A freedom-denying petition

All are welcome to this forum, which is for debating the teaching of creationism or intelligent design in schools. This forum can be boisterous, and you should not participate if easily offended.

Moderator: Moderators

A freedom-denying petition

Postby Michael » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:11 pm

Surely this petition is against freedom, pluralism and democracy

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Make it illegal to indoctrinate or define children by religion before the age of 16. In order to encourage free thinking, children should not be subjected to any regular religious teaching or be allowed to be defined as belonging to a particular religious group based on the views of their parents or guardians. At the age of 16, as with other laws, they would then be considered old enough and educated enough to form their own opinion and follow any particular religion (or none at all) through free thought.


******
Surely this will deny parents the right to convince their children of atheism as well?

Michael
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

A freedom-denying petition

Postby Anonymous » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:14 pm

Michael wrote:

Surely this will deny parents the right to convince their children of atheism as well?

It doesn't control what happens *in the home*. It, rightly imo,
secularises schools.
Anonymous
 

A freedom-denying petition

Postby Ian Lowe » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:31 pm

Surely this will deny parents the right to convince their children of
atheism as well?

1) Atheism is not a religion.

2) The fact that you have phrased your post this way clearly shows your
intentions - nothing more than an attempt to stir up bad blood between the
users of this forum.

I'm getting might sick of your two faced behaviour on this forum, Michael.
Ian Lowe
 

Postby Paula Thomas » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:33 pm

Michael

Given what happened to your daughter I should have thought you'd be in favour of this petition.

Paula
Paula Thomas
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:51 pm
Location: London, UK

Re: A freedom-denying petition

Postby Gwynne » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:35 pm

Michael wrote:Surely this will deny parents the right to convince their children of atheism as well?


? what makes you think atheist parents proselytise to their children? The absence of any overt form of worship or grovelling before a deity during their impressionable years is all it takes to protect children.
Gwynne
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 3:07 pm

Re: A freedom-denying petition

Postby pentylzic » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:36 pm

Michael wrote:Surely this petition is against freedom, pluralism and democracy

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Make it illegal to indoctrinate or define children by religion before the age of 16. In order to encourage free thinking, children should not be subjected to any regular religious teaching or be allowed to be defined as belonging to a particular religious group based on the views of their parents or guardians. At the age of 16, as with other laws, they would then be considered old enough and educated enough to form their own opinion and follow any particular religion (or none at all) through free thought.


******
Surely this will deny parents the right to convince their children of atheism as well?

Michael



Atheism is (demonstrably) the default position. Even were the petition to be in respect of domestic arrangements, which does not appear to be the intent, atheist parents would not need to indoctrinate their children, as without being exposed to religious indoctrination the children would not become religious.

Steve J
pentylzic
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:54 pm
Location: London, UK

MIC: Personally I Agree With It!

Postby Kekerusey » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:44 pm

Michael wrote:Surely this petition is against freedom, pluralism and democracy

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Make it illegal to indoctrinate or define children by religion before the age of 16. In order to encourage free thinking, children should not be subjected to any regular religious teaching or be allowed to be defined as belonging to a particular religious group based on the views of their parents or guardians. At the age of 16, as with other laws, they would then be considered old enough and educated enough to form their own opinion and follow any particular religion (or none at all) through free thought.


******
Surely this will deny parents the right to convince their children of atheism as well?


Not because of the atheism thing (others have already dealt with that) but because a religious POV and/or a position on religion is important ... whether god exists or he doesn't it has to be important. Let's be straight here ... if any of the Abrahamic doctrines are correct then if we don't embrace god the rest of us are on a fast elevator to a fiery fate, if there isn't one then every theist in the world is wasting their time. But there can be no doubt in any rational mind IMO ... agree or disagree, its important.

Therefore (and I'm sure that as a rational man you must agree with this) such a decision MUST NOT be entered into lightly, if there is any danger of coercion at a too young age (and children do trust their parents and teachers) then it should be avoided should it not?

Would it not make much more sense to fully INFORM all children of the values of all religions and religious positions whilst they are at school and then allow them to choose their own path at 16 or 18?

Kyu
User avatar
Kekerusey
 
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:38 am
Location: http://www.atheistsheaven.com

A freedom-denying petition

Postby Jaf » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:45 pm

On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 14:11:13 -0600, you wrote:

Surely this petition is against freedom, pluralism and democracy
[...]
Surely this will deny parents the right to convince their children of atheism as well?

