No, because this isn't a situation where the means need justifying...

(March 11, 2016 at 9:07 am)Stimbo Wrote: Oh, and your recycling analogy is flawed because recycling is hardly likely to be abused the way indoctrination can and often is.

Give me an example.

So I suppose you would be okay with Muslims indoctrinating their children in the ways of Islam?

(March 11, 2016 at 9:10 am)Stimbo Wrote: So I suppose you would be okay with Muslims indoctrinating their children in the ways of Islam?

let me refer back to an earlier post in this thread:

(March 11, 2016 at 8:17 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Really?

If the ideology a person is being "indoctrinated" into results in that person being as Stimbo puts it, "good and kind and loving"... I don't have a problem with that, no matter what religion they belonged to.

If Nazi indoctrination resulted in "good and kind and loving" Nazi's, no one would've had a problem with them.

The fact that you guys turn being a "loving" person into a bad thing is what's telling about the atheist "doctrine".

If the end result is "loving" Muslims, I'm fine with that, they have just as much a right to believe what they do as I have.

Analogy time.

As most of you know, I'm taking driving lessons. The philosophy behind them is learning how and why things happen. This means that I should end up able to evaluate situations autonomously and know how to think for myself. If the lessons consisted merely of learning the rules of the road and which control does what, how does that make me a driver as opposed to simply being able to move a car around, however safely? What happens when I come across something that wasn't covered in the lessons?

(March 11, 2016 at 8:47 am)Huggy74 Wrote: And my point was the REASONS for one being a "loving person" is irrelevant, the fact that they are a loving person is all that matters

So you'd be okay with me burning my children with lighters until they're 'loving', would you?

What about genetically altering them to remove undesirable traits?

What if the parent's idea of "loving" is different to yours?

(March 11, 2016 at 8:17 am)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 11, 2016 at 7:37 am)Bob Kelso Wrote: You're being willfully dense, aren't you? 

Really?

If the ideology a person is being "indoctrinated" into results in that person being as Stimbo puts it, "good and kind and loving"... I don't have a problem with that, no matter what religion they belonged to.

If Nazi indoctrination resulted in "good and kind and loving" Nazi's, no one would've had a problem with them.

The fact that you guys turn being a "loving" person into a bad thing is what's telling about the atheist "doctrine".

Atheist doctrine.

How long does it really take to learn what atheism means, and that it can't possibly have dogma except its own definition?

(March 11, 2016 at 9:52 am)Stimbo Wrote: Analogy time.

As most of you know, I'm taking driving lessons. The philosophy behind them is learning how and why things happen. This means that I should end up able to evaluate situations autonomously and know how to think for myself. If the lessons consisted merely of learning the rules of the road and which control does what, how does that make me a driver as opposed to simply being able to move a car around, however safely? What happens when I come across something that wasn't covered in the lessons?

Bad analogy.

I don't know where you're from but I never needed driving lessons, you got a learners permit at 14 and kind of learned through experience.

---

(March 11, 2016 at 10:18 am)Ben Davis Wrote: So you'd be okay with me burning my children with lighters until they're 'loving', would you?

First of all, provide an example of that ever producing loving children then you just might have a point...

---

(March 11, 2016 at 10:23 am)robvalue Wrote: What about genetically altering them to remove undesirable traits?

What if the parent's idea of "loving" is different to yours?

You mean like aborting a child about to be born with down syndrome?

---

(March 11, 2016 at 10:27 am)drfuzzy Wrote:

(March 11, 2016 at 8:17 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Really?

If the ideology a person is being "indoctrinated" into results in that person being as Stimbo puts it, "good and kind and loving"... I don't have a problem with that, no matter what religion they belonged to.

If Nazi indoctrination resulted in "good and kind and loving" Nazi's, no one would've had a problem with them.

The fact that you guys turn being a "loving" person into a bad thing is what's telling about the atheist "doctrine".

So I guess the guy that invented the vaccine doesn't count?

---

(March 11, 2016 at 10:29 am)robvalue Wrote: Atheist doctrine.

How long does it really take to learn what atheism means, and that it can't possibly have dogma except its own definition?

When its ones belief that there is no God, and wants to convert others to their way of thinking, I think you can safely describe that as a doctrine.

(March 11, 2016 at 3:27 am)Alex K Wrote: I'll be getting my hopes up that he'll deconvert their pastor

(March 11, 2016 at 10:55 am)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 11, 2016 at 9:52 am)Stimbo Wrote:

---

Analogy time.

As most of you know, I'm taking driving lessons. The philosophy behind them is learning how and why things happen. This means that I should end up able to evaluate situations autonomously and know how to think for myself. If the lessons consisted merely of learning the rules of the road and which control does what, how does that make me a driver as opposed to simply being able to move a car around, however safely? What happens when I come across something that wasn't covered in the lessons?

---

Bad analogy.

I don't know where you're from but I never needed driving lessons, you got a learners permit at 14 and kind of learned through experience.

UK. And that's a red herring.

And is my analogy bad just because you say so, or are you going to tell the class why, like I did with yours?