Our New Home

We have a new home, come join us at WeAreSMRT (We Are Skeptical Minds & Rational Thinkers)

The Forum

Monday, August 18, 2008

In case you ever start to forget why we need to vehemently protest religion.

RELIGION AND CHILD ABUSE

Posted by at
Labels: ,

32 comments:

  1. nonmagicAugust 18, 2008 at 3:31 PM

    Now THAT'S a good blog find. Kudos to whomever is putting the time and effort into running that blog.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lance Christian JohnsonAugust 18, 2008 at 3:34 PM

    Depressing stuff. I think that more people need to wake up to this kind of a thing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Andrew LouisAugust 18, 2008 at 6:28 PM

    And this is not fallacious reasoning because?

    Athiests don't abuse children?

    Or that; because people use the bible to wrongly abuse children according to they're supposed beleifs, that means religion is at fault?

    Lets not put the personal responsability on the people. It's religions fault.

    Meagan,
    I realize you're somewhat editorializing here, and being sensational; but it's not in good faith. I think these things are horrible, but it's not religion/Gods fault...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lance Christian JohnsonAugust 18, 2008 at 6:46 PM

    Andrew,

    Would these things have happened if these people were taught to think critically and not just take things on blind faith?

    I would go so far as to say that religion is at fault here. It's not always the reason for child abuse, and it doesn't always lead to abuse. However, you can't deny the relation between the abuse and the religion.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Andrew LouisAugust 18, 2008 at 7:18 PM

    that was, *not* trying to be condescending

    ReplyDelete
  6. MaragonAugust 18, 2008 at 7:22 PM

    The site in question chronicles the systematic abuse of children by religious cults.

    Ever heard of a cult not based on a religion?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Andrew LouisAugust 18, 2008 at 7:28 PM

    You're also suggesting thinking critically means not being a christian. Which is more fallacy.

    Just because some christians are not critical thinkers does not mean all of them are (this is a slippery slope). Afterall, there are plenty of athiests who are likewise uncritical in they're thinking.

    Look,
    I'm not one to come out against you guys as I think Ray is a doof; but I think you're wrong here.

    ReplyDelete
  8. WeemaryanneAugust 18, 2008 at 7:33 PM

    Andrew, you might have a point:

    - IF there were any reason to suspect that child abuse had occurred as a product of, let's say, the Time-Honored Teachings of Giggles The Clown; AND

    - IF the alleged abusers defended themselves with "B-b-but the priest sed if I didn't pray to the pitcher of Giggles then I couldn't have any ice cream an' Giggles luvs me an' Giggles is always right an' anyway yer a meanie 'cause you don't love Giggles;" AND

    - IF people hearing this news could refrain from stuttering "B-b-but that's not MY GAWD they're talkin' about" because they know how idiotic that sounds.

    Since these conditions observably do not pertain, you need to come up with something better than "you can't blame MY GAWD for this because MY GAWD wasn't the cause, because MY GAWD doesn't do things like that, so there."

    ReplyDelete
  9. Andrew LouisAugust 18, 2008 at 7:36 PM

    Meagan,
    you're feeding your own beliefs with fallacy and ignoring my point entirely.

    Again your argument is (now that you've changed it a smidge):

    1.) Some cults abuse children.
    2.) All cults are based on religion.
    3.) Therefore all religion is bad.

    Meagan,
    does this follow?

    Now there is likely no question about 1, and 2 is certainly not true if you know anything about cults, and even if it were true, clearly 3 is a stretch.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Andrew LouisAugust 18, 2008 at 7:43 PM

    Wee,
    you havn't shown how it is the cause. The burdon of proof is not on me.

    ReplyDelete
  11. WeemaryanneAugust 18, 2008 at 8:15 PM

    What do you want me to prove, AL?

    That there isn't a magic man in the sky?

    That even if there were, it never (never, nohow, nope, nuh-uh) told that kook Warren Jeffs to marry minor girls off to men old enough to be their grandfathers?

    That the only priests who ever raped children were, um, not-real priests? ('Cause everybody knows that no TRUE Scotsman would ever play the banjo, or some such inane reasoning.)

    Take your pick.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Andrew LouisAugust 18, 2008 at 8:18 PM

    Wee,
    this argument isn't about the existence of God per se' and showing proof of that. it's about this:

    1.) Some cults abuse children.
    2.) All cults are based on religion.
    3.) Therefore all religion is bad.

    ReplyDelete
  13. WeemaryanneAugust 18, 2008 at 8:34 PM

    If I were going to make any claim about ALL members of a group then I would be damnsure to bring along a libraryfull of evidence detailing my reasons for making such a claim.

