I Think Indoctrinating Children With Religion Is Child Abuse

You have completely ignored the point I was making and gone off with your own comments which show a complete lack of understanding. Religious people hurt people? Yes. Lots of atheists hurt other people. The atheist regimes of last century killed 100 million people! People hurt people and that is why people need forgiveness. Of course people can live a good life without religion but that wax not the point I was making. @softspokenman

@Speedyman
Are you saying that the genocidal and militaristic actions of the Nazi and Communist régimes were undertaken in the name of atheism?

Yes. That is history. You can include Mao in Chiba and Pol Pot in Cambodia @newjaninev2

@Speedyman and that was done in the name of atheism, was it?

No mention of National Socialism or Communism?

No Nazi or Communist symbols?

Just... atheism?

They were regimes which embraced atheism is a fundamental.@newjaninev2

@Speedyman They were régimes that embraced unquestioned state authority as a fundamental. Religions were seen as a threat to that. Those regimes were antagonistic towards religion only because they threatened the State's hegemony.

Religions were seen as a threat because the state embraced atheism as a fundamental@newjaninev2

@Speedyman Religions were seen as a threat because they, like the régimes, sought (still seek) unbridled influence and unquestioned power.

@Speedyman You are mistaking atheism as the opposite of religion - it's not. Theism and atheism are opposites and, in themselves require no doctrine - just a belief (or not) in deities.

Religion, however, is a doctrine theists have created throughout the ages to control the masses with a punishment (hell for bad people) and reward (heaven and eternal bliss for good people) system. Religions were seen as a threat because religious people use them as a form of law which often conflicts with state law and morality. The bible effectively advocates the persecution of infidels and homosexuals, for example, and those things are clearly not acceptable in modern times.

You are f course again makng these absurd generalisations. I wonder if you ever think at all. Christianity was not invented to control the masses - if you read history it started as a small group persecuted by the masses. Since where does the New Testament advocate the persecution of infidels and homosexuals? There were huge and powerful groups of such people in New Testament times and Christians were too busy being persecuted to persecute others. Anyway, nothing in the New Testament to back up what you have said. You are obviously muxing up Christianith with another religion that won its influence by conquest. You need to start thinking straight and get your facts right and not believe everything you are told. @fazer1k

@Speedyman I didn't say anything about the new testament. The bible consists of an old and new testament and the persecution I spoke of is in there. Those who refer to themselves as Christians discriminate on the basis of religion, as we know from recent events with 'Christian' bakers and hoteliers. The KKK refer to themselves as 'soldiers of god' and believe the bible justifies their discrimination.

Yes, I did generalise and said 'religion' rather than Christianity, as do both the group you posted under and your original story.

In the cases you mentioned it was the Christians who were persecuted. But then they were by the state in New Testament times. Nothing has changed. It is Christians who are the persecuted minority @fazer1k

@Speedyman So in the cases I mentioned you are saying that bakers have been persecuted by being asked to bake a cake for couples who happened to be homosexuals? And it is the KKK, rather than those they target with their hatred, who are the ones who are persecuted? Is that really your argument?

It is nte resting that even Peter Tatchell said in the case of the bakers that people should be allowed freedom of Conscience and that was the more important issue. It appears that those who persecuted the Christians were like the KKK Who did the same thing to people in America they hated. It's interesting that people go on a hate campaign and then accuse other people of hating . I assume also you are one of these people does not believe in liberty of conscience. Or doesn't ypur tolerance go that far? The problem is the people like you do not think any further than your nose and do not think of the wider implications of shutting down freedom of speech and conscience, something my father fought in the war for and which people like you appear to want to get rid of apart from the people who agree with you @fazer1k

@Speedyman I fully support freedom of speech and expression provided it does not impact negatively on the freedom of others. It's not okay for people to discriminate against others based on religion, and freedom of speech can never make it okay; discrimination is just another form of persecution. And speech used to incite hatred and violence should never be tolerated for the same reason.

