Ex-Christian apologizes to everyone

[Kathryn]

Were the wonderful tales in the Old Testament among your bedtime stories?

There are many exciting and interesting stories in the Old Testament. The stories of Joseph, Rahab, King Solomon, King David, Elijah and Elisha, Moses, etc. I loved hearing them as a little girl, as well as the stories of Paul's adventures, Jesus and his travels, the parables, etc.

My parents also taught me to think independently, to analyze, critique, and question. They made sure that their three children got to travel extensively, explore, and create. They filled our home with books and art supplies, and made sure our time sitting in front of the TV was limited. I was reading at college level by the time I was seven years old, thanks in part to their encouragement. I cut my teeth on GK Chesterton.

They did a great job raising us, and I tried to pass along the best of their parenting skills to my own four kids, who are now doing a great job as parents themselves.

 

[Sunstone]

I think if we are going to start talking about human nature, as some of us seem determined to do, then we should recognize it can be human nature to put down people we don't agree with. Perhaps this is the origin of the notion that Rechelle is not sincere? That she is a fraud? That she is a hater?

Whether or not it is the orgin of the notion she is a fraud, etc, it is far easier to assert that Rechelle is a fraud than it is to assert she is mistaken in her belief she committed some offense when she was a Christian that now requires her repentance.

So, by all means, go ahead and tell me that Rechelle is not sincere, is a fraud, is a hater. I certainly will not believe you unless you provide some compelling evidence for your claim. And if you repeatedly assert she is a fraud, etc, without supporting your assertions with compelling evidence, then what does that make you?

As for myself, I'm not sure what to think of Rechelle's desire to apologize for behaviors she thinks were inspired by Christianity. I don't know that an apology is necessary.

 

[Sunstone]

Atheist of the 20th century have as much of a checkered past as any religious group. Both Mao and Po Pot have filled the minds of children with crap. They also killed many just because they had a faith. You must remember that Mao invaded Tibet killed and raped because he believed that religion poison. The 20th century has shown that religion is not the only opiate of the people.

Would you please provide compelling evidence that atheism encourages killing people, filling the minds of children with crap, raping Tibet, or doing anything else that would compel a reasonable atheist to apologize for having been an atheist.

 

[sonofskeptish]

You don't have an argument. You're streotyping.

Actually it's you who don't have an argument. Force-feeding kids religious beliefs of any kind is child abuse. And when confronted with this, the religious quickly envoke freedom of religion as their right to abuse their children and feed them beliefs disguised as facts. Some claim these beliefs are "loving, guilt-free" beliefs, somehow thinking this making them exempt from critisizm, while others fill their teachings with "guilt and fear" to make it stick. In either case, it's suppressing the child's free-will and free-thought.

 

[Storm]

Actually it's you who don't have an argument. Force-feeding kids religious beliefs of any kind is child abuse. And when confronted with this, the religious quickly envoke freedom of religion as their right to abuse their children and feed them beliefs disguised as facts. Some claim these beliefs are "loving, guilt-free" beliefs, somehow thinking this making them exempt from critisizm, while others fill their teachings with "guilt and fear" to make it stick. In either case, it's suppressing the child's free-will and free-thought.

No, it isn't. Child abuse, be it psychological or otherwise, is TRAUMATIC. It leaves scars. That's what makes it abuse.

I actually was abused, and there are no words for how much this tripe ****** me off. Not as a believer, but a survivor. In labelling Sunday School abusive, you belittle the real suffering I and far too many others actually endured.

I know it makes you feel all nice and self-righteous to use the most horrific thing you can think of, but it screams of callous naivete.

 

[sonofskeptish]

There are many exciting and interesting stories in the Old Testament. The stories of Joseph, Rahab, King Solomon, King David, Elijah and Elisha, Moses, etc. I loved hearing them as a little girl, as well as the stories of Paul's adventures, Jesus and his travels, the parables, etc.

My parents also taught me to think independently, to analyze, critique, and question. They made sure that their three children got to travel extensively, explore, and create. They filled our home with books and art supplies, and made sure our time sitting in front of the TV was limited. I was reading at college level by the time I was seven years old, thanks in part to their encouragement. I cut my teeth on GK Chesterton.

They did a great job raising us, and I tried to pass along the best of their parenting skills to my own four kids, who are now doing a great job as parents themselves.

It sounds like your parents are/were good people. I'm assuming the censored the horrors contained in the OT:

Evil Bible Home Page

 

[sonofskeptish]

And here I thought Hitler is an example people use against religion....

You're correct... I've seen him used both ways. Bottom line, he was a madman first, and anything else second.

 

[Watchmen]

Actually it's you who don't have an argument. Force-feeding kids religious beliefs of any kind is child abuse. And when confronted with this, the religious quickly envoke freedom of religion as their right to abuse their children and feed them beliefs disguised as facts. Some claim these beliefs are "loving, guilt-free" beliefs, somehow thinking this making them exempt from critisizm, while others fill their teachings with "guilt and fear" to make it stick. In either case, it's suppressing the child's free-will and free-thought.

So, you're argument is teaching any religious belief is abuse or "burn in hell" teachings are abuse? Which is it? You keep changing.

 

[Sunstone]

Force-feeding kids religious beliefs of any kind is child abuse. In either case, it's suppressing the child's free-will and free-thought.

So, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that force-feeding kid's religious beliefs is child abuse because it suppresses the child's free will and free thought? Is that how you see it?

 

[sonofskeptish]

In labelling Sunday School abusive, you belittle the real suffering I and far too many others actually endured.