Please do not feed the trolls.
--
JAF
anarchatntlworldfullstopcom
Keep Science Scientific
BCSE http://bcseweb.org.uk
Jaf
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Scunthorpe, N.Lincolnshire

A freedom-denying petition

Postby Peter M J Hess » Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:24 pm

Kyu, you are being tendentious at best. There are many Christians
(including this one) who would reject your straw-person caricature of
"Abrahamic doctrine." Even if there are troglodytic Christians and
Muslims who would ridiculously consign non-believers to "hell"
(whatever that archaic word means), please don't tar us all
(including your allies in the fight for sound science) with the same
brush. Regarding your last statement, if there is no God, how is
theism any more a waste of time than any other belief system, or any
other activity? A "waste" according to what criterion of importance?

Peter


At 12:44 PM 1/11/2007, Kyuuketsuki wrote:
Let's be straight here ... if any of the Abrahamic doctrines are
correct then if we don't embrace god the rest of us are on a fast
elevator to a fiery fate, if there isn't one then every theist in
the world is wasting their time.
Peter M. J. Hess, PhD
Faith Project Director
National Center for Science Education
http://www.ncseweb.org
Peter M J Hess
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:27 pm
Location: Berkeley, California USA

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

Postby tubataxidriver » Thu Jan 11, 2007 11:55 pm

This small extract from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, particularly the first point, gives adequate justification for this petition.

Article 14
1. States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
2. States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child.
3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
User avatar
tubataxidriver
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: Aylesbury, UK

Re: A freedom-denying petition

Postby Brian Jordan » Fri Jan 12, 2007 1:08 am

Michael wrote:Surely this will deny parents the right to convince their children of atheism as well?Michael

All other things being equal, there won't be any need. No preaching about Odin, Kali, Christ, Mohammed, Thetans, Moroni and the rest, then no need to argue against them.

Brian
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4175
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: A freedom-denying petition

Postby Timothy Chase » Fri Jan 12, 2007 2:58 am

Michael wrote:Surely this will deny parents the right to convince their children of atheism as well?

Michael


Given its wording, it would seem to deny the rights of parents to bring up their children in their own religious tradition. Interestingly, this is not how Richard Dawkins understood it not too long ago. He seemed to think at the time that it was simply a step towards the Separation of Church and State enjoyed in the United States. However, once he realised the actual intent of the petition, he promptly removed his signature.

See:

Divided by a common language: Richard Dawkins clarifies his position
Nick Matzke posted Entry 2810 on December 31, 2006 04:54 AM.
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/200 ... _a_co.html


Something you two have in common...
User avatar
Timothy Chase
 
Posts: 532
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Postby Timothy Chase » Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:15 am

Here are the last few sentences from a letter written by Richard Dawkins in to Nick Matzke:

Richard Dawkins wrote:Bloody hell! All that storm in a teacup for nothing! If only the petition had been worded properly in the first place … And if only I had read it more carefully … And if only Brayton had read it more charitably … No wonder lawyers and diplomats need special training. I’m out of my depth here.

The full letter is at the link above...

PS I am of the strong opinion that Dawkins was right in this case.
User avatar
Timothy Chase
 
Posts: 532
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: A freedom-denying petition

Postby andy_shill » Fri Jan 12, 2007 6:10 am

Michael wrote:Surely this petition is against freedom, pluralism and democracy


David Anderson certainly thinks so - I wonder if the timing of your thinking and his is purely coincidental? However, I'm not sure what this has to do with BCSE. BCSE hasn't signed it and as a single issue organisation would certaily not be promoting it!

Andy
Last edited by andy_shill on Fri Jan 12, 2007 6:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
andy_shill
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 4:01 pm

Re: A freedom-denying petition

Postby andy_shill » Fri Jan 12, 2007 6:22 am

Mike Brass wrote:Michael wrote:It doesn't control what happens *in the home*. It, rightly imo, secularises schools.


I think to limit "education" to schools you actually have to mention schools in the wording of the petition. Of course, you can believe it means whatever you want it to mean but that won't help others to have confidence in your deductive reasoning.

Is it helpful for the BCSE (a single issue group) Chairman to state his desire for the secularisation of schools on the BCSE forum? You appreciate that I am not in any way questioning your right to hold the view - just wondering about the wisdom of letting Michael lure you into irrelevant issues.

Andy
andy_shill
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 4:01 pm

Next

Return to Free For All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 8 guests

cron