[Mr. Silverback]

The “mental abuse” Dawkins refers to is the result of teaching children that nonbelievers will spend eternity in Hell. Dawkins calls this doctrine “an extreme threat of violence and pain” and “mental terrorism.” He rhetorically asks, “If you can sue for the long-term mental damage caused by physical child abuse, why should you not sue for the long-term mental damage caused by mental child abuse?”

I guess to get my point across succinctly I need to be as blunt as Dawkins here: If there's no Hell, God is a spiritual rapist. So, if one teaches a child that God is not a rapist, that's child abuse in Dawkins' world.

Yeah, he's so much brighter than me, I just feel ashamed thinking about it. Yeesh.

There are links to further information at the source document.

If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[Mr. Silverback]

BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[CSM]

The tools provided to the lefties by the righteous right will now be used against the righteous right. Nope, didn’t see that coming at all!

[taxcontrol]

People who believe in Science have their own religion. It starts by accepting on FAITH that the universe is rational and can be explained. Therefore, there is no room for miracles in the mind of the true believer of Science.

And as with all zealots, if others believe differently, they are “irrational” at best and at worst, are heretics and deserve death.

[RSmithOpt]

Not any more abuse to a child than the public school systems, is it?

[Albion Wilde]

There was a pop-psychology movement in England when Dawkins was a younger man called "Summerhill" -- a book by that name was published around 1969 by the founder of the Summerhill School, A.S. Neill. It was a pillar of the anti-authoritarian, relativist movement, and this view that religion is an unacceptable imposition on children was part of that movement. Summerhill children do not have to attend classes, but if they do, they get to design their own curricula.

I subsequently read an interview with Summerhill graduates. They were not doing very well. One said he "mostly just listened to music." Of course, in a welfare state like Britain, this is a viable life style.

[Sherman Logan]

rails against the so-called “immorality” of the Bible, like the sanctioning of slavery—untrue

I'm curious how Colson arrives at this remarkable conclusion. The Bible, particularly the OT but also the NT, takes slavery very much for granted as a part of life.

It doesn't order people to practice it, but it never once implies that they shouldn't.

The concepts of human dignity and equality that eventually led to the end of slavery are embedded in the Bible, but it seems pretty clear that those living at the time didn't make the connection.

[najida]

IMHO,
Religion it’s self isn’t abusive,
it’s how it’s taught and delivered to the child....

One of the most evil events branded in my brain as a teenager I was sitting next to a pregnant woman and her 11 year old daughter (They were trying to convert me from my ‘moderate’ church to their non-denominational-super-duper-yer-all-goin’tahell-brand).

She said “I know that if this baby is born and dies two minutes later, SNAP! it’s going straight to hell! Same with my daughter here. If she dies right now, she’s hellbound.” (all this was about a discussion of infant versus adult baptism and if you didn’t get it in time, well just too damn bad). I remember looking at that little girl and seeing real fear.

Granted, I was old enough and hardened enough to know that the only Satan in the room was that woman ;) Monsters walk and even carry babies.

So yeah, any religion can be harmful to a child if taught with an angry or hatefilled heart.

[stuartcr]

It’s only abuse when the religion is one you cannot tolerate...

[Lowcountry]

The “mental abuse” Dawkins refers to is the result of teaching children that nonbelievers will spend eternity in Hell. Dawkins calls this doctrine “an extreme threat of violence and pain” and “mental terrorism.” He rhetorically asks, “If you can sue for the long-term mental damage caused by physical child abuse, why should you not sue for the long-term mental damage caused by mental child abuse?”

I guess you could make the same argument about the Global Warming scare tactics.

[MEGoody]

Yeah, he's so much brighter than me

That's what he and his fellow atheists would like you to think. But I'm not impressed with is level of 'intelligence.'

[wintertime]

Ping

[festus]

He mocks the irrationality of believing in something that you cannot subject to scientific scrutiny;

Which is why I mock psychology.

[reg45]

In reality, the absence of religion is child abuse.

[wintertime]

Please place me on your ping list.

Thank you, Wintertime

[joebuck]

"Dawkins calls this doctrine “an extreme threat of violence and pain” and “mental terrorism.”

Is this really worse than the end Dawkins perceives? The Dawkster has obviously never read Milton's "Paradise Lost" where the poet takes his arguments and plays with them philosophically in verse. This horse has already been well beaten. Great read.

[vaudine]

Extreme religions can be abusive--and not just to children. However, in this time, school indoctrinatiion is the biggest abuser of children.

vaudine

[Popman]

When it comes to knowledge about God Richard Dawkins suffers from Dunning-Kruger effect