byenzer - 22 June 2011 05:53 PM

I’ve seen a pic to two of Ms. Mercer on Amazon.com.  Here’s two pics of our illustrious interview leader, Ms. Stollznow.  Helps us to picture the conversationalists when we know what they look like, eh?  Doesn’t hurt,,,,,,, the eyes!  :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karen_Stollznow.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karen_Stollznow_2.jpg

Superficial much???

traveler - 27 June 2011 07:22 AM

Certainly Dawkins’s statement would apply to fundamentalists who withhold medical care from their child while “providing religious instruction.” I believe you are taking Dawkins’s claim a bit to strongly and you may not be taking the damage done by some theistic parents strongly enough.

You are wrong here, traveler. Of course parents who fail to provide their children with medical assistance are guilty of child abuse. Dawkins, however, refers to the parents’ teaching of religion to their children as child abuse; here he is clearly wrong. I really have nothing to add here as I thought Dr. Mercer already said everything that needed to be said.

George - 27 June 2011 08:15 AM

traveler - 27 June 2011 07:22 AM

Certainly Dawkins’s statement would apply to fundamentalists who withhold medical care from their child while “providing religious instruction.” I believe you are taking Dawkins’s claim a bit to strongly and you may not be taking the damage done by some theistic parents strongly enough.

You are wrong here, traveler. Of course parents who fail to provide their children with medical assistance are guilty of child abuse.

And since that is their way of providing religious instruction, such instruction involves child abuse. Granted, it’s an extreme case.

Dawkins, however, refers to the parents’ teaching of religion to their children as child abuse; here he is clearly wrong. I really have nothing to add here as I thought Dr. Mercer already said everything that needed to be said.

Well, that’s certainly possible. But I cannot find where Dawkins (in God Delusion) states it that simply - that parents’ teaching of religion to their children is child abuse. He talks about blind faith being dangerous, priestly abuse, Humphrey’s thoughts about the ills of religious education, and more. Could someone help me find where he says simply that the teaching of religion by parents is child abuse? So far as I can tell, he always seems to qualify what he means.

I am not a fan of Dawkins - I find him rude and arrogant - but I want to understand him correctly.

Edit to add: by parents

byenzer - 27 June 2011 08:35 AM

traveler - 27 June 2011 07:28 AM

byenzer - 22 June 2011 05:53 PM

I’ve seen a pic to two of Ms. Mercer on Amazon.com.  Here’s two pics of our illustrious interview leader, Ms. Stollznow.  Helps us to picture the conversationalists when we know what they look like, eh?  Doesn’t hurt,,,,,,, the eyes!  :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karen_Stollznow.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karen_Stollznow_2.jpg

Superficial much???

Quite right! Quite right.  Please forgive the indiscretion. 

How silly of me to have posted those ‘oh so limiting’ pics of Ms. Stollznow.  She certainly deserves better and twould be remiss of anyone to perceive her in anything but, the most honoring light! 

The “proper picture” link that I should have used instead is one that Ms. Stollznow has provided for us all to see.  Here tis:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/surlyramics/sets/72157623856128547/detail/

Thank you, so much, for the corrective guidance.

More pics. Great. Answers the question though. 

traveler - 27 June 2011 08:48 AM

Could someone help me find where he says simply that the teaching of religion is child abuse?

HERE:

“Priestly groping of child bodies is disgusting. But it may be less harmful in the long run than priestly subversion of child minds.”

He has zero scientific evidence to support such claim.

George - 27 June 2011 09:00 AM

traveler - 27 June 2011 08:48 AM

Could someone help me find where he says simply that the teaching of religion is child abuse?

HERE:

“Priestly groping of child bodies is disgusting. But it may be less harmful in the long run than priestly subversion of child minds.”

He has zero scientific evidence to support such claim.

Thanks George, but that doesn’t even mention parents. Did I miss something? (more likely the older I get…)

Edit to add: I should have said parents explicitly here, but it is in your original statement.

Well, if the priest had an impact on the kids’ mental health, you could implicitly blame the parents since they are the ones who send their children to the priest. But Dawkins does explicitly blame the parents for committing child abuse (google it: I think he said so in the first “Beyond Belief”) through identifying their kids with religious labels. This is obviously nonsense.

George - 27 June 2011 09:29 AM

Well, if the priest had an impact on the kids’ mental health, you could implicitly blame the parents since they are the ones who send their children to the priest. But Dawkins does explicitly blame the parents for committing child abuse (google it: I think he said so in the first “Beyond Belief”) through identifying their kids with religious labels. This is obviously nonsense.

Hmmmm, seems like the one who says I’m wrong should point to the explicit text…   

This post #39 is the same as half of my post #23, so, Eh?  again.

Jean Mercer - 05 September 2011 07:51 AM

This post #39 is the same as half of my post #23, so, Eh?  again.

It is a spammer, just copies some text in the hope it gets true. I hope it will be deleted soon…

GdB - 05 September 2011 08:18 AM

Jean Mercer - 05 September 2011 07:51 AM

This post #39 is the same as half of my post #23, so, Eh?  again.

It is a spammer, just copies some text in the hope it gets true. I hope it will be deleted soon…

Deleted. This is a tactic we’ve seen several times now, trying to get spam through unnoticed ...

If you want to read about some abuse that really is based on religious belief, see http://childmyths.blogspot.com/2011/12/faith-based-child-abuse.html. You’ll see that the reality is a far cry from religious instruction.