This Has to Stop

[Harry Nevis]

I accept scientific facts.

I don't accept claims.

Creationists, in particular YECs, are not rational or sensible.

 Sure we are, we know there has to be a beginning point, we have one, you have snail poop.

GC

---

No, you've been TOLD there has to be a beginning point, and you FEEL like there should be a beginning point.  You KNOW nothing of the sort.

---

ArouraHere you go, this is the post I meant.
[quote pid='1619719' dateline='1505368188']

Dinosaur Train is awesome! I actually watched it with my daughter when she was younger.  There was nothing in it I couldn't accept to be true. It just teaches kids what scientists have recently discovered, and some of their best guesses, which they even explain how those theories are formed and why, about one of kids favorite subjects, dinosaurs!

 I've watched a number of times to see what they say and they claim much as fact that in reality isn't. Don't try to excuse their behavior, that type of behavior is what Christians will reject every time.

GC

---

[/quote]

Pot, meet kettle.

---

I don't usually do this but I'm entering a thread late without reading the whole thing.

This is a difficult, gray area. On one hand, there is the right of a parent to raise a child as they see fit. On the other hand, there is societal protection of the child against what is considered abuse.

I once heard of a Steve Martin comedy skit where he hypothetically raises the idea of raising a child and deliberately teaching him/her the wrong words for everything in the local language. On the child's first day of school, he/she needs to pee so he/she asks the teacher, "Mame, may I mumble dog paddy down to the banana patch?"

Obviously, a parent doing this would be dragged through the coals. But is there really any difference between this and feeding a blank, impressionable child information about an all-powerful, all-knowing, Master of the Universe as if it were fact?

There is nothing wrong with telling someone else about your faith - when they are mature enough to parse it objectively. But what is the difference between raising a child with a false language or indoctrinating a child with your religion or indoctrinating a child with the Peanuts (Charlie Brown) idea of The Great Pumpkin? None, IMO. Feeding information to a child as if it were fact when it is NOT fact is child abuse, IMO.

The difference is that no one actually believes in The Great Pumpkin. But if I 100% think that God is real and that Jesus was God made man who came down and taught us things and died for us, of course I'm going to teach my child about Him. Its insulting  and narrow minded that you say i will be abusing my future child and that you think my mom and dad abused me, just because you believe something different.

I don't think Mohammed or Buddha or Joseph Smith were anything more than completely regular men, and I think their stories are completely false, but i would never call Muslims, Buddhists, or Mormons child abusers for conveying to their children the religious belief that they fully believe are true.

So, whether or not what you're teaching your kids is factual or not (independent of what you believe) is not as important as telling them what you believe is fact.