Child abuse ?

[Kousbroek]

Doesn't freedom come with responsibility ?

Is brainwashing little kids responsible behavior ?

[LastPoet]

I am confused now. It seems the thread is drifting out of topic.

EDIT: not you Kous.

[festive1]

I think one should be able to express one's views, no matter how unsavory those views may be. But the line is when expressing those views causes direct harm to others. Basically, what Darkstar is saying. My question would be: Is holding an anti-gay rally causing direct harm? I'm not sure...
The State (I'm specifically thinking of schools at this point) should only be allowed to present facts. Perhaps sharing that some hold other views rooted in their religious belief systems. Such as, mentioning in biology class that some don't believe in evolution, but not going into the finer points of creationism as those are beliefs that have zero factual basis.
And I agree with Gilgamesh that forcing a child to go to church when they don't want to is wrong. But the flip side of that is forcing a child to go to school when they don't want to, which can be a punishable offense under the law, as it should be. This is a murky grey area.

[The Grand Nudger]

Peoples beliefs don't even deserve mention in biology. I don't expect my kids to learn about peoples beliefs when I send them to dissect a frog. I'm fairly certain there are plenty of subjects practically fucking devoted to peoples beliefs. They should probably handle that in those classrooms, and leave biology to...you know..biology.

[festive1]

Peoples beliefs don't even deserve mention in biology.

That's my attempt at appeasement. Creationists get very upset if you only teach evolution. Throw them a bone by mentioning, "Some don't believe in evolution due to their religious beliefs. However, there is no evidence for a young Earth or Creationism. Now back to evolution, the accepted scientific theory..." and leave it at that.

---

The real problem arises when you get biology teachers who are creationists... That just doesn't make sense and they shouldn't be teaching.

[Kousbroek]

I think one should be able to express one's views, no matter how unsavory those views may be. But the line is when expressing those views causes direct harm to others. Basically, what Darkstar is saying. My question would be: Is holding an anti-gay rally causing direct harm? I'm not sure...

I agree on the " I think one should be able to express one's views, no matter how unsavory those views may be." part.

But things like holding an anti-gay rally will inevitably result in to things like this i'm afraid.

http://soswirl.blogspot.nl/2012/07/gay-b...le-as.html

[Shell B]

I`d like to see someone get a job and actualy be a usefull and productive member of sociaty, when that someone is nothing but a biblequoting, intolerant moron who can hardly spell and has problems understanding the most simple concepts.

They do it all the time. Just because someone is a bible quoting moron does not mean they have no other skills. The lack of any other skill is an entirely different issue. I have two very Christian family members who happen to be the most successful members of my family. They run a multi-million dollar tool business.

Nowhere in this thread did anyone demand that "families should be ripped apart".

Easy. Saying it is abuse is suggesting that it be treated in a manner fitting abuse, yes? Do children who are abused stay with their parents if that abuse is found out? Not in all cases.

But what is knowlege and what is not, shouldnt be determened by a bunch of loons.

Nor should it be determined by a bunch of people on the internet peppered by individuals who can't spell.

Cirliculum should be set by akademics and professionals, and a educational sector should be built arround the concept of bringing forth inteligent and therefor productive members of sociaty.

The OP was not about curriculum. It was about what parents teach children.

---

Education is not democracy, neighter is knowlege. There is a right and there is a wrong. The earth is not 8000 years old. point. and teaching otherwise combined with a total ignorance for reality should be prohibited.

Not talking about education. Talking about parents raising their children.

Hating someone is not putting thoughts into action, to whoever said that. Hate is a feeling, not an action. Parents are free to hate their children. You can't force people to love and respect another person and you should not try. This is yet another example of people who take all the butterfly concepts of life to such an extreme that they become as militant as the douches they claim to oppose.

[Lion IRC]

Natural selection will favor the kids whose parents or teachers provide them the best survival advantage.
Theres two factors prevailing here.
1. Parents love their kids more than teachers (the State)
2. Religion has conferred a survival advantage for a long time.

[Faith No More]

You have to go with the lesser of two evils here, and the choice is obvious to me. As much as I despise religious indoctrination on kids, the alternative is the government regulating how parents raise a child. I will go with the former every time.

[pocaracas]

Natural selection will favor the kids whose parents or teachers provide them the best survival advantage.
Theres two factors prevailing here.
1. Parents love their kids more than teachers (the State)

Correct.

2. Religion has conferred a survival advantage for a long time.

Very debatable!
Even if it was once an advantage, it most likely no longer is.... unless you claim that people who go to church end up meeting people from different ways of life, and expand their web of connections, which may help to have a successful business.
That's why scientists have a lot of conferences; so they can expand their web and learn what other are doing in their field, or fields a bit on the side.