Thommo wrote: As an aside I read just the other day that the pope said hell doesn't exist.

Thommo wrote: Just the other day I heard that Australia is a hoax!

So Australia is hell ? Makes sense, with all those spiders and snakes and sharks that can kill you in a heartbeat.

Scot Dutchy wrote:

Just remove religion from society. Your country is so backward.

Any thought about how this could be done?

Chris Putnam wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

Just remove religion from society. Your country is so backward.

Any thought about how this could be done?

Don't expect that kind of details from Scot...

Chris Putnam wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

Just remove religion from society. Your country is so backward.

Any thought about how this could be done?

Just remove it from schools. It is what happened here. State schools (99% of all schools are) just became non-religious.

aban57 wrote:

Chris Putnam wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

Just remove religion from society. Your country is so backward.

Any thought about how this could be done?

Don't expect that kind of details from Scot...

You are judging at your low level where everything just flies over your head.

Scot Dutchy wrote:

aban57 wrote:

Chris Putnam wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

Any thought about how this could be done?

Don't expect that kind of details from Scot...

You are judging at your low level where everything just flies over your head.

My low level ? Like this for example ?

Scot Dutchy wrote:
Just remove it from schools. It is what happened here. State schools (99% of all schools are) just became non-religious.

In case you didn't realize, religion is mostly taught in these little things called churches. Not schools.

Scot Dutchy wrote:

You are judging at your low level where everything just flies over your head.

Sorry Scot Dutchy. I'll try to be more careful.

I did just learn this morning that several major atheist writers and thinkers, including Dr. Dawkins, believe it is child abuse to teach ones children the fundamental of the parents religion, though he stopped short of calling for the removal of such children from their parents. John Dewey, late prominent educational philosopher, believed that for American schools to do a proper job (I'm paraphrasing) in directing America society, the best thing that could happen would be to remove the children of immigrants from their parents. He clearly did not want traditional parental values from immigrants to be propagated

Chris Putnam wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

You are judging at your low level where everything just flies over your head.

Sorry Scot Dutchy. I'll try to be more careful.

I did just learn this morning that several major atheist writers and thinkers, including Dr. Dawkins, believe it is child abuse to teach ones children the fundamental of the parents religion, though he stopped short of calling for the removal of such children from their parents. John Dewey, late prominent educational philosopher, believed that for American schools to do a proper job (I'm paraphrasing) in directing America society, the best thing that could happen would be to remove the children of immigrants from their parents. He clearly did not want traditional parental values from immigrants to be propagated

I don't know who this Dewey is, but you couldn't choose your example more poorly. First, because the US doesn't really import creationists. They are born there. So taking away immigrants' children won't solve the indocrination issue. Second, almost all Americans are "children of immigrants" anyway. Even the president and his first lady. So what do we do, take away all children but the natives ? Good luck with that.
And third, what are those so called "traditional parental immigrants values" to begin with ? There is no such thing, as immigrants come from extremely various places, with different cultures.

aban57 wrote:

I don't know who this Dewey is,

He was a popular education philosopher about a hundred years ago. He developed what became known a "progressive education". Something for another discussion forum. He was probably responding to America as he saw it then, but apparently he thought separating the children of immigrants from their parents could have been productive overall. Not that he ever suggested actually doing so. He probably represented a very "elitist" attitude for his time. But the concept of taking kids away from their parents for educational reasons has been around a while. I have said several times on this thread that I believe this is a bad idea and should not be practiced. I have been on the internet looking to find those who do feel this way. Many Christians view atheists as having elitist arrogant attitudes toward them and resent the perceived attitude as much as the atheism itself. Some are trying to find ways to protect themselves from Child Protective Services. They feel that CPS might think that teaching Christian ideology is a form of child abuse and act accordingly.

Thank you all for the discussion. I had no idea it would last this long.

aban57 wrote:First, because the US doesn't really import creationists. They are born there.

Most are born here, but that's not exactly true. Ken Ham, for example, is from Australia.

