(November 12, 2011 at 7:39 am)tackattack Wrote: the backlash will come from doing a google search for atheist+child+forum and once it get out... idk This might actually be the first place I'm aware of regarding atheism that would have a kids section. That in itself is enough of a novelty to attract militant theists.

This post does lead one to ponder the balance of the two belief structures where children are involved. It is the standard practice of Christianity to indoctrinate children very very young, and thus could it not be argued that the counter measure of indoctrinating atheism into children is necessary and easily justified?? Although I'm not completely on board for this whole children's forum, I think allowing children to talk to children about atheism pales in comparison to the programs that devout christians set up for their children. Just visit YouTube to see evidence of this.



Anyway, it's an interesting debate if nothing more.

So fight brainwashing with brainwashing Cinjin? Either it's wrong to program kids or it's not. I'm fine with giving atheists a place to explore their beliefs without the influence of religious, but when you start hitting the slope of eye for an eye with youth, I'd reject that outright.

(November 13, 2011 at 7:41 am)tackattack Wrote: So fight brainwashing with brainwashing Cinjin? Either it's wrong to program kids or it's not. I'm fine with giving atheists a place to explore their beliefs without the influence of religious, but when you start hitting the slope of eye for an eye with youth, I'd reject that outright.

I would tend to agree if it was anything like those "revivals" and indoctrination camps that christians send their kids to. However, I don't think that's quite the same as allowing a child to freely access a discussion forum with other children. Although, this is not really the heart of my point as I am really not in support of the children's forum. I just find it interesting that the people who might show up here and protest an atheist forum for children are more than likely the same ones who will send their 7 year olds to a week long Jesus fest. (there's a disturbing video posted on this site somewhere about it)

The hypocrisy in it all is justified because they are quote, "guiding their children into righteousness," or some other similar line of nonsense that allows them to overlook their own brainwashing.

No matter what they do, the atheists can't seem to get a fair shake. What's good for the goose, is not only unacceptable for the gander ... it's condemned.

Which is why I fully acknowledged the hypocrisy in whatever backlash we're assuming. I think from a Christian perspective, I could see the excuse, they'd be helping to establish a good objective moral standard in their young, whether God exists or not. The funny thing I see is that while the Cristian is trying to guide a youth towards an objective standard, the atheist would be helping youth define their personal moral standard. I think both of which are valuable. I think I'm starting to detract from the thread and perhaps that's a discussion for another time and place.

Hey ...Thanks everyone for at least considering this proposition ... And I mean that in all sincerity!

All points are valid and it is certainly up to the parental unit as to what their child gets up to on the net.

@Tacky ...no I don't know you very well and you have no idea of my history past or present but thanks for your input,... a very good point. These "kids" may or may not find their way here but for now they are all over Facebook and doing quite well... I understand the mothers prohibitions but the reasoning left me a bit stunned as I strive to get my son "out into the world" and don't be afraid to try something new.

Still...it was just an idea prompted by Aleialoura's thread regarding her children

(November 13, 2011 at 11:43 pm)tackattack Wrote: I think I'm starting to detract from the thread and perhaps that's a discussion for another time and place.

Fair enough.

Accusing parents and educators of indoctrinating their children, while is accurate is probably the wrong way of wording it. Since these parents and educators sincerely believe that their religious views are totally right and seeing instructing them in these beliefs the same to teaching them reading, writing and mathematics. But these same parents and educators are teaching children to blindly accept these dogmas on face value. This needs to be replaced with children being taught critical thinking skills instead, so they can be able to develop their own philosophies.

To see where I am coming from, I am linking to a previous post of mine.
http://atheistforums.org/thread-9519-pos...#pid205909

Note to self: I need to buy Richard Dawkins new book: The Magic of Reality and give some thoughts on it in the forum.

Anyway I believe that if minors (say younger than 13-16) are going to be on the forums, they should be "quarantined" into a minors only sub-forum and not be allowed to view the rest of the forum (which has material which can be inappropriate at times for such young people). However that is just my $0.02

WTF... as a 16 year old I can assure you what happens in this forum is much more tame than the average "minor's" life.

Also in today's world even your 11 year old daughters are munching cock... sorry to ruin your fun.

(November 14, 2011 at 4:36 pm)HeyItsZeus Wrote: Also in today's world even your 11 year old daughters are munching cock... sorry to ruin your fun.

Hahahaha... Great word choice.

I'm certainly in favor of a forum where children can discuss matters of belief, whether they be atheists or not.

I'm not sure this is the right place - unless some kind of wall was erected between areas for children and those more advanced in years. I probably wouldn't want my child wandering into the Gauntlet or R'lyeh. AF is pretty much a de facto "adults zone", and while we certainly have our share of minors, I think it's generally assumed here that we don't need to self-censor both in choice of topic and language.

I'm not particularly worried about my kid encountering "bad language" - he knows it when he sees it and avoids it by his own choice. It's more a case of him being exposed to topics that I'd prefer he be a bit older before he's exposed to them. Yes, parents should monitor their children's online activities (and I do) - but I don't think that responsibility should require a parent watch over their child's shoulder 100% of their online time (doing so, I think, sends a message I do not want to send).

While it is true that there is nothing preventing my (or any other) child from reading any public topic at AF, I think there's a difference between the site being available should one wish to search for it versus directing one's children to it.

Also - it's got to be said: Some of us should not be allowed anywhere near children, online or not. I'm looking at you, Min. I jest.

If the details could be worked out to make it a child-safe zone, I'm totally on board with the idea.