    We know -- with a reasonable degree of certainty -- that the claim "all X are criminals" is likely to be false or at least unprovable since the evidence can never be strong enough or comprehensive enough to support all instances of the claim in all possible circumstances.

    But, tell me true now:

    Do you genuinely believe that if you and I began right now to check out the history of every known religion back to, let's say, the year 1900; and if we do nothing else for the rest of our lives; do you suspect, as I do, that in 99.9% of those histories we could find at least one case of some poor soul who went off the rails at least partly because of what he was taught to believe?

    That's what happens with religion.

    Islam requires the Iranian mullahs to stone people to death. It requires the Saudi Arabs to lock up their women. It doesn't suggest that they do these things, it insists.

    Buddhism - one branch of it - requires Japanese pilots to die to protect the Emperor. (Or it did until 1945.)

    Christianity doesn't make a Fred Phelps or a John Hagee or a Jeremiah Wright possible; it makes them inevitable.

    Religion doesn't make suggestions. It requires people to accept nutso beliefs and from time time, to demonstrate their acceptance of same.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Andrew LouisAugust 18, 2008 at 8:45 PM

    Wee,
    again, I could point out plenty of athiest ragimes who commited atrocities, but that wouldn't prove anything. Only that people are horrible to eachother.

    You're building strawmen wee,
    when this is the argument:

    1.) Some cults abuse children.
    2.) All cults are based on religion.
    3.) Therefore all religion is bad.

    Does 3 follow logically?

    You guys do a good job of trying to keep Ray honest, but none of it works because he's a fundamentalist. You're behaving in the same way now, you're sticking to your own fundamental belief in the face of obvious fallacy.

    The reasoning is fallacious for two reasons; your're now building straw men, and the above argument [1-3] is a slippery slope and does not follow.

    If you disagree with me, how are you not being fundamental? How are you thinking critically?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Lance Christian JohnsonAugust 18, 2008 at 9:16 PM

    Andrew,

    I can only speak for myself, but I don't think that the following statement accurately represents what anybody here is saying.

    1.) Some cults abuse children.
    2.) All cults are based on religion.
    3.) Therefore all religion is bad.

    For me, the point is that if these particular people had been taught to think critically and to NOT accept things on blind faith, then these things probably wouldn't have happened. That's it. To go from that to saying that all religion is bad is a step far beyond what I'm saying; however, I will say that there's a link.

    As for whether Christians can think critically or not, I'll just say this: If somebody believes that a man was born of a virgin and later rose from the dead, then it's very possible that they might be critical thinkers; however, they're definitely not being critical when they accept something like that.

    Will getting rid of religion get rid of perversion lance?

    Did I even say that? Talk about your strawmen.

    And as for "atheist regimes" and their atrocities, come on. They just got rid of the old gods and then installed themselves as gods (like Stalin). It's not like people were taught to be free thinkers.

    ReplyDelete
  16. MaragonAugust 19, 2008 at 3:10 AM

    "Meagan,
    you're feeding your own beliefs with fallacy and ignoring my point entirely."

    I don't really care. It's an interesting link that shows a definitive correlation between child abuse and religious cults.

    Just because I say that some religious cults abuse children doesn't mean I assume that all do. That was your assumption, not mine. No one with any sense would suggest that. However, to deny the correlation is simply silly.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Andrew LouisAugust 19, 2008 at 5:49 AM

    Lance,
    so it seems clear that your issue isn't religion, but non free thinking? I can understand that - certainly some religious folk are cracked. And, this doesn't follow?:

    1.) Some cults abuse children.
    2.) All cults are based on religion.
    3.) Therefore all religion is bad.



    Meagan,
    I said:
    "you're feeding your own beliefs with fallacy and ignoring my point entirely."

    And then you responded:
    I don't really care....

    Then you're no better then Ray Comfort. You're a fundi of a different ilk. I'm not trying to be mean here, but this is what you're suggesting. You praise yourself on be rational, yet when it comes to your own beliefs your entirely irrational.

    And,
    I'm not assuming anything. The argument [1-3] is based directly on what you said. "...we need to vehemently protest religion."
    You are saying precisely what I layed out. I'll restate it to make it more clear:

    1.) Some cults abuse children.
    2.) All cults are based on religion.
    3.) Therefore all religion should be vehemently protested.

    Does THIS follow?

    Tell me Meagan, how this is not fallacious reasoning?

    ReplyDelete
  18. WeemaryanneAugust 19, 2008 at 6:41 AM

    'Mornin', AL. I lost my final comment last night to encroaching sleepiness and a balky broadband connection. Sorry.

    I remember that I agreed with your point that people must be made to take responsibility for their actions; that's a given. But it doesn't let religion off the hook.

