United Nations to ban religion?

[Sonofason]

Oh it's possible. I read a few of them myself. Not realising that some of your fave children's authors also did adult fiction is often how I was exposed to things I probably was not ready to see/read. My Uncle Oswald comes to mind.
Hell because I was a kid in the 90s I played all sorts of adult only games because the adults didn't know games could even be for adults. So as a kid I played things like Doom, Conker's bad fur day, all the GTA games and much more.
Ahh memories.

But it never really harmed me. Perhaps gave me a more dirty sense of humor maybe. But I personally would suggest discussing said books with kids. Put them into context for them, explain to them any questions they might have and you know be a freaking parent! Kids aren't idiots you know, they're resilient little beggers and your handwringing is nothing more than condescension. Which I hated having to put up with as a kid. Adults too afraid to treat me like a person because they assumed I was made of glass. Spare me.

Well, that seems to be what everyone is saying...I think I still disagree.

 

[loverofhumanity]

This was a proposal submitted to the UN la few years back. The formulism site is now off line, but the formulism movement seems quite alive.

Quote:
The resolution is being proposed by Antony Last, founder of formulism.org, a site which claims that freedom FROM religion would be of far greater benefit to mankind than freedom OF religion.

Freedom from Religion | Proposed UN Resolution / Charter Amendment | Version 1.1

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS HEREBY VOW
* to save succeeding generations from the scourge of organized religion, a folly which has brought untold sorrow to mankind through the division, hatred and conflict it engenders, and
* to reaffirm an individual's right to freedom of belief, freedom of conscience and freedom of prayer, and
* to establish conditions under which these freedoms can be privately exercised.
AND FOR THESE ENDS WE UNDERTAKE
1. To outlaw, with immediate effect, the public expression of religious beliefs, including the use of symbols, clothing or markings which are synonymous with any currently or previously existing religions.
2. To outlaw, with immediate effect, public acts of worship or religious declaration.
3. To outlaw, with immediate effect, private gatherings of three or more people for the purposes of engaging in acts of worship or religious services.
4. To outlaw, with immediate effect, the publication of books, literature or articles which seek to promote religious beliefs or encourage adherence to religious doctrine.
5. To outlaw, after a period of amnesty, the personal ownership of books or materials which seek to promote religious beliefs or encourage adherence to religious doctrine. (Books of academic or social interest will be made freely available to schools, universities and public libraries).
6. To outlaw, with immediate effect, the celebration of religiously significant dates.
7. To begin, with immediate effect, the destruction or reassignment of predominantly religious buildings, such as churches, mosques and temples.


See Revelation Chapters 17 & 18

Is that some dream?

Google the lyrics to John Lennon's Imagine

Take note of religious developments in Russia.

This is very relevant and actually a prophecy in our religion that they may try and actually ban religion. The idea may not be that far fetched as some think in light of this quote from Baha'u'llah, Founder of the Baha'i Faith which says attempts to abolish religion will be made.

"Once Varqá asked Bahá'u'lláh, 'How will the Cause of God be universally adopted by mankind?'

Bahá'u'lláh said that first, the nations of the world would arm themselves with infernal engines of war, and when fully armed would attack each other like bloodthirsty beasts. As a result, there would be enormous bloodshed throughout the world.

Then the wise from all nations would gather together to investigate the cause of such bloodshed.

They would come to the conclusion that prejudices were the cause, a major form being religious prejudice. They would therefore try to eliminate religion so as to eliminate prejudice. Later they would realize that man cannot live without religion. Then they would study the teachings of all religions to see which of the religions conformed to the prevailing conditions of the time. It is then that the Cause of God would become universal."
(Revelation of Baha'u'llah Vol.4)

 

[columbus]

Perhaps. Though I agree banning something is laughable. It's the best publicity imaginable.

Yeah, I remember when R rated movies would put "Banned in Boston" on their posters, even when notoriously difficult Boston didn't care enough to ban them.
Tom

 

[SomeRandom]

Yeah, I remember when R rated movies would put "Banned in Boston" on their posters, even when notoriously difficult Boston didn't care enough to ban them.
Tom

Lol
Had a teacher once who read us Roald Dahl's The Twits just because some lady wanted it banned from our school library. I'm fairly certain I read a few books simply because I had heard them getting banned or at least people wanted them banned. Nothing stirs the curiosity like something forbidden.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

That would be great if you knew what they were reading. Do our children tell us everything? I don't think so.

