"Raising Children Without the Concept of Sin"

I have seen complete monsters that were raised with a foundation of a religious exposure during childhood and severe corporal punishment, two that come to mind is Joe Stalin and Adolf Hitler.

 

The article referenced several scientific studies with embedded links to all of them. The author is an experienced professional in the field. There is no bias in the science that PROVES that there is NO POSITIVE aspect to physical abuse of a small child.

Your scenario ONLY makes works in a fantasy idealized setting that does not deal with REALITY!

Parent comes home exhausted after working one and perhaps even two jobs just to make ends meet. Had to deal with the stress of commuting and worrying about having enough money to be able to pay all the bills this month without having in increase the debt load on the credit card again. The toddler reaches for the cord and the parent yells NO! The toddler is cowed but undeterred and tries again so the parent loses it and smacks the child far harder than they even realize because there is a great deal of frustration pent up inside. The toddler is now sobbing with pain and the parent does not even reach out to comfort the child because the parent needs to have a smoke or pour themselves a drink because they need some time alone.

That scenario is far closer to reality than your Leave It To Beaver fantasy.

 

Actually that is the ENTIRE POINT that you are IGNORING!

Children who are physically punished have much higher rates of substance abuse, delinquency and antisocial behaviors.

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/2/184.full

 

But first YOU need to substantiate YOUR allegation with CREDIBLE sources.

 

Wouldn't it be great if the world was perfect?

 

Wouldn't it great if we all tried to make it a better place than we found it?

 

To start with I don't think you can criticize Christianity as being irrational unless you are also prepared to criticize all other religions on the same basis - which means becoming at least moderately familiar with the core tenants of the major regions of the modern world. Secondarily most Christian philosophy isn't about 'proving' Jesus was God as much as it is about the critical analysis of his teachings with aim of applying them to daily life or to the deeper questions of philosophy itself. Most 'Christian' philosophers by default having accepted Christ's divinity to begin with.

 

I don't see either Stalin or Hitler as having a sincere desire to have a "relationship" with the One that created everything. I think that is where everyone gets it wrong with the word "Religion".

 

My experience confirms the poster you replied to. Christians are routinely dismissed with the phony narrative,

'Christians have religion! Atheists have science!'

It does not matter how rational, factual, or soundly reasoned the arguments are, that dismissal is thrown out faster than the race card by a liberal.

It is the New Reality, dealing with a massive false Narrative, where historical Christian scholarship and reason is redefined as religious hysteria. The ironic thing is, just like a race obsessed liberal, the anti-christian dismissers actually exhibit the hysteria and irrational responses that they accuse the christians of. My first post in this thread illustrates my point. Just noting the 'unscientific' conclusion of some study brought the immediate response, 'Science hater!' 'Religious extremist!' ..no logical rebuttal, or evidentiary support of an asserted 'scientific' study, just 'hater!' dismissal for any skepticism of some study, claiming universal Truth under very questionable conditions.

But this is Progresso World, where reason, facts, and reality have no purpose. Mandated beliefs, that fit the Official State Religion, are indoctrinated from infancy. Why should anyone expect it to be any different?

 

"Better" without God is only in the mind of every individual secular humanist. Many different "roads".

 

Whether they had one or not is not the issue it is that they had a background in religion when being raised along with corporal punishment.

 

Since when did liberals not have religion? While it may be true that some liberals are not christians but it is not true that all christians are conservative only.

 

This is Progresso World. Indoctrinated into the belief that 'any corporeal punishment is child abuse!', they get worn out by constant childish defiance, and lash out in anger and frustration, because the 'soft voiced reasoning' doesn't work. I see this constantly. Deluded with fantasy beliefs about the nature of children, these poor, misguided parents find their tidy little world of human formulaic responses dashed by a 2 year old.

No matter how 'enlightened!', 'progressive!', and 'educated!' these experts in childhood development and psychology are, a brief interaction with a toddler destroys years of their neat little theories. And then once you get to puberty, any pretense of 'expertise!' usually is forgotten by all but the most deluded.

But it makes for good hyperbole...

'Physical punishment will turn your child into Stalin or Hitler!'

 

When it comes to zealots everyone who does not strictly adhere to the bizarre beliefs of the zealot is automatically an unbeliever and condemned as being somehow "unclean" in the "eyes" of their imaginary deity.

