Hi PvM,
Dawkins is making a testable claim about our world: "It's a form of child abuse, even worse than physical child abuse." Dawkins has also claimed that Catholic children being taught about hell is worse than sexual abuse. He claims that labeling a child as a 'Christian' or 'Muslim' is child abuse. Does science support these sensational, malicious accusations? No.
Science has shown the physical and sexual abuse of children stongly predict a negative adult outcome in terms of mental and physical health:
"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.)"
In fact, the development of the human brain is so sensitive during childhood development that even emotional abuse and simple neglect have a similar effect:
"OBJECTIVE: There were two aims to this study: first to examine whether emotional abuse and neglect are significant predictors of psychological and somatic symptoms, and lifetime trauma exposure in women presenting to a primary care practice, and second to examine the strength of these relationships after controlling for the effects of other types of childhood abuse and trauma. METHOD: Two-hundred and five women completed the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (Bernstein et al., 1994), Trauma History Questionnaire (Green, 1996), the Symptom Checklist-revised (Derogatis, 1997), and the Revised Civilian Mississippi Scale for posttraumatic stress disorder (Norris & Perilla, 1996) when presenting to their primary care physician for a visit. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine unique contributions of emotional abuse and neglect variables on symptom measures while controlling for childhood sexual and physical abuse and lifetime trauma exposure. RESULTS: A history of emotional abuse and neglect was associated with increased anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress and physical symptoms, as well as lifetime trauma exposure. Physical and sexual abuse and lifetime trauma were also significant predictors of physical and psychological symptoms. Hierarchical multiple regressions demonstrated that emotional abuse and neglect predicted symptomatology in these women even when controlling for other types of abuse and lifetime trauma exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Long-standing behavioral consequences may arise as a result of childhood emotional abuse and neglect, specifically, poorer emotional and physical functioning, and vulnerability to further trauma exposure. (Spertus IL, Yehuda R, Wong CM, Halligan S, Seremetis SV. 2003. Childhood emotional abuse and neglect as predictors of psychological and physical symptoms in women presenting to a primary care practice. Child Abuse Negl. 27:1247-58)."
So it's time to think. Think like a scientist.
Science has shown that a history of physical, sexual, and emotional child abuse, along with neglect, predicts emotional and physical problems later in life.
Dawkins claims that children being taught about hell is worse than physical and sexual abuse.
We would thus predict that adults who were taught about hell as children (and this was the only form of "abuse") would show increased anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress and physical symptoms. In other words, 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.
There is no scientific evidence to support this prediction. Shall we abandon science or abandon Dawkin's bigoted notion? Your choice, PvM.
Furthermore, there is abundant scientific evidence that indicates a deeply religious upbringing has a positive emotional and physical effect on development. Why ignore this?
And then there is the brutal irony.
"Self-esteem is often lower among persons who have experienced trauma, but religiosity may ameliorate these psychological effects. The purpose of this paper was to examine the relationships among religiosity, self-esteem, and childhood exposure to trauma, utilizing data from the National Comorbidity Survey, a large (N = 8,098) nationally representative population survey in the 48 contiguous states of the USA that assessed religious practices, self-esteem, and exposure to trauma. Exposure to trauma in childhood was assessed through self-report of presence or absence of childhood physical abuse, sexual abuse, or neglect. Religiosity was assessed as the sum of responses to 4 self-report items (religious service attendance, use of religion for comfort and guidance, and importance of religion). Self-esteem was assessed on 9 self-report items adapted from the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Analysis of variance compared scores for persons who reported exposure to childhood abuse and differed in the value they placed on various religious practices on self-esteem. Persons who reported physical abuse, sexual abuse, or neglect in childhood had significantly lower mean self-esteem than those who did not report these events. There was also a main effect for religiosity in a comparison of persons who reported childhood sexual abuse with those who reported none. The High Religiosity group had higher mean self-esteem than the Medium and Low Religiosity groups. There was a significant interaction as those who reported childhood sexual abuse had lower mean self-esteem than peers who reported none in the Low and Medium Religiosity groups. Mean self-esteem for those who reported childhood sexual abuse was comparable to that of those who reported none in the High Religiosity group. (Reiland S, Lauterbach D. 2008. Effects of trauma and religiosity on self-esteem. Psychol Rep. 102:779-90."
In other words, the very thing that can help protect a child against the effects of child abuse is something Dawkins would label as child abuse. How cruel.
--Mike
Sigh... You and Dawkins make a wonderful couple
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 9:17 PM, Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com> wrote:
I've long said that the New Atheist movement is the mirror image of an fundamentalist, religious movement. Thus, it should surprise anyone that Richard Dawkins is now attacking.....Harry Potter:
What's of more concern is that Dawkins still seems obsessed with peddling his pseudoscientific bigotry:
""It is evil to describe a child as a Muslim child or a Christian child. I think labelling children is child abuse and I think there is a very heavy issue, for example, about teaching about hell and torturing their minds with hell.
"It's a form of child abuse, even worse than physical child abuse."
So in the ethical world of Dawkins, it is better to break a child's jaw than to expose the child to Catholic teaching about hell. That's just sick.
- Mike Gene
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Nov 8 14:31:43 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Nov 08 2008 - 14:31:43 EST