Chris Putnam wrote:several major atheist writers and thinkers, including Dr. Dawkins, believe it is child abuse to teach ones children the fundamental of the parents religion, though he stopped short of calling for the removal of such children from their parents.

Richard Dawkins does not speak for all atheists. Christians often seem to assume he is some kind of spokesman for atheists or something. Though he's clearly intelligent, he says some pretty stupid things sometimes.

Chris Putnam wrote:But the concept of taking kids away from their parents for educational reasons has been around a while. I have said several times on this thread that I believe this is a bad idea and should not be practiced. I have been on the internet looking to find those who do feel this way. Many Christians view atheists as having elitist arrogant attitudes toward them and resent the perceived attitude as much as the atheism itself. Some are trying to find ways to protect themselves from Child Protective Services. They feel that CPS might think that teaching Christian ideology is a form of child abuse and act accordingly.

Wait, is this really a problem? Can you provide a link or citation describing Child Protective Services trying to take children from Christians? This is the first I've ever heard of this.

Occassionally someone sues their parents for abuse and their parents argue the behaviour was religiously ordained and therefore not abusive. It's pretty unusual though. The vast majority of kids raised by Christians don't feel abused and the vast majority of Christian parents are average like every other kind of parent.

Shagz wrote:

aban57 wrote:First, because the US doesn't really import creationists. They are born there.

Most are born here, but that's not exactly true. Ken Ham, for example, is from Australia.

Yeah, right.

Thommo wrote:Just the other day I heard that Australia is a hoax!

Shagz wrote:
Richard Dawkins does not speak for all atheists. Christians often seem to assume he is some kind of spokesman for atheists or something. Though he's clearly intelligent, he says some pretty stupid things sometimes.

[
Wait, is this really a problem? Can you provide a link or citation describing Child Protective Services trying to take children from Christians? This is the first I've ever heard of this.

I am around fundamentalist Christians a great deal. Many are well educated and very nice caring folks. We talk and they share their concerns with me. These are concerns they have about the direction they feel things are headed. They hear comments from Dr. Dawkins (who I'm sure is no world leading spokesman for Atheists) and others make comments in speaches and in print that sets these ideas in motion.

Thank you "Shagz" for you comments.

I know there have been cases where children have been removed from parents or the parents have been charged when they died due to extreme fundamentalist beliefs like denying medical care and resorting to prayer alone. The mental cost of raising children with an extremely narrow world-view based on unsupported superstition is of course more difficult to gauge. Much of it appears benign and well-intentioned, but it still restricts the children from receiving a more general education with exposure to more objective information and other beliefs.

aban57 wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

aban57 wrote:

Chris Putnam wrote:


Any thought about how this could be done?

Don't expect that kind of details from Scot...

You are judging at your low level where everything just flies over your head.

My low level ? Like this for example ?

Scot Dutchy wrote:
Just remove it from schools. It is what happened here. State schools (99% of all schools are) just became non-religious.

In case you didn't realize, religion is mostly taught in these little things called churches. Not schools.

Well well. Religion is not taught in schools? You want to read more about American private schools which there are plenty.

Scot Dutchy wrote:

aban57 wrote:

Scot Dutchy wrote:

aban57 wrote:

Don't expect that kind of details from Scot...

You are judging at your low level where everything just flies over your head.

My low level ? Like this for example ?

Scot Dutchy wrote:
Just remove it from schools. It is what happened here. State schools (99% of all schools are) just became non-religious.

In case you didn't realize, religion is mostly taught in these little things called churches. Not schools.

Well well. Religion is not taught in schools? You want to read more about American private schools which there are plenty.

You need to improve your reading skills, because you seem to skip (I'd say on purpose, but that's just me) certain crucial words, like "mostly", which clearly means that religious indocrination (as this is the topic we're talking about) mostly takes place in churches (and families), schools are a minority here.

You need to brush up your understanding of American school systems.

Maybe you need to learn the definition of "proportion".