Why I Am Anti-Theist

[God of Mr. Hanky]

Also try to say that parents shouldn't force their religion onto children and see how quickly those interested in spreading the church influence will start crying about trying to rob parents of their rights. I might be wrong and pessimistic but for me it appears that such indoctrination is something that won't go away soon if ever and we can't really do much about it without encroaching on freedoms of other people.

This attitude (the one held by Xtian parents, as you mentioned above), more than ever is what we should work to abolish, IMHO. Yes, I do know what IMHO means , and I really don't think it's the least bit arrogant to hold such a position, and teach this position that the rights of children, who are the future, are more important than parental rights. Parental custody has since the 20th Century been a revocable privilege for some very good reasons, and denying children the right to learn the unbiased facts which will enable them to make their own intellectual and moral decisions are at least two very good reasons to add to that list. To indoctrinate them with non-fact under the motivation of making them religious as you are is to cripple their minds against learning and understanding unbiased facts, therefore this must be be publically discourage, if not outlawed.

In my not-so-humble opinion, and I truly could give a fuck how the child brain molester sees it: If you think it's your god-given right to indoctrinate your children with whatever you believe is true, then fuck you - you don't, and it's far past time we show you that it isn't your right! Far from this being a totalitarian position, this is a necessity in order to protect the rights of every child, therefore it should be enforced.

The prevailing attitude won't change overnight, but I think a lot of people now understand what this means to society, and some day the decisions which direct children's learning opportunities and lives will no longer be subject to the whim of stupid parents.

[Ivan Denisovich]

This attitude (the one held by Xtian parents, as you mentioned above), more than ever is what we should work to abolish, IMHO. Yes, I do know what IMHO means , and I really don't think it's the least bit arrogant to hold such a position, and teach this position that the rights of children, who are the future, are more important than parental rights.

I agree that well-being of children is more important, but that makes two of us. It isn't exactly number which matter.

Parental custody has since the 20th Century been a revocable privilege for some very good reasons, and denying children the right to learn the unbiased facts which will enable them to make their own intellectual and moral decisions are at least two very good reasons to add to that list.

This reason is good for us. In countries with strong religious influence it would be deemed totalitarian idea.

To indoctrinate them with non-fact under the motivation of making them religious as you are is to cripple their minds against learning and understanding unbiased facts, therefore this must be be publically discourage, if not outlawed.

Sure. But religion is too strong for outlawing such. Also argument about totalitarianism isn't without any merit for if state can revoke parent's right to indoctrinate then it easily can revoke the right to teach children other things. Precedent would be already existing.

In my not-so-humble opinion, and I truly could give a fuck how the child brain molester sees it: If you think it's your god-given right to indoctrinate your children with whatever you believe is true, then fuck you - you don't, and it's far past time we show you that it isn't your right! Far from this being a totalitarian position, this is a necessity in order to protect the rights of every child, therefore it should be enforced.

Problem is that it's not I who need to be convinced of this. I can't imagine religious parents giving up easily neither I think that this idea would find much support. It may be not totalitarian but I'm quite sure that it would be perceived and pictured that way and perception is the key here.

The prevailing attitude won't change overnight, but I think a lot of people now understand what this means to society, and some day the decisions which direct children's learning opportunities and lives will no longer be subject to the whim of stupid parents.

I do not think that we will live long enough to see such changes.

[comet]

I guess we would have to be anti-family. families do far more abuse then any religion.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

I guess we would have to be anti-family.  families do far more abuse then any religion.

No, I would never advocate going that far, and if it ever came to any public discussion/debate, the clarification that there is no such position would be of critical concern. Anti-family experiment were conducted under the Stalin regime, and they failed miserably because they made people miserable. The family unit is natural to humanity, much if not all of it is analogous to the young-raising instincts of other animals, and much too strong for any crazy ideology to displace. Therefore, removing a child from the care of natural parents should not be taken lightly, but when the benefits of doing this outweigh the damage, then society must be willing to draw the line and remove kids from parents who cause them harm. The role of parents in society is, and probably will always be a necessity, but parents need to understand that society will not tolerate them using their children against the interests of society, and those of the children themselves.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

I guess we would have to be anti-family.  families do far more abuse then any religion.

