12yo Texan Girl Told to Write that God is Fake!

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Actually, "agnosticism" denotes that one is unsure whether or not God(s) exist. It has nothing to do with belief.

I think the word you're looking for is apatheism.

Agnosticism and apatheism is not the same thing.

I feel like this is a good time to bring up ignosticism.

[Brandenbourg-Anhalt]

Agnosticism and apatheism is not the same thing.

Exactly the point he was trying to make.

I see that now. Sorry

[Gim]

Exactly the point he was trying to make.

I see that now. Sorry

No worries. Mistakes come and go. We're all human.

[Brandenbourg-Anhalt]

I see that now. Sorry

No worries. Mistakes come and go. We're all human.

They do. Like you believing that God is the universal truth

[Gim]

No worries. Mistakes come and go. We're all human.

They do. Like you believing that God is the universal truth

Well,...I did not expect you to say that...

but, I'm just stating God is the truth, based on my opinion. I discuss, but I don't try to coerce people into believing that is the case.

[Brandenbourg-Anhalt]

They do. Like you believing that God is the universal truth

Well,...I did not expect you to say that...

but, I'm just stating God is the truth, based on my opinion. I discuss, but I don't try to coerce people into believing that is the case.

Good. As you said yourself, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I respect yours and hopefully people will respect mine

[Gim]

Well,...I did not expect you to say that...

but, I'm just stating God is the truth, based on my opinion. I discuss, but I don't try to coerce people into believing that is the case.

Good. As you said yourself, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I respect yours and hopefully people will respect mine

I never disrespected yours. If I tried to contradict your statement through discussion, that was to prove my point, not to prove that your opinion is worthy of disrespect.

[Brandenbourg-Anhalt]

Agnosticism and apatheism is not the same thing.

I didn't say they were...

I see that now. I refer to my previous post

Exactly the point he was trying to make.

I see that now. Sorry

[Brandenbourg-Anhalt]

Good. As you said yourself, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I respect yours and hopefully people will respect mine

I never disrespected yours. If I tried to contradict your statement through discussion, that was to prove my point, not to prove that your opinion is worthy of disrespect.

I didn't say you were disrespecting me or my opinion. It wasn't meant like that

[U n i t y]

I am an agnostic. But I feel that the teacher has no right to impress their own religious views on that student. Have you ever heard of the Freedom of the Religion?

But may I ask why you are reading RT? RT is a welfare program for crackpot journalists, failures called reporters, and anchor oddities.

[Gim]

I never disrespected yours. If I tried to contradict your statement through discussion, that was to prove my point, not to prove that your opinion is worthy of disrespect.

I didn't say you were disrespecting me or my opinion. It wasn't meant like that

Oh, okay. My apologies. Hopefully, others respect your opinion.

[Brandenbourg-Anhalt]

I didn't say you were disrespecting me or my opinion. It wasn't meant like that

Oh, okay. My apologies. Hopefully, others respect your opinion.

And I hope people will respect yours too. Peace brother/sister

[Gim]

Oh, okay. My apologies. Hopefully, others respect your opinion.

And I hope people will respect yours too. Peace brother/sister

[AlezSalmond]

So if the parents force their religion on their child, which is a violation of their religious freedom, it's perfectly okay? Glad to see their are so many pro-child abuse dipshits out there.

[Gim]

So if the parents force their religion on their child, which is a violation of their religious freedom, it's perfectly okay? Glad to see their are so many pro-child abuse dipshits out there.

No need to swear, but I agree that the concept of positive freedom exists. Parents are more than welcome to inculcate their children about religion, as long as they give the child a choice to venture the world by which the child can learn about the different views present in his or her life, after a few years.

[Newel Swabia]

Atheism is outsmarting common sense

[Jute]

Not sure if it's been posted before, but apparently this is the paper in question.

So if the parents force their religion on their child, which is a violation of their religious freedom, it's perfectly okay? Glad to see their are so many pro-child abuse dipshits out there.

What exactly is forcing a religion on their child?`Punishing them for not believing, or just exposing them to it, like taking it to church and talking about God? If it's the latter, than non-religious people still "force" their non-religious views on the child.

