1st April 2010

“Freedom from indoctrination ought to be a basic human right for all children.”

Björn Ulvaeus

33 Responses to “1st April 2010”

  1. solomon Says:

    Childrens should be equipped with strong adequate shields so that they are not easily swayed like most of the Atheists.They should be equipped with truth.The campaign of the hypocrates as if children are tout with religion as a mental torture or what so ever is just tactics to break these shields and to sabotage religion so that they can easily influence those innocent kids.

  2. sam Says:

    For the first time people are able to speak about the lies and fairytales the bible teaches us from a young age. Religion is not torture but it is brainwashing the youth.

  3. CaptainZero1969 Says:

    It’s maddening to hear theists equate religious indoctrination with materialism. That, friends, is double speak in the purest Orwellian tradition. What’s more, the purveyors of this slur cannot help but know that they are lying when they say this. A child, raised with a proper understanding of the natural world, without being told by authority figures that there are angles, demons, gods, flying horses, zombies and “transubstantiation”, could not help but conclude that these are all fantasies.

    If the sellers of religion really held their own convictions to be true and self evident then they would not fear secular education, as they very clearly do. But they know that if their flock is not taught to be fleeced at a young age there would be no flock.

  4. solomon Says:

    The questions or morals here is Who brings truth?Whats wrong with telling there are angles, demons, god not gods, flying horses=buraq, zombies(I doubt) apart from “transubstantiation”(no comment,leave it to tech) if its the truth?How can you prove its just fantasies?There are tons of possibilities.
    Most Atheist started off with a strong religous backgrounds as often claimed.With this kind of scenario they can’t even grasp with faith, what will happen to those childrens if they are exposed to the secular education ill hidden agendas.
    Early religous education or thoughts Must & Will go on forever.

  5. Atheist MC Says:

    Wow Solomon I think you just invoked rule #1 again.
    Your question “who brings truth” is very telling. The problem with religion is that excluding a common belief in supernatural agency most religious truths are mutually exclusive. There is no objective way to determine whether God is as Mohamed describes him, or is more like Vishnu or the Catholic Trinity or Loki or Qeztacoatl.
    Naturalism however does give an epistemological basis for truth that (dogma and wishful thinking aside) can be objectively agreed on by everyone (hint if you want to mount a rational argument against this, research Alvin Plantinga).
    As the Cap’n points out

    If the sellers of religion really held their own convictions to be true and self evident then they would not fear secular education

    A secular education should not be a barrier to religion if the truth of supernatural agency was obvious and religions would still have their places of worship and scripture to place before minds un-biased towards any particular faith.

  6. j sutton Says:

    An impossible goal, of course, if we are to give parents the right to raise children as they see best. However, in an open democracy it is important that the state does not collude in the abuse. One aspect of indoctrination is the abusers need to prevent their victims from experiencing alternatives. The line between indoctrination and education or explanation and brainwashing is crossed in faith schools. These should not be funded by the taxpayer.

  7. solomon Says:

    The taxpayers are the religous lots.You Atheists contribute a negligible amount of tax.So its better off to exercise a bit of silence.

  8. Atheist MC Says:

    The line between indoctrination and education or explanation and brainwashing is crossed in faith schools. These should not be funded by the taxpayer.

    Yea verily!

  9. Atheist MC Says:

    Although I can’t cite the source atmo. In general atheists are better educated, more likely to be in a profession and on average better paid than religious people, so on an individual level atheists probably pay more tax (not to mention that in most countries religious institutions are tax exempt so atheist are funding them too). While there are undoubtedly more religious people than atheists, those people follow hundreds if not thousands of denominations so their taxes most likely fund faith schools to which they are not aligned. Are you happy that your tax $/£ supports hindu schools. Or in other words is it your contention that teaching childrenany religion is better than teaching them none.

  10. Atheist MC Says:

    I’ve just realised who Björn Ulvaeus is. Mama Mia! 🙂

  11. Atheros Says:

    I coudn’t agree more Björn.

  12. Holysmokes Says:

    Lets look at this quote head on. How could we as a world wide society realistically stop children from being indoctrinated about silly superstitions? Short of removing children from their homes, or jailing parents for violating any potential law on the subject, I see no way to correct the problem. The only possible alternative is education. Even if successful, that will still take generations, or a massive scientific breakthrough squelching the god concept once and for all.

  13. Atheist MC Says:

    Lets look at this quote head on. How could we as a world wide society realistically stop children from being indoctrinated about silly superstitions?

    This was j sutton’s point and like you I think it’s correct. We have to allow parents the right to convey their world view to their children, anything else would be unenforceable and probably undesirable anyway. What we should do though is make sure that away from the home children have the right to hear alternative viewpoints. School education should be secular and religion only taught as comparative and cultural so it becomes obvious that there are many different strands of thought. Science of course should always be science and not mixed with theology. I do not assume this would raise a generation of atheists, nor do I necessarily want that, but at least children who grew up religious would be doing so with all the information available.

  14. steve Says:

    Children should be equipped with shields so that they are not easily swayed like Atheists. They should be equipped with truth. The campaign of the hypocrites that children are taught with religion as a mental torture is just a tactic to break their shields and to sabotage religion so that the Atheists can easily influence those innocent kids.

    The moral of the story here is Who brings truth? What’s wrong with telling children that there are angels, demons, god not gods, flying burros, if its the truth? How can you prove its just fantasy? There are tons of possibility.

    Most Atheists started off with a strong religious background as claimed. With this kind of scenario they can’t even grasp, with faith, what will happen to those children if they are exposed to the secular education and ill hidden agendas.

    Early religious education must and will go on forever.

    The taxpayers are the religious lots. Atheists contribute a negligible amount of tax. So it’s better off to exercise a bit of silence.

