Should we ban the indoctrination and brainwashing of children by religions? Is it chi

Follow your hero then.

http://imgur.com/IBroXK9

Regards
DL

 

Islam, I agree.

Socialism is too broad for me to agree with you on.

Most of the West, for instance, have social medicine and that is a very moral thing for a country to supply it's people.

Do not be like God in terms of sanctity of life.

[video=youtube;1_tr_k59O6s]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=1_tr_k59O6s[/video]

Regards
DL

 

The reason for the indoctrination is vaccination of the mind.
What happens when kids reach age 12 is that Hormones appear which tell them to fornicate.

That behavior produces kids which today must live in a civilization.
That is way different then back then, before there was civilization.
So now we see that fathers and mothers are needed to civilized the kids.

Hence religion makes kids understand it isn't dad and mom saying, "No sex til you are older," but the Reality of getting along.

 

I guess it depends on what the issue is.

I think it is in Bangladesh that outlawed child brides in 1980 or so.

It continues, along with all the problems it creates, almost irrespective of the law.

Schools have allowed the leeway you think parents should have to teach the children the law. All while the women of Bangladesh have waited these many years for equality under the law.

Sitting back and allowing our children to be lied to is wrong.

Those who advocate it are not good parents.

Santa and such is fine but in things of any importance, we should always tell our children the truth.

Regards
DL

 

It is the scum of the earth today.
This is because, now, since 32 AD, we know that telling the truth about sexual misconduct should make force unnecessary stop sexual promiscuity among the kids.

But Christian did not tell the truth and let the Feminists and the Gays preach sexual misconduct, and say it hurt no one.
So we got that now.

 

No vaccination of the mind is required and if that is what it is it is not working as can be shown by the so called Christian nation having the highest abortion stats in the world.

Thanks for helping me make my point.

It seems that children that are smart enough to know when their parents are lying to them seem to lose confidence in other areas in terms of parental advice.

Parents lose the trust of their children when children know they are being lied to.

Regards
DL

P.S. Most young girls know not to have potential reproductive sex, as most know that they are not interested in motherhood for years to come. Our kids are not as dumb as we sometimes think. The odd one is though.

 

It would seem your serpent avatar fits you accordingly.

 

Don't like most socialism. I can stomach the school lunch program, maybe Medicare (although it's a Ponzi scheme).

I do not view entitlements as rights. Like healthcare, housing, free cellphones and so on.

I do support nations allowing those who are really hungry lots of free food if those in need are incapable of feeding themselves. That's actual food "simple commodities" NOT SNAP cards, food stamps and the like.

 

Oh yeah, its not working when the Feminists started pushing sex without marriage.
The guys were like kids inside a candy store, and it was Halloween or something.

Most of the people who listened to the Bible had been the girls, who wouldn't let the guys go all the way.
And if back then, they did, they knew the father would get the shoot gun.
But welfare got rid of the fathers.

 

Well there are faithful Christians, then there are Christians who pick and choose what moral laws are right for them.

We'll be seeing the Man-Boy-Love-Association Presbyterian Church before too long.

 

Yeah.
The Bill hasn't come in yet for all the supposed "free stuff."

The Health Care System wouldn't work because the price of medicine was not controlled.
At any time, you can start a 100% Health Care System, but over time, even with nurses earning $70/hour now and doctors become millionaires, the prices will just go up and up.
Doctors will develop more treatments and surgeries to keep everyone alive, even in stupors like Alzheimer’s disease.
The Egyptians did the same thing, building giant pyramids so they could keep everyone coming back forever.

 

The bill has already been coming in for years. Each year the US takes in two dollars in revenue and spends 3. 18+ Trillion in debt. No way to pay for healthcare, housing and all the other goodies, even if we taxed the richest at 100%.

This is what the US debt looks like stacked in $100 dollar bills:

 

Definitely.

