Total Posts:48|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

For Parents:

DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 7:14:34 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
As a born-again, Bible believing Christian I, of course, believe the doctrine that we are all born sinful.
If I'm honest, however, I still like to think that kids are 'little angels' etc as much as the next man/woman.

BUT: At work last week I overheard a conversation where a father (not a Christian) was relating how his infant son, who signals his need of the 'potty' (baby toilet; don't know what you Americans call 'em) by pointing to his penis, HAS already learned the trick of pointing when he DOESN'T actually need to urinate etc BUT just wants out of his play-pen or whatever..

SO: Do any of you, who are parents, have similar stories of how we do NOT have to be taught to lie/deceive etc?
The Cross.. the Cross.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 1:03:59 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 9:34:19 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
I'm no parent, but I'm guessing children are more shrewd than we think.

*For parents* ~Shrewder than some 'adults' for sure..
The Cross.. the Cross.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 7:40:27 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
There's nothing inherently immoral about lying. We lie to people all the time. If you've ever worked in an office, or been a part of a higher social class, you realize that a social mask is almost mandatory.

A kid lying to his parents is seen as immoral because it robs the parent of information he needs to care for the child.

A government agent lying to a terrorist and saying that he doesn't know anything might save his life and his country.

Doctors use the placebo effect and it has a pretty significant mind over matter impact on the body.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 10:54:02 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Placebo isn't lying, it's withholding information. Actual lying is only justifiable when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 11:05:16 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 10:54:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Actual lying is only justifiable when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Lying is justifiable a lot more times than just "...when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 11:05:48 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 11:05:16 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/5/2009 10:54:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Actual lying is only justifiable when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Lying is justifiable a lot more times than just "...when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Such as?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 11:19:17 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 11:05:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:05:16 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/5/2009 10:54:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Actual lying is only justifiable when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Lying is justifiable a lot more times than just "...when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Such as?

-Defending yourself from punishment. If you did something wrong, and get caught, you have to make up a story. And the making up of the story involves lying.

-Defending yourself from your girlfriend. They need to know everything. A lie here or there doesn't hurt. "What you don't know, what hurt ya."

-Just saving your own a$$ in general.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 11:25:17 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 11:19:17 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:05:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:05:16 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/5/2009 10:54:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Actual lying is only justifiable when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Lying is justifiable a lot more times than just "...when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Such as?

-Defending yourself from punishment. If you did something wrong, and get caught, you have to make up a story. And the making up of the story involves lying.
Key word JUSTIFIABLE. It is not justifiable to avoid punishment if the act the punishment is for is actually wrong in a sense that justifies punishment. To claim it is is to claim punishment is both just and unjust.

-Defending yourself from your girlfriend. They need to know everything. A lie here or there doesn't hurt. "What you don't know, what hurt ya."
What a terrible thing to build a relationship on. Why would you want the meaning of your every moment with someone you love to be built on the premise of offering your falsehood to their stupidity? How could you have any respect for yourself if that's the thing your emotions draw you to?


-Just saving your own a$$ in general.
Saving yourself from yourself?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Rezzealaux
Posts: 2,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 11:34:28 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 11:25:17 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:19:17 PM, Nags wrote:
-Defending yourself from your girlfriend. They need to know everything. A lie here or there doesn't hurt. "What you don't know, what hurt ya."
What a terrible thing to build a relationship on. Why would you want the meaning of your every moment with someone you love to be built on the premise of offering your falsehood to their stupidity? How could you have any respect for yourself if that's the thing your emotions draw you to?

I agree with this.
: If you weren't new here, you'd know not to feed me such attention. This is like an orgasm in my brain right now. *hehe, my name is in a title, hehe* (http://www.debate.org...)

Just in case I get into some BS with FREEDO again about how he's NOT a narcissist.

"The law is there to destroy evil under the constitutional government."
So... what's there to destroy evil inside of and above the constitutional government?
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 11:37:46 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 11:25:17 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:19:17 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:05:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:05:16 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/5/2009 10:54:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Actual lying is only justifiable when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Lying is justifiable a lot more times than just "...when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Such as?

-Defending yourself from punishment. If you did something wrong, and get caught, you have to make up a story. And the making up of the story involves lying.
Key word JUSTIFIABLE. It is not justifiable to avoid punishment if the act the punishment is for is actually wrong in a sense that justifies punishment. To claim it is is to claim punishment is both just and unjust.
-It is justifiable from my view, but not from the punisher's view.
-Defending yourself from your girlfriend. They need to know everything. A lie here or there doesn't hurt. "What you don't know, what hurt ya."
What a terrible thing to build a relationship on. Why would you want the meaning of your every moment with someone you love to be built on the premise of offering your falsehood to their stupidity? How could you have any respect for yourself if that's the thing your emotions draw you to?
-Have you ever had a girlfriend before? And they are little fibs or white lies, it's not like I'm leading a double life.
-Just saving your own a$$ in general.
Saving yourself from yourself?
-HA HA... ha.
sherlockmethod
Posts: 317
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2009 11:50:07 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
DATC,
The child is not lying. The child probably associates pointing toward his penis with getting out of the playpen. He may not associate it with going to the potty, and may, depending on how this situation is handled, associate the potty with going back into the playpen so he avoids it.
1. point to penis get out of playpen
2. potty, go back in playpen
3. point to penis, avoid potty so I do have to go back into the playpen.

