Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Children should be protected from bigoted Christian foster parents

page: 9
6
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Re The Endtime Warrior

thanks for your balanced and relevant answer. A small digression: In spite of having hard science, university with social sciences and 2½ craftsman's educations in my background (I love learning) I am close to being imbecile, when it comes to handling computors. Hence my primitive response form in posts.

So instead of pressing response buttons, I'll give you a generalised answer.

I am the father of two biological children and had one stepson. Besides I've worked as a teacher for app. 9 years (students up to 10'th grade). As the mother of these children and I had a rather complex relationship (she being extreme permisssive and I liberal) and I in social contexts have seen the results of various ideologically based methods of upbringing (or more common, just blindly following comtemporary cosensus), I naturally have been searching for patterns in all the emerging confusion.

On one hand there's the predatory extreme, manifesting in authoritarian, hierarchial systems, where individuals in one way or another fight constantly for their position in the hierarchy. And while the human animal 'naturally' (instictively) follows this way, it's totally outdated as a survival mechanism, as mankind now has such a destructive technological potential, that the thugs at the top of different power-groups can blow everything out of existence. Besides the hierarchial systems tend to loose an enormous amount of the available 'energy' present in the system to the competitive aspect. Eventually all power-hierarchies implode from this 'energy' waste.

On the other hand there's the symbiotic extreme, the anarchistic flower-powery, tree-hugging utopia, peopled with responsible and integrated individuals. I would love to live in such a culture, but sadly enough the pragmatic experiments in this direction (from small collective communities to ideological nation-wide ideologies) practically always end by dissolving and switching back into hierarchies. Children brought up this way usually become asocial monsters.

Obviously a middle way must be found, and I believe liberal society is a decent compromise. Consider it a circle, INSIDE which there (ought to be) quite a lot of individual freedom, based on a balance of power. The private individual should theoretically be able to do about anything s/he wishes (admittedly we're far from this ideal still). Whereas the circumference strictly defines the limits of freedom in social contexts: "So far, but not further". The circumference is upheld with rather authoritative methods, but everybody is expected to be treated on equal grounds.

Maybe my following opinion will be very provocative: Basically all the power competing factions of a society will be fascistic, both in doctrine and deed (though the 'labels' ofcourse vary), and, as I have said before, 'education of the masses', especially of children, will have a high priority. So such as Hitler-jugend, the red garde, the zulu-king's elite troops and children in Stalin Sovjet (informing on their 'counter-revolutionary' parents) turn up. And militant, literal-bible-reading christians are no exception. In deed and doctrine the similarities between this kind of christianity and e.g. nazism are striking (the assasin part of islam ands thugee Kali worshippers can be included).

History has clearly demonstrated, that a small and determined group of militants can topple a confused, insecure or decadent society and the liberal society has the difficult task of keeping an eye on such groups to avoid the formation of a state inside the state, while at the same time allowing for individual freedom. I think present US demonstrates this problem clearly.

The 'answer' eventually lies in the individual(s) making up any society, and the cutting-line is between awareness, knowledge and 'real' education as opposed to indoctrination. My, often somewhat aggressive, attitudes on ATS is an effort to make the various ideologers profile themselves clearly, as I believe transparency is a necessity of outmost importance.

I apologize, Warrior, if you have been unfairly victimized in this process, and I also apologize for my lengthy and probably boring post, but I don't have the talent for presenting this kind of thoughts in a short and elegant form.




posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


That was a very intelligent answer. I am afraid I can't give an equally impressive response, but I can at least show you were I am coming from. Yes I am a christian. yes my parents told me about god/ gave me a bible. No I wasn't forced to go to church, in fact both my parents are/were very liberal. They grew up in the 60s as hippies, well at least mainly my dad, my mom is from a large mexican family. They both smoked pot, and I did also, with both of them in my teens. In fact, my dad took me to my first concert, I saw KISS when I was 4.

So the fact is, there was no indoctrination when I was younger. I thank them for that. They merely demonstrated what they believed and only answered when asked about such questions. And boy did I have questions!

You see, I am/was a solipsist. I started out real young believing I was the only "real" element of my existence. I discovered my inner voice when I was 6, and I would often contemplate things deeply within myself as if I was having a conversation, relationship with another entity. That entity, was my consciousness.

Progressing in my teens I started to dabble in '___' and mushrooms. You could say I was addicted, for quite awhile. I soon embraced the belief (or lack thereof) of Atheism. At one point I even thought that '___' made me "superhuman" and clairvoyant, that somehow I could tap into other dimensions.

