Ok.....So you killed off Religion...

[Ryantology]

How is "education" different from "indoctrination"?

An underlying agenda to teach a falsehood or an opinion as if it was factual truth. Math, science, languages, technology, are taught to give children skills which are useful in the real world. History, sadly, is prone to be taught according to agendas, but that does seem to be getting a little less egregious over time. Religion is not about teaching facts or improving a student's knowledge of the world. It is about making obedient robots, controlling behavior, and making money. Scams have no place in education.

Why do religious parents think that teaching children sex education is encroaching upon the duty of the parent, then turn around and demand that schools handle religious indoctrination? Twisted priorities or rank hypocrisy?

[Esquilax]

How is "education" different from "indoctrination"? Do you call anything religious indoctrination? If so, then what is religion but a set of worldviews? How is educating children on a set of worldviews a bad thing? When you teach no worldviews at all, are you not implying that the best worldview is an "I decide what's best for me" worldview? How is an "I decide" worldview healthy? Why not teach worldviews that focus on issues unrelated to self-gratification? After all, studies show that people who adopt such worldviews live longer, happier lives.

I'll help you out: education is setting out the facts. Indoctrination is setting out something (it doesn't have to be factual) and then formulating the lesson so as to discourage dissent or research into additional information, while encouraging belief in the ideas being indoctrinated sight unseen regardless of their veracity.

So, while teaching your kids algebra is education, teaching them, say... that there's an invisible man in the sky who controls everything, and that if you don't believe this absolutely you'll suffer forever, and also thinking critically about this or studying things that disagree with this concept is the same as disbelieving, and also you don't need evidence for this assertion, just believe it... is indoctrination.

There's an implied threat with religion, in the form of hell, and an implied devaluation of critical thinking in the form of faith, that makes it tailor made for an indoctrinating approach to learning.

[Ryantology]

[xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
[xxxx_______xxxxxxxx]
[xxx/      \xxxxxxxx]
[xx| o \/ o |xxxxxxx]
[xx\___/\___/xxokxxx]
[xxx|      |xxxxxxxx]

[Mystical]

Doesn't matter Ryan, your avatar speaks for itself

[ThomM]

Maybe 50 or 60 years from now when science finally proves that all of you are right and there is no God..... and religion dies out for you!

Where as a society will the moral compass come from? Considering of course you even want a moral society?


-------------

THE idea that being moral in order to gain a reward - is NOT being moral to begin with. Being moral - is doing something simply because it is the correct thing to do

If you need to be bribed to be moral - you are not actually being moral - and that is the basis of religion - so WHERE does YOUR moral compass come from



Obviously - it can come form the existing moral compass that xtianity stole from prior religions - since the basis for the moral compass of xtianity is another religion - Judaism.

THERE is NOTHING that is in xtianity that did not exist BEFORE xtianity - from the golden rule - which is in the Rig Veda - to the moral rules of Buddha and Confucius - which cover far more than xtiaity to begin with

Being intelligent creatures - the elimination of the dominance of a particular religion would allow us to read the writing oF all religions - and put together a truly moral society based on the one thing that xtians cannot claim - that things are done for the correct reason - because they are the correct thing to do

[Mystical]

Well...look here, a fowl mouth moral atheist telling us how to be Christians!

Nope, I was just stating fact about you. I'm not quite sure the other theists around here want you speaking for them..

[Ryantology]

Well...look here, a fowl mouth moral atheist telling us how to be Christians!

duckface.jpg

[Whateverist]

Doesn't matter Ryan, your avatar speaks for itself

Besides, underbooby is the best part. (Your avatar is pretty hypnotic for me, but boy that killjoy guy may turn me into an antitheist.)

[Godscreated]

Maybe 50 or 60 years from now when science finally proves that all of you are right and there is no God..... and religion dies out for you!

Where as a society will the moral compass come from? Considering of course you even want a moral society?


-------------

THE idea that being moral in order to gain a reward - is NOT being moral to begin with. Being moral - is doing something simply because it is the correct thing to do

If you need to be bribed to be moral - you are not actually being moral - and that is the basis of religion - so WHERE does YOUR moral compass come from



Obviously - it can come form the existing moral compass that xtianity stole from prior religions - since the basis for the moral compass of xtianity is another religion - Judaism.

THERE is NOTHING that is in xtianity that did not exist BEFORE xtianity - from the golden rule - which is in the Rig Veda - to the moral rules of Buddha and Confucius - which cover far more than xtiaity to begin with

Being intelligent creatures - the elimination of the dominance of a particular religion would allow us to read the writing oF all religions - and put together a truly moral society based on the one thing that xtians cannot claim - that things are done for the correct reason - because they are the correct thing to do

I see you've never studied the NT, Jesus taught we are to be moral to benefit others.

[DeistPaladin]

Thanks....I didn't need any help! But here is a useful link:

And that's your complete rebuttal, is it? You really thought that was such a slam-dunk that you can just say "Q.E.D."?

Here's the full quote, to show Christians how this is done:

"debunked"? You think pretty highly of yourself. Well, you failed in this attempt (see below) ....and miserably I might add.

Summary: Denial without any substance
Logical Fallacy: Bare Assertion Just because you say so, doesn't make it so.

I especially liked the phonically challenged:

"How'd I do? Better than "duh, cus big invisible sky daddy sez not to."?

Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Ridicule. "Ha ha, you sound funny" isn't an argument.

EDIT TO ADD: What's more, you had already been told that appeal to ridicule is not an argument. And yet you ignored that response and represent that same post as if it were a slam-dunk? Are you a liar or are you just stupid?

And you Christians wonder why you're not taken seriously?