I am definitly a fan of your rants. Well said.

Agreed. This is why movies such as Jesus Camp (not the movie itself, but the people the movie examines) piss me off so much.

I can honestly say that children with faith do not bother me immensely, as long as it is not to the brainwash level. It is natural for parents to pass down their beliefs to their children. It is a bit irksome, but it does not make my blood boil.

I definatly makes my blood boil. It's ALWAYS brainwash when children are religious. To say "it's natural to pass on your beliefs" isn't really an excuse for the parents that do it.

Indoctrination IS mental abuse no matter what they say...

To say that there is no difference between indoctrination/brainwashing and passing on tradition to children is a bit simplistic, no matter how angry the latter makes you. Here is the definition of brainwash:

1 : a forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up basic political or social beliefs and attitudes and to accept contrasting regimented ideas
2 : persuasion by propaganda or salesmanship

I just don't think taking children to church because you were brought to church as a child constitutes as some evil plot against the child. There is a difference between a child who believes in some deity and the cult-like zombies of the children in Jesus Camp.

Parents pass down morals and family traditions...why not beliefs? I would say that I had a religious upbringing...not overly much, but the Christian god was definitely mentioned and we occasionally prayed. However, by fifth or sixth grade I already began doubting. Brainwashing rarely leaves room for doubt.

It does piss me off when children are obviously brainwashed by religion, but not every child who has belief is brainwashed.

Tradition passing isn't the same as indoctrination, obviously. But intimidation about sinful activities (such as masturbation) and threats about eternal damnation, surely qualify as abuse. I didn't get any of those when I grew up as a Christian child, but I know a few who did.

Yeah, definitely.

I thought my original post differentiated between the two types of children, though.

The first paragraph was about the brainwashed children; the second paragraph was about children who have some belief but do not appear brainwashed.

"To say that there is no difference between indoctrination/brainwashing and passing on tradition to children is a bit simplistic."

No, it's not. It's truth. Indoctrination = Brainwash, no matter what the degree of it. Get it?

"I just don't think taking children to church because you were brought to church as a child constitutes as some evil plot against the child."

I never said it did. Is the phrase 'evil plot' anywhere in the definition of brainwash? No. Bringing a child to church IS brainwash. Period. Just because they think it's right doesn't make it any less brainwash.

"There is a difference between a child who believes in some deity and the cult-like zombies of the children in Jesus Camp."

Yes, there is. They're different degrees of brainwash, and brainwash in different things, but they're both brainwash. Sorry.

Just because you say it is so does not make it so. When you say something is "truth", it would be nice for you to provide some evidence. Additionally, adding in phrases such as "Get it?" is very patronizing and not really necessary. I assure you that I am quite intelligent and quite capable of understanding your arguments and "getting it."

Here is what your argument sounds like: Brainwashing is brainwashing because I say it is brainwashing so that means it's brainwashing and so it's brainwashing. In all honesty, it does not sound entirely different from "God is real because I say he is real because I believe he is real so he must be real."

How about some support? Some logical reasoning? Is that too much to ask from a fellow freethinker?

I said "evil plot" because brainwashing is generally intentional and understood to be an unkind procedure. I have pulled out another definition for the word brainwash:

1: persuade completely, often through coercion; 2: submit to brainwashing; indoctrinate forcibly

How is teaching a child about beliefs, no matter how erroneous, automatically to "persuade completely, often through coercion" or an attempt to "indoctrinate forcibly." I mean, if we're following your definition of the word, when a parent teaches his child how to read or write he is also brainwashing them.

What is your personal connotation of the word brainwash, and how does this apply to every single child who has some form of belief?

You are very pushy these days Nick... Chill out :)

Excellent Nick.

Brainwashing [i]is[/i] indoctrination. They're pretty much synonymous. When children are raised from a very young age to believe that soemthing is true, particularly when told not to question these doctrines and without giving any evidence for the truth behind these doctrines, it's feeding them false or potentially false information with the means of making it a dogmatic belief.

