Jump to content

This Is The Mail I've Sent To Http://www.christianparents.com/


Recommended Posts

Thank you for educating me about John Dewey.

 

I had never heard of the man before I read your web site.

 

I've checked out his entry on wikipedia and he seems like a top bloke to me.

 

As a recently deconverted christian I am reading and absorbing as much secular and humanist lieterature as I can.

 

This knowledge was denied me in my upbringing as a christian. It is only now that I am free of the chains of the death cult that I can appreciate how men like Dewey are striving to advance humanity.

 

You should read your web site through the eyes of someone who does not believe in god. It makes the text into an insane, illogical rant.

 

 

 

Thank you again.

 

Stewart Paterson

 

I found their web pages through a page claiming that

Atheists are laughing at Christian parents behind a mask of humanism, as the atheists train up children the way they want them in public schools.

Apparantly atheists are to blame to the terrible state of affairs in today's schools.

Please remember that if the children are not being taught to keep God in all their thoughts, to understand all things by the light of Christ, then they are being trained to ignore God, to understand all things by their own reasoning.

He says this like it's a bad thing!

 

Anyway, thanks to ChristianParents.com I've learned about a man called John Dewey.

 

I'll keep y'all updated if they reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please remember that if the children are not being taught to keep God in all their thoughts, to understand all things by the light of Christ, then they are being trained to ignore God, to understand all things by their own reasoning.

 

He says this like it's a bad thing!

 

Anyway, thanks to ChristianParents.com I've learned about a man called John Dewey.

 

I'll keep y'all updated if they reply.

You know what that translates into, don't you? Brainwashing. Amazing how Bible verses can be fitted to what-the-hell-ever agenda you have, namely in this case brainwashing children into a cult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what that translates into, don't you? Brainwashing. Amazing how Bible verses can be fitted to what-the-hell-ever agenda you have, namely in this case brainwashing children into a cult.

 

Their website is not very impressive, and the hysterics many Christians exemplify are most unbecoming. Last night, I watched James Dobson on "Larry King Live." If I had had them, I would have taken a blood pressure and nerve pill when the show was over.

 

To counterbalance that "slam" against an extremist Christian, the extremist atheist Richard Dawkins has the same effect on me. I wish we'd all be more moderate in presenting our views and seek to be assertive without being aggressive. And we all need to keep our minds open; so many Christians definitely do not do this.

 

-CC in MA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what that translates into, don't you? Brainwashing. Amazing how Bible verses can be fitted to what-the-hell-ever agenda you have, namely in this case brainwashing children into a cult.

 

Their website is not very impressive, and the hysterics many Christians exemplify are most unbecoming. Last night, I watched James Dobson on "Larry King Live." If I had had them, I would have taken a blood pressure and nerve pill when the show was over.

 

To counterbalance that "slam" against an extremist Christian, the extremist atheist Richard Dawkins has the same effect on me. I wish we'd all be more moderate in presenting our views and seek to be assertive without being aggressive. And we all need to keep our minds open; so many Christians definitely do not do this.

 

-CC in MA

 

CC, your tricks are well known and ineffective. You slam the xians to get on our side. Then you slam Richard Dawkins as extremist because you think the fuzzies are swaddling our hearts so we don't notice. The first I saw of Dawkins was about as mild as baby jesus. The aggression was on the part of Colbert. You pretend to be different. Your tactics are different but that's all. You are as brutally insistent on evangelizing as Colbert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CC, your tricks are well known and ineffective. You slam the xians to get on our side. Then you slam Richard Dawkins as extremist because you think the fuzzies are swaddling our hearts so we don't notice. The first I saw of Dawkins was about as mild as baby jesus. The aggression was on the part of Colbert. You pretend to be different. Your tactics are different but that's all. You are as brutally insistent on evangelizing as Colbert.

 

Hi again RubySera. Your judgment is premature and will be found wanting. If I were trying to evangelize you, where would I take you? I've not been a member of any religious organization for 20 years. I do not attend any church. I have no group to bring you to, no house of worship. Sorry, but you are wrong.