    You're going a bit too far in assuming that I paint all believers as child abusers sipmly because they believe. I know better than that. OTOH, we observe that religion gives people excuses - and poor ones at that - to do dreadful things and it also diminishes their ability to think for themselves -- thereby making such things at least a little more likely to happen.

    (Aside: Isn't it interesting how many priests and ministers are making headlines on charges of rape, battery, fraud, drug use and more, and worse. I don't expect anyone to be a saint and I know that the headlines represent only a tiny percentage of men/women of the cloth; but I find the headlines astounding in themselves. Their Imaginary Boss apparently doesn't keep a very close eye on his employees.)

    ReplyDelete
  19. WeemaryanneAugust 19, 2008 at 6:43 AM

    Also, Andrew, your distinction between belief and fundamentalism doesn't really work. For the fundies, the fundamentalism IS the belief; and for the non-fundies, well they don't matter because it's the fundies who go after power and then get to make the rules. As they have in the Muslim Middle East and as they're currently doing in Christian America.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Andrew LouisAugust 19, 2008 at 7:13 AM

    Wee, (all)
    listen you guys, I don't want to draw this out until someone gets angery (I'm a member of this group and I'd just asssume keep it that way). My point is simply that the argument [1 - 3] is dishonest fallacious reasoning and I think you see that. Furthermore I think it was somehwhat stated in an editorial way, which is fine if it's recognized as that.

    My dig against religion is absolutism, as I feel it is this sort of thinking that leads to all the sorts of justifications for horrible behaviors (hence my beef with Sye and Ray). But it's not religion that breeds that, people inject that into it.

    From lance's perspective it's non-critical thinking, which I think is also a worthy option.

    All I'm saying is, lets be clear on what it is we're attaccking. I say, it's NOT religion, it a certain type of thinking as it RELATES to religion. This type of thinking exists with and without religion, inside and out.

    Again,
    no ill will here you guys.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Lance Christian JohnsonAugust 19, 2008 at 9:35 AM

    All I'm saying is, lets be clear on what it is we're attaccking. I say, it's NOT religion, it a certain type of thinking as it RELATES to religion. This type of thinking exists with and without religion, inside and out.

    But Andrew, what's the one thing that all religions have in common? Faith. There's the central ingredient. Again, that's not saying that it always leads to death, but you can't deny that link.

    ReplyDelete
  22. MaragonAugust 19, 2008 at 11:05 AM

    "Then you're no better then Ray Comfort. You're a fundi of a different ilk. I'm not trying to be mean here, but this is what you're suggesting. You praise yourself on be rational, yet when it comes to your own beliefs your entirely irrational."

    Wrong. What I'm saying is that I don't really care to argue my atheism with you over a link that I posted.
    Please point out and explain how my beliefs are irrational.
    Please explain why accepting the positive correlation between religious cults and child abuse is irrational.

    "And,
    I'm not assuming anything. The argument [1-3] is based directly on what you said. "...we need to vehemently protest religion."

    If religion can lead to cults abusing children, then we do need to protest it. If religion leads to people being unable to critically examine their faith then we need to protest it.

    There is nothing positive that man gets from god belief exclusively. It's not needed, it's superfluous.

    "You are saying precisely what I layed out. I'll restate it to make it more clear:

    1.) Some cults abuse children.
    2.) All cults are based on religion.
    3.) Therefore all religion should be vehemently protested."

    No, that's not what I'm saying. That's what you inferred from the ONE LINE OF TEXT I posted along with a link.

    THIS is what I'm saying.

    1)There is a positive correlation between child abuse and religious cults.

    And that's all I'm saying. Anything else is your own bias.

    "Tell me Meagan, how this is not fallacious reasoning?"

    Not everything should be turned into a full blown debate. Not everything is an exercise in logic.If you don't like the conclusion that religious cults have a positive correlation with child abuse, then find some statistics to refute this fact.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Andrew LouisAugust 19, 2008 at 2:35 PM

    Meagan,
    1.) Some cults abuse children.
    2.) All cults are based on religion.
    3.) Therefore all religion should be vehemently protested.

    you showed that some cults abuse children (I agree), you said that all cults are based on religion (not so), you said that religion should be protested in this way. I believe I have your argument correct.

    Unless you're saying that some religion is ok?

    Anyway,
    I'll drop it here. Sorry for the debate, just trying to understand your thinking on the matter and keep it honest as I am sympothetic to religious thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  24. MaragonAugust 19, 2008 at 3:25 PM

    I wasn't making any argument.

    I was presenting evidence for the positive correlation between religious cults and child abuse.

    Any argument is perceived and perpetuated by you.


    And show me a cult that isn't based on religion.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Andrew LouisAugust 19, 2008 at 5:46 PM

    Meagan,
    semantics. You were following that reasoning. Your case was based on 1 - 3.

