The Instigator
devient.genie
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
RationalMadman
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Scaring young children with stories of hell is child abuse

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
RationalMadman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/25/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,641 times Debate No: 28634
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (16)
Votes (4)

 

devient.genie

Pro

When you tell a young child that if they commit one of hundreds of mistakes, labeled sins, during their life, they face eternal damnation in a scary place described as hell, you are in fact abusing your child.

Its called mental abuse and unlike physical abuse, there are no visible bruises or breaks.

The longtime effects of such abuse may never be visible, except in the tortured mind of the victim.

So that is why scaring children with stories of hell, is in fact mental abuse to a child.

What that means is, parents who share this delsuional view of reality that there is a hell and the reason for everything in the world is admittingly jealous, are creating unecessary stress, and fear, all because the delusions in religion have control of their mind :(
RationalMadman

Con

Scaring young children with stories of hell isn't child abuse, it is only abusive when you insist the stories are non-fiction.
Debate Round No. 1
devient.genie

Pro

Lets at least do our best to use logic, reason, and ultimately, the probability that something is true, and it will be clear to everyone, scaring young children with stories of hell is child abuse.

More unfortunaltely though, stories of hell is abuse to their childhood, the most important learning and discovering time of their lives. Stories of hell are poisons, one of many posions spewed by those who consider themselves religious.

I set you up for failure. This was over before it started.

Now any sane person will tell you that you can NOT put a number on how many children need to be damaged before the words or actions of an adult are abuse. 1 child equals mental abuse Example: Jane Doe is told at a very, very young age that sinners go to hell, and if you dont follow a certain doctrine, you will go to hell if you were to follow one of thousands of other doctrines.

So as a young child when you hear these things, are taught these things, and are ultimetely poisoned with by religious leaders, leads to nightmares for various reasons.

However since it only takes one child to be abused, whether physically or mentally, in order for abuse to have taken place, lets get to why you were set up for failure :)

"I was reminded of the incident later when I received a letter from an American woman in her forties who had been brought up Roman Catholic. At the age of seven, she told me, two unpleasant things had happened to her. She was sexually abused by her parish priest in his car. And, around the same time, a little schoolfriend of hers, who had tragically died, went to hell because she was a Protestant. Or so my correspondent had been led to believe by the then official doctrine of her parents" church. Her view as a mature adult was that, of these two examples of Roman Catholic child abuse, the one physical and the other mental, the second was by far the worst. She wrote"..........Richard Dawkins

http://richarddawkins.net...#

Now after reviewing the empirical evidence that scaring young children with stories of hell is child abuse, we see also empirical evidence that anymore than two rounds would be redundant.

Not only has one child been proven to suffer long term effects because of her belief in hell, she felt it worse than her physical abuse at the hands of a trusted adult.

Now any sane person will tell you that of the millions and millions of adults following doctrine that makes them believe in a hell for mistakes labeled sins, there are hundreds if not the probability of thousands of children suffer unecessarily, until the delusion they are poisoned with, is corroded away by empirical scientific evidence.

Once a human admits that science is Not the devil and Not involved in a conspiracy, we call them sane.

Insane people who insist that science is either the devil or a huge conspiracy, are delusional, everyone can agree to that. Why is it that those who believe that the reason for everything is admittingly jealous, somehow posess moral excellence?

Such questions inspire big kid stuff. So with out further ado, our sponsors present, Big Kids Stuff :)

DevientGenie 2:7--For those who are smarty pants, the Genie is not deviant, the second 'e' is testament to that fact. He is merely splashing a glass of ice water on the world :)

CaptainObvious 1:4--The planet earth is covered with 70% water. Of the remaining 30%, you have desert and mountains and other non livable areas, so about 15% of earths surface is actually livable. Why? Poor design or poor designer? Birth defects have been around since the beginning of time, but why, poor design or poor designer?