The Truth only works if the kids hear it and see the bastards are first filling up the Special Education classes at school, but then forming gangs and doing violent crimes later.
But the Black families which 73% are on Welfare will oppose telling the truth here.


Bastards = violence

 

You are right here.

Welfare now costs $1 Trillion dollars annually.
That is bigger than the one time bail out.
And it s bigger than the Military Budget which comes every year.

 

The court wasn't banning a belief. The court wasn't banning a "lie". You ask me to acknowledge a false premise. I recommend you read up on those cases and the reasoning for not having creationism in public schools.. You on the other hand is wanting to outlaw religion and force your values on children ...regardless of parental wishes.. That is totalitarian and very indicative of what North Korea does.

 

A law to make parents tell the truth would be the most disobeyed law of all time. It would also be very destructive - no more Santa, no more Tooth Fairy - we need to be able to lie to our kids.

In addition, prohibiting lies would require the state to determine what truth is on many questions. Since the state is almost always rule utilitarian in conduct, would it be unacceptable to teach deontology as truth? What of strongly held religious beliefs? Would you let them teach 'there is no God'? If so, you're picking religions (or lack thereof), if not then I have a few million Atheists who would vehemently oppose your plan too.

Your plan is broadly totalitarian. The state regulates harm to children, and if teaching religion as truth in your view is unacceptably harmful, then you've set those scales so far in the state's favor as to effectively take custody of all children.

I'm an Atheist, but (*)(*)(*)(*), some people take it way too far. We are a minority in society, what happens when the GOP delegates this ministry of truth to the Ken Ham sorts in their leadership?

 

My bad. I meant in a country with a federal constitution that reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances' and where the Supreme Court holds that said language applies to all governmental entities. I reject your qualification, 'period of reaction' as ill-defined and moot. I also will reject any suggestion that efforts by American governments to censor ideas in the nineteenth century or early to mid 20th century are justification for your blatant and overt government censorship plan. They mean that while your lousy censorship ideas are not without any American precedent, they are still without any recent and successful American precedent.

While I will concede that in many instances, even most instances, the 'ruling class' controls government and thus the phrase can be used to provide context for governmental power and control. It has not succeeded in containing the scope of the first amendment of our constitution or using the agencies or institutions of government to censor. That is the context of our discussion.

We are discussing the complete annulment of one section of the first amendment protection, and the amending the rest the language in the bill of rights, to provide a big fat loophole whereby religious speech, assembly and exercise can be regulated or curtailed entirely by federal and state legislative bodies.

I may have some idea what 'intellectually healthy' means to me, but my definition does not exclude activity relating to religion or theism, and it has no connection to logic, truth or reason at all and neither of us can speak to what anyone else thinks is intellectually healthy or sick.

In short there is no way in f***ing hell, I will entertain amending the American constitution and abandoning freedom of speech, assembly and religious exercise in our bill of rights, because you think religious clerics are liars, because you don't think religion is intellectually healthy. It is ludicrous to kill the only protection we have for the promotion of innovative or controversial ideas and the potential reform they may engender, because religion is a bad idea and religion is not 'healthy'.

 

Of course it is about you. You are proposing that we annul the free exercise section of the first amendment and amend the free speech and assembly language to insert a exemption because you don't like religious lies or religious institutions that lie for money. Not a lot of folks in this country have proposed that we crap all over the bill of rights, because some pastors preach about hell or some Imams advocate in favor of sharia law. You are pretty much it. It really is about you.

I do not like being lied to for my money. Its what happens in a free society and it happens a lot in a free society. Americans adjust and suck it up because they detest having government decide which ideas are lies, and which of those 'lies' should be censored from them or their kids. they think that should be their call, not yours or some federal agency's call.

 

First, who are you to tell people what to teach their children? Second, people "indoctrinate" their children all the time. Here's a couple of examples: Should we allow parents to teach their children liberal ways? Should we allow parents to teach children conservative ways? Should we allow parents to teach their children that homosexuality is wrong both morally and goes against nature? Should we allow parents to teach their children that homosexuality is morally good and completely natural? Should we allow parents to teach children how to use a gun? Should we all parents to teach their children <insert whatever topic here that you are for and/or against>?