Freedom of conscience seems a rather meaningless term unless people's conscience happens to align with the mainstream view of morality and the law of the land. Just because someone's conscience allows certain behaviours doesn't mean those behaviours are acceptable - if that were the case laws wouldn't exist at all and people could do whatever they claimed their conscience allowed.

How is it you think religious people are persecuted nowadays? Questioning their beliefs based on a lack of evidence for those beliefs, and not wanting children to be indoctrinated with those beliefs, is not persecution.

But it was the Christians who were being persecuted in the instance you mentioned. You are just the same as the mooing herd who does not think. I'll say this for Tatchell - at least he thought about this case and its implications. You people don't think at all. Just parrot out the garbage. If course Christians are persecuted. You named a case. Millions are in other lands and no doubt it will come here with people like you wanting to shut down freedom of conscience. In fact it has arrived! @fazer1k

@Speedyman The examples I gave were of bakers and a hotelier refusing to serve a gay couple, and the KKK claiming to be 'soldiers of god' as justification for their hatred.

Please enlighten me as to how it is the Christians being persecuted there.

Or did you mean the section about questioning religious beliefs based on a lack of evidence? Teaching children facts and hypothesis and theories based on those facts is education. Teaching them something claimed as true when there is no hard evidence is indoctrination which is wrong.

I would say that persecuting a couple who are doing no one any harm is hatred. You seem to have a funny idea of what hatred is. You as I've your own hostile feelings to other people. Yet this is the total nature of the hypocrisy. The couple were persecuted by being taken to court by people who hated them. Even Peter Tatchell said they should be allowed freedom of conscience but there are some people who believe the freedom of conscience should not be allowed. There are people whose lives are based on hatred and discrimination which they want to ascribed to others. You are one of these people who wants to shut down freedom of conscience for people to believe different to you. The problem with that comes when it is your views that are not allowed freedom of conscience. I noticed at least Peter Tatchell realises that whereas people like you don't as you just plough blindly on in your unthinking morass@fazer1k

@Speedyman I have no hostility towards anyone. Disagreement is not hostility. I would say it is those who feel the need to resort to personal insults who are hostile.

So you agree the homosexuals were persecuted in that instance?

I addressed the rest of your post two posts ago but here it is again:

"I fully support freedom of speech and expression provided it does not impact negatively on the freedom of others. It's not okay for people to discriminate against others based on religion, and freedom of speech can never make it okay; discrimination is just another form of persecution. And speech used to incite hatred and violence should never be tolerated for the same reason.

Freedom of conscience seems a rather meaningless term unless people's conscience happens to align with the mainstream view of morality and the law of the land. Just because someone's conscience allows certain behaviours doesn't mean those behaviours are acceptable - if that were the case laws wouldn't exist at all and people could do whatever they claimed their conscience allowed."

So no, I don't accept that one person's so called freedoms are okay if they violate someone else's freedoms.

I don't know why you bring up Peter Tatchell. I can't verify what you claim he said, neither do I care what one protester, thinks. What happened was not acceptable to the gay couples concerned and (at least in the cases related to the UK) violated the law.

Of course being one of those people who is unable to think beyond your nose you would make these points. The fact that Tatchell can see the wider implications behind the verdict as an attack on freedom of thought and religion, both of which this country has held dear. This verdict now means that Christians are persecuted for what they believe and although small minded people might like you might support it, The broader implications of it are extremely worrying for freedom of speech, expression and religion in this country, as Peter Tatchell rightly points out@fazer1k

@Speedyman You don't believe in freedom of speech so it's hardly a valid argument. Anyone who believes in freedom of speech would not delete others' posts. Why don't you prove me right by deleting this too!

I delete posts which are infantile and add nothing to the argument. You are quite ridiculous @fazer1k

@Speedyman you just called this person ridiculous and you’re going to tell me you’re not being rude? Now you are just lying.

Not if it’s true@Bandit2398