Heh...mine are 6 and 8, so I have a pretty good handle on it.
Whole point (at the moment) is to have them read critically. I read Mein Kampf, for example. There was no reason for my parents to be worried about this (despite me having a shaved head).

 

[SomeRandom]

Well, that seems to be what everyone is saying...I think I still disagree.

Why? Because kids are stupid? Because they have to be protected from thinking? From subjects you deem "inappropriate?"
I'm not surprised kids wouldn't share everything with a person with such a mindset. Someone who does not respect them enough to expect them to learn about the world around them.
You know who the most secretive kids are? The ones with parents who ban them from certain books or TV shows or what have you. I told my dad everything as a kid, because he never judged me and I knew he would answer any questions I had. Nor did he ban me from reading or watching anything. He explained why I would not like watching certain shows or reading certain books as a little tot. And for the most part I took his arguments as reasonable and went back to I dunno reading Dr Seuss or Hairy Mclairy or whatever I read in preschool. But never forbade me. A much better approach.

 

[Sonofason]

As a firm proponent of freedom I think that it isn't damanging for children to read so called "innappropriate" books. I wouldn't give a kid a porno mag but even if someone did I don't think it would ruin them. I think that our society's uber secrecy of sexuality to our children is also wrong. Its wrong to have sex with childen obviously. Castrate the pedophiles for all I care but kids have known about sex since the dawn of time. A mixture of religious shaming of sex and misuided protectionist practices have led to us telling children that babies come from storks. Why lie like that? What is so wrong with sex that we have to keep it hidden from them? We don't hide childbirth anywhere near as much. We don't hide any other bodily function?

There is smiply no good argument against sex education in general; as this is what it boils down too.

Or if you mean by "innappropriate" you mean viewpoints that differ from your own? Hell I don't think its wrong to let kids read Mien Kamphf. I actually encourage it. But have a conversation afterwards. Explain your ideas. I recommend, as an atheist, people read the bible, the Torah and the Koran.It broaden's them as people. Children aren't some pure white cloth that gets stained or infected by the outside world. They are a complex little person who needs to learn and question.

Anyway my two bits on that.

According to the scriptures lying is wrong. So I would not advocate lying to children about sex and where babies come from. But I do think it is important and significant to express the importance of family, and chastity. Our best examples of a healthy family are wrought in families where husbands are faithful to their wives, and wives are faithful to their husbands, spouses that honor and cherish their commitments to one another, who love one another until by death they do part. And even more so ought we cherish the ones that were established in chastity until marriage, the couple that fell in love in their youth, who have never had eyes for another, who reserved their virginity until marriage, and who shall never have eyes for another throughout their entire lives. I understand that children are resilient, but does that mean it's okay to subject them to evil, because we know that they might recover. When we read inappropriate books, do we really ever recover? Are we turning out as perfect as Christ commands us to be?

 

[Sonofason]

Heh...mine are 6 and 8, so I have a pretty good handle on it.
Whole point (at the moment) is to have them read critically. I read Mein Kampf, for example. There was no reason for my parents to be worried about this (despite me having a shaved head).

Yes, we all tend to think we turned out okay. I'm just not certain that we are so right about that. Is okay good enough?

 

[Sonofason]

Why? Because kids are stupid? Because they have to be protected from thinking? From subjects you deem "inappropriate?"
I'm not surprised kids wouldn't share everything with a person with such a mindset. Someone who does not respect them enough to expect them to learn about the world around them.
You know who the most secretive kids are? The ones with parents who ban them from certain books or TV shows or what have you. I told my dad everything as a kid, because he never judged me and I knew he would answer any questions I had. Nor did he ban me from reading or watching anything. He explained why I would not like watching certain shows or reading certain books as a little tot. And for the most part I took his arguments as reasonable and went back to I dunno reading Dr Seuss or Hairy Mclairy or whatever I read in preschool. But never forbade me. A much better approach.

I think you've got me all wrong. My relationship with my children is exactly the same as you describe your relationship was like with your dad. However, I feel compelled to say this. I do not watch anything on television that I do not believe is appropriate for me to see. And I do not read books that are inappropriate for me to read. And it seems as a result I have children that will not watch certain types of programming or read certain kinds of books perhaps because they themselves feel it is inappropriate for themselves to see. So there is no hiding of anything, and I have found that there is no need for much discussion about inappropriate subjects at all.