Chidlren are very susceptible to persuation at and early age and have not yet developed the abiltiy to rationally weigh the merit of ideas. By bringing kids to church regularly, they are putting these ideas into the kids' heads when they have no ability to really judge the validity of what is said. Therefore, children are brainwashed into believing, they don't coem to it through weighing of the arguments agaisnt fact and counterarguments, they believe simply because they were trained to believe taht what they learned in church was right and the truth.

Braiwnashing need not be done with the intentions of 'evil'. I'm sure that most parents aren't doing it out of some sort of sadism, but because they were trained to beleive it was truth as well and don't know any better. The intention isn't what makes brainwashing, it's all in the methodology.

I agree that children have not yet developed the ability to rationally weigh the merit of ideas. But how can you say bringing kids to church regularly is brainwashing, but teaching a child any other behavior expected in our society is not brainwashing. What is the difference between brainwashing and teaching? What is the difference between teaching a child religion and teaching a child to read, write, or have morals? What? Religion doesn't have enough evidence? Well, what does? Do you think parents can provide evidence as to why we have certain rules and laws in our society that other cultures may not have?

A parent could teach his child, "We are Christians because that is how I was raised. It has been helpful for me in living my life. It gives me a sense of purpose making my life more enjoyable."

How is that any different from, "Charley, you must learn how to use the toilet. It is socially unacceptable to excrete waste in your underwear."

You said, "By bringing kids to church regularly, they are putting these ideas into the kids' heads when they have no ability to really judge the validity of what is said. Therefore, children are brainwashed into believing..." This argument does not logically flow. A child does not have the "ability to really judge the validty of what is said" for ANYTHING a parent teaches him. That does not make every single thing the parent exposes his child to an act of brainwashing. Look at this: "By bringing kids to SCHOOL regularly, they are putting these ideas into kids' heads when they have no ability to really judge the validity of what is said. Therefore, children are brainwashed..." It makes no sense.

I agree that brainwashing is all in the methodology. Now, you explain what that methodology is. I assure you what MOST religious parents impart on their child does not qualify.

“I assure you that I am quite intelligent and quite capable of understanding your arguments and "getting it." ”

And yet even after I explain it, you still don’t.

“I said "evil plot" because brainwashing is generally intentional and understood to be an unkind procedure. I have pulled out another definition for the word brainwash:
1: persuade completely, often through coercion; 2: submit to brainwashing; indoctrinate forcibly”

Ah, so now you go searching for different definitions you can twist to meet your irrational ideas? Really.

“How is teaching a child about beliefs, no matter how erroneous, automatically to "persuade completely, often through coercion" or an attempt to "indoctrinate forcibly”?”

So, your ‘argument’ is this: “Even though the definition doesn’t say it, to be brainwashed, it must be deliberate and evil and the people doing the brainwashing must know its wrong and do it anyway!” Oh yeah, that’s totally logical.

They aren’t teaching them about beliefs. They’re saying “Jesus was your savior, God exists, and the Bible is truth!” That isn’t teaching about anything, that’s called BRAINWASH. Faith goes against rationality, common sense. Children’s minds are predisposed to trust what their parents tell them, so it works. They ARE persuading them completely, they ARE using coercion, and in most cases it is forcibly (if they don’t believe, they get punished). They also use propaganda. What theist parents do to their children fits perfectly with BOTH definitions you pulled up. And yet you still don’t see.

Teaching someone to read is merely giving them knowledge. Convincing someone completely that something which goes against all logic and reason, that makes no sense and offers threats and punishment if you don’t believe it, is true... since they were CHILDREN, who couldn’t even think for themselves.... That’s brainwash. Pure and simple. And yet you still don’t see.

Your personal connotation to the word brainwash is wrong. You (for some strange, idiotic reason) seem convinced that the people doing the brainwashing must know its wrong and do it anyway. This obviously isn’t in the definition of brainwash. And yet you still insist it is. That makes you a fool. You demand explanations from me and supply none of your own. That’s makes you a hypocrite. Is it so much to ask that you stop being stupid and hypocritical?

"You are very pushy these days Nick... Chill out"

No. I see no reason to go soft on anyone, if they're being idiots.