Point taken, the intention was not to belittle other forms of abuse. Sorry. Also, there is clearly a difference between scenarios where loving, lightly-religious parents tell bedtime stories that are not scary, and households where children are continually bombarded with messages of eternal damnation and self-worthlessness and guilt.

 

[Storm]

Point taken, the intention was not to belittle other forms of abuse. Sorry. Also, there is clearly a difference between scenarios where loving, lightly-religious parents tell bedtime stories that are not scary, and households where children are continually bombarded with messages of eternal damnation and self-worthlessness and guilt.

Apology accepted.

 

[sonofskeptish]

So, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that force-feeding kid's religious beliefs is child abuse because it suppresses the child's free will and free thought? Is that how you see it?

Perhaps my choice of words is a little harsh, but yes.

I've seen several young children permanently scarred by the teachings of their fanatical parents. One example from my childhood is particularly haunting where a young boy's religious parents oppressed him, his young class mates ridiculed him, and in the end, he snapped and stabbed a teacher in the back. I acknowledge this is an extreme example, and that there were likely other factors, but the poor kid never had a chance. I feel we all have a responsibility to protect kids from such scenarios. What's wrong with treating religion like alcohol and making it something an individual can choose when their minds have developed... giving the kids freedom of religion indepedent of what their parents believe. While one parent is using religious freedom to teach one thing, another is using it to teach something else. Where do you draw the line? Should a gay child live in fear of his parents? Should a child who is questioning his family's faith not have the same rights as those outside his family?

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Would you please provide compelling evidence that atheism encourages killing people, filling the minds of children with crap, raping Tibet, or doing anything else that would compel a reasonable atheist to apologize for having been an atheist.

One of Mao's battle cry was to rid Tibet of religion. Unless a Atheist was a part of that he would have no need to apologize. Just like a Quaker would have no need to apologize for for the bad behavior of Christians. They have almost a spotless history. I feel no need to apologize for the caste system in India. My sect never played a part in it. However, If it makes someone feel better I would be more then happy to say I am sorry,

 

[Autodidact]

So suppression of thought is the way you want to go? If religion is right, then isn't it the atheists who are filling defenseless children's minds with lies?

I don't know of any atheists who bring their children to regular group gatherings to chant and sing that there is no God. I've never met an atheist who threatened their child with eternal damnation for believing in God. In fact, most atheists I know let their children know that it's up to them to figure out whether there is a God and if so what Her nature is; that's certainly how I do.

 

[Storm]

Perhaps my choice of words is a little harsh, but yes.

I've seen several young children permanently scarred by the teachings of their fanatical parents. One example from my childhood is particularly haunting where a young boy's religious parents oppressed him, his young class mates ridiculed him, and in the end, he snapped and stabbed a teacher in the back. I acknowledge this is an extreme example, and that there were likely other factors, but the poor kid never had a chance. I feel we all have a responsibility to protect kids from such scenarios. What's wrong with treating religion like alcohol and making it something an individual can choose when their minds have developed... giving the kids freedom of religion indepedent of what their parents believe. While one parent is using religious freedom to teach one thing, another is using it to teach something else. Where do you draw the line? Should a gay child live in fear of his parents? Should a child who is questioning his family's faith not have the same rights as those outside his family?

Well, anything can be made to be abusive. That doesn't justify infirnging on the rights of good parents to raise their children according to their own values.

 

[Autodidact]

Are you serious? This isn't "standard Christian culture" or the way most Christians raise their kids. Sheeze, please tell me you're not that gullible.

But then, I guess it must be "standard human behavior" to automatically accept and believe grossly exxagerated tales about groups that you are already prejudiced against.

It's not a grossly exaggerated tale; it's an individual relating her personal experience. Kind of the opposite, really.

 

[Sunstone]

Perhaps my choice of words is a little harsh, but yes.

I've seen several young children permanently scarred by the teachings of their fanatical parents. One example from my childhood is particularly haunting where a young boy's religious parents oppressed him, his young class mates ridiculed him, and in the end, he snapped and stabbed a teacher in the back. I acknowledge this is an extreme example, and that there were likely other factors, but the poor kid never had a chance. I feel we all have a responsibility to protect kids from such scenarios. What's wrong with treating religion like alcohol and making it something an individual can choose when their minds have developed... giving the kids freedom of religion indepedent of what their parents believe. While one parent is using religious freedom to teach one thing, another is using it to teach something else. Where do you draw the line? Should a gay child live in fear of his parents? Should a child who is questioning his family's faith not have the same rights as those outside his family?

I agree that religion can -- under some circumstances -- be a tool of abuse.

 

[Autodidact]

Here's an idea - let's allow responsible parents who love their children raise them with the moral values that they believe provide the best framework for their children's growth - without interfering with or undermining their authority to do so.

We certainly allow it, that's not at issue. The question is, should they? Is it right? And it's not moral values we're worried about, it's statements, stories, descriptions that are not based on a strong factual foundation.

 

[sandandfoam]

We certainly allow it, that's not at issue. The question is, should they? Is it right? And it's not moral values we're worried about, it's statements, stories, descriptions that are not based on a strong factual foundation.

I believe it is right. Facts are provisional.
Parents are responsible for their children. I believe any transfer of that responsibility away from parents is a move in the wrong direction.

 

[sandandfoam]

I agree that religion can -- under some circumstances -- be a tool of abuse.

Abusers have many tools.
I think it's better to focus on the abuser than their tools.