No, I would never advocate going that far, and if it ever came to any public discussion/debate, the clarification that there is no such position would be of critical concern. Anti-family experiments were conducted under the Stalin regime, and they failed miserably because they made people miserable. The family unit is natural to humanity, much if not all of it is analogous to the young-raising instincts of other animals, and much too strong for any crazy ideology to displace. Therefore, removing a child from the care of natural parents should not be taken lightly, but when the benefits of doing this outweigh the damage, then society must be willing to draw the line and remove kids from parents who cause them harm. It is becoming more than apparent that significantly damaging abuse is not purely physical, and that religious ideas often lead to devastating mental abuse. The role of parents in society is, and probably will always be a necessity, but parents need to understand that society will not tolerate them using their children against the interests of society, and those of the children themselves.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

  deleted!

[Angrboda]

The role of parents in society is, and probably will always be a necessity, but parents need to understand that society will not tolerate them using their children against the interests of society, and those of the children themselves.

And what if they choose not to do so? What then?

[abaris]

As an anti-theist, I have been maligned by many atheists on this site as "militant", and even "hateful". Neither are in fact true - I'm not militant unless it makes you militant to give more than a shit about protecting people from the undeniably real damage caused by practices which have proven to be so harmful that they should not be allowed to continue in any society which protects its citizens from predation, be that mental, physical, or intellectual.

Yeah, towards the minority still holding up these practices, I'm anti theist too. I will, however, not conflate simple church goers with their radicals. Regardless of their religion of choice.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

As an anti-theist, I have been maligned by many atheists on this site as "militant", and even "hateful". Neither are in fact true - I'm not militant unless it makes you militant to give more than a shit about protecting people from the undeniably real damage caused by practices which have proven to be so harmful that they should not be allowed to continue in any society which protects its citizens from predation, be that mental, physical, or intellectual.

Yeah, towards the minority still holding up these practices, I'm anti theist too. I will, however, not conflate simple church goers with their radicals. Regardless of their religion of choice.

There is no religion of choice, when it's been decided for you before you had the ability to decide on anything. That's what childhood indoctrination does.

Not all religion is radical, and the typical churchgoer may be healthy and normal, but he really isn't normal on account of his religion, as he is liable to believe. He thinks his sense of ethics and social values come from his religious teachings, and he is liable to vote according to them, even when his unfettered conscience may move him differently. He may do so against his own interests, or his decisions may unfairly harm others. Also, the typical church doesn't necessarily imply all of its churchgoers are typical. One who is born with mental weakness may have fared much better without the indoctrination with any of the depressing Xtian ideas, which are all quite good at feeding unhealthy obsessions and delusions.

So what that not all religious sects promote suicide bombing, harassment of abortion doctors and gays, or Constitutional meddling/muddling? The churches which are regarded as normal expose children to barbaric violence which is celebrated! They teach their flocks to view their own nature in a light which is at best less than healthy. They give them a view of the world which is considered normal by other Christians, but it still leaves much to be desired. They teach injustice against gays and women, as Franky Normal has recently made unmistakable. Churches don't feed the poor as much as they feed poverty through their teachings. Therefore, no religious teachings, including those which are regarded as typical and moderate should be conflated with good.

[J a c k]

I grew up in a fundie home. I was told that I needed to be careful to not sin even in my thoughts. I wasn't even allowed to listen to secular music. I grew up ashamed of my feelings, my nature. Things that I should have enjoyed and celebrated as a normal person made me feel guilty beyond what words can describe. I was afraid to admit things even in my mind. I deserved hell. Everything was godly or evil. My self esteem had no hope. I took bad decisions based on faith that now, years later, I'm still having to work hard on to fix. 
Religion is child abuse. I forgive my parents, and they have asked for forgiveness too many times now that they are free. I'm not hesitant, though. Religion abuses children, women, lgbt, government, education, money, etc. I am very much anti religion and feel strongly about it.