Because you have not effectively explained it. As I said before, saying it is so does not make it so. You fail to even address the points I make. Being rude and obnoxious does not make what you say anymore true. Just because I disagree with you does not make me "irrational" or an "idiot."

How does, "How is teaching a child about beliefs, no matter how erroneous autmoatically to 'persuade completely, often through coercion" or an attempt to 'indoctrinate forcibly'"? equate to "Even though the definition doesn't say it, to be brainwashed, it must be deliberate and evil and the people brainwashing must know it's wrong and do it anyway!" I originally said when a parent teaches their child about religion that it is not necessarily an "evil plot against the child." This was in response to your anger at all parents who pass on religion. To me, it does not make sense to be so angry at people who are just ignorant. I was not equating brainwash with evil plot. However, words like "coercion" and phrases such as "forcibly indoctrinate" do imply intent and a specific plot.

"They aren’t teaching them about beliefs. They’re saying “Jesus was your savior, God exists, and the Bible is truth!” That isn’t teaching about anything, that’s called BRAINWASH."

Again, your argument here is....I say it's brainwash, so it must be true! And not all parents pass on religion as such. My mother was very much, "I believe in God, and it has helped me tremendously throughout my life. There is no proof of his existence, but I still believe he exists." Of course, my mom beleived so I autmoatically believed...until I was about 10. Would you say the way my mother presented the information to me was brainwash? Is saying "I believe in God...blah blah" to "forcibly indoctrinate" and persuade under "coercion." Saying that less religious kids are just less brainwashed is erroneous. You say I'm bending the definition of the word, but you are the one who is, in fact, changing the meaning.

"They ARE persuading them completely, they ARE using coercion, and in most cases it is forcibly (if they don’t believe, they get punished). They also use propaganda. What theist parents do to their children fits perfectly with BOTH definitions you pulled up. And yet you still don’t see."

You're making the mistake of confusing a few whackjob parents with all mildly religious people. I mean, where do you get off saying "most cases." I know very few kids who if they don't believe they get punished. I grew up in Texas where a majority of the people were pretty religious. Even they were not as nutty as you are making all religious people sound. I understand your points perfectly; but it is you who do not see. Everything is not as black and white as you make it sound. Coercion and force is used by certain parents, but can you honestly say it is used by all parents of kids who turn wout to believe?

"Teaching someone to read is merely giving them knowledge. Convincing someone completely that something which goes against all logic and reason, that makes no sense and offers threats and punishment if you don’t believe it, is true... since they were CHILDREN, who couldn’t even think for themselves.... That’s brainwash. Pure and simple. And yet you still don’t see."

Can you provide an example of a parent punishing their child for not believing? You say this is happening, yet I have never seen it in the several churches I've gone to, in all of the kids I've babysat, the daycares I've worked at...the camps where I've been a counselor. I'll tell you one thing, most kids who are religious are NOT completely convinced. They are not all that persuaded. They ask themselves "If God created man, who created God? Could Noah REALLY fit all those animals in one boat? Where did Cain's wife come from? Where do dinosaurs fit into all of this?" Brainwashing does not leave room for these kinds of questions, because it leaves a person, in our case a child, COMPLETELY persauded and convinced. Don't get me wrong, there are examples of children who are clearly brainwashed, but that does not apply to every single child who is "religious."

"Your personal connotation to the word brainwash is wrong. You (for some strange, idiotic reason) seem convinced that the people doing the brainwashing must know its wrong and do it anyway. This obviously isn’t in the definition of brainwash. And yet you still insist it is. That makes you a fool. You demand explanations from me and supply none of your own. That’s makes you a hypocrite. Is it so much to ask that you stop being stupid and hypocritical?"