CaptainObvious 1:35--Genetics is the science of genes, heredity, and variation in living organisms, DNA is an informational molecule encoding the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all known living organisms and many viruses. Fractal Geometry is the geometry of fractals, Quantum Physics is a branch of physics dealing with physical phenomena at microscopic scales, where the action is on the order of the Planck constant. Quantum mechanics departs from classical mechanics primarily at the quantum realm of atomic and subatomic length scales. Quantum mechanics provides a mathematical description of much of the dual particle-like and wave-like behavior and interactions of energy and matter, all these things were unknown to Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Charles Darwin and all ancient people. These discoveries make it painfully obvious that the reason for everything is NOT admittingly jealous and interested in your sex life and convicting you of thought crimes :)

GAMEOVER 10:26--The Theory of Evolution is just like the Theory of Gravity, testable, repeatable, falsifiable, and fits known empirical evidence. Advocating intellectual honesty, is the single most corrosive thing for religious dogma :)

DevientGenie 11:56--Lets look at some basic differences. Cristian Leaders Institute-- "We use the term home discipleship to accent the point that when the home is strong and supported in walking with god, the church prospers". Science-- We use the term empirical to accent the point that when evidence is strong, and supported by years of testing, mankind prospers :)

Bigotry 11:14--Atheist is a bogus word. There is No word for someone who does Not believe in astrology or horoscopes, there is Not a name for someone who doesnt believe leprechauns are at the end of rainbows, there is Not a name for a person who does not believe there is a tea pot orbiting the andromeda galaxy. Why is there a name for someone who does Not believe the reason for everything is a homophobe :)

GrowUp 16:1--The best words for "nonbelievers" in leprechauns at the end of rainbows, are sane and logical, the same words should be used for those who are nonbelievers that the reason for everything rested on the 7th day and can convict you of thought crimes :)

Despicable 9:38--What is a surefire way to slow down the growth of human conciousness on society as a whole? You admonish scientific, mathematically sound evidence, instead favoring one of thousands of religious texts from thousands of years ago as a better way of viewing reality and you are guaranteed divisiveness which leads to violence :)

EgoManiacs 9:27--The holy binky DOES NOT own the rights to another existance just because they "called it first". The Higgs Boson was just discovered in July 2012. It was thought to be non existant when suggested in 1964 by Peter Higgs. It is going to help science unlock and understand other dimensions of reality. Science will always win because thats what the good guys always do :)

Delusional 9:16--44% of Americans believe god literally gave the land of israel to the jews. Awwww, he's also a real estate broker how cute :)

STUDS 7:58--"Mathematics, rightly viewed, possesses not only truth, but supreme beauty " a beauty cold and austere, like that of sculpture, without appeal to any part of our weaker nature, without the gorgeous trappings of painting or music, yet sublimely pure, and capable of a stern perfection such as only the greatest art can show,"--Bertrand Russell, He couldnt be more right :)

QUESTIONS 7:6--Why is it that people who think Elvis or Tupac are alive, we consider delusional, yet people who think that the reason for everything can convict you of thought crimes, those people somehow posess moral excellence? :)

CaptainObvious 2:3--Science cannot prove or disprove a slave supporting sexist who is admittingly jealous and can convict you of thought crimes, anymore than science can prove leprechauns at the end of rainbows. Those things seems a bit far fetched for a thinking person and are therefore called statistical improbabilities amongst not only the most brilliant minds of today, but millions and a growing number, of other FREE THINKERS :).

The preceeding true scripture is brought to you by our faithful sponsors, CHECK and MATE :)
RationalMadman

Con

If you tell our child the bible is just a best-selling novel and read it to them as such then in no way whatsoever is stories of hell child abuse any more than seeing a villain in a cartoon burning people is child abuse. It's all about context, you failed to deny this and therefore I must declare a vote for Con.