Its very easy to get lost in psychedelics, getting lost in your mind coupled with strange and exciting music, throw in the fact that I am/was a solipsist and what do you get? Well the rest you can infer.

After I graduated from high school, I moved out into my own apartment. It was at this time I became fascinated with UFOs. And then it started. The more and more I would think about these things, spend my time researching, the more I would see strange stuff in the sky. I would at times walking to my car at night from college or work would see strange stars appear and seem to "tag" along in the same direction as I drove. on one occasion I actually followed one of these things that kept sinking closer and closer to the earth into a forest. I dared not follow the rest of the way!

It wasn't long before my dreams started to change. I began having out of body experiences, levitation, whispering, strange lights in dark room, sleep paralysis, false awakenings. Needless to say it wasn't long before I decided to give the UFO stuff a rest! No sooner than I quit all that, the activity stopped abruptly.

It was these experiences that caused me to question my perspective on things. So I didn't just pick christianity out of all the different things in the world, I had weighed all general opinions and made the logical choice for me. I am not here to convert, but only give testimony for what I believe when I asked. I defend others when I feel they are being picked on for their beliefs (such as on here or in this thread) or correct people when I feel they are spreading lies themselves. I am a protective person, and I feel many are misled, I just am here to help.

So my experiences, to the skeptic, is the aftermath of heavy psychedelic use, and thats objectively speaking. Thats fine, anyone can rationalize all they want, whatever makes them comfortable is fine with me. You have to live your life, not I and I really can't be bothered with what people think in their heads.

I been there, done that, walked through the valley of Atheism and came out an enlightened man. My journey is far from over, and I hope that yours isn't either. thanks again for your reply and understanding.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Hi Siren,

I have followed your posts with interest, and while I often express myself sharply towards extremist-christians, I have much sympathy with your attitudes. In part because I like you also am a vegetarian (since 45 years back); and in your case this seems to demonstrate a willingness to take pragmatic consequences (as is also my motivation, rather than being doctrinal about it).

This approach of yours is also mirrored in your christianity/bible 'research'. It would be difficult to deny that the bible or bibles contain both white AND black at the same time, and the effort of reconciling these selfcontradictions mostly ends with a lot of embellishing on-top-of-bible-texts extra narratives and petty fights about completely insignificant details.

(E.g. the eastern and western churches have been in each others hair since day one CE, and around year 1000 the fighting point was leavened/unleavened bread. Just as an example).

According to the statistics I've seen, christianity has on average schismed about 17 times a year for 2000 years, and many of the outcoming factions are rather polarized in their relationships, to the point of inter-christian violence on black-white issues.

We all relate to existence somewhere/somehow and the smaller our original reality-tunnel is, the less chances do we have to find a 'highgrade relative reality'. Occasionally I ironically use my omniscient, talking mouse Henry as an example on this; he's my 'spiritual guide' and can neither be proved nor disproved.

I strongly believe in extensive, inclusive methodology for 'truth-seeking', rather than a narrow, exclusive model. And in any case being in a rambling mood today, I'll indulge in the luxury of presenting you with some speculations on this (in the hope of not overdoing it).

Contrary to a first look, redemption- and other christian doctrines contain a strong option for control, which can be misused, and in a black-white dichotomy in christian terms this is often externalized in social contexts. In in- or outside christianity contexts the various interpretations of christian doctrines have lead to a lot of social engineering, instead of spiritual understanding. As I endlessly have lectured on in this thread I find the idea of unrestricted possibilities of hammering home doctrines detrimental for both children exposed to it, possible target victims of intolerance and the structure of society as a whole.

But there is another perspective on black-white paradoxes, which internalizes the dichotomy instead of externalizing it. The zen-buddhist approach. Don't worry, I'm not missionary about it, it's just an interesting alternative, which probably can be adapted to christian use also. Here the polarized dualities of black-white are considered an attribute of the individual mind, to be 'solved' there. All very peaceful (except that some of the zen-'masters' beat up their students, but this is mutual consent between adults and doesn't start wars).

My bad, if my abstract ruminations are completely besides the point and/or not arranged intelligible. Kindly ignore it then.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Re The Endtime Warrior

On my part thanks for your answer, which really warmed my heart, as a common communication platform is emerging (instead of the dung-throwing I often participate in, not least because of my own grumpy character).

In spite of probably being a few hundred years older than you (and believe me, age doesn't automatically bring wisdom), I share a lot of 'been there, done that' experiences with you, down to specific details. And recently (5 years ago) the high weirdness manifested brutally in my life with extremely strong paranormal experiences like those you describe. Up till then it had just been low weirdness.