 

[SomeRandom]

I think you've got me all wrong. My relationship with my children is exactly the same as you describe your relationship was like with your dad. However, I feel compelled to say this. I do not watch anything on television that I do not believe is appropriate for me to see. And I do not read books that are inappropriate for me to read. And it seems as a result I have children that will not watch certain types of programming or read certain kinds of books perhaps because they themselves feel it is inappropriate for themselves to see. So there is no hiding of anything, and I have found that there is no need for much discussion about inappropriate subjects at all.

Sounds kind of......stale. How do you challenge yourself philosophically? How do you question the world around you if you avoid anything "inappropriate?" How do you learn about different perspectives? How do you emotionally challenge yourself? How do you even know your limits?

Also, forgive me, but knowing just how many difficult questions are asked by every kid imaginable, by themselves, never mind having outside sources, I find it a tad hard to believe that "inappropriate subjects" have never come up. I mean my nephew used to ask me why his dick was hard as a toddler. Damned biology.
Kids are curious, they are unfiltered and lack propriety. They ask all sorts of embarrassing and difficult questions.

 

[Sonofason]

Sounds kind of......stale. How do you challenge yourself philosophically? How do you question the world around you if you avoid anything "inappropriate?" How do you learn about different perspectives? How do you emotionally challenge yourself? How do you even know your limits?

Also, forgive me, but knowing just how many difficult questions are asked by every kid imaginable, by themselves, never mind having outside sources, I find it a tad hard to believe that "inappropriate subjects" have never come up. I mean my nephew used to ask me why his dick was hard as a toddler. Damned biology.
Kids are curious, they are unfiltered and lack propriety. They ask all sorts of embarrassing and difficult questions.

I have two daughters. They are 17 and 19 years of age. They both still live at home. One is going to college, and the other will be following right behind her next year. I am quite sure they have a few embarrassing and difficult questions that they likely do not direct to me, but their mother instead. Difficult questions do sometimes arise, but I don't recall having any trouble answering their questions. Likewise, we sometimes have discussions on important issues, some personal, some social. They do not always agree with me. And of course I accept that. I love them, and they know it.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

According to the scriptures lying is wrong. So I would not advocate lying to children about sex and where babies come from. But I do think it is important and significant to express the importance of family, and chastity. Our best examples of a healthy family are wrought in families where husbands are faithful to their wives, and wives are faithful to their husbands, spouses that honor and cherish their commitments to one another, who love one another until by death they do part. And even more so ought we cherish the ones that were established in chastity until marriage, the couple that fell in love in their youth, who have never had eyes for another, who reserved their virginity until marriage, and who shall never have eyes for another throughout their entire lives. I understand that children are resilient, but does that mean it's okay to subject them to evil, because we know that they might recover. When we read inappropriate books, do we really ever recover? Are we turning out as perfect as Christ commands us to be?

I think we agree with the not lying thing to children.

I think the best examples of a healthy family are ones independent of many things you have added. Yes having husbands and wives that are faithful is extremely important. However even more important is being kind and loving to one another. Having a healthy relationship, especially a long term one, is a complex thing that requires good mental health and communication. The chastity of newlyweds is a total non-issue. Abstinence isn't good or evil. It may be right for some and not for others. For children and teenagers I would encourage it because of the risks of pregnancy at that age would spell a significantly higher chance of living in poverty and not obtaining higher education. This goes double for women who get pregnant during teen years.

It is a lie if someone says they have never had eyes for another. This idea of one partner for life doesn't pan out psychologically or practically. In fact the majority of people who are really happy in relationships have had plenty of others. Reasons behind that is you need to know different people to find out what you like and to find out what being good is. The first relationship you will be in you will most likely be terrible at it. That is psychologically every bit as much as sexually. It takes practice to be a good person or at least a functional person in a relationship and those with dating experience often are much better at adapting to the other person.

Subjecting them to evil? I mean why would you ever mention then devil then? Isn't that subjecting them to evil? If not then I don't understand why inappropriate books would be considered subjecting them to evil. Subjecting them to evil would be abuse. If you beat your children or show an ugly side of yourself to them then that is exposing them to evil. Learning from books is not.

 

[SomeRandom]

I have two daughters. They are 17 and 19 years of age. They both still live at home. One is going to college, and the other will be following right behind her next year. I am quite sure they have a few embarrassing and difficult questions that they likely do not direct to me, but their mother instead. Difficult questions do sometimes arise, but I don't recall having any trouble answering their questions. Likewise, we sometimes have discussions on important issues, some personal, some social. They do not always agree with me. And of course I accept that. I love them, and they know it.

