Roundup

From the give people the benefit of the doubt because you can always overreact later category, Kentucky Census Worker Officially Committed Suicide, The Left Completely Pwnd — He was truly committed to his cause, killing himself to make conservatives look bad. 

Richard Dawkins’ karma runs over his dogma.  Also see some other inconsistencies about his new anti-religion ads.

The two children chosen to front Richard Dawkins’s latest assault on God could not look more free of the misery he associates with religious baggage. With the slogan “Please don’t label me. Let me grow up and choose for myself”, the youngsters with broad grins seem to be the perfect advertisement for the new atheism being promoted by Professor Dawkins and the British Humanist Association.

Except that they are about as far from atheism as it is possible to be. The Times can reveal that Charlotte, 8, and Ollie, 7, are from one of the country’s most devout Christian families.

He said: “It is quite funny, because obviously they were searching for images of children that looked happy and free. They happened to choose children who are Christian. It is ironic. The humanists obviously did not know the background of these children.”

He said that the children’s Christianity had shone through. “Obviously there is something in their faces which is different. So they judged that they were happy and free without knowing that they are Christians. That is quite a compliment. I reckon it shows we have brought up our children in a good way and that they are happy.”

Hat tip: Confessions of a Recovering Pharisee (one of the best blog titles ever!)

Lots o’ apologetics Podcasts — load up your iPod!

What a missed opportunity!  A character in the latest episode of House had to have 16 spleens removed and they didn’t use the best surplus spleen joke ever: “Well, he’s got some ex-spleening to do.”  I would have let them use it for free!

0 thoughts on “Roundup”

  1. It is ironic.

    No, it’s not. Children of believers are the very ones who should be asking not to be labelled, and to be allowed to think for themselves. The children on that ad don’t look old enough to have decided anything for themselves and as a result should not be labelled “Christian”. This predictable reaction actually proves the point of the ad. And in case any of you think this labelling doesn’t matter just think of the immense, irreparable damage that segregated schooling on sectarian lines has done in Northern Ireland. A child is labelled Catholic or Protestant long before they are capable of deciding whether the wafer really becomes Jesus or not.

    Yet another person who attended the Alanis Morissette school of irony.

    (language warning)

    Like

  2. The point can be made that it is because the parents are evangelicals the children are felt more loved and therefore happy. They also may have just been posing for the camera.

    Like

  3. “Children should not be labeled.”

    Interesting perspective Racing Boo. Exactly what does that mean?

    Are you saying parents should not teach their religion to their children? I am sorry, is that not also making a choice of forcing a certain perspective? The ad is saying that the humanist view of life is superior to a religious view of life. It gives no proof. If the exact same ad with same text and photos was run substituting secular humanism for religion would that ad be correct?

    Your point above seems vague to me. Labeling does happen no matter what as a part of raising a child. And it happens whether the child is being raised by Humanists or by Christians, by single parents or a couple, by liberal or conservative. What you call labels I call values. And every child must learn some. The scariest world I can imagine is a worls where parents are no longer allowed to teach any values at all since that wouldbe mconsidered “labeling” their children.

    I also think you seem to forget we have something called separation of church and state in this country. What Ireland or Great Britain thinks does not apply here. That separation means if a parent wants to teach their religious values to their children IT IS ALLOWED and the state cannot say different. If a parent does NOT want to teach any religion to their children IT IS ALLOWED and the state cannot say different. End of story.

    Like

    1. I didn’t hear anyone say that you can’t teach your religion to your children. Dawkins brought the point up in The God Delusion that people are so sure they are right about their religion, but had they been brought up in another country, or with different parents, they would believe just as strongly in a completely different religion, or none at all. It makes one think about which is true.

      As for having a problem “labelling” children, I don’t know about that. I think it much more valuable to think that you chose a religion at an age where you could understand the choice. The majority of people simply grew up believing something and have no idea why they do.

      Like

      1. Dawkins asserts that teaching children religions is child abuse in a variety of places

        He also writes, “Priestly groping of child bodies is disgusting. But it may be less harmful in the long run than priestly subversion of child minds.”

        http://richarddawkins.net/articles/118

        I. If teaching children religion is child abuse;
        II. and all child abuse is (and should be) banned…
        III. then….???? Teaching religion to children… should be banned?

        Like

      2. I would disagree with him on that, and I would go as far as to say that I dislike the groping analogy immensely.

        I think if we teach our children solid reasoning skills and expose them not only to knowledge, but to methods of obtaining knowledge, they will be fine when they grow up.

        Like

    2. The headline of the article linked to above is: “Children who front Richard Dawkins’ atheist ads are evangelicals.” I am saying they are not – I’d be surprised if either of them know what the word evangelical means. But that doesn’t stop their father (a “celebrity within evangelical circles”, who evidently supplements his income by selling pictures of his kids) claiming that they are Christians.

      I was a Christian for 25 years, but we have always told our children that they will need to make up their own minds. We taught them our values, which haven’t changed, and when we stopped going to church I was very open with them about it. I told them if they wanted to keep going we would facilitate that, it was their decision. Even now I’m always very conscious of presenting as balanced a view as I’m able to if they ask me something. I encourage them to find out things for themselves, for example with supervised use of the internet. If this leads them to religion I won’t be upset, but it’s their decision at the end of the day, not mine. I’m not going to tell them what to think or believe, or tell them they have to be atheists.

      By all means teach your religion to your children, but remember it’s your religion until they are capable of making a decision for themselves.

      Like

    3. The ad is saying that the humanist view of life is superior to a religious view of life.

      Really?? Does it say that anywhere?

      If the exact same ad with same text and photos was run substituting secular humanism for religion would that ad be correct?

      We must be looking at different ads. The one I saw says “Please don’t label me. Let me grow up and choose for myself” and has as a background various religious and secular labels, including atheist and agnostic.

      Like

  4. I was just poking fun at Dawkins’ and his silliness.

    The label thing is nuanced. Of course I believe in the freedom of parents to raise their children with their particular worldview.

    As a Christian I am all for telling people to investigate the facts. You can’t coerce real faith. It is better to be an open skeptic than a pretend believer.

    People who use coercion demonstrate a lack of confidence in their beliefs. People should be Christians for one reason: Christianity is true. Jesus really rose from the dead.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s