(May 17, 2017 at 8:01 pm)Aroura Wrote:(May 17, 2017 at 7:53 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Original sin, is best described as the fact that we will all do things that are wrong if given the chance to.
While we may not agree on religion, I'm sure we all agree that no one is perfectly good and none of us have never done anything wrong.
I was Catholic, I know the doctrine.
That being said it isn't the Catholic thinking I find repulsive, but in particular the evangelical one. That babies cry because they are full of sin, that a 2 year old saying "no" to his mom or dad is a sin (even if not held responsible), thinking that a 2 year old is willfully sinning is both ludicrous and sick, imvho.
So my comment was at Steve, not at you CL.
Where in the world did you get babies cry because of sin?!? Then you take the most innocuous scenario possible (saying "no") and claim that it is ludicrous. How about when the child hits another unprovoked? Does not share? Throws temper tantrums when they don't get what they want? Breaks/takes something intentionally and then runs (after being told 'no')? Are you seriously claiming a child is a clean/innocent slate and we can't view these actions as selfish, insolent, destructive, and/or hurtful until...when? What is the point when we can call a spade a spade? To me, these are objectively wrong motives no matter what the age of the child is or how well they understand their motives. Again, I don't think they are morally responsible, so it seems your objection comes from me calling a spade a spade rather than some conclusion I am drawing from it.
BTW, I have had 5 two-year-olds myself as well as being the oldest of 7 siblings and having 13 nieces/nephews over 2. I am well acquainted with the age.