We are talking about children here, very young children, and his father's religion has nothing to do with the child wanting out of the playpen and associating an action, pointing, with a desired response ... getting out of the playpen. The child is not capable of lying in any significant sense.
Library cards: Stopping stupid one book at a time.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 8:43:00 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 11:37:46 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:25:17 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:19:17 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:05:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:05:16 PM, Nags wrote:
At 8/5/2009 10:54:02 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Actual lying is only justifiable when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Lying is justifiable a lot more times than just "...when you're defending yourself from the consequences of some other a**holes unjustifiable actions.

Such as?

-Defending yourself from punishment. If you did something wrong, and get caught, you have to make up a story. And the making up of the story involves lying.
Key word JUSTIFIABLE. It is not justifiable to avoid punishment if the act the punishment is for is actually wrong in a sense that justifies punishment. To claim it is is to claim punishment is both just and unjust.
-It is justifiable from my view, but not from the punisher's view.
You already stated your action was wrong.

-Have you ever had a girlfriend before?
That's a complicated question. The best answer is yes, but I've never been within 3000 miles of said girlfriend :).

And they are little fibs or white lies, it's not like I'm leading a double life.
"Whenever you commit the evil of refusing to think and to see, of exempting from the absolute of reality some one small wish of yours, whenever you choose to say: Let me withdraw from judgment the cookies I stole, or the existence of God, or the lie to the one I love, let me have my one irrational whim and I will be a man of reason about all else-- that was the act of subverting your consciousness, the act of corrupting your mind. Your mind then became a fixed jury who takes orders from a secret underworld, whose verdict distorts the evidence to fit an absolute it dares not touch-- and a censored reality is the result, a splintered reality where the bits you chose to see are floating among the chasms of those you didn't, held together by the embalming fluid of the mind which is an emotion exempted from thought."
New addition is in bold :).

-Just saving your own a$$ in general.
Saving yourself from yourself?
-HA HA... ha.
To lie to save yourself from the consequences of your own actions is to first declare yourself an instrument of self-destruction.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 8:49:32 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 8:43:00 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:37:46 PM, Nags wrote:
-It is justifiable from my view, but not from the punisher's view.
You already stated your action was wrong.
-Depending on which way you look at it.
-Have you ever had a girlfriend before?
That's a complicated question. The best answer is yes, but I've never been within 3000 miles of said girlfriend :).
-Lolz, no, that doesn't count.
And they are little fibs or white lies, it's not like I'm leading a double life.
"Whenever you commit the evil of refusing to think and to see, of exempting from the absolute of reality some one small wish of yours, whenever you choose to say: Let me withdraw from judgment the cookies I stole, or the existence of God, or the lie to the one I love, let me have my one irrational whim and I will be a man of reason about all else-- that was the act of subverting your consciousness, the act of corrupting your mind. Your mind then became a fixed jury who takes orders from a secret underworld, whose verdict distorts the evidence to fit an absolute it dares not touch-- and a censored reality is the result, a splintered reality where the bits you chose to see are floating among the chasms of those you didn't, held together by the embalming fluid of the mind which is an emotion exempted from thought."
New addition is in bold :).
-Hmm, that kinda sounds like one of those scriptures that DATC quotes.
-Just saving your own a$$ in general.
Saving yourself from yourself?
-HA HA... ha.
To lie to save yourself from the consequences of your own actions is to first declare yourself an instrument of self-destruction.
-Ehh, no.

I like how you are acting as the Dr. Phil on relationships, when you haven't had a gf within 3,000 miles of you. Which means you've probably never kissed a girl.

Maybe when you get in an actual relationship, you can understand what I'm saying.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 9:29:21 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 8:49:32 AM, Nags wrote:
At 8/6/2009 8:43:00 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:37:46 PM, Nags wrote:
-It is justifiable from my view, but not from the punisher's view.
You already stated your action was wrong.
-Depending on which way you look at it.
Right or wrong don't change when you point your eyes, whether you know them does.

-Hmm, that kinda sounds like one of those scriptures that DATC quotes.
In a sense-- but one that asks for reason, not faith :).

To lie to save yourself from the consequences of your own actions is to first declare yourself an instrument of self-destruction.
-Ehh, no.
How can you be saved from the consequences of your own actions if there isn't anything destructive about them to be saved from?
Or, how can the consequences of your actions be destructive without you being the source?
Or is there something else I'm missing?
"Ehh, no" is not an argument.

I like how you are acting as the Dr. Phil on relationships, when you haven't had a gf within 3,000 miles of you. Which means you've probably never kissed a girl.
I'm not acting as Dr. Phil. Dr Phil would be telling you how to engage in such. I am simply making a statement about how not to. In any case, ad hominem.

