introducing faith/religion to kids

In article , Banty says...

:::sigh:::

Sure, but, to make this abundantly clear, you think reasonable:

_____________________________________________

If your child encounters a serious devotee of a religion
and comes home asking about it, I think it's fine and appropriate
to say that we don't believe in that religion for reasons X, Y and Z,
but if that's what Johnny believes, then it's not your business
to make fun of him or argue over it at school. Lots of people
have different religious beliefs that are important to them, and
for many of them there isn't and won't ever be conclusive evidence
either way; therefore, it's appropriate for us to live and let live.
______________________________________________

Actually, I like it much better without the "and won't ever be concludive
evidence either way". Because that's irrelevant. And I strongly disagree, and
wouldn't want to teach, that just anything not subject to conclusive evidence
merits belief.

You seem to want to keep that niggling little reference to how not having a
religion and having a religion is on the same logical ground. It's not.
Religious beliefs are the ones put forward, they are the statements with the
need for evidence.

Banty

Banty wrote:
In article , Banty says...
:::sigh:::

Sure, but, to make this abundantly clear, you think reasonable:

_____________________________________________

If your child encounters a serious devotee of a religion
and comes home asking about it, I think it's fine and appropriate
to say that we don't believe in that religion for reasons X, Y and Z,
but if that's what Johnny believes, then it's not your business
to make fun of him or argue over it at school. Lots of people
have different religious beliefs that are important to them, and
for many of them there isn't and won't ever be conclusive evidence
either way; therefore, it's appropriate for us to live and let live.
______________________________________________

Actually, I like it much better without the "and won't ever be concludive
evidence either way". Because that's irrelevant.

On the contrary. It's irrelevant in that the manners issue
alone justifies the "don't argue about it at school" conclusion,
but it is not at all irrelevant in terms of the arrogance perspective
(for lack of better terminology). That which is unprovable is
typically not worth arguing about (what are you going to bring
to the table if you don't have any proof?), and if it's religious
to boot you're just likely to be provocative. I think there's a
huge qualitative difference between something that's provably wrong
and something you believe to be wrong but don't have evidence for.
I rather seem to recall science makes some distinctions along those
lines as well.

And I strongly disagree, and
wouldn't want to teach, that just anything not subject to conclusive evidence
merits belief.

Again, you are totally missing my point. Nowhere in that
statement is the absence of evidence used to suggest that the
child should therefore believe in it. There's nothing in the
statement that encourages the child to believe in it at all.
In fact, there's a clear statement that the speaker *doesn't*
believe, and provides support for that belief. It's not about
asking the child to change his belief. It's about recognizing
a class of statements that one shouldn't argue about. If the
kid believes that the sun rises in the west, go ahead and argue.
There's evidence. It's provable. If the kid believes in something
that is not provable, you might as well walk away. What's your
ammunition? If it's unprovable *and* a religious belief, you've
got two reasons to let it lie: 1) you haven't got anything
substantive to bring to the table in the way of proof and 2) as
a religious belief, it's a hot button issue that you shouldn't
be poking at in polite company anyway.

You seem to want to keep that niggling little reference to how not having a
religion and having a religion is on the same logical ground.

That is not something I've ever said. That is something
you are (incorrectly) reading into my statements.

Best wishes,
Ericka