I don't care if you vote pro though, his point is valid only if the nature of telling is that of 'truth'.
Debate Round No. 2
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by devient.genie 4 years ago
devient.genie
sure, Im not splitting hairs and saying that religion is the only poison in the world. Such arrogance would make me religious :)

Im saying that religion is the single most destructive poison because it causes atrophy of a childs intuition, intellect and instinct, it discourages free thought, it divides, and excludes and even denys human rights, all here in the United States in 2013, bigotry still survives everyday homosexuality is denied the same rights those who claim moral excellence have in a court of law :)

Misogyny 2:12--"I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent." (1 Timothy 2:12)

Quotes 5:21--A pessimist is a man who thinks all women are bad. An optimist is one who hopes they are--Chauncey Depew :)

Cristian Leaders Institute-- "We use the term home discipleship to accent the point that when the home is strong and supported in walking with god, the church prospers". (check their website)

Science-- We use the term empirical to accent the point that when evidence is strong, and supported by years of testing, mankind prospers :)

CaptainObvious 10:22--Obviously there is a reason for everything, however defining it with unequivical evidence and proof that you know absolutely, the big reason out of the trillions of possiblitites, the reason for everything, involves ritualistic practices, not limited too, human sacrifice on a cross, and is personal to the point of keeping track of who is naughty or nice. This reason for everything is also responsible for the complex make up of the universe, and the beautiful, complex and extremely efficient sub atomic world of particle physics, and is concerned with your sex life......really? Do you lose your common sense after dismissing zeus and mythology? Does your common sense disappear when it comes to flying horses called unicorns or leprechauns, no, it works fine there, it only goes away when you say the reason for life is admittedlly jealous :)
Posted by CelticStar 4 years ago
CelticStar
What about things like Halloween or horror stories? Couldn't those also be considered child abuse in some instances then, since they revolve around scaring people...including children?
Posted by devient.genie 4 years ago
devient.genie
There;s no crying in baseball. You know that already. Walk It Off :)

Now back to big kids stuff :)

It was quicksand from jump street. Scaring young children with stories of hell is child abuse :)

RIDDLES 6:66--The boogey man goes into a bar orders a few drinks, then a few more, gets drunk and stumbles around, whilst his drunkeness he finds god in the corner. He is so drunk he tells god.."As the Boogey Man I have done more good, produced the most benefits,(hiccup) and been the best overall blessing for this world than anything or anyone"...(Burp)..god replied "my son in your drunkeness you are a silly fool, for I am all highest of all those things, just read the bible. The Boogey Man said.."I meant to say that I am the biggest a-hole (hiccup) and meansest sexist S.O.B in all the universe...(Burp)..My son in your drunkeness you are a silly fool, for I am all highest of all those things, just read the bible :)

LOVE 8:14--What does a stalker do, that the main character in the holy binky does?....They put you on a pedestal, but then once they're rejected, its anger, and rage :)
Posted by RationalMadman 4 years ago
RationalMadman
shut up and and accept your defeat like a true warrior of debate.
Posted by devient.genie 4 years ago
devient.genie
Vote Placed by KeytarHero, it was an ambush boobie trap. It was over before it started :)

"Good people will do good things, and bad people will do bad things. But for good people to do bad things -- that takes religion."
-- Steven Weinberg

How is that possible?

Otherwise good people, for example, pull the "yes" lever on ballot measures aimed at denying certain folks the same rights they (otherwise good people) freely enjoy or they help AIDS spread because their religion instructs them to do so in the name of god :)

Hence, religion making otherwise good people do bad things :)
Posted by devient.genie 4 years ago
devient.genie
Vote Placed by KeytarHero, it was an ambush boobie trap. It was over before it started :)

"Good people will do good things, and bad people will do bad things. But for good people to do bad things -- that takes religion."
-- Steven Weinberg

How is that possible?

Otherwise good people, for example, pull the "yes" lever on ballot measures aimed at denying certain folks the same rights they (otherwise good people) freely enjoy or they help AIDS spread because their religion instructs them to do so in the name of god :)

Hence, religion making otherwise good people do bad things :)
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
likespeace wrote:
: While Pro has made a good case for the narrower claim that scaring children with stories of Hell,
: presented as non-fiction, constitutes child abuse.. he did not defend his broader claim that appear in
: both the title and his round one argument.. from Con's rebuttal.

