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?

I think the "norm" should be no belief. There'd be a huge benefit to this being a secular country, or world, for that matter.

Then, if children want to believe in something other than fact and science they can go off and learn it for themselves when they're older.

IMO religion has been created to keep the people down, stop people questioning things too deeply and so that they behave themselves in a way in which the religious leaders want them to. I have family who are Witnesses and it never ceases to amaze me, the utter nonsense that they seem to believe. They're intelligent people - how can they deny scientific fact and believe in something for which there is absolutely no proof?

Each to their own, but honestly... the fact that people still believe in any kind of god or gods when the world is in such a mess is beyond me........

Everyone born into this world is born with no belief.

MissGB - the problem with that is that, for many families, belief is the norm. So they can't really raise their children in the absence of belief, unless they are somehow going to hide their religion - sneaking off to church while claiming to be going to B&Q...

For believers like me, there's no problem in letting DS make his own choices, and letting him know that there are other, equally valid, ways of viewing the world which don't include God.

But for others, their belief system means that's the equivalent of telling their children there are "equally-valid" views about whether sticking your fingers in the socket is a bad idea. If you believed that not practising your religion meant terrible consequences, then you would of course protect your child from that by raising them to know that this is what they have to believe and do in order to avoid the terrible fate which awaits them otherwise.

People may scoff at anyone believing that, but you have to understand that that's what these campaigns will never be able to touch.

Honestly, the thought that children might grow up not having had any exposure to religious dogma... never having regularly attended a church... never having believed in a superstition or a religion.

Isn't that...

... hugely encouraging?

Ain't going to happen, sadly.

I think a lot of people feel like you, Duelingfanjo, and it's peplexing to the religious. They think you must somehow, at some point in your life, have "rejected god." The concept of it not only not being real but also not being relevant is one of the hardest to get across.

Shrieking Harpy, as you say Jesus' divinity is open to speculation and is also impossible to disprove, so it's very much like the mystical badger of doom. If it's rational to be an atheist when it comes to my proclamations about the mystical badger of doom then it's equally rational to be an atheist over other people proclamations about Jesus being the son of God.

Also God, Souls or celestial dimension might be hypothesises but they are not good scientific theories unless you can come up with some way that they can be disproved. That also makes my badger hypothesis a bad scientific theory for exactly the same reason.

You can just come up with any theory and say that as science can't disprove them you've got to consider them as being possible and should therefore be agnostic about them.

Absolutely UQD.

I first became aware there was a thing called God and religion at about 6 years old when I started being kept out of School assemblies on the day of the week that they had a vicar come to do the service. I think the other days was just general assembly stuff. This is despite being raised from 6 months to over 5 in a Catholic area in Ireland.

It was only when people actively started trying to teach me about god that my parents started actively trying to stop them. Up until then I knew nothing of so called Gods and religionsbecause they just weren't a part of my life.

How it should be I think and I think schools shouldn't be teaching kids about religion at all.

"Mystical badger of doom", I like that. I shall have to adopt it and use it instead of the Spaghetti Monster (seeing as people always miss the point of that and think it is "tiresome"...)

I'd disagree with you on one thing, DF, which is that I do think the curriculum should include teaching about religion.

After all, I learned about the Greek and Egyptian myth systems at primary school -as "interesting stories which people once believed were true and have influenced culture" - so there's no reason why people shouldn't learn about the Christian myth system, and others, in the same way.

Yea - I guess I agree that religion should be taught as a historical thing rather than as an absolute truth.

"Each to their own, but honestly... the fact that people still believe in any kind of god or gods when the world is in such a mess is beyond me........"

I suppose I'd look at that statement as evidence that there's clearly something within the human spirit that continues to believe and trust in a faith, despite things being wrong with the world.

People can blame religion for causing wars. I don't feel that religion is to blame - people themselves cause wars.

I define myself as an atheist, and there's nothing religious about that. It seems to be a rather hackneyed argument that atheists are operating some kind of 'faith' thing. As most people well know, DISproving God is like trying to disprove the existence of a flying spaghetti monster, or a gazillion other entities that can be imagined. There is one of those old maxims, that people making extraordinary claims should provide the proof, and I have to say I would go along with that.