 

Regarding Dawkins. I have read much about him and watched much about him. He can be "as mild as baby Jesus," and he also can be intolerant and mean-spirited. I would be afraid to live in a world ruled by Richard Dawkins just as I would be afraid to live in a world ruled by James Dobson.

 

To me, respectful assertiveness is a modus operandi of great merit. Neither Dawkins nor Dobson consistently demonstrate this character trait.

 

-CC in MA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not been a member of any religious organization for 20 years. I do not attend any church. I have no group to bring you to, no house of worship.

 

What about fellowship? You need fellowship. That's what the Bible says. What is your take on that? The Bible also says that you need to preach the word. Again, what's your take on that?

 

Regarding Dawkins. I have read much about him and watched much about him. He can be "as mild as baby Jesus," and he also can be intolerant and mean-spirited. I would be afraid to live in a world ruled by Richard Dawkins just as I would be afraid to live in a world ruled by James Dobson.

 

Wait a minute though. There is no "mid-ground" anyway. What would be your 'perfect' world?

 

 

To me, respectful assertiveness is a modus operandi of great merit. Neither Dawkins nor Dobson consistently demonstrate this character trait.

 

-CC in MA

 

Look at it this way. Christians and Atheists will never have agreeing beliefs. That's why they are labeled as such. If you're thinking of some Christian leader who presents the attributes that you find "appealing" or "respectful," it still won't change a thing for Atheists. As long as Jesus/Christian "God" is being promoted, it will only cause disputes unless that promotion is NOT shoved down our throats, which 98% of the time...it is. So, my question is...what exactly are you getting at?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I happen to like Richard Dawkins. I've read one of his books and am looking forward to the rest, love him or hate him, the man is brilliant and funny. Dawkin's is brash, straightfoward, and has little time for ignorance. Many atheists do not agree with his tactics but I feel that they are needed ( at least in the United States anyway, I don't know enough about other countries to offer an opinion). Dawkin's is viewed as a rabid atheist, and often compared with fundamental christians in his debating style. Personally, I think we need someone who is as outspoken and blunt as Dawkin's to counteract this growing fundy christian nation and their absurd demands for creation "science" to be taught in public schools. Some may not agree with me, but I feel that atheists who bitch about christians should speak out against them, and help stop the spread of creationism being taught in schools.

 

I do not have respect for people's religions, just as I would not respect a 45 year old man who still believes fervently in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy. If this is offensive, so be it, I refuse to respect individuals who push their delusions on others. To me, forcing religion on children or threatning children with an imaginary hell is CHILD ABUSE. I'm sure religious people with disagree with my views, as will many atheists and agnostics etc.... But this is just how I think. To long has the church stood in the way of freethought.

 

I do however acknowledge that this attitude may not win converts to atheism. But, IMHO, at this time, people like Dawkins are needed to preserve real science, and freethought, especially in America. People like Pat Robertson have been allowed to spout their nonsense to the masses for to long without being called into question for the way they greedily scam people out of their money and promote bigotry and histeria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CC, your tricks are well known and ineffective. You slam the xians to get on our side. Then you slam Richard Dawkins as extremist because you think the fuzzies are swaddling our hearts so we don't notice.

 

Now hold on a sec. People on these boards are constantly bitching about how intolerant, mean-spirited, and antagonistic Christians are. But it seems that now that a Christian has showed up who has some shred of decency and respect, he's being accused of being manipulative and deceptive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I happen to like Richard Dawkins. I've read one of his books and am looking forward to the rest, love him or hate him, the man is brilliant and funny. Dawkin's is brash, straightfoward, and has little time for ignorance. Many atheists do not agree with his tactics but I feel that they are needed ( at least in the United States anyway, I don't know enough about other countries to offer an opinion). Dawkin's is viewed as a rabid atheist, and often compared with fundamental christians in his debating style. Personally, I think we need someone who is as outspoken and blunt as Dawkin's to counteract this growing fundy christian nation and their absurd demands for creation "science" to be taught in public schools. Some may not agree with me, but I feel that atheists who bitch about christians should speak out against them, and help stop the spread of creationism being taught in schools.

