Mortarman Rockpainter said:Whether or not someone gets their kids baptised is a personal decision.
As for saying "I'm leaving the choice to my child", that is a cop out. Do you allow your children to choose how to behave in public? Do you allow your children to choose between right and wrong on their own, or do they come up with their own moral code? Do you allow your children to choose what foods to eat? A parent's role is not to simply make sure that their children survive to the age of 18. A parent's role is to raise their children according to how the parents believe they should be raised. Baptism or not is a personal choice, but I would argue that the choice is up to the parents and not the child.
Reccesoldier said:I would say that leaving that choice to the child is the right thing to do. The reason I say that is because I will always advocate free will. Is the choice to believe yours or your child's? To me that is the question you and your wife should answer.
We are in my opinion far too often slaves of tradition. All tradition.
Just my two cents.
the 48th regulator said:That's right, and I suppose you would leave the child to change their own diaper as well.
In fact do you allow them to shop for their own groceries, clothing, and such.
How about a school, when they were four did you sit them down and give them choices in the area to go to? Or better yet when they began to leanr to speak did you give them the option to choose what language they spoke?
Let's get real, as a parent it is my responsabilty to raise them until they are adults, in the best way that I know. My way. After they are responsible enough to make their own descision, by all means they are not bound by that religion and choose to do what they wish.
Reccesoldier said:No it isn't.
I teach my children, which is not the same as denying them a choice.
Selecting a religion for a child is not equivalent to teaching between right and wrong. My children will not be ostracized by society for not having a religion forced on them like they would be if I were to fail to teach them acceptable moral behaviour. My children will not become sick because I didn’t force them to be baptized.
MR, the difference between the points of your argument and the compulsion of being baptized is that the straw men you set up were all requirements of survival in a societal framework or conversely biological imperatives and therefore taught out of necessity. Baptism is neither.
Maybe you should really look at what your beliefs are, is it that there is no higher being, or the fact that you despise organize religion?
dileas
tess
Richie said:Obviously parents have an obligation to raise their child in a moral environment; to produce at the end of those first eighteen years a Human Being with a strong sense of right and wrong. If the parents believe that this can be done by a religious upbringing including baptism it's the parents' choice. However once their child is old enough to make his or her own choices about religion, then the parents should respect the choice their child makes. The child may decide to renounce baptism or simply ignore it. Being a moral individual is in no way contingent on being a religious individual; the parents may have to come to respect that as well.
Reccesoldier said:Already answered these kinds of straw man arguments.
Why do people insist that my disbelief is founded in hatred?
I invite anyone to show a single instance where I have espoused hate for religion. Until that can be done then all such comments are nothing more than useless pontification by those who can not argue the subject without trying to intimidate, besmirch my character or misrepresent my position.
Basically I’m asking you to prove your premise that I hate religion. I will answer any and all questions you wish to ask and all my posts are open for your dissection. Bring it on.
So I'm a troll now? Nice, still not proof, just more "sugar coated" mud slinging.the 48th regulator said:Yes because your sugar coated way of criticising the way we practice our beliefs is so well done it will be hard to find evidence of your angle.
You don't believe in a higher being, good on you, but you constantly respond to anyone's post with, I would not do that, not me I believe in free will.
Insinuating, those that practice a religion don't.
Nice try Rece, fish all you want.
dileas
tess
Reccesoldier said:So I'm a troll now? Nice, still not proof, just more "sugar coated" mud slinging.
Tess I responded to a poster who ASKED for opinions. In my world opinions are usually accompanied by beliefs, and one is useless without the other. Or are you saying that my lack of belief in a supreme being precludes me from having an opinion?
Your misinterpretation of my comment about free will is probably an honest one. My point in that case is that a child who's parents select a religion for him aren't allowing him to freely choose or not according to his will/a rational decision on his part/needs/accuired beliefs.
Reccesoldier said:My point in that case is that a child who's parents select a religion for him aren't allowing him to freely choose or not according to his will/a rational decision on his part/needs/accuired beliefs.
the 48th regulator said:Your lack of belief of a supreme being does not preclude you to an opinion, however, that right to an opinion does not give you the right to say a religious path is a wrong path does not proscribe to free will.
Then I will admit fault, when you made the comment about free will I felt it alluded to the fact that I did not accept the free will of man.
dileas
tess
the 48th regulator said:a religious path is a wrong path in that it does not proscribe to free will.
Yrys said:I'm not sure if it's because I want my bed, but I don't understand that part of your sentence.
Could you rephrase, please ? (Is rephrase English?)
MCG said:For an Atheist (or even one from a religion without any such initiation) it would be very easy to adopt a position of letting the children decide when older. For these parents, there is no belief in the child being harmed during (and as a result of) the waiting period prior to the child being able to make the decision.
Greymatters said:Thats an assumption based on a responsible parent model. Take a look around and you will see a lot of children around the world being parented by people who shouldnt be allowed to have kids, or once having them fail to take adequate responsibility for them.
Richie said:Agreed. There are a lot of people who should not be parents in the first place, I see them everyday.
The study focused on children younger than 1 year, and found nearly a third of those who had been abused or neglected were one week old or younger
when the abuse or neglect occurred.
...
Federal officials define neglect as a failure to meet a child's basic needs including housing, clothing, feeding and access to medical care. But the counted cases
did not include new parents stumbling their way through breast-feeding or making other rookie mistakes.
Greymatters said:...there must be a starting point somewhere, and exposing children to the belief system of the parents is one way to start, with the understanding that the child has the choice to say no later on if they dont like it.