Just because you happen to not like what is taught doesn't give you the right to demand that such is wrong or "child abuse".

Besides, whatever happened to freedom of religion? Or does that pesky Constitution mean nothing anymore? Oh wait...nevermind, anyone that would advocate barring parents from teaching their children their religious beliefs obviously has no use for the Constitution.

 

I'm not quite sure why you're placing so much emphasis on the USA - the other countries I mentioned were capitalist too, and my point was that capitalist countries employ ideological censorship too. Since I'm from Europe, I'm not that clued-up on American legislative decisions, but a quick Google search for "first amendment violation examples" revealed multiple occasions of people being denied their First Amendment rights because a court ruled that certain speech is not covered by the First Amendment. Most of these relate to censorship of things deemed "inappropriate" (sex, violence, profanity), which would not be deemed "inappropriate" under a proletarian state, I would hope. There are also things like book banning, restrictions on films and video games for minors, the abilities of schools to ban discussion of certain topics or certain viewpoints and governmental cover-ups. All of these demonstrate intellectual areas into which no one can foray without meeting some sort of criterion.

"Period of reaction" has a pretty straightforward meaning: it's a non-revolutionary period, a period during which the majority of people are politically placid and uprisings are few and far between. During such a period, governments and ruling classes feel more secure and therefore don't feel the need to blatantly censor so much, which is why censorship in America and the West is lower than it has been at other points in history. The sort of government about which I'm talking would have just emerged from a revolution, and would therefore have been facing many of the same threats as censorship-happy capitalist governments. And as these capitalist governments used censorship when they had to, in order to protect their gains, so would a proletarian government.

Actually, after a revolution, the entire Constitution would become null and void, just as British-imposed laws were rendered null and void by the American revolutionaries.

What is "intellectual healthiness" according to you, then? Why is it so separate from logic?

 

Indeed.

As you can see, the serpent is well spoken of in scriptures.

Matthew 10:16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

Genesis 3 ;3 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made.

Did you know that serpent worship pre-dates all known religions?

Christianity did a lot of murdering to rid their areas of that older and wiser religion.

Serpent worship is the oldest know worship and goes back to the Africa of 70,000 years ago.

Christianity was so afraid of the serpent that they even changed the zodiac from 13 signs to 12 when bringing that to the West.

Regards
DL

 

I think that a society like the U.S., one of the riches it the world, to be so backward in how it deals with it's poor, --- to be a national disgrace.

http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2

Poverty is the worst form of violence. - Mahatma Gandhi

The U.S. could easily end it's violence against it's poor yet as you can see by that graph, they refuse to remedy the situation.

I hear that your Bernie Sanders might remedy this if elected.

Regards
DL

 

You blame girls and welfare while it is the males who have to have the law put in deadbeat dad legislation to have these men step up to their responsibility.

Only a really big fool would think that women libbers were the ones pushing for more sex when men have been shirking their parental responsibilities forever.

Regards
DL

- - - Updated - - -

Catholics already have that in place.

Oh wait. That is Priest-Boy without any love at all.

Good money for Christian parents though.
http://www.religionnews.com/2015/11...se-of-catholic-child-sex-abuse-a-masterpiece/

Regards
DL

 

If it is totalitarian to not want lying priests and imams lying to children about God constantly, then sign me up for a totalitarian tee shirt.

If you don't get one as well, then you are not a moral man as you support adults lying to children.

Regards
DL

 

Santa does not have a hell.

We are talking damaging information.

Perhaps you cannot see the difference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3FjY3_vjsn8

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jvchamary/2015/11/05/religion-morality/#26836d0670e8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olhCazkejPg

And many more.

Selfish parents who want clones and a greedy church do not care.

Regards
DL