Assume Nothing

I'm not God-fearing, so it'll be pointless to pretend that I was. Nor was that a direct response to your responses. If I suppose that if I had adopted religious beliefs, but kept my moral code the same, I'd say that it'll still be immoral to indoctrinate a child because I believe that heaven is a place for Christians to worship an immoral God. I believe worshiping an immoral God is immoral because it's effectively endorsing immoral actions, which maximises pain/suffering and minimizes happiness/love/pleasure/well-being. I'm guessing if I was a strict utilitarian, it would be justified to indoctrinate, if Yahweh truly did exist as depicted by the Bible and I was God-fearing. I don't happen to be a strict utilitarian, though. Are you happy now?

If I was theistic, I'd be closer to a maltheist than Christian. I see Yahweh's actions as depicted by Biblical texts to be highly immoral too - he commands slavery, rape, genocide, etc. EDIT - This is not a response to Gingy_Warr.

Oh, I've experienced that problem before. Parents love walking in when the sexy scenes start. I've had that happen when watching scrubs too ._.

I realise that it was my fault - it's unnecessary to point it out again. I'm still confused on how someone could think child indoctrination is indeed, moral - or at least, not immoral, though.

I'll write an elaborate post tomorrow - I'm short on time today. The arguments against child indoctrination on moral grounds isn't anything new though - it'll be reiterating many of the pre-existing points.

I have mixed feelings about that too. I kind of paused here: Could this be the emergence of a new meme?

Yet, even without the claim, your point still lacks sufficient support for 'Religious indoctrination is not immoral'.

It seems relevant.

Banned for providing an insufficient reason for banning others.

There's no such study as of yet, but given that it's standard practice to impart knowledge to adherents via indoctrination in Christian societies, it's pretty easy to deduce. When's the last time a Christian told their child to question religious teachings?

Nobody did. It just happens to be the most popular method, by far. I find that highly immoral.

You're right - it does apply to more than religion. in·doc·tri·nate/inˈdäktrəˌnāt/ Verb: Teach (a person or group) to accept a set of beliefs uncritically: "broadcasting was a vehicle for indoctrinating the masses". But we're not teaching children to accept things uncritically.

You're deliberately obfuscating the term 'indoctrination'. Indoctrination entails teaching children to accept religious doctrines as facts without question/doubt, as to cast doubt is deemed blasphemous. Parents should only teach their children what to believe if it's factual (i.e. backed up with empirical data) - otherwise, it should be taught as what it is - opinion. I honestly don't think you're putting them in a position to make decisions for themselves if you're teaching them what to think/believe.

That's a nice find, Nom. I've spent much of today browsing the internet, and made a rather inactive thread with plenty of bickering. I like where Off Topic is going.

>necessarily Please provide a detailed example of where it doesn't. I know enough about religious fundamentalists to know that they do, but not about religious moderates.

Could you drop the 'you have no interest' crap? It's not going anywhere, is it? I don't see how it's an opinion when it objectively limits what people can learn. I retract my statement about religious moderates - I don't know enough about how they interpret the purported holy texts of Yahweh. Please explain what religious moderates actually believe/do.

That's completely irrelevant. Parents may think teaching their children that communism is a good thing, but that doesn't justify that it's indeed good (I can't think of any better analogy). I understand that religious people have every intention of trying to help their children as much as possible, but the consequences of teaching their religious beliefs as objective truths are deleterious to their long-term well-being. In order to accept religious fundamentalism, one must reject anything that contradicts it - which includes science and critical thinking. You're just pulling a cop-out after proclaiming that you have a point. If you don't want to have a discussion, then don't make these claims.

So you're basically going to refuse to justify your unfounded assertion, because you believe that I don't approach religion with any kind of objectivity? How ironic.

It goes beyond teaching religious beliefs, which is the problem. Could you explain how it's supposedly helpful?

Is that an attempt at sarcasm? What is your point? EDIT: Oh, and that analogy fails simply because homework is beneficial in that it helps students academically, whereas religious ideals being imposed on youngsters are generally more deleterious than helpful.

... what do those lyrics even mean? I've heard worse, but it's definitely annoying. It doesn't quite top this though (from the old thread):

I think one of the more relevant ones would be religious ideals. Religious beliefs themselves have been discussed ad nauseam, but we haven't talked much about the ethics of religious ideals. I find many Christian, and Islamic practices highly immoral. An example may be say... child indoctrination. Why must a religion be imposed on a child at such a young age? This applies just as much to religious moderates as religious fundamentalists.

Let's get this established: Do you actually want to be with him as partners, or would you be content with friend-zoning? I'd suggest taking the course of whatever makes you happy, because in the end - that's all that matters in this discussion. Don't do it too hastily if you're uncertain, though. There's too many people on tip.it that have expressed regret for these decisions, and these regrets are painful. They last a frustratingly long time too, to ponder the 'what ifs'.

Okay, we need a specific few subjects to talk about: Religious ideals Marijuana consumption Prostitution Abortion Polyamory 'Cheating' etc.

Of course, everything is presumptuous. Neither of us know the guy in person so we take experiences from our past that we can relate to the scenario in question, therefore neither of our advice is likely to be accurate or correct as we are constructing a figure in our head of the guy in question from life experiences which is most likely to be wrong as we are unique. Yes it is but it is never the major concern of a relationship. A relationship should function without money and it should at no point stop one from occurring. Don't you think it's worrying how he is already concerned about money in a relationship? It was a reference back to a previous point again about him having multiple sexual partners at once. Yes I'm making presumptions here but I know all too recently how 17 year old, teenage boys float about with girls and have few morals I base my opinion on what actually happened, whereas you seemed to base yours on a stereotype. That's the point of contention. The point regarding money; I've illustrated why the financial aspect could be problematic to some. It obviously shouldn't be the primary concern of initiating a relationship, but we can't be sure if it's his primary concern - it's just said to be a 'concern'. If he understood what a relationship entailed, perhaps he wouldn't be so stringent? I didn't quite catch the part about him having several sexual partners at once, but if that's the case, then I'd agree that it may be necessary to reconsider the guy being a potential partner. I'd disagree on the point about him having 'no morals' - it depends what's defined as morals, what kind of upbringing he's had, etc. It's a bit of a sweeping generalization to state that he would have no morals because 'there's many cases of teenage boys who float around with girls'. I'd suggest that you draw your own conclusions, Maddy. I'm slightly concerned about the 'making out for a joke' - in what context is this 'joke'? I'd understand if he was drunk, since people are likely to lose their inhibitions and act on psychological impulses... not so much for a joke though. It seems awfully complicated. You need to have a discussion with him.