This applies to the zealots of ALL religions. The irony being that it makes these zealots have more in common with the zealots of other religions than they do with the normal adherents of their own faith who do not embrace the extremes of zealotry.

 

On the contrary, 'liberals', and more accurately, 'progressives', are steeped in religious belief. But they do not label it so. Progressive beliefs are automatically, 'science!', as this thread has illustrated, and any questioning of these progressive sacred cows brings howls of, 'kill the infidel!' and 'religious hater!'

So yes, there are none more 'religious!' than progressive indoctrinees, but they see themselves (and present their beliefs) as 'science!', in nearly every area. Origins, environment, child rearing, governance, and every aspect of human life is affected and controlled by the years of constant propaganda and Indoctrination they have been submitted to. It is more surprising when a rare free thinker escapes the vise grip of Progressivism.

 

Yet i am sure you exclude yourself, with your 'imaginary belief!' of atheistic naturalism...

Good illustration of the narrative.

 

To the bold above. Pretty much 100% of the time.

 

Given that you have NEVER experienced anything other than your "unenlightened" physical abuse of children mode of parenting it is hardly surprising that you would not grasp the NEGATIVE EFFECTS and HOW they manifest themselves in adolescence.

Children who are physically abused are going to RESENT those that abused them and they will lose all TRUST and RESPECT for them. This results in the NEGATIVE transformation during puberty that you FALLACIOUSLY assume to be the "norm".

It is ONLY the "norm" for those parents who use physical abuse as means of discipline.

For parents who chose to actually interact with their children in order to teach them good behavior there is no "acting out" during puberty. Instead the TRUST and RESPECT is maintained and incidence of negative behaviors like drug abuse and depression is considerably lower.

 

As usual in these forums, the false caricatures overwhelm reality.
1. I have not seen ANY 'easy refute!' in my 'philosophy' threads. Assertions and fallacies abound, but facts? Arguments? Rebuttals? ..not so much.
2. Your anti-christian bias is showing, with the phony caricatures and narratives, that are NOT 'established facts!', as you present them.
3. Hysterical and irrational anti-christian bigotry defines most of the progressive's responses, when anything 'Christian!' comes up. Triggered by certain buzz words, they involuntarily launch into the canned Narrative, attacking straw men and caricatures of 'Christians!', and ignoring whatever the topic is.
4. 'Seriously?' Take 'seriously' the straw men used to attack Christianity? I see few, if any, 'arguments', just irrational hysteria as a conditioned response from these progressive indoctrinees.
5. 'Christianity that consist of horrible bible teachings, scriptural errors, and a philosophy that doesn't make any sense.' Examples? Would you like to actually debate, with facts, this prejudicial statement?
6. Another good illustration of religious bigotry, from progressive indoctrinees. They have smears and phony narratives for Christianity, and just promote their competing worldview, or religious belief.

 

Ironic PROJECTION duly noted and ignored for obvious reasons.

 

Yuk it up. Enjoy your theories. Judge others as you wish.

But I sincerely wish you well, in your child raising endeavors. Parenting is not for the faint of heart.

 

Certainly!:

https://www.npr.org/sections/health...nces-many-studies-fail-the-reproducibility-te

https://www.theguardian.com/science...cial-scientific-findings-of-past-decade-fails

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

. . . aaaaaaaaaaaand there are many other similar and well-documented reports. Enjoy.

 

I've always been a rebel so to speak and listened to myself before following the Pied Piper.

 

It doesn't matter how many different sources reported the EXACT SAME THING!

Links one and two are IDENTICAL! 33% were FULLY reproducible and another 33% were partially reproducible which blows your 90% allegation out of the water.

Link #3 contains conflicting information. A POLL finds that 70% of scientists were unable to replicate results but does not explain why this was the case. It is a meaningless statistic because it does not specify what was tested and the rigor that was applied. Further on there was a small attempt to replicate the results of 5 studies of which 40% fully succeeded and another 40% were partially successful with only 20% failure. That again blows your 90% bovine excrement out of the water.

Your Wiki link was only relevant for Psychology replications attempts match up with the findings about although no specific figures are cited they also blow away your 90% allegation.

So your own links debunk your "over 90%" allegation.

 

Translation: I was correct and you were wrong and now you are picking nit with both irrefutable facts and reality. Gasp! You must be an agenda-driven leftist.