How many of you would punish religious people for being religious?

[vulcanlogician]

Atheists on the internet? We're setting the bar pretty low aren't we? Wouldn't you be annoyed with an argument premised on "theists on the internet say x"?

And you'd be justified in thinking that. Because it's strawmanning.

As you can see, it's hard to get a straight answer here.

Fake obviously thinks that raising a child in a religion is child abuse. But we knew he would say that.

Valkyrie seems to equate "religion" with "cutting a child's forehead," which is a practice done within a certain religion, but not, I think, something essential with or contiguous to religion. 

Boru brings up circumcision, without any argument as to whether or not it's child abuse, or relevant in any way.

Helios wants to talk about his own thing and doesn't want to address the issue. 

So the subject was that Dawkins, among other atheists, believes that raising a child within a religion is child abuse. No one wants to say that he's wrong. 

If he's right, and it's child abuse, then religious parents should be punished.

You make a good point. I said "internet atheists" was too strawmanny, and then you produced Dawkins, who (for some reason) we both agree is less strawmanny than "internet atheists." But I personally don't give two fucks about what Dawkins thinks unless he happens to be right, which happens somewhat consistently.

I don't agree with Dawkins on: "raising a child with religion constitutes abuse."

Boru said it better than I. Many atheists disagree with Dawkins on this.

I don't think raising a child within a religious practice is necessarily immoral. To the objections against circumcision, that's a good discussion to have. Secular circumcision practices, if they existed, should equally suffer such moral scrutiny,shouldn't they? . What would be the verdict for secular institutions imposing circumcision to all youths from on high, as some kind of tribal identity marker? Would that be right? If so, why? If not, why not?