First of all, why do you feel a need to be so rude? Do you have some deep rooted psychological need to feel superior to your peers? Do you have the classic bully syndrome, putting down others to bring yourself up? It is possible to get through to people by presenting your arguments in a clear, nice way. No need to be a bitch, bitch. Second of all, I do not believe that those brainwashing must know it's wrong and do it anyway. However, I do believe that most people who brainwash people do it actively, with clear intent. I never said that the definition of brainwashing is an evil, intentional plot. I will not deny that I said brainwashing usually involves unsavory intent, though. Just look at figures such as Hitler. Thirdly, even if I were misusing the definition of the word, that does not make me a fool. Fourthly (word?), I am not being stupid.

[quote]No. I see no reason to go soft on anyone, if they're being idiots.[/quote]

Can't you just debate politely? That's all I'm asking. I see no reason to call anyone on the forum an idiot...

[quote=Derevirn][quote]No. I see no reason to go soft on anyone, if they're being idiots.[/quote]

Can't you just debate politely? That's all I'm asking. I see no reason to call anyone on the forum an idiot...[/quote]

Well if they're being an idiot than it wouldn't be so bad, however nobody in this thread has even come close to displaying idiocy, nowhere even in the same city as idiocy. I think he may have been referring to the parents who are brainwashing their kids though.

"I see no reason to call anyone on the forum an idiot..." So far. ;)

Teaching is brainwashing at that age, really. The difference is mostly in the content. Generally, in schools, the things that are being taught are facts or techniques that don't have any controversy with them. Teaching how to read and write doesn't really carry any fallacicious or possibly fallacious information, it's learning a skill. The problem comes when you're teaching things that don't have any merit. It's the responsibility of the adults, who do have the capacity to reason and investigate, to make sure that the information getting to the kids are verifiable. That said, skepticism and question-asking should be encouraged behavior in schools, and I don't think it always is.

Good point (about all teaching at that age being brainwashing, at least to a certain extent), but I agree with your earlier point that brainwashing is in the methodology. Writing and reading certainly were probably very bad examples. They are fundamentally different than religious teachings. But don't you think how the information about religion is presented to the child determines whether or not it's brainwashing, the methodology?

Probably. But I imagine that very few pastors tell their congregations to go look and see what evidence there is for god or Jesus, or give reason based in fact and observable or repeatable data. If they presented these ideas to their congregations as an idea that they need to go out and confirm against reality, it wouldn't be brainwashing. But you'll be hard pressed to find clergy in most sects that will do this - it's not productive to keeping the numbers up. People are taught that this is truth from a young age when there's not a foundation in fact and evidence for their claims. They are taught to believe in it despite what the world around points out.

I think it's important for you guys to define the terms in a debate like this. Brainwashing involves coercion, not all lessons taught to children are coercive or forced.

I feel that any sort of religious teaching which is biased towards one religion is brainwashing. Shit, any teaching of bias at that young age is brainwashing. See, children at infantile ages are programed to learn from their parents, and to accept their statements as truth. This is how they learn to not kill themselves, to live properly. Mother tells you 'no don't touch that stove it's hot!' you obey. Tells you 'don't get too close to the edge, you'll fall!' you obey. Tells you 'God will only accept you if you believe in jesus christ' you obey. See it's brainwashing once it becomes something that isn't true, and generally deals with opinions being passed as fact. If your parents don't tell you that God may be fake, they're brainwashing you to believe that God is not fake, and never could be. Yes, atheists still emerge even at young ages like I did myself, but this wasn't from my mother's lack of religious teaching, it's because I couldn't believe it. It didn't make sense to me. My brother raised nearly identically, only two years older than me, and on par intellectually as me, believes. He's not devout by a long shot but he does believe that a man named jesus christ died for his sins. I looked him in the face and said 'there's no way you can seriously tell me you believe some man was crucified to save you' he looked at me dumbly and said 'that's what mom and I believe...' The fact that some of us break free from the brainwashing doesn't mean that it isn't, it means that we're more inquisitive and ultimately more analytical. I felt bad for not believing what I was told. That's brainwashing, that I felt like a fucking whore, or something simmilar for not believing what I was told. That is brainwashing, and I wasn't even a child to a pastor's wife, my mother rarely showed her religion sans minor religious talks with my grandparents. Yes, indoctrination without explaining that it's a theory is brainwashing.

Right on.

I agree to some extent.

<3