Well there's girl talk and then there's dad talk.
But again, if one is comfortable discussing a wide variety of topics then it sort of renders the idea of banning something moot.

 

[Sonofason]

I think we agree with the not lying thing to children.

I think the best examples of a healthy family are ones independent of many things you have added. Yes having husbands and wives that are faithful is extremely important. However even more important is being kind and loving to one another. Having a healthy relationship, especially a long term one, is a complex thing that requires good mental health and communication. The chastity of newlyweds is a total non-issue. Abstinence isn't good or evil. It may be right for some and not for others. For children and teenagers I would encourage it because of the risks of pregnancy at that age would spell a significantly higher chance of living in poverty and not obtaining higher education. This goes double for women who get pregnant during teen years.

It is a lie if someone says they have never had eyes for another. This idea of one partner for life doesn't pan out psychologically or practically. In fact the majority of people who are really happy in relationships have had plenty of others. Reasons behind that is you need to know different people to find out what you like and to find out what being good is. The first relationship you will be in you will most likely be terrible at it. That is psychologically every bit as much as sexually. It takes practice to be a good person or at least a functional person in a relationship and those with dating experience often are much better at adapting to the other person.

Subjecting them to evil? I mean why would you ever mention then devil then? Isn't that subjecting them to evil? If not then I don't understand why inappropriate books would be considered subjecting them to evil. Subjecting them to evil would be abuse. If you beat your children or show an ugly side of yourself to them then that is exposing them to evil. Learning from books is not.

I do not recall ever mentioning the devil to my daughters. But I have no trouble at all expressing my loyalty, my love, and my respect for God in their presence. I love them as well, and they know it.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I do not recall ever mentioning the devil to my daughters. But I have no trouble at all expressing my loyalty, my love, and my respect for God in their presence. I love them as well, and they know it.

I'm just trying to get a clear picture of your dynamic relationship with the defilement and acknowledgment of evil to the minds of children. Its coming out vague to me.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Yes, we all tend to think we turned out okay. I'm just not certain that we are so right about that. Is okay good enough?

Assuming your measure of 'okay' doesn't include Biblical belief, I think I could pass whatever measure you'd like to offer. If you see lack of Biblical belief as a flaw, then consider me seriously flawed, and completely past the point of redemption.

 

[Sonofason]

Well there's girl talk and then there's dad talk.
But again, if one is comfortable discussing a wide variety of topics then it sort of renders the idea of banning something moot.

I'm just trying to get a clear picture of your dynamic relationship with the defilement and acknowledgment of evil to the minds of children. Its coming out vague to me.

Well, I just don't believe that titillations of the mind advance the cause of Christ to any degree. I would suggest that they tend to have the opposite affect. But I am of course open to suggestions as to why someone might think I am wrong.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Well, I just don't believe that titillations of the mind advance the cause of Christ to any degree. I would suggest that they tend to have the opposite affect. But I am of course open to suggestions as to why someone might think I am wrong.

Oh I agree. Education, open mindedness, cultural exchange and free thought are all things that are of the worst for advancing Christian beliefs. But what you do is shelter and cage the children mentally. Personally I feel that is a bad way to go. I also think that indoctrination is child abuse so I doubt we will see eye to eye on this.

 

[SomeRandom]

Well, I just don't believe that titillations of the mind advance the cause of Christ to any degree. I would suggest that they tend to have the opposite affect. But I am of course open to suggestions as to why someone might think I am wrong.

"Titillations of the mind?"
Hmm. Define that.
Because I don't think God would give someone a brain only for them to use it as little more than a hat rack. Should one not explore subjects intellectually and philosophically? If yes then that sort of makes banning any book contrary to that goal.

 

[Laika]

I often see proposals by atheists just on this site alone for banning the Bible. So I can assure you it is not a Christian only notion. But even if you were right, I'd be okay with that too.

No you haven't. The atheists here bend over backwards to respect freedom of religion and whilst they criticise religion a great deal, they fundamentally support freedom of religion as a human right.

A quick search of the forums shows only two threads with "ban the bible" in the title and the second one is about it being used as a scare tactic back in 2004.

Ban the Bible and the Qur'an?

Banning the Bible

So basically in RFs 12 year history the only atheist who proposed banning the bible is me.

You mean crackpots like @Laika ? He was also proposing banning the Quran.
Tom

I'm feeling so cool right now.