I do not define myself as an agnostic, because that might give the impression that I think it might be just as likely there is a God, as not. Despite being brought up in a religion, there has never been a single thing that would for a moment make me think that God might exist, never mind the god as represented in any of the holy books that I have come across.

Of course, when people attempt to scientifically examine the efficacy of religion (ie. something that can be proved), such as the benfits of prayer/divine intervention, then there is always some bullshit answer given such as 'god moves in mysterious ways', or free will defences.

It just doesn't add up. To paraphrase the old saying...I respect every person's right to hold their beliefs, but I don't necessarily respect their beliefs, especially when it might affect my life.

How can anyone make a real decision about religion if they're denied the opportunity to learn as a child

laughing my pants of here. a good argument for Atheism is that God is not something a child would dream of if no-one told them about it, and you have just agreed with that argument.

It is true that people cause wars...about many things, but sadly when someone is taught that only their beliefs are 'sacrosanct', and that they are superior to others, then wars are started on the basis of not allowing people to live and let live, rather than over things like the right to self determination, or the right to provide for oneself - things that really matter.

I would hasten to add that I realise that for most people, this is not necessarily the way they life their religion.

Indoctrinate them early EAP...they need to know they are sinners from the earliest possible age, and also build in that fear nice and early...I bet that keeps a lot of people in the fold!

UQD, that sounds like my upbringing. Atheist parents. Attended church once in my childhood, for a relative's wedding. No RE at school (lived in a country where it wasn't allowed).

I did what many people on this thread suggest, and found out about it for myself as a young adult.

So now I'm a Christian. It's fab.

I quite liked the agnostic buses. "probably no God". Really? Are you quite sure? Do you want to find out more, just in case? .

I still don't get it

WHO is labelling children as Christian or Muslim? Are Doctors giving it out as a diagnosis?

genuine question

very good advert and very good campaign IMO.

Although does anyone else lol a little trying to imagine what an atheist bus looks like?

The point is not that anyone is trying to deny children an education about all faiths, but rather that religious people tend to teach their children that only one faith is correct. Often there is an addendum; that everyone else will go to hell.

I find it very odd that to say that early indoctrination into one particular faith to the exclusion of all others helps you to make "a real decision about religion". I'd say it does rather the opposite, actually.

OK I've found it

NO FAITH SCHOOLS is the name of the campaign - they are campaigning to end faith schools

Sorry, I didn't get that AT ALL from the bus

The only people who I can think of who label children as eg "Christian children" rather than "children of Christian parents" are faith schools, where there is an assumption that you ought to be educated in a certain way on the basis of that label. In my experience, even churches don't label the children that way, or assume that they will all want to "sign up" for themselves in due course. Obviously they hope many of them will choose to, but it's not a default.

As I've said previously, many religious people will teach their children that only one religion is correct. They do this because they believe it to be true. Unless you plan to take the children away from those families to teach them differently, then you're not going to convince anyone with a campaign.

The thing this does achieve is to get people talking about issues like faith schools, which I think is an important issue. But suggesting that parents should be discouraged from teaching their child their religion is a very dodgy area - would you suggest no-one should be allowed to teach their children that the tooth fairy exists? Why is one irredeemably "harmful" to children while the other is a "nice story"?

Note to self - press Refresh...

Shrieking Harpy, Jesus' existance really isn't the point, the point is whether or not he was the son of God, which is as unprovable as the giant invisible badger.

We know that badgers exist, would it make a difference if I claimed that the giant invisible badger of doom was the reincarnation of the poor unfortunate one I saw lying in the lay by the other day? That badger has a far more definite and proveable existance than Jesus. However once again his metaphysical qualities are beyond the realms of testability.

Personally I do have faith, however that's my own personal choice and it's not in something that I can prove or disprove.

To other people my faith will appear to be as irrational as the Giant Badger of Doom and they will be equally atheist about both of them.

To me that's a perfectly rational response that I have no problem with.

I'd be very surprised if someone did call themselves agnostic about either my beliefs or the badger, after all why should they give them the benefit of the doubt?