing or that I should have done my bit to discourage such beliefs.

Madness.

Unfortunately, you are right. There always will be those who will blanket-accuse unfairly. Not too unlike presuming or believing that just because a family may read a particular newspaper, for example, that they will 'sit round the dinner table holding dispassionate seminars on comparative religion', which I too do not think is a healthy way to express, question or build any kind of unbiased, educated or informed opinion on a topic.

For the record, in case that comment regarding Guardian readers by Chris was aimed at myself, we do not read newspapers in my house. if something in the public domain peaks our interest, we tend to search for and read multiple sources to gain a balanced view. yes, it takes a bit longer than taking up the opinion fed to us by the mainstream media or single story one might glance over, but even the media can be biased or not present all the information. as I have already said, we should never lose the thirst to question what we are told, because it is that ability that allows us to become a more rounded and open minded person.

I think that to even begin to break down the barriers between those who choose to believe, those who are indifferent to religion and those who choose not to believe, ALL parties need to stop being so defensive about their own personal stance and learn to listen and accept that other's views, thoughts and beliefs are just as valid as their own ones. Even more so those who are aggressively defensive. those who, ironically, shout that no one should tell them what to believe, or that what they do is wrong, or that they are being tarred with a single brush, and then throw back accusations or presumptions that are just as unfounded and uninformed as the ones they themselves have just been upset by.

We should all be able to believe what we wish without feeling pressured into it through manipulation, be that mental (fear, indoctrination, blackmail, et cetera) or physical (punishment, pain, restraint, et cetera). It should make no difference if someone wants to believe something or not. And no single view point should be forced upon another, especially if that person is not able to make an informed, cognitive decision on the topic - in the same way as an elderly person may be influenced, pressured or out rightly led into parting with their life savings by a callous sales person or con man - we all know that is wrong and it should be considered no different to someone telling or manipulating a child that they should, or equally, should not, believe in a God. And we would all do well to remember that a belief is not necessarily a fact, be that for or against any religious inclinations. 'Belief', 'truth' and 'fact' can be mutually exclusive from one another.

---------- Post added at 14:10 ---------- Previous post was at 13:42 ----------

Originally Posted by papa smurf

and what if you walk into the room and their all enjoying a read of the god delusion by Richard Dawkins and agreeing with it .

This is a good question.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

and what if you walk into the room and their all enjoying a read of the god delusion by Richard Dawkins and agreeing with it .

Go ahead, tell me what you think.

You do all realise that many children reject that which their parents believe.It does not always follow that children remain 'indoctrinated' by anything their parents say or do.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Russ

Go ahead, tell me what you think.

its not about what i think .its about "what if you walk into the room and their all enjoying a read of the god delusion by Richard Dawkins and agreeing with it ."

[Russ]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

its not about what i think its about "what if you walk into the room and their all enjoying a read of the god delusion by Richard Dawkins and agreeing with it ."

Yeah I'm asking why you want to know, what do you think I'd do/say.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Russ

Yeah I'm asking why you want to know, what do you think I'd do/say.

never mind- if the idea is too uncomfortable for you to contemplate lets just move on and pretend i never asked.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

never mind- if the idea is too uncomfortable for you to contemplate lets just move on and pretend i never asked.

lol ok

What do you expect me to say? I’d lock them in a room and refuse them food and water until they recant their heretic ways?

I’d be disappointed and hope they see through his BS.

---------- Post added at 17:44 ---------- Previous post was at 17:43 ----------

Maybe get them a copy of the brilliant "The Dawkins Delusion" instead.

[idi banashapan]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

You do all realise that many children reject that which their parents believe.It does not always follow that children remain 'indoctrinated' by anything their parents say or do.

which is why it is so important that you allow the choice to be their own. you hand them the information, and let them create their own conclusions.

indoctrination (in this case into religion) differs however;

Authority
it will involve a level of manipulation by the Authoritative figure(s) - be that a Pope, Vicar, Care-Giver, Cleric, whatever. there may even be punishment if the subject does not follow the code, such as we saw only this week (http://bit.ly/1JZBYyz).

Reciprocation
The child may also be told that the religion will give them support, love and reward if they simply abide by the rules and beliefs that the religion sets out.

Commitment / Consistency
If the child openly agrees, or is baptised, or follows through with any ceremony that the religion deems necessary as part of an inclusion or right of passage, the child has then openly committed to that faith and will be far more inclined to be consistent with the commitment they have made.

Scarcity
Some religions state that the places for eternal reward after death are scarce, so you must strictly follow the rules set out to have any chance of 'getting in'.

Likeability
The religion welcomes warmly new-comers and aims to give support and love to members within the group, much like any group of peers that like-minded people are member of.