I understand both the very unpleasant part of meeting the unknown (it's far from being only wine and roses 'out there') and the need to structure it into something more bearable from the sheer need of mental or physical survival. To find such an 'organized' peace has my total sympathy and understanding, as long as it isn't done on a missionary basis. People must find their own way (this said completely non-offensive).

But I'm an old stubborn bastard, and like Robert Anton Wilson once put it: "You go through chapel perilous and come out on the other side either stone paranoid or enlightened". I wish to get as close to an alleged 'reality' as possible, and am willing to pay a higher price in uncertainty, discomfort or inconvenience than the average person.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Djin
I'm off to bed early not too well so will catch up on this thread when feeling better or someone heals me with jesus.

Hope you feel better soon.


Originally posted by Kailassa
Definitely the way to go. But my local supermarket now stocks fish to die for, and right now I'm dying for a thick, moist, yellow-fin tuna steak just caught yesterday.

Oh, I should clarify - I do eat fish. My type of vegetarianism (or 'eating disorder' as my hilarious husband calls it) is Pescatarian - so tuna sounds good.



Originally posted by Kailassa
The Catholic church seemed to think the bible meant what it said, just ask Galileo.

Right you are. We all tend to make our name arse once or twice in our lives, but the Catholic church has made a habit of it.

reply to post by bogomil
 


Thanks for your interesting and enjoyable post.

I hear you about the in-fighting. My atheist brother-in-law loves to point out: "The Bible is a book, and all books are open to interpretation". I personally do not claim to be part of any denomination...probably because I don't agree/disagree with any one of them 100%. Even the Jehovah Witnesses have certain beliefs that I feel are more accurate than some of the more popular denominations.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by the siren
 

hmmm, Pescatarian . . .

I just might use that next time I have to fill in a box marked "religion".



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Well thanks guys. You've effectively killed this thread with outrageous rhetoric.


Did you expect less with "bigoted Christian.." in the thread title?

Speaking of, the OP wants to point out Christian bigotry by making a bigoted thread toward Christians?




posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Re NotUrTypical

You wrote:

"Speaking of, the OP wants to point out Christian bigotry by making a bigoted thread toward Christians?"

And now you are posting a bigoted comment against a bigoted thread against bigoted parents, and I follow it up with this bigoted comment of mine against your bigoted comment on the bigoted thread on bigoted parents.

As this kind of threads usually go, this one has had a decent level of communication, but it doesn't sit welll with you. Hence your rhetorical smokescreen, which can only be meant to destroy any chance for even small reconciliations between the opposing parts.

All according to Calvinist and the 'sons of light' doctrine: No fraternizing with the 'enemy'.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





Speaking of, the OP wants to point out Christian bigotry by making a bigoted thread toward Christians?


Ah, nice of you to join us with 10 cents worth of pointless blather adding nothing to the discussion which is not unusual for xtians that completely fail to defend their delusion time and again.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by The Djin
 


HAHA, I didn't make an attempt to "defend" anything.

Just pointed out the hypocrisy of the thread.






posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Re NotUrTypical

if you're not here to defend anything, and obviously not to add anything either, then why do you post?



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by bogomil
Re NotUrTypical

if you're not here to defend anything, and obviously not to add anything either, then why do you post?


How in the world did you manage to miss the reason why I originally posted in the two-line post above??

Oh well, I'll say it again. I posted to point out the hypocrisy of the thread.



posted on Nov, 24 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   
I am an Agnostic - but that has absolutely nothing to do with my answer

I have also been involved with a children's organisation for 10 years now and one thing that I have been contemplating recently is "What makes a good parent?"

Forget race, class or religion - the key thing is involvement, involvement for the child to grow, be happy and have the confidence to make the decisions that they want to make. In this environment., a child fluorishes and makes - what they believe - is the right choice. A child will always challenge their parent - it is Greek text that someone said that "the kids nowadays are more unruly than they used to be". And by the way, in the teens, the child looks for outside the family for role models -this idea that they get all ideas from Mum and Dad is just fantasy.

Coming back to the religious question, I genuinely think this is irrelevant, religion gives young people a framework to know right from wrong but that is all. Teenagers have massive influences from their peers and as long as the core moral values aren't shaken e.g. It is okay to kill someone. then a teenager will adapt their morals with the outside world [hence the often clothing issues of British Moslems]

I personally have far wider issues when the parent is working too much and using that as an excuse not to bond/come close with their child than any religion that they support.





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join



atslive.com

hi-def

low-def