Final phase of atheist bus campaign

[RockinSockBunnies]

So, I've just read this latest installment about the atheist bus campaign here.

Now, I'm a Christian, we go to church, DD is baptised, so obviously I'm not going to be impartial. But there point of the poster campaign seems somewhat flawed. How are children going to grow up and suddenly decide which (if any) religion they adhere to, if they've had no real exposure to any of the various religions during their upbringing?

Unless you have parents who are willing to learn the fundamental points of each and every faith, take the children to the places of worship of these faiths, whilst also discussing the concepts of atheism, then how on earth is a child going to be able to decide for themselves what they believe in once they're older?

I was an atheist for around fifteen years, but when I went back to Christianity I had the basic knowledge and understanding of the faith from attending church and Sunday School as a child. How can anyone make a real decision about religion if they're denied the opportunity to learn as a child?

Yes, and also surely he is allowed to be a polymath. All this "just a scientist, what does he know?" rubbish is a bit reductive.

Actually, reducing what I said to 'all this "he's just a scientist, what does he know'" is somewhat reductive.

Why is it Terry Eagleton's territory? He's not a theologian.

UQD

'It's just that every time something comes up about Prof Dawkins, whether I raise him or not, people seem to think I have to explain him - as if they are waiting to see if I slip up, like on some sort of intellectual "You've Been Framed".'

Eh? What people?

No, but he's a philosopher of sorts (although he claims not to be). So he may feel it falls into the area of "thought", where one is not allowed to tread unless one has a Special Badge. Again, why is Dawkins not allowed to be a polymath? People can engage with his arguments on their own terms if they like, but to question why he should even be allowed to write about them seems somewhat absurd.

I have Real Life to attend to. I will be back tomorrow, maybe.

ZD - that I don't

Prunerz - perhaps brilliant is a little overenthusiastic. I was about 16 when I read the Selfish Gene and thought it was all completely brilliant, but it was probably all a bit like what morningpaper was saying about Desmond Morris.

I see what you mean IvyKaty. That seems like a sensible approach, although the fact that you don't go to church, don't talk about god/religion etc is probably a bit of a giveaway for them.

ah but the Bible has some lovely stories and there are a couple in the house, I used to take dd to the church youth club...so that could be an indication I am happy for her to go

Just thought I'd pick up on the "Atheist Camp" propaganda. Camp Quest is a sceptical organisation teaching critical thinking. It's not atheist as such, even if many of us think atheism is the only rational position to hold.

www.camp-quest.org.uk/frequently-asked-questions/are-you-an-anti-christianmuslimreligious-camp/

And if you're asking who labels children as christian, you can start with Ruth Gledhill in the Times.

That is quite funny about the kids in the photo though.

I'm not sure I really have a problem with people referring to their kids as Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Jewish. There is a wide range of beliefs within any one of those labels - it's really a lot more about culture than belief.

However, they should certainly not be separated by religion at school, any more than they should be separated by culture.

Nah, try as I might, I don't care HOW my children are described.

I do agreed that admissions should be centralised, I really don't understand why they don't focus on that.

It's funny that a campaign against applying religious labels to children didn't choose the children in the photo on the basis of a religious label? It would be funny (odd, not ha ha) if they had.

No, cruelandunusual, obviously that isn't the reason why it's funny. The comedy (mild though it is) is in the fact that these children have been chosen to represent the freedom and innocence of a childhood unhampered by religion when in real life their upbringing has been anything but secular.