children can make their own mind up about religion when they grow up...

[AliGrylls]

Okay I have just read this on another thread but this is a statement I hear quite a lot and want to ask the question.

If all you teach your child is atheism how will they make their mind up about religion when they grow up because they have no religion other than atheism?

They will know nothing other than what you have taught them so they have nothing to make their mind up about - they will be atheist, by default. If people genuinely want their children to make their own mind up they have to provide them with a reasonable alternative (ie, Judaism / Christianity / Islam).

I don't actually know any adults who have been brought up atheist who have thought all of a sudden "I believe in God, I am going to go to Church".

Chicken - great definition of evil!

Do you have any questions?

well thank you Roseflower, clearly I missed where you said that already, I do apologise.

It seems a little wide to me as a definition. Chickens killing a spider with her war and peace seems an act that intentionally causes both destruction and harm(both of and to the spider). Is it then an evil act?

I think an evil act is defined by the individual observer. Even murder can be justified by the individual in most cases I suspect, but as a society we have defined 'evil acts' and made them laws. So I suppose that all acts are actually neutral to an extent, until we interpret them.

Not sure I'm explaining this very well. I have eaten two Walnut Whips.

One woman has described encountering an evil person as like "suddenly losing your ability to think."

Thank you.

The point is I think evil is human behaviour (not a supernatural force made me do it).

Perhaps it is evil to the spider and it's family. Perhaps kinder to just put it outside. But there are degree's of evil.
Perhaps there is occasions where evil can even be justified. It is not black and white.

It is a wide defintion, perhaps simplistic but a starting point but by no means the end point.

I think you are explaining very well. And I think this is why I have such problems with the terminology of evil, it seems to me such a loaded term for something so subjective.
For instance, it can seem easy to assert evil, or just plain wrong to use a different term. One can confidently say "Killing (lets say a human in this case, rather than your more debatable spiders and kittens) is wrong/evil."
Seems simple, but how many caveats can different people add?

Killing is wrong/evil:

• except in self-defence *except in the death penalty *except in war *except in abortion (if indeed we accept any of the terms such as killing or human to be appropriate, which I don't but some would) *except ....insert your own here.

So, in essence, I think we agree?

....Scott Peck (again) talks about evil being chronic scapegoating!!

Any questions?

What exactly does that mean Animation?

Yes. Ultimately we tend to consider things 'evil' if they involve something which hurts us, or is something we would not do. The first is probably easier for us as humans to agree on (loosely), but the second is totally subjective. I'm sure there are many people who would weep over the spider's flattened corpse (once I'd peeled it from the book jacket).

Chronic scapegoating?

Yes. What does he mean by that?

It's where an innocent is accused and forced to take the blame.

of what, by whom and huh?

Oh. I read it more as saying that we avoid responsibility by blaming human acts on 'evil'.

But surely there will be cases when someone is not innocent?

I'm thinking specifically of the mugshots used in the tabloid media, with 'EVIL' stamped above them, instead of really considering how a human being has come to commit some awful act.

I think it is used that way, Chickens. IMO, to call someone evil is to say "they are different, not like me, I could never be/do that" evil=other, which is an abdication of responsibility but putting bad things outside of normal human experience, when thats where they should firmly be.

Thats the other reason I don't agree with the term.

*by putting, not but.

So why I am I so poor then Winter, where's my dosh? :o

And why did Jesus say to give all our money to the poor - or are you only talking about "the Church" instead of the guy the New Testament is about? The actions of churches do not necessarily represent what Jesus/the Bible represent.

"Religion produces plenty of happiness and wealth for those peddling it"

Sorry not Winter, it was SpringchickenGoldBrass wot said it

Another thing about evil - that when you're at the receiving end of of an evil deed, in the form of lies or blame directed at you - you usually get a revulsion feeling in the stomach.

That is your gut instinct giving you a warning sign that evil is being done.

What about native american languages that had no concept of ownership? Not all about money and power. Thats just one example

Why were the Apaches in frequent conflict with the Comanches-the Arapaho in conflict with the Shoshone and Pawnee-the Crow in conflict with the Sioux etc etc- just for fun, with no one hurt, or because they wanted control?
How does someone get to be chief-I would suggest by being strongest. Survival of the fittest.

What is the Devil's role in all this evil-doing?

No such thing-man made! People need to take responsibility-not pass it off to something outside their control!

I thought the philosophical definition of evil was that if a person is capable of moral deliberation, believes an act to be morally wrong, but chooses to commit that act anyway, then that is evil.