Social Proofing
If a family is already part of a religious group, there will be a tendency for the younger members of the family to follow suit. once at the place of worship or when surrounded by those of a similar mindset, everyone that the child sees has similar interests and beliefs. when everyone else is doing it, who is the child to question why? they are far more likely to follow the lead of the adults in the group.


and there we have the 6 principles of influence at play within a religious setting. of course, not all communities will use these forcefully or manipulatively. not all religions will use all 6 principles, and if they do, they will be varying degrees of intensity. but none-the-less, the principles are at play. equally, militant atheists may well do the same to put children off religion. this is equally as bad because it does not allow a full view or fair narrative in order to base a sound judgement.

---------- Post added at 16:52 ---------- Previous post was at 16:45 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

lol ok

What do you expect me to say? I’d lock them in a room and refuse them food and water until they recant their heretic ways?

I’d be disappointed and hope they see through his BS.

---------- Post added at 17:44 ---------- Previous post was at 17:43 ----------

Maybe get them a copy of the brilliant "The Dawkins Delusion" instead.

I don't think Papa Smurf's question was in any way intended to be a personal attack. it was a valid question which could and should have led to a mature and adult, considerate response. your answer appears to have the hallmarks of a defensive response, which I mentioned in an earlier post on this thread as being something we should all avoid doing.

but open up your answer. why do you believe it to be BS? what specifically has Richard Dawkins said that makes you so angry or upset? we need this information to debate. giving short, nondescript, single line answers gets us nowhere. let's use this debate forum to debate, and debate well. asking questions and listening to the responses, then responding with consideration. how else can we possible begin to understand another's point of view otherwise?

[Russ]

I’ve made my feelings on Dawkins clear many times. He’s made it his mission to make people lose their faith, he’s said so in interviews promoting his book regardless of the questionable ‘evidence’ in his book. The Dawkins Delusion counters all his points and demonstrates where he embellishes, misquotes and takes things out of context.

[idi banashapan]

Originally Posted by Russ

I’ve made my feelings on Dawkins clear many times. He’s made it his mission to make people lose their faith, he’s said so in interviews promoting his book regardless of the questionable ‘evidence’ in his book. The Dawkins Delusion counters all his points and demonstrates where he embellishes, misquotes and takes things out of context.

do you not feel that your very first post on this thread took his words out of context? Where Richard Dawkins has said that indoctrination should be avoided, you have taken it to mean he is telling you how to bring up your child and that he wouldn't want you to even discuss religion in your own home. is your response not just as bad as how you feel Richard Dawkins has taken religion and it's teachings out of context too?

if you look into what Richard Dawkins says, he does not try to make people lose their faith. what he wants is for people to be able to step back and question their faith, religion and religion's teachings. if, after doing so, one returns to that faith, then so be it. his point is more about people blindly following a belief system without ever asking why they are doing it or whether doing so is benefiting or potentially hindering them as a person.

EDIT: but that aside, please humour us for the sake of this thread - what is it specifically that Dawkins says that you consider BS? what specifically has upset or angered you? they are simple questions.

I don't think it reasonable to make each person who reads this thread have to go trawling through years of forum posts to find snippets of your muses on him in order to further comment here. much the same as when someone on the forum makes a point which refers to a study, experiment, new article or viewpoint, you will request that a link to the evidence that is posted or referred, and do not feel you should have to google it yourself. take almost every single thread started by ArthurGray50 for example.

[Russ]

Dawkins DOES want people to lose their faith, he said so in promotional interviews for his book. He tries so hard at a gimmick of a wise scholar who warmly seeks open debate when in reality he would like nothing mote than for religion to die out. That's his right obviously, I'd respect him more if he was just more honest about it. The number of counter points made in the Dawkins Delusion indicates he put more effort in to trying to destroy someone's faith than researching real facts and quoting scripture accurately.

I know of people who have lost their faith after reading his book and their lives are now miserable as a result. I have no time for the man.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Russ

Dawkins DOES want people to lose their faith, he said so in promotional interviews for his book. He tries so hard at a gimmick of a wise scholar who warmly seeks open debate when in reality he would like nothing mote than for religion to die out. That's his right obviously, I'd respect him more if he was just more honest about it. The number of counter points made in the Dawkins Delusion indicates he put more effort in to trying to destroy someone's faith than researching real facts and quoting scripture accurately.

I know of people who have lost their faith after reading his book and their lives are now miserable as a result. I have no time for the man.

what about all those people who found faith from reading the bible doesn't that balance things out .

[Russ]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

what about all those people who found faith from reading the bible doesn't that balance things out .

I haven't spoken to them all so I wouldn't know.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Russ

I haven't spoken to them all so I wouldn't know.

perhaps he's doing religion a favor by separating the wheat from the chaff ,if people loose their faith by reading his book it couldn't have been very strong.