…Continued

I think there is also something to be said of teaching a child that it is alright to love a being as evil as the Christian God clearly is, and that compulsory love is okay in some circumstances. Then there's the 'Do as I say, not as I do' double-standard...

I could go on indefinitely, now that I think about it.

<<This is not just my assertions. It's my understanding of what counts as abuse.>>

Until you can provide evidence or sound reasoning for your claims, they are still just assertions, even if they are your understanding. My understanding of Bigfoot could be that he exists, but until I could provide evidence for such a claim, it would remain a mere assertion.

<<I stand by my point though that religion is accused as abuse largely as a means to silence religion instead of dealing with any actual abuse.>>

In some cases, perhaps. That doesn’t mean that teaching it to children is not abuse, though. It just means that some have ulterior motives for explaining why it is abuse.

Seeing believers like NNS love the idea that scaring children about hell and the devil, (that don't exist), and don't consider lying to and terrifying children with those lies abuse I have to warn them of something.

Lying to children is still lying!

Does Jesus approve of liars? OOPSY! Another epic fail.

But I can assist you in your lust to terrify children. I mean it is obvious you only have one method of influencing children to be good little people and that is fear. That is why you prattle on about it so and defend scaring children in so many posts.

Tell them if they are naughty, God will send King David back to Earth, and he will set up a holocaust in the little one's life.

If that doesn't suit perhaps you could tell them that King David will divide all his friends and their families and slaughter two rows and make the last row slaves.

There is more chance of that in your fear mongering mind anyway.

2Samuel 8:2 And he smote Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the ground; even with TWO LINES measured he TO PUT TO DEATH, and with ONE FULL LINE TO KEEP ALIVE. And so the Moabites became David's servants (SLAVES), and brought gifts.

At least in these horrid crime stories the child would only suffer until they die and not an eternity in your beloved sulphur lakes of hell. Hey they may even get lucky and end up a slave with no rights at all...lmao

Your religion sure has made you a very nutty person... Have you seen a psychiatrist?...lmao

I know you are pretending to ignore me NNS, but your insane position on deliberately scaring children and lying to children to manipulate their thinking simply makes you an evil sh**head.

And to think you thought you were a nice person...lmao

DELUSIONAL MUCH?

To AJ Philips. A few points. While your accusing that teaching Christianity is abuse, you've descided that you need no proof outside of your accusation. While the burden of proof of not abuse rests on believers. Even though the burden should be on the accuser and the other is innocent until found guilty, I've still explained hell without it being abusive. It can be told to both child or adult in this way, and still not be abusive to either. Therefore it is not abuse.

Second point. God is not a monster. He is very powerful so His decisions for our benefit or our discipline can pack a punch. But He is not a monster. He's known for His love, His forgiveness, His justice, and His blessing. Among many other things. What he asks for largely is social justice, even generosity. Forgiveness and kindness, impartiality in our judgments. To not steal, lie, murder, as wall as many other attributes that sum up to love your neighbor and love your enemy. What He asks more then this is to also Love Him. When you find the love He gives us, this is a small thing compared to how much He loves us. Still not a monster.

Third point. The bible is not a lie. I don't lie to people. The bible is reliable based on it being from God. If God does not exist then you can accuse me of lying. If God exists but has no part of the bible then you can again say I'm lying. But still both are in the right that both God exists, and that the Bible is a written record from God for our benefit. (Even with it being written by several authors.)

(Continued)

(Continued)

Forth point. (Back to point one). Even if you do not agree with me on point three, my teaching others about it is not abuse. This is true regardless of religion. Each parent that teaches their children any subject matter is not counted as abuse if they are wrong, nor are they counted as abuse if they teach their children at an early age. (Reading, math, social skills, culture, and a good work ethic and determination, can all be taught starting at a young age (before they can be critical of it and question it's worth to them). So can consequences and discipline be taught from an early age. It's not abuse unless there's an abusive element present. Just the accusation is not enough. After all you are critiquing a parent's right to be a parent when you accuse them of abuse. Make sure there's merit for it before you tell them how to do their responsibility as the parent.

FYI I know many people raised in Christian environments. Some stayed Christian, others did not. None of those people would stand the insult that they were abused because of their parents religious beliefs. Those who have a complaint about their parents, have something usually harmful and scarring. But more often then not Christian environments like church encourage healthy relationships and to take care of each other when there is a need. It's the anti-thesis of abuse.

To Bush Bunny. Don't jump on the bandwagon of believing that religion is abuse. This really digs into whether a parent has the right to teach their own children what they believe to be right. Hell as a subject is like death. It's not a lesson I'd want to teach a kid become they are able to hear it. Some kids unfortunately don't get to wait that long before they know what losing someone is like. But outside of those situtions teaching about death is too hard a topic for little kids, and instead should be focused on the other aspects of life. To fill your kids with the joys and wonder life has to offer, while they are still in the stage of life to appriaciate it. Loving God fits in with those kinds of elements.

Even if this sounds archaic to you, if it is not abusive then it should not be the right of a parent to be able to discern what to teach their kid and what not to teach them. They have only so much control over what their kids actually learn, but they have control what they teach them though. Unless there is real abuse (as opposed to accusations), parents should have a lot of freedom for what and how they raise their kids.

I stand by that and I hope you can understand.

A minor niggle, Not_Now.Soon.

<<While your accusing that teaching Christianity is abuse …>>

Teaching Christianity is not in and of itself abuse. Christianity can be taught in an objective way or comparatively in contrast with other religions. The problems arise when it is taught uncritically and as though it were definitely true.

<<… you've descided that you need no proof outside of your accusation.>>

Not at all. Anyone making a claims carries a burden of proof, and I'm no exception. Which is why I have provided you with evidence and reasoning for my claims.

<<While the burden of proof of not abuse rests on believers.>>

That is correct. I have explained why a few times now.

<<… I've still explained hell without it being abusive. It can be told to both child or adult in this way, and still not be abusive to either.>>

Yes, but I’m an adult who you know is going to be expecting evidence for Hell before I believe what you’re saying. I’ve already explained to you that this is entirely different to “telling a vulnerable child - whose critical thinking skills have not yet fully developed - that a place like Hell awaits certain people.” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8181#255705)

<<God is not a monster. He is very powerful so His decisions for our benefit or our discipline can pack a punch. But He is not a monster.>>

That’s being a bully. What you’ve essentially said here is that God abuses his power. You’re not making things any better for Him. The extent of power exerted should be in direct proportion to the problem faced. Even our laws acknowledge this.

Infinite punishment for finite crimes is not just “packing a punch”, it is excessive force, and it is immoral. Your god is evil and immoral.

Would you create a special place to torture your children for the rest of their lives if they didn’t love you? No. So why hold your god to a lesser standard than yourself? (These are not rhetorical questions, by the way.)

Continued…