Maybe when you get in an actual relationship, you can understand what I'm saying.
Making a relationship physical does not suddenly alter the rules of logic.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 3:34:07 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 7:40:27 PM, Kleptin wrote:
There's nothing inherently immoral about lying. We lie to people all the time. If you've ever worked in an office, or been a part of a higher social class, you realize that a social mask is almost mandatory.

A kid lying to his parents is seen as immoral because it robs the parent of information he needs to care for the child.

A government agent lying to a terrorist and saying that he doesn't know anything might save his life and his country.

Doctors use the placebo effect and it has a pretty significant mind over matter impact on the body.

The fact that 'everyone's at it' does NOT make it right: A lie is a lie.

The fact that 'everyone's at it' ONLY confirms that we are in a fallen creation and are ALL inherently sinful.

The fact that people of a higher class are better liars only shows that this world is run by those who (unknowingly) follow the 'god of this world'.

IF you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free..
WHAT will lies make you?
The Cross.. the Cross.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 3:36:10 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/5/2009 11:50:07 PM, sherlockmethod wrote:
DATC,
The child is not lying. The child probably associates pointing toward his penis with getting out of the playpen. He may not associate it with going to the potty, and may, depending on how this situation is handled, associate the potty with going back into the playpen so he avoids it.
1. point to penis get out of playpen
2. potty, go back in playpen
3. point to penis, avoid potty so I do have to go back into the playpen.

We are talking about children here, very young children, and his father's religion has nothing to do with the child wanting out of the playpen and associating an action, pointing, with a desired response ... getting out of the playpen. The child is not capable of lying in any significant sense.

Yes, the child IS lying.. you are merely describing the water.
I would SOON put a stop to it.
The Cross.. the Cross.
patsox834
Posts: 406
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 4:37:02 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 8:43:00 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
-Have you ever had a girlfriend before?
That's a complicated question. The best answer is yes, but I've never been within 3000 miles of said girlfriend :).

...how does that work?

I feel rather odd asking that.
patsox834
Posts: 406
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 4:37:39 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 8:43:00 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That's a complicated question. The best answer is yes, but I've never been within 3000 miles of said girlfriend :).

...how does that work?

I feel rather odd asking that.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 4:59:34 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 3:36:10 PM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:50:07 PM, sherlockmethod wrote:
DATC,
The child is not lying. The child probably associates pointing toward his penis with getting out of the playpen. He may not associate it with going to the potty, and may, depending on how this situation is handled, associate the potty with going back into the playpen so he avoids it.
1. point to penis get out of playpen
2. potty, go back in playpen
3. point to penis, avoid potty so I do have to go back into the playpen.

We are talking about children here, very young children, and his father's religion has nothing to do with the child wanting out of the playpen and associating an action, pointing, with a desired response ... getting out of the playpen. The child is not capable of lying in any significant sense.

Yes, the child IS lying.. you are merely describing the water.
I would SOON put a stop to it.

No, the child is NOT lying. Scientists have done tests to see if you can get a bird to do irrational things by getting it to associate certain actions with a certain outcome. They got the bird to bob his head and they would then feed the bird. After repeatedly doing this, the bird thought that by bobbing his head, he will be rewarded with food. Just like the child pointing down, he associates that with getting out of the play pen. It's not a lie, it's that a certain action is associated with a certain outcome.

.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 5:39:59 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 4:37:39 PM, patsox834 wrote:
At 8/6/2009 8:43:00 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That's a complicated question. The best answer is yes, but I've never been within 3000 miles of said girlfriend :).

...how does that work?

I feel rather odd asking that.

The same way you have an argument without being within 3000 miles. Basically all interaction is online text.

You know you've broken up when you find that you're blocked from their instant messenger.

Lasted almost a year or so.
On the plus side both parties know that you don't just like each other for bodies/money/whatever. ^_^
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 6:01:20 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 4:59:34 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:

No, the child is NOT lying. Scientists have done tests to see if you can get a bird to do irrational things by getting it to associate certain actions with a certain outcome. They got the bird to bob his head and they would then feed the bird. After repeatedly doing this, the bird thought that by bobbing his head, he will be rewarded with food. Just like the child pointing down, he associates that with getting out of the play pen. It's not a lie, it's that a certain action is associated with a certain outcome.

Words you are looking for are operant conditioning. Full bladder + pointing = reward (initially releasing bladder) - pointing becomes positively reinforced because the child is removed, so the behaviour (pointing) increases.
leet4A1
Posts: 1,986
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 6:16:20 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 5:39:59 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/6/2009 4:37:39 PM, patsox834 wrote:
At 8/6/2009 8:43:00 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That's a complicated question. The best answer is yes, but I've never been within 3000 miles of said girlfriend :).

...how does that work?

I feel rather odd asking that.

The same way you have an argument without being within 3000 miles. Basically all interaction is online text.

You know you've broken up when you find that you're blocked from their instant messenger.

Lasted almost a year or so.
On the plus side both parties know that you don't just like each other for bodies/money/whatever. ^_^

This is interesting to say the least. So exactly what was it that made you and this girl a couple? Cyber sex? Was this the older lady you spoke of some time ago?
"Let me tell you the truth. The truth is, 'what is'. And 'what should be' is a fantasy, a terrible terrible lie that