Leave My Child out of your evangelism

[Cu Mhorrigan]

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssen...l/11844508.htm

Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing. The fact that we are free to say what we wish without facing criminal charges shows true democracy in action. But at what point does freedom of speech become harassment?

There are individuals who go door-to-door in a desperate attempt to convert others to their faith. Those of us who are not interested in this face-to-face equivalent of spam either refuse to answer the door or blindly take the pamphlet that is handed to us, knowing that we will be throwing it in the trash.

Continued through the link.

[technomage]

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssen...l/11844508.htm



Continued through the link.

A timely and well-written article. Thank you, Cu.

[suffer for joy]

They do this in the schools everyday with non-religious anti-religious dogma.

Deal with it.

[BlackOpal12]

They do this in the schools everyday with non-religious anti-religious dogma.

Deal with it.

Care to substatiate that, SFJ? Otherwise, its a baseless assertion and will be summarily dismissed as such.

Likewise, there is a significant difference between non-religious and anti-religious actions, fields, and ideas. Establish the negatives of both, otherwise you are poisoning the well by conflating two different strata of "offenses."

The Opal

[Darth Executor]

Care to substatiate that, SFJ? Otherwise, its a baseless assertion and will be summarily dismissed as such.

Likewise, there is a significant difference between non-religious and anti-religious actions, fields, and ideas. Establish the negatives of both, otherwise you are poisoning the well by conflating two different strata of "offenses."

The Opal

The article writer was a liar too then.

SFJ was right. Last semester there wasn't one history class that didn't have some idiot mocking my religion.

[technomage]

The article writer was a liar too then.

SFJ was right. Last semester there wasn't one history class that didn't have some idiot mocking my religion.

Is "disagreeing" the same as "mocking?"

[BlackOpal12]

The article writer was a liar too then.

SFJ was right. Last semester there wasn't one history class that didn't have some idiot mocking my religion.

Are you a minor? Your parallel fails.
Did that idiot enter your minor child's school? If not, your parallel fails.
Was the idiot mocking your religion a faculty member? If not, that's a reality of free speech - non-minor to non-minor. You were free to correct the idiot. A child does not have the same social priviledge to correct an adult.

Try again, wannabe martyr.

The Opal

[The Laughing Man]

Care to substatiate that

I can with but a single word: "evolution."

Wow. That was easy.

[BlackOpal12]

I can with but a single word: "evolution."

Wow. That was easy.

Ah, good. Now we have an example of my last post - conflating non-religious and anti-religious ideas. What Jinx here has just done is what is called "conflation." Does everyone understand?... other than Jinx, obviously.

Jinx, I know many Christians who believe in evolution - as well as many persons of other religions, with very strong ties to their own (non-atheist) belief systems. Just because something is not an endorsement of your religion does not make it a derogation of all religions. Don't bother with your "my religion is the only religion" malarky right now, its irrelevant to the discussion.

The Opal

[The Laughing Man]

From the article:

Then they decided to prey upon my child. Now I realize that all they were doing was simply sharing their faith with my child, but the fact is that she is a minor, and children do not realize that they can tell such individuals to leave them alone.

Then, as the child's parent, you need to TELL THEM.

It's weird, though. People have no problem letting their underaged children make decisions regarding things like sexual activity and abortion, but when the question of religion comes up, it's all "KEEP YOUR FILTHY CHRISTIAN MITTS OFF MY CHILD!!!!"

Interesting priorities...

[The Laughing Man]

Ah, good. Now we have an example of my last post - conflating non-religious and anti-religious ideas. What Jinx here has just done is what is called "conflation." Does everyone understand?... other than Jinx, obviously.

Wrong. Evolution isn't merely non-religious. It's completely anti-religious.

Jinx, I know many Christians who believe in evolution

Such Christians obviously don't believe in Christ's teachings, then.

- as well as many persons of other religions, with very strong ties to their own (non-atheist) belief systems. Just because something is not an endorsement of your religion does not make it a derogation of all religions. Don't bother with your "my religion is the only religion" malarky right now, its irrelevant to the discussion.

AFAIK, most - if not all - religions have creation accounts that preclude anything about evolution. You can't believe in evolution without compromising your religious beliefs.

Evolution is also the anti-religious crowd's best friend.

[BlackOpal12]

Then, as the child's parent, you need to TELL THEM.

A legitimate point - however, children have little to no real capacity to enforce their decision to hear no more when confronted by an adult without another adult nearby enough to enforce it for them.

It's weird, though. People have no problem letting their underaged children make decisions regarding things like sexual activity and abortion, but when the question of religion comes up, it's all "KEEP YOUR FILTHY CHRISTIAN MITTS OFF MY CHILD!!!!"

Interesting priorities...

Another interesting example of conflation, class - here, Jinx has conflated the population portion who feel that their children should not be evangelised to without reasonable recourse, and the population portion who believe in "letting their underaged children make decisions regarding things like sexual activity and abortion." While there is likely a cross-section of these two populations that coincides in each category, there was no evidence presented to assume that the population sample is precisely synchronious in each group - hence, conflation. Everybody got that, other than Jinx? Good.

[Cynic Sage]

Wrong. Evolution isn't merely non-religious. It's completely anti-religious.

Jinx, there are people on this board who would disagree with you.

[technomage]

Jinx, there are people on this board who would disagree with you.

He's already covered that with the "No True Christian" fallacy. (Exact words: "Such Christians obviously don't believe in Christ's teachings, then.")

Justin

[Darth Executor]

Is "disagreeing" the same as "mocking?"

I don't make baseless accusations Justin.