[Cybraxia]

So if the parents force their religion on their child, which is a violation of their religious freedom, it's perfectly okay? Glad to see their are so many pro-child abuse dipshits out there.

???

Children are minors. The Constitution has limited effect on them until they are adults, or can be considered old enough to fend for themselves (If I remember it correctly). As such, parents can take them to church whether they like it or not.

Who are you to say whether or not they should do that? Besides, that isn't even what's being discussed here.

[Gim]

Atheism is outsmarting common sense

Humans tend to agree to it more than any other belief, that's why.

[AlezSalmond]

Not sure if it's been posted before, but apparently this is the paper in question.

So if the parents force their religion on their child, which is a violation of their religious freedom, it's perfectly okay? Glad to see their are so many pro-child abuse dipshits out there.

What exactly is forcing a religion on their child?`Punishing them for not believing, or just exposing them to it, like taking it to church and talking about God? If it's the latter, than non-religious people still "force" their non-religious views on the child.

Children are forced to go to church, against their will, from a young age. Generally, when they grow up they begin to explore and a large chunk of religious parents punish this. Which is abuse and a violation of the 1st Amendment. The majority of abusive households are religious anyways so your argument kind of bites itself

[The Wolven League]

I am an agnostic. But I feel that the teacher has no right to impress their own religious views on that student. Have you ever heard of the Freedom of the Religion?

But may I ask why you are reading RT? RT is a welfare program for crackpot journalists, failures called reporters, and anchor oddities.

The religion?

[AlezSalmond]

So if the parents force their religion on their child, which is a violation of their religious freedom, it's perfectly okay? Glad to see their are so many pro-child abuse dipshits out there.

???

Children are minors. The Constitution has limited effect on them until they are adults, or can be considered old enough to fend for themselves (If I remember it correctly). As such, parents can take them to church whether they like it or not.

Who are you to say whether or not they should do that? Besides, that isn't even what's being discussed here.

Umm, no. Child abuse is not sanctioned by the Constitution. Try again.

[Cybraxia]

Not sure if it's been posted before, but apparently this is the paper in question.


What exactly is forcing a religion on their child?`Punishing them for not believing, or just exposing them to it, like taking it to church and talking about God? If it's the latter, than non-religious people still "force" their non-religious views on the child.

Children are forced to go to church, against their will, from a young age. Generally, when they grow up they begin to explore and a large chunk of religious parents punish this. Which is abuse and a violation of the 1st Amendment. The majority of abusive households are religious anyways so your argument kind of bites itself

Alright, first off:

The majority of abusive households are religious anyways so your argument kind of bites itself

[Citation Needed]

Children are forced to go to church, against their will, from a young age.

Who can determine if it is against their will or not? Besides, Parents are their legal caretakers.

[Jute]

Not sure if it's been posted before, but apparently this is the paper in question.


What exactly is forcing a religion on their child?`Punishing them for not believing, or just exposing them to it, like taking it to church and talking about God? If it's the latter, than non-religious people still "force" their non-religious views on the child.

Children are forced to go to church, against their will, from a young age. Generally, when they grow up they begin to explore and a large chunk of religious parents punish this. Which is abuse and a violation of the 1st Amendment. The majority of abusive households are religious anyways so your argument kind of bites itself

Making someone go to church is neither abuse nor a violation of the 1st amendment (which deals only with the separation of church and state, and says nothing about families).
If you argue like that, any kind of upbringing is a "forcing" of your views on your child, isn't it.

[The Wolven League]

Children are forced to go to church, against their will, from a young age. Generally, when they grow up they begin to explore and a large chunk of religious parents punish this. Which is abuse and a violation of the 1st Amendment. The majority of abusive households are religious anyways so your argument kind of bites itself

Making someone go to church is neither abuse nor a violation of the 1st amendment (which deals only with the separation of church and state, and says nothing about families).
If you argue like that, any kind of upbringing is a "forcing" of your views on your child, isn't it.

Teaching kids how to speak is abuse *nod*