Should teaching eternal hell be a crime?

[LuisDantas]

What? I'm not at all anti-religious. I take offense at your claim.

As for families, quite a few are already broken but refuse to admit. I find that unsettling and in need of urgent fix.

 

[no-body]

It's a complicated question I think. I mean should you throw a parent in jail because they tell their children that a policeman will come and lock them away forever if they don't brush their teeth? Sure most people with common sense will know it's retarded parenting, but once you start legislating opinions it becomes a slippery slope.

For that matter I don't see how certain Christians who teach non-existence rather than the hell belief to be any better. A God that will bring you back to life and give you immortality and superpowers if you give it unquestioning obedience is a little better than one that will throw you into a pit of fire if you don't belive, but just barely.

 

[ChristineES]

No. You can't stop people from teaching what they believe, even if you disagree with it. Next, someone will be wanting to make the teaching of nuts a crime (I just developed an allergy to nuts).

 

[Revoltingest]

What? I'm not at all anti-religious. I take offense at your claim.

You're proposing that a large segment of believers be prohibited from teaching their tenets to
their children, under threat of the state taking custody of them. This is very anti-religion.

As for families, quite a few are already broken but refuse to admit. I find that unsettling and in need of urgent fix.

You propose confiscating children from all such families, not just the broken ones.

 

[LuisDantas]

Maybe you have never met people emotionally scared by the teaching of Hell. I have.

 

[lunamoth]

If outlawing it is going to solve the problem let us outlaw war, too.

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't blame you. But you're proposing that a large segment of believers be prohibited from teaching their tenets to their children, under threat of the state taking custody of them. This is very anti-religion.

If it were a "large segment" who scared their children with threats of an eternal Hell, then yes, that is what I would propose. Hopefully we haven't arrived at such a sad scenario, but if we have, then you are right.

Also, please take notice that I made a point of saying we should have degrees of enforcement. Taking custody away from the natural parents is quite traumatic and should be avoided, of course. It just happens that it is not always worse than the alternatives.

By all means we should avoid it, mainly by allowing children to realize that it is ok not to believe in Hell from an early age.

That said, if wanting to protect children from such emotional scarring is "anti-religion", then I am definitely anti-religion and proud of it.

You propose confiscating children from all such families, not just the broken ones.

That is just plain false.

 

[ChristineES]

If outlawing it is going to solve the problem let us outlaw war, too.

While we're at it, let's outlaw expletives, the not wearing of deodorant (particularly on a hot day), the words "stupid", "idiot", "moron", "imbecile" and the like. And not walking your dog when you know your neighbors are allergic to pet dander. (Sorry, I am feeling a bit sarcastic this morning).

 

[Revoltingest]

If it were a "large segment" who scared their children with threats of an eternal Hell, then yes, that is what I would propose. Hopefully we haven't arrived at such a sad scenario, but if we have, then you are right.

Also, please take notice that I made a point of saying we should have degrees of enforcement. Taking custody away from the natural parents is quite traumatic and should be avoided, of course. It just happens that it is not always worse than the alternatives.

By all means we should avoid it, mainly by allowing children to realize that it is ok not to believe in Hell from an early age.

That said, if wanting to protect children from such emotional scarring is "anti-religion", then I am definitely anti-religion and proud of it.




That is just plain false.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revoltingest
So if parents believe in a religion with eternal Hell, & insist on teaching their faith to their children, you favor the government
taking the kids away & placing them in an orphanage or foster care, eh?

Definitely. It takes a lot less than that, in fact. IMO guardianship for natural parents is given far too often and questioned way less often than it should.

I was going by the above exchange. You might find my take on your post wrong, but not false.

 

[LuisDantas]

It is categorically wrong and false. Your take on what I said was quite reckless and verges dangerously into libel territory.

Although I guess I shouldn't have given so much weight to the word "insist" in your question, come to think of it. The key is how strongly they would insist, and against which kind of resistance from the kids.

 

[Revoltingest]

It is categorically wrong and false. Your take on what I said was quite reckless and verges dangerously into libel territory.

You answered "Definitely." to my very specific question.
So an accusation of "libel" is rather over the top.

