RE: [asa] Dawkins is at it again

Schwarzwald said: "The bottom line simply doesn't work."

Then I guess we will agree to disagree.

I understand Dawkins completely. I disagree with his conclusion, but I can see what he means by the 'child abuse' statement. If it turns out that there is no God, and all us Christian are deluded, then I agree with Dawkins that children and others have been unnecessarily damaged.

...Bernie

________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Schwarzwald
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 3:48 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Dawkins is at it again

The bottom line simply doesn't work. As I've pointed out, there are plenty of undeniable (by most atheist and christians alike) facts about the world that would be cruel/abusive to tell a child, especially depending on context. Further, if the cruelty depends on the truth of the matter, then raising a child with atheist beliefs is cruel if there is a God - and no one can say whether or not it's actually cruel, because none of us are privy to that certain and demonstrable knowledge on the question. This before noting the problems with right/wrong or cruel/kind under an atheism-as-true perspective.

And keep in mind that many people who leave one faith or another don't do so entirely because of the faith itself. I'm sure some people may fit the bill, but there are many, many people who are bitter about christianity because of their experience with other christians (hypocrites, etc), with political stances, or otherwise. Mike's done a good job of pointing out where Dawkins' claim must go for it to be true, and why it fails.
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com<mailto:bernie.dehler@intel.com>> wrote:
There are a lot of people who leave Christianity and feel abused by it. Many are quite bitter about it... damaged goods. You can read their "falling away" testimonies here:

http://exchristian.net/

Bottom line- if there's no God- it is cruel to say there's a God who will send you to hell if you don't accept his imaginary son. On the other hand, if there is a God and the gospel is true, a person loses out on an abundant life in Christ if he rejects it.

If someone yells "FIRE" in a movie house during your favorite movie, would you be upset? It all depends- on whether the fire is true or not. If true, you'll thank them. If false, you'll hate them for wrecking the movie. Same exact thing... only different.

...Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu<mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu<mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu>] On Behalf Of Iain Strachan
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 12:24 AM
To: Nucacids
Cc: asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
Subject: Re: [asa] Dawkins is at it again

Mike,

Thanks for presenting this evidence. It confirms what I've known
through empirical observation for a long time; which is why Dawkins's
comments on child-abuse were the most offensive in the entire book as
far as I'm concerned.

In my voluntary work ( a telephone support line for the suicidal) I
get to talk with appalling regularity with people who have been
sexually abused as children. The damage it does is permanent - I do
indeed get to see the lack of self-esteem, the feelings of guilt
(victims often think it's their fault), the depression, the traumatic
flashbacks when the victim re-lives the abuse vividly, and the
suicidal thoughts.

But on the other hand, I can count on the fingers of no hands the
number of times when I've spoken to a person who was traumatized by
being taught about hell.

Dawkins's approach is shameful in this part of his book - as you say,
it ignores the evidence, and, it seems to me, is deliberately using a
highly emotive subject (child abuse) to make his point. I was quite
disgusted by Dawkins's claims, so it's good to see real evidence that
counters it. Dawkins is without excuse for his sloppy scholarship
here.

Regards,
Iain.

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com<mailto:nucacids@wowway.com>> wrote:
> Hi Bernie,
>
>
>
> "If Dawkins was right, then he would have a very good point. If there was
> no God heaven, or hell, then it could be mental torture on kids."
>
>
>
> This is incorrect. Real child abuse and mental torture bring about changes
> in the brain and body that are detectable later on in life. For example, if
> you meet or know someone who has a low self-esteem, who has poor social
> skills, who battles depression, and who suffers from a variety of ailments
> (migraines, skin problems, digestive problems, anxiety issues, etc.),
> chances are good that this person was abused as a child. But don't take my
> word for it, look to science:
>
>
>
> "Childhood maltreatment strongly predicts poor psychiatric and physical
> health outcomes in adulthood. This overview of the literature shows that
> individuals who suffer abuse, neglect, or serious family dysfunction as
> children are more likely to be depressed, to experience other types of
> psychiatric illness, to have more physical symptoms (both medically
> explained and unexplained), and to engage in more health-risk behaviors than
> their nonabused counterparts. (Arnow BA. 2004. Relationships between
> childhood maltreatment, adult health and psychiatric outcomes, and medical
> utilization. J Clin Psychiatry. 65 Suppl 12:10-5.)"
>
>
>
> There is no evidence that teaching children about hell results in these
> adult outcomes. Dawkins, writing as the Professor for the Public
> Understanding of Science, ignores the extensive scientific literature on
> child abuse and its effects. What's more, there is also a large body of
> scientific evidence that shows a religious upbringing is psychologically and
> developmentally positive. An there are studies which show religious people
> are less likely to engage in child abuse:
>
> "Religiosity and the socioemotional adjustment of adolescent mothers and
> their children.Carothers SS, Borkowski JG, Lefever JB, Whitman TL.
> J Fam Psychol. 2005 Jun;19(2):263-75.
>
> This study assessed the impact of religiosity on the socioemotional and
> behavioral outcomes of 91 adolescent mothers and their offspring over 10
> years. Religiosity was defined as involvement in church and contact with and
> dependence on church officials and members. Mothers classified as high in
> religious involvement had significantly higher self-esteem and lower
> depression scores, exhibited less child abuse potential, and had higher
> occupational and educational attainment than mothers classified as low in
> religious involvement; differences remained when multiple factors, such as
> stress and grandmother support, were held constant. Children with more
> religious mothers had fewer internalizing and externalizing problems at 10
> years of age, with maternal adjustment mediating this relationship.
> Religiosity, through increased social support, served as a protective factor
> for teenaged mothers and their children."
>
> Dawkins also ignores these data.
>
> Thus, there is a profound hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty in Dawkins
> message. On one hand, he claims science has disproven the existence of God,
> yet there are no scientific studies that attempt to determine whether or not
> God exists. On the other hand, there are plenty of scientific studies that
> undercut his "religious upbringing as child abuse" message, and the
> scientist ignores these.
>
> What he instead offers in his book is rhetoric and anecdote. He tells the
> story about a letter he received from some unknown woman who got over her
> sexual abuse, but is still tormented by hell beliefs. Of course, there is
> no effort to substantiate this account; Dawkins trusts it on blind faith.
> But even if the story is true, I'd bet this woman has many monsters in her
> past and her mind has decided to "blame hell" as a defensive mechanism. It's
> often easier to lash out at an idea than relive the hellish experience that
> can come from *people.*
>
> Bottom line: Even if hell does not exist, there is no evidence that such
> belief generates the effects typically associated with child abuse.
> Furthermore, there is plenty of evidence that strong religiosity during
> childhood has a positive effect on development.
>
> -Mike
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dehler, Bernie
> To: asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 11:54 AM
> Subject: RE: [asa] Dawkins is at it again
>
> If Dawkins was right, then he would have a very good point. If there was no
> God heaven, or hell, then it could be mental torture on kids. However, if
> Dawkins is wrong, then he'll burn in hell for it... likely... but that would be
> God's call.
>
>
>
> ...Bernie
>
>

--
-----------
Non timeo sed caveo
-----------
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.