Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

A truly Christian school...!

Control of behaviour according to mysticism and religious dogma is OK ?
In order to answer your question, I require more specificity.

Are you asking about all religious dogmas, or only a specific subset?

Are you asking about all manifestastions of behaviour control,(i.e. external, internal, voluntary, involuntary) ?
If not, to which manifestation/s does your enquiry pertain?
 
In order to answer your question, I require more specificity.

Are you asking about all religious dogmas, or only a specific subset?

Are you asking about all manifestastions of behaviour control,(i.e. external, internal, voluntary, involuntary) ?
If not, to which manifestation/s does your enquiry pertain?

Lets just say continued membership of and allegiance to a particular mass religion like Islam or Christianity.
 
Lets just say continued membership of and allegiance to a particular mass religion like Islam or Christianity.
Over the years, I have known a few Muslims, and many Christians.

The only times I experienced cause for concern, were on those few (fortunately rare) occasions, when I encountered some practitioners whom had somehow managed to delude themselves into believing that they had the right to impose their chosen religion upon others.
 
when I encountered some practitioners whom had somehow managed to delude themselves into believing that they had the right to impose their chosen religion upon others.

That seems to be the practise of most parents with strong religious beliefs.
 
That seems to be the practise of most parents with strong religious beliefs.
My understanding of healthy parents is, that they will generally operate in accordance with their beliefs, about those things that they perceive to be most beneficial for the children they raise.

Are you contesting their right to do so?

If yes, how is that not tantamount to imposing your dogma upon others?
 
My understanding of healthy parents is, that they will generally operate in accordance with their beliefs, about those things that they perceive to be most beneficial for the children they raise.

Are you contesting their right to do so?

You think parents have the right to decide who their children will marry ?
 
I ask again, are you contesting their right to do so?
If so, how is that not tantamount to imposing your dogma upon others?

Of course I'm contesting a parents right to decide who their children will marry.

Aren't you ?
 
Of course I'm contesting a parents right to decide who their children will marry.

Aren't you ?
Not at all! What I am contesting, is your presumption to having the right, to tell other families, that you know better than they, how their children ought, or ought not, be raised.

Whose children are we talking about, and who is ultimately accountable for the welfare of those children, the parents or Sir Rumpole?

My personal views on specific parental practices such as betrothal, breast feeding, circumcision, vaccination, corporal punishment etc. are, to my understanding, a separate matter, to the actual issue being discussed here.
 
Not at all! What I am contesting, is your presumption to having the right, to tell other families, that you know better than they, how their children ought, or ought not, be raised.

When it comes to fundamental matters of human rights the law of the land dictates what parents can or can't do as far as their children are concerned.

Do you object to that ?

Secondly if parents want to send their children to a religious school, fine as long as they pay for it themselves.
 
When it comes to fundamental matters of human rights the law of the land dictates what parents can or can't do as far as their children are concerned.

Do you object to that ?
Before moving onto the opening of that particular tin of worms, do you think you could maybe find the time to answer the last couple of questions I posed to yourself?
Secondly if parents want to send their children to a religious school, fine as long as they pay for it themselves.
Do you believe that those institutions, easing the burden on public facilities, are not entitled to some recompense, in recognition of their contribution to our society?
 
Before moving onto the opening of that particular tin of worms, do you think you could maybe find the time to answer the last couple of questions I posed to yourself?

I have answered your questions. If you fail to interpret my answers to your satisfaction that is not my problem.
 
Do you believe that those institutions, easing the burden on public facilities, are not entitled to some recompense, in recognition of their contribution to our society?

Scientology is classified as a religion in Australia. Should we pay them for educating children ?
 
I have answered your questions. If you fail to interpret my answers to your satisfaction that is not my problem.
Where in this thread may I find your answers to the following?:
...
If so, how is that not tantamount to imposing your dogma upon others?
...

Whose children are we talking about, and who is ultimately accountable for the welfare of those children, the parents or Sir Rumpole?
...
 
Scientology is classified as a religion in Australia. Should we pay them for educating children ?
By educating their children are they easing the burden on the public school system?
If so, then by what right can anyone begrudge them some recompense?
 
By educating their children are they easing the burden on the public school system?
If so, then by what right can anyone begrudge them some recompense?

We expect children to be educated with evidence and critical thinking, not voodoo, prejudice and mysticism.
 
Top