Pro never claimed that _all_ stories about Hell are child abuse. Nor does his OP suggest that the abusive stories are presented as fictional. Pro doesn't say that children are abused by being told that they _won't really_ go to a _ficional_ Hell. He's clearly saying that teaching kids that Hell is real is what's abusive.
Posted by devient.genie 4 years ago
devient.genie
What needs to be taken into consideration, is the abuse happens to all children who wholeheartedly believe sinners and those who do not follow a certain doctrine, are going to burn in hell :)

Abuse is the constant in the equation, the variable is the severity, or duration of effects. So just because "sticks and stones break my bones but words will never hurt me", works on the playground, when a parent, teacher, or religious leader uses words that threaten eternal damnation, those words are mental abuse :)

Soldiers 10:4--Don"t make mistakes. It is a battle. Religious leaders from all religions realize that the more you know, the more educated you are, the more you understand this world we live in - the chances you will become non-religious are greatly increasing. This is not just a statement. It is backed up by various studies, that show the correlation between the level of education and religious disbelief. Therefore these leaders want you to live in the dark. They don"t want you to understand science, they don"t want you to study and research the yet unknown phenomena of this world. They are afraid that they will lose their grip on you, so they scare you with fables about hell :)

FourHorsemen 3:15--Science we are told should NOT tread on the toes of theology. But why should scientists tiptoe respectfully away? Its time for people of reason to stand up, and say enough is enough. Religious FAITH discourages independant thought, its divisive and its dangerous--Richard Dawkins :)

STUDS 7:2--Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science "to support scientific education, critical thinking and evidence-based understanding of the natural world in the quest to overcome religious fundamentalism, superstition, intolerance and suffering." :)

DevientGenie 8:22--Believers in a god do good for the sake of getting a reward and avoiding punishment after death, non believers in Bronze Aged fiction, do good becasue theyre nice :)
Posted by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
: likespeace, thats the whole problem. Its Not presented as fiction in millions of homes, and those children are being poisoned mentally.

You made a strong case for that, but your title and round one claims were broader.

:Pro claims that (sometimes) stories of Hellfire are child abuse.

Pro made the broader claim: "So that is why scaring children with stories of hell, is in fact mental abuse to a child." Con then identified an apparent hole in the that claim--scaring children with stories of Hell, presented as fiction, does not appear to constitute child abuse.

While Pro has made a good case for the narrower claim that scaring children with stories of Hell, presented as non-fiction, constitutes child abuse.. he did not defend his broader claim that appear in both the title and his round one argument.. from Con's rebuttal.
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
Philochristos wrote:
: Con answered that it's only child abuse if it's not true, but you make them believe it anyway. Pro
: could've responded by either showing that hell is false or that it's irrelevant whether it's true or not. He
: didn't do either.

He didn't do either because he didn't have to. Pro claims that (sometimes) stories of Hellfire are child abuse. Con's point that (sometimes) they are not is not a refutation or a contradiction or even a disagreement. Pro doesn't need to respond.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by KeytarHero 4 years ago
KeytarHero
devient.genieRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Disappointing debate. Pro conceded that he set Con up for failure before they even began (which he really didn't), but since he attempted to, conduct to Con. Con's argument was short, but his points went un-refuted. That, mixed with the fact that Pro never supported his own resolution, even right from the start, gives arguments to Con.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
devient.genieRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro says that scaring children with stories of Hellfire is child abuse. Con says that sometimes it isn't. That's not a refutation. It isn't even disagreeing. Con agrees that sometimes scaring children with stories of Hellfire is child abuse, which is all that Pro undertook to prove. Con agrees with Pro. Pro wins.
Vote Placed by philochristos 4 years ago
philochristos
devient.genieRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Basically, Pro's argument was that telling kids about hell scares them, and scaring people is child abuse. Con answered that it's only child abuse if it's not true, but you make them believe it anyway. Pro could've responded by either showing that hell is false or that it's irrelevant whether it's true or not. He didn't do either. Instead, he just reasserted that it scares people. Then he rambled on and on about irrelevant stuff. Finally, Con argued that if the stories are presented as stories, and not as realities, then that's not child abuse either. Another good point. Arguments clearly go to Con.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
devient.genieRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: pro seemed more preoccupied with shitting on god then debating the resolution, so since pro failed to meet his burden of proof to even begin to argue why stories of hell is child abuse, arguments go to the con.