    I can name off cults that are not religious just as I can name regimes that commited atrocities that were not theistic; but that is beside the point. It's fallacious reasoning to jump off that platform and slide down a slippery slope from there.

    The point is we shouldn't shun all of religion because of a handfull of bad seeds that don't represent what religion is about. To do so would again be a perfect example of the Slippery Slope Fallacy.

    And again, Meagan, I'm with on this being horrible, and I'm with on tearing down these cult structures - but I'm not on throwing all of religion into the chopping block as it doesn't follow.

    ReplyDelete
  26. AnonymousAugust 19, 2008 at 9:30 PM

    Hum, Andrew,

    This is interesting. I agree that concluding that all religion is bad because of the child abuse presented here would be a fallacy. However, I do think lots of abuse would not happen if these particular cults were not there ... but I cannot be sure, can I? Maybe there is a good proportion of the population who cannot be taught proper thinking, and thus the abuse would come in some other form.

    But agreed, not to generalize from one or several cults into the whole of religions. But I also doubt that child abuse is confined to a few religion cults (or non-religious). Abuse can come at different levels. I do consider threat of hell and alleviation by a belief in gods as child abuse. This is quite the general minimum in christianity. Am I wrong? (I insist I agree on not generalizing, but I also disagree on the "just a few").

    G.E.

    ReplyDelete
  27. MaragonAugust 19, 2008 at 10:15 PM

    "The point is we shouldn't shun all of religion because of a handfull of bad seeds that don't represent what religion is about."

    Religion is superfluous.

    There is nothing it provides that people cannot get elsewhere. It has zero redeeming qualities. The 'good' will never outweigh the 'bad'.

    Once again, I am not drawing any conclusion other than the fact that there is a statistical positive correlation between religious cults and abuse. Anything else is what you've read into my ONE SENTENCE post.

    I'm rolling my eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Andrew LouisAugust 20, 2008 at 7:35 AM

    GE,
    I don't believe in teaching religious dogma, you know that. Telling kids they'll burn in hell for they're sins is something I don't agree with. You guys misjudge my beliefs (I'm not a dogmatic christian thinker, one look at my blog will tell you that. Religious language is a path, not a truth in and of itself)

    -----

    Meagan,
    So telling me you're rolling your eyes is supposed to say what? That you're long past right?

    You say:
    "Religion is superfluous. There's nothing it provides that people can't get elsewhere."

    What does religion provide Meagan? This is perhaps where you spout religious dogmatic nonsense I suppose, which isn't religion. Sure, that's what many have made it out to be (like Ray), but that, Meagan, is where WE both agree. Yes/no? I debate against the same sort of religious nonsense you do, I don't think you realize that; maybe you do though, I don't know.

    Remember,
    I've hammered Ray and Sye the same way you have.

    ReplyDelete
  29. AnonymousAugust 20, 2008 at 10:30 AM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  30. AnonymousAugust 20, 2008 at 10:38 AM

    Hey Andrew,

    I know this Andrew, I was just making the point that although I agree with you about the fallacy of extending this notes on child abuse to judge all of religion. Yet I pointed out that maybe it is not just a few cults, but most of christianity (at different levels). I never implied you are like that. I think I know you good enough.

    I completely understand your point, that we might be doing here the exact shit the Rayliens do, and all of that. And I agree we should be careful.

    G.E.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Andrew LouisAugust 20, 2008 at 11:46 AM

    GE,
    I'm with you on religion ABUSING minds by saying you'll go to hell.

    Thats what my joke HERE was about. There's no doubt Christmas is nothing more then preparing little minds to beleive the same thing on the next tier. It's brain wash.


    Funny story (for me anyway). Last time I went to church was when I was confirmed at 15. In confirmation class one day the Pastor was going over all the sins that will end you up in hell. So picture a bunch of 15 year old boys sitting in a circle while this guy is staring us down naming off all this shit. Honestly I'm thinking, (I'm in the clear) after every one. Until he stays, in a vary stern voice, "Masturbation?". I thought at that point, "Oh shit, I'm fucked", I'm not gonna be able to stop doing that. Of course you can imagine the looks on all the other kids faces, we all thought we were fucked and we were all lookin around at eachother.

    ReplyDelete
  32. AnonymousAugust 20, 2008 at 6:21 PM

    Oh, actually, when I heard about masturbation being a sin I thought "That's bogus, why would God give us this if he did not want us to use it!"

    Yeah, I always was that arrogant. I try not to, but hell, I have been, are, will be, but I know my limits ...

    G.E.

    ReplyDelete

Unlike Ray we don't censor our comments, so as long as it's on topic and not spam, fire away.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)