    This has been a tribute.
    (Happy April Fool’s Day)

  15. steve Says:

    What was the penalty again?

    Sigh.

    I apologize for the previous post. Material like that just just is not found anywhere. Scary part is, that Troll is sincere! Sollie’s mind is an example of the kind of delusional thought that allows for suicide bombers. Maybe it is better to keep Sollie busy here and keep him away from any sort of ballistic endeavor.

    On to the Quote.

    A child’s freedom from indoctrination would be hard to accomplish, but that does not mean that it is not a laudable goal. The same skills that will allow a child to become a fully functional adult will let them see through the imaginary world of superstition. We need to teach the basic skill of critical thinking, and we need to do it early.

  16. The Heretic Says:

    I disagree with the idea that children who have religious parents should be “re”indoctrinated at schools with “other views”. How a parent brings up his/her child is up to him/her. Society shouldn’t meddle with that. That would be Orwellian at best.

    Do I like it that children are brainwashed by their parents with religion? No. But I would also say that there are plenty of children that the brainwashing doesn’t “take”. Schools need to be completely neutral and ignore the subject entirely, save comparitively. An emphasis on science in the curriculum will further erode superstition.

    In summary, parents should be allowed to raise their children in any manner they deem fit. With the exception of abuse (and religion, no matter how much you dislike it (short of genital mutilation and the like) is not abuse), they should be able to raise their children to pay homage to whatever deity suits them, even if it is made of pasta and smells of basil. Those rights should be sacrosanct.

    A religion neutral society will sort out those adolescent persons later.

  17. Talnoy Says:

    “You Atheists contribute a negligible amount of tax.”

    What the hell drugs are you on?

  18. CaptainZero1969 Says:

    Good comments today!

    Heretic – there are rather a lot of circumstances where the rights of society or of the child can and do trump the parents wishes. Often times the state is late to step in resulting in children dying of, say, the flu.

    I don’t know how you enforce it but I think we fail in our duty to defend children when we allow their parents to stunt their mental development. We do not countenance foot binding and female circumcision. Eventually we will do away with male circumcision and mental foot binding.

  19. Hypatia Says:

    I’m glad to see that Ulvaeus is not one of those björn again types…

    (sorry – couldn’t resist!)

  20. steve Says:

    There are times that religious indoctrination IS a form of abuse. Maybe not torture, but abuse.

    Should a child lie in bed at night in fear of imaginary sky fairies, or should a parent give comfort to their child? Should your knuckles be rapped with a ruler by a pudgy old woman in a penguin suit?

    Or, as in my case, should you be led to believe that you were going to be ‘raptured’? Whole families, preparing to leave this earth. Yes, there is a long story here.

    Long story short, religious indoctrination CAN be abuse and it can be dangerous. It is not always, but never say never.

    We need to give our children basic critical thinking skills, and if the parents are unable or unwilling, it should come as early as possible in school.

  21. steve Says:

    Hypatia: Boo! Hiss! (Wish I’d thought of it first.)

  22. Atheist MC Says:

    Steve: We all thought it, just exercised a little self control 🙂

  23. Atheist MC Says:

    Long story short, religious indoctrination CAN be abuse and it can be dangerous. It is not always, but never say never.

    You might like to read this piece by a very courageous woman called Sarah Braasch

  24. steve Says:

    AMC, thanks.

    That link was a little too close to home, schizophrenic siblings and all. My past was a little different; better, I guess, in that I was a male in a patriarchal cult, and my father died when I was young so it was a little more evenly matched battle of wills. At least I could easily run away at will.

    But that story contains way too many similarities to mine for comfort, including me ‘saving’ my siblings by continuing the ‘tough love’. I still regret my treatment of my brothers.

    I do not wish to make this a blog about me, so I am stopping now.

    But, yes, religious indoctrination can be child abuse.

  25. Atheist MC Says:

    Shit! Sorry Steve, I wish I had your email address but I’m gonna post this here in the hope that it might make a difference to outcomes (this is not an easy read). Sarah has become a friend of mine on FB and in other online forums, she is an awesome individual and I hope to meet her in person quite soon. She now works in Paris for Ni Putes Ni Soumis supporting ghettoised women (mainly Muslim).

  26. Atheist MC Says:

    Sorry Steve I’m posting elsewhere and pasted the wrong link. Sarah’s follow up article is [here] following the recent death of her brother.

  27. steve Says:

    Thanks AMC – I have found them as well. I was intrigued, did a web search. I appreciate it.

  28. steve Says:

    Sollie – here, have a good read.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ni_Putes_Ni_Soumises

  29. Holysmokes Says:

    steve,

    To answer your eelier question about the penalty. As I recall, you are supposed to side and defend “said person” for the next three days, regardless of how outrageous the commentary. This should be interesting. Good Luck!

  30. Holysmokes Says:

    Ummm, make that EARLIER. Stupid typos!

  31. steve Says:

    Holysmokes, just checking – are you sure it was not ‘eerier’? ‘Cause that works, too, when referencing the “said person”.

    OK. Thanks HS, I now have my mission. I am heading out of town, so I will have to bring my laptop. This will be a daunting challenge, but I earned it. I assume it is OK to visit the local loony bin for assistance with the correct syntax and punctuation, right? Right .Burnin hell!

  32. Holysmokes Says:

    Oh sure. In fact you might try running down the street yelling, “The sky is falling too.” lol

  33. solomon Says:

    Dear steve,
    The NPNS movement which in their earlier goal is to claim justice for this group later being perpetuated by hypocrates even to raise false sentiments like

    1.Pressure to wear the hijab
    2.Pressure to marry early without being able to choose the husband.

    Theres no any such pressure impose to muslims.On the other hand wearing hijab is beneficial for them, for men does not notice their beauty thus lowers the possibility of being gang raped.