Fish Shall Not Be Eaten

[Trollgaard]

Who said that? Muslims are free to ban eating pork in their own families. Just not for everyone. Same goes for any religion. They are free to forbid people of their faith from eating x, but it should not be against the law of the land to eat x for everyone.

IM wrote this brainfart of a thread based on this thread, where alternatives to pork were planned to be removed from a local French school system menu with only side dishes being offered as alternatives if the family could not afford to make their own lunches for children.

That sounds like a dick move.

[BK117B2]

For me it would greatly depend on whether or not they were correct

[Lunatic Goofballs]

IM wrote this brainfart of a thread based on this thread, where alternatives to pork were planned to be removed from a local French school system menu with only side dishes being offered as alternatives if the family could not afford to make their own lunches for children.

That sounds like a dick move.

[Australian rePublic]

If the parent really believed that fish should not be eaten, he made the most ethical decision he could have. Of course, as an authority figure he would have had to have taken into account such things as "did the child know he was eating fish" and "how well has the fish prohibition been explained in the past".

If someone's going to get THAT pissed, I'm sure it's been made extremely clear

[Infected Mushroom]

I see nothing wrong with the OPs scenario. It is the right of the parent to set the rules their children follow.

not when it involves forcing religion on people

[Trollgaard]

I see nothing wrong with the OPs scenario. It is the right of the parent to set the rules their children follow.

not when it involves forcing religion on people

Its a parent's duty to raise children. Many people, I would say most, are religious. There is nothing wrong with parent's of x religion raising their kids to be followers of x religion.

[Infected Mushroom]

not when it involves forcing religion on people

Its a parent's duty to raise children. Many people, I would say most, are religious. There is nothing wrong with parent's of x religion raising their kids to be followers of x religion.

there is

children are vulnerable to indoctrination

[Trollgaard]

Its a parent's duty to raise children. Many people, I would say most, are religious. There is nothing wrong with parent's of x religion raising their kids to be followers of x religion.

there is

children are vulnerable to indoctrination

All cultures and societies indoctrinate the next generation. That's what society is.

[The Hobbesian Metaphysician]

Its a parent's duty to raise children. Many people, I would say most, are religious. There is nothing wrong with parent's of x religion raising their kids to be followers of x religion.

there is

children are vulnerable to indoctrination

One could claim children are vulnerable at education facilities too considering the indoctrination which goes on there.

[Orpheocordyceps Unilateralis]

You should be able to impose that until the age of 12, because by then the child is on the brink of being a teenager and must make their own choices, choose their own paths.

But then if the child's under twelve, experimentation should most definitely not be met with punishment. I personally think it never should, nor should breaking any religious rule for any reason. That is, other than obvious ones like murder, rape, and other federal crimes.

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

Brainwashing your children is unethical.

News at 11.

[Australian rePublic]

Its a parent's duty to raise children. Many people, I would say most, are religious. There is nothing wrong with parent's of x religion raising their kids to be followers of x religion.

there is

children are vulnerable to indoctrination

How would you go about raising them?

[Gauthier]

Brainwashing your children is unethical.

News at 11.

Only if you brainwash them to believe a deity. If you brainwash them into believing any form of religion is backwards deluded bullshit it's ETHICAL. *nod*

[The Hobbesian Metaphysician]

Brainwashing your children is unethical.

News at 11.

An incredibly vague word right there.

[Kaalmi]

I believe if you do believe in a religion that has these laws, you should follow them to truly be a follower. If you don't, who cares?

[Orpheocordyceps Unilateralis]

there is

children are vulnerable to indoctrination

How would you go about raising them?

Allow them to decide their faith and other personal choices, but regulate safety-related things and basic public conduct.

[Jute]

Wait, but didn't Infected Mushroom argue in another thread against recreational fishing?

[Jacobania]

Consider the following hypothetical situation...

This entire thread is based on a hypothetical situation established to create a strawman, and then have everyone dismantle a real-world position by tackling this strawman.

If you have a problem with a real-world cultural practice, address that, not some hypothetical scenario that you thought up.

[Jute]

there is

children are vulnerable to indoctrination

All cultures and societies indoctrinate the next generation. That's what society is.

Atheistic-irreligious education is just as much "indoctrination", or as little. It depends on how you educate children, not what you tell them.

[Italios]

Wait, but didn't Infected Mushroom argue in another thread against recreational fishing?

This is just a scenario.

not when it involves forcing religion on people

Its a parent's duty to raise children. Many people, I would say most, are religious. There is nothing wrong with parent's of x religion raising their kids to be followers of x religion.

Okay so let's say I'm religious and my religion said I cannot eat some specific foods, many of which are important to growth and supporting your body's health, and contain nutrients. Is it fair that I force these on my child, so he cannot get a good diet, simply because I believe in it? What if he personally doesn't even believe in it?

[Diopolis]

If the parent really believed that fish should not be eaten, he made the most ethical decision he could have. Of course, as an authority figure he would have had to have taken into account such things as "did the child know he was eating fish" and "how well has the fish prohibition been explained in the past".

If someone's going to get THAT pissed, I'm sure it's been made extremely clear

I'm sure- but punishing such a thing should be subject to the same standards as anything else(ie an honest mistake should not be punished or punished very lightly).

[Australian rePublic]

Wait, but didn't Infected Mushroom argue in another thread against recreational fishing?

This is just a scenario.

Its a parent's duty to raise children. Many people, I would say most, are religious. There is nothing wrong with parent's of x religion raising their kids to be followers of x religion.

Okay so let's say I'm religious and my religion said I cannot eat some specific foods, many of which are important to growth and supporting your body's health, and contain nutrients. Is it fair that I force these on my child, so he cannot get a good diet, simply because I believe in it? What if he personally doesn't even believe in it?

Pork is vital to ones diet because?

[Trollgaard]

Wait, but didn't Infected Mushroom argue in another thread against recreational fishing?

This is just a scenario.

Its a parent's duty to raise children. Many people, I would say most, are religious. There is nothing wrong with parent's of x religion raising their kids to be followers of x religion.

Okay so let's say I'm religious and my religion said I cannot eat some specific foods, many of which are important to growth and supporting your body's health, and contain nutrients. Is it fair that I force these on my child, so he cannot get a good diet, simply because I believe in it? What if he personally doesn't even believe in it?

There are plenty of foods that are nutritious and promote good health and growth. If one or two of those are non-kosher, if you will, then that's not really a big deal.

[Italios]

Consider the following hypothetical situation...

This entire thread is based on a hypothetical situation established to create a strawman, and then have everyone dismantle a real-world position by tackling this strawman.

If you have a problem with a real-world cultural practice, address that, not some hypothetical scenario that you thought up.

This is very similar to many situations. Judaism says you can't eat pork, because pigs are unclean, filthy animals. I am a Jew, albeit a virtually irreligious one who doesn't believe in God, and I will eat pork. Just because the food differs doesn't mean the actual cause doesn't.

[Diopolis]

This is just a scenario.
Okay so let's say I'm religious and my religion said I cannot eat some specific foods, many of which are important to growth and supporting your body's health, and contain nutrients. Is it fair that I force these on my child, so he cannot get a good diet, simply because I believe in it? What if he personally doesn't even believe in it?

Pork is vital to ones diet because?

Because anything to stick it to those religious people.
But seriously, you can have a balanced diet based on just about anything. Even veganism- although it's difficult.