Proselytizing

[rjh4 is back]

You mean you dont know!!

Isn't teaching them how to use rationality and logic indoctrinating them also? If not, why?

Its the difference between
A:telling a child theres an elephant in the kitchin and B: telling them to go and see if theres an elephant in the kitchin
see how simple that is.
A: is indoctrination because it imposing a view with the strong possibility that it is unfounded(it is very unlikely that there is in fact and elephant in your kitchin).
B: Is showing asking the child to go and check for itself, it is not imposing a view parse but asking that the child go see and make up its own mind.

I think this is a case of redefining a word to your own liking and applying it to your own liking. According to Dictionary.com

in·doc·tri·nate 
1. to instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., esp. to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.
2. to teach or inculcate.
3. to imbue with learning.

So why can't this apply to anything an atheist or anyone else teaches their children? For example, isn't teaching children that the scientific method is the only rational way to discover truth instructing them in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., esp. to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view? The fact is that even the most well meaning person has their biases which are sure to come through when dealing with other people and/or teaching their children.

I think you just would like to use the negative connotation and apply it to "religious" folk but not recognize that it applies to you also.

You are about to equate atheism with a religion sometime soon arent ya I can see it coming on.

Nope. I don't see how whether or not atheism is a "religion" would be relevant to the discussion.

Well lets see you are a potent force in a young childs life, when they are young they believe what you say without question. I myself used to believe in santa because my parents told me he was real, (the spell was broken by my older sister when I was about seven) but imagine if no-one had broken that spell, maybe I'd still believe the lie. Thats christianity, santa for adults.

Really I'd of thought you could have worked some of this out for yourself. Oh well.

We were talking about "indoctrination". You seem to be suggesting that atheist parents can somehow mask their biases such that their teaching of their children would not be "indoctrination". I fail to see this as a well supported position (if, in fact, it is your position).

---

Why not face the fact that I was right? I'm not saying there isn't positive, my point is that you said "I do not see the Bible as using scare tactics" and it clearly does.

lol

Because I do not equate the mentioning or stating of consequences as being "scare tactics". That is my position.

On the other hand, if it is your position that when one mentions a negative consequence to an action when explaining an issue (such as explaining that you should not murder because you will be executed), I can certainly understand your position.