 

[LuisDantas]

Sorry, but I don't take lightly to being called anti-religious. Please see the update on my previous response (#30).

 

[Revoltingest]

Sorry, but I don't take lightly to being called anti-religious. Please see the update on my previous response (#30).

I'm sure your not "anti" towards some religions. But you propose to regulate religious teaching to such an extent that tens of millions
of American parents would be subject to extreme sanctions (loss of their kids) for teaching their faith to their own children. The
massive scale of such governmental interference strikes me as anti-religious.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm sure your not "anti" towards some religions.

Yes. Those that aren't otherwise morally or criminally wrong.

I'm a straight secularist, I don't think "being religious" should make any difference outside the strictly personal context.

But you propose to regulate religious teaching to such an extent that tens of millions of American parents would be subject to extreme sanctions (loss of their kids) for teaching their faith to their own children.

Only if they insist in doing so despite the consequences to their children, and after far less severe measures fail to revert or avoid the emotional damage. I thought I made that clear enough already.

The massive scale of such governmental interference strikes me as anti-religious.

Nope, it is just catastrophic.

 

[England my lionheart]

I voted yes,i think if its taught as an absolute it is a crime,it would be impossible to Police though so it matters little.

 

[839311]

No. You can't stop people from teaching what they believe, even if you disagree with it. Next, someone will be wanting to make the teaching of nuts a crime (I just developed an allergy to nuts).

Sure you can. Go to a busy street corner in Mecca and start preaching to people about your beliefs. While your at it, tell them that you believe Muhammad is a false prophet. You will be stopped, to say the least.

Evil done in the name of religion is unwisely tolerated by our society. What happened to many of the child raping priests? Were they prosecuted? Nope. Reassigned to another church. Are you ******* kidding me? People need to wake up.

This isn't a joke. Comparing terrorizing people with eternal punishment with nuts is disturbing. The damage done to people through the preaching of eternal torment isn't funny. It causes people harm. It makes them live in fear. It terrorizes them in such a ghastly way that those peoples' senses are overwhelmed and they accept whatever cult the preacher belongs to. It strips away at their ability to reasonably think about what is right and wrong. They begin to believe that torturing people forever is a perfectly good thing. "God does it, and God is perfectly good, so that means that torturing people forever is good. I personally don't like it, or understand how it could possibly be good, but it must be good. I don't want my atheist sister to be tormented forever, but then that's what she gets for not being Christian. I'd better continue to tell her that she's going to hell unless she accepts the teaching of my wonderful, loving denomination."

 

[Revoltingest]

I voted yes,i think if its taught as an absolute it is a crime,it would be impossible to Police though so it matters little.

Something which is illegal with severe consequences, but is hard to police, ends up being enforced capriciously.
It would probably matter a great deal in the few cases where the government over-reacts.

 

[England my lionheart]

Something which is illegal with severe consequences, but is hard to police, ends up being enforced capriciously.
It would probably matter a great deal in the few cases where the government over-reacts.

There is that of course,thats why i said it makes little difference to regard it as a crime,it simply couldn't be Policed or enforced in a fair way but i still consider it a crime non the less.

 

[839311]

Something which is illegal with severe consequences, but is hard to police, ends up being enforced capriciously.
It would probably matter a great deal in the few cases where the government over-reacts.

I don't think the consequences for preaching eternal torment should be severe. Maybe a fine together with mandatory attendance at a Christian church which does not teach eternal torture. For a second offense maybe a significantly larger fine. I think this would make more than a few preachers think twice before they terrorize others with this evil teaching. It would be a significant human rights achievement if society and the state no longer tolerated the harm that preachers inflict on people with this evil teaching of eternal torment.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't think the consequences for preaching eternal torment should be severe. Maybe a fine together with mandatory attendance at a Christian church which does not teach eternal torture. For a second offense maybe a significantly larger fine. I think this would make more than a few preachers think twice before they terrorize others with this evil teaching. It would be a significant human rights achievement if society and the state no longer tolerated the harm that preachers inflict on people with this evil teaching of eternal torment.

Mandatory church attendance? Whatever suffering you spare a child by sparing them the knowledge of Hell,
would be more than offset by the country-wide violent open rebellion such a policy would cause.