 

I do not have respect for people's religions, just as I would not respect a 45 year old man who still believes fervently in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy. If this is offensive, so be it, I refuse to respect individuals who push their delusions on others. To me, forcing religion on children or threatning children with an imaginary hell is CHILD ABUSE. I'm sure religious people with disagree with my views, as will many atheists and agnostics etc.... But this is just how I think. To long has the church stood in the way of freethought.

 

I do however acknowledge that this attitude may not win converts to atheism. But, IMHO, at this time, people like Dawkins are needed to preserve real science, and freethought, especially in America. People like Pat Robertson have been allowed to spout their nonsense to the masses for to long without being called into question for the way they greedily scam people out of their money and promote bigotry and histeria.

 

 

Good, points all. I did start a thread to the effect of "why should I respect your beliefs?" and have yet te receive a good answer. The child abuse thing is also very very true. As dawkins himself says, children have to believe their parents and authority figures otherwise they wouldn't have survived. Dawkins is at times confrontational but, how else do you act when you are in a conflict? I've started another thread in religion v science asking for opinions from creation scientists opinions and evidense but amazingly these "many" doubters of accepted science I keep being told about have yet to appear. People like dawkins are not a minority in the real scientific comunity, we are a majority and we are no-longer prepared to stand silent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What about fellowship? You need fellowship. That's what the Bible says. What is your take on that? The Bible also says that you need to preach the word. Again, what's your take on that?

 

...

 

Wait a minute though. There is no "mid-ground" anyway. What would be your 'perfect' world?

 

...

 

Look at it this way. Christians and Atheists will never have agreeing beliefs. That's why they are labeled as such. If you're thinking of some Christian leader who presents the attributes that you find "appealing" or "respectful," it still won't change a thing for Atheists. As long as Jesus/Christian "God" is being promoted, it will only cause disputes unless that promotion is NOT shoved down our throats, which 98% of the time...it is. So, my question is...what exactly are you getting at?

 

Lots of questions there, Everglaze. We all need fellowship and that's what we are doing right now. I know, I know...Paul said that believers and unbelievers should not be yoked together. But surely we can talk! :HaHa: (Can you imagine how Paul would make use of the Internet?)

 

For me a perfect world is not attainable, of course. But a good world would be one in which we all worked together to promote peace and establish justice.

 

I think you are right that often we want others to see/think/feel as we see/think/feel. We do this for profit (e.g., commercials for Dawn or Ivory Soap); for power (political ads) and for control (religious evangelizing). We need to be skeptical of all such promotion and be very careful not to get sucked in.

 

-CC in MA

 

 

I happen to like Richard Dawkins. I've read one of his books and am looking forward to the rest, love him or hate him, the man is brilliant and funny.

 

That he is! No doubt. And I understand his anger.

 

Some who have been in the minority for so long become quite angry. Understandable. In their anger, their vision is distorted. Some gays see homophobia everywhere. Some women see sexism everywhere. Some atheists see Christian stormtroopers everywhere. My view is that it is better to deal with one's anger and face the majority thoughtfully, respectfully, peacefully. Dawkins has said many things that would make me fear for my life if he were in power. (Same for some religious leaders, of course.)

 

-CC in MA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CC, your tricks are well known and ineffective. You slam the xians to get on our side. Then you slam Richard Dawkins as extremist because you think the fuzzies are swaddling our hearts so we don't notice.

 

Now hold on a sec. People on these boards are constantly bitching about how intolerant, mean-spirited, and antagonistic Christians are. But it seems that now that a Christian has showed up who has some shred of decency and respect, he's being accused of being manipulative and deceptive?

 

Fonkey,

 

Most of us will testify that xtianity is -- manipulative, intellectually dishonest --

 

Ruby did not say that CC was -- abusive, intolerant or mean spirited --.

 

She accused him of not presenting genuine arguments and being intellectually dishonest.

 

Go figure why she would do that????

 

Just take a look at CC's latest volly in response to Dakota saying that Dawkins is brilliant:

 

That he is! No doubt. And I understand his anger.

 

While this is not rude or abusive there is nothing genuine about that kind of schlock.

 

If you agree with CC then I'd dearly love to know why **you** hate god like Dawkins (the implication is obvious).

 

If you want to argue that CC is more intellegent that the average apologist then I think you have a good case. So let's give fair due to CC:

 

1) being polite. CC has been polite.

2) providing more of a challenge than most apologiests who make no attempt to reason. CC is slippery. (Comparing Dawkins to Dobson - I think this had a hint of genius in it)

 

However, a Straw Man is a still a Straw Man even when dressed in a tuxedo.

 

As well CC has shamelessly used the Ad Hominin which Ruby made plain.

 

People with intellectual integrity do not use Ad Hopminin and Straw Man. You give too much credit to CC.

 

Mongo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now hold on a sec. People on these boards are constantly bitching about how intolerant, mean-spirited, and antagonistic Christians are. But it seems that now that a Christian has showed up who has some shred of decency and respect, he's being accused of being manipulative and deceptive?

 

Fonkey,

 

Most of us will testify that xtianity is -- manipulative, intellectually dishonest --

 

Ruby did not say that CC was -- abusive, intolerant or mean spirited --.

 

She accused him of not presenting genuine arguments and being intellectually dishonest.

 

Go figure why she would do that????

 

Just take a look at CC's latest volly in response to Dakota saying that Dawkins is brilliant:

 

That he is! No doubt. And I understand his anger.

 

While this is not rude or abusive there is nothing genuine about that kind of schlock.

 

If you agree with CC then I'd dearly love to know why **you** hate god like Dawkins (the implication is obvious).

 

If you want to argue that CC is more intellegent that the average apologist then I think you have a good case. So let's give fair due to CC:

 

1) being polite. CC has been polite.

2) providing more of a challenge than most apologiests who make no attempt to reason. CC is slippery. (Comparing Dawkins to Dobson - I think this had a hint of genius in it)

 

However, a Straw Man is a still a Straw Man even when dressed in a tuxedo.

 

As well CC has shamelessly used the Ad Hominin which Ruby made plain.

 

People with intellectual integrity do not use Ad Hopminin and Straw Man. You give too much credit to CC.

 

Mongo

I'm not sure I quite agree with the cynicism expressed here (though I certainly appreciate where it can come from). A moderate is someone who makes an effort to find the value in opposing positions and offer acknowledgement of the worth of the other person’s point of view. This is an act of bridge-building, of peace-making, of reconciliation, of diplomacy, but not being "slippery". That seems to be a bit on the cynical side, and I don't see that happening here. The typical apologist is about not listening, but arguing against other points of view. I don't see that here. I can smell a fraud ten miles away, but CC isn't a fraud. I respect his beliefs, even though I don't share them.

 

I believe strongly that there is common ground to be found between atheists and the religious, though it may not yet be realized in practical ways. We are all humans and our points of view come from being human. Religion is simply a language to express something in our humanity. Languages are always evolving. The only real enemy is being rigid and inflexible with the use of language, which defines fundamentalism, religious or secular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe strongly that there is common ground to be found between atheists and the religious, though it may not yet be realized in practical ways. We are all humans and our points of view come from being human. Religion is simply a language to express something in our humanity. Languages are always evolving. The only real enemy is being rigid and inflexible with the use of language, which defines fundamentalism, religious or secular.

 

Thank you, Antlerman, for these words. You hit the nail on this head when you wrote that "the only real enemy is being rigid and inflexible." I see so much rigidity and inflexibility in many modern expressions of Christianity. It's most unfortunate, debilitating and demoralizing. Sometimes I find that those who oppose these traits in modern Christianity, unfortunately, adopt the same tactics -- rigidity and inflexibility. We all need to keep the mind open, the blinders off, and preconceived notions somewhat at bay if we hope to fully engage the world and the myriad voices vying for our attention and allegience.

 

-CC in MA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first I saw of Dawkins was about as mild as baby jesus. The aggression was on the part of Colbert. You pretend to be different. Your tactics are different but that's all. You are as brutally insistent on evangelizing as Colbert.

 

You know that Colbert's fake, right? A character played by a comedian, like Borat. If you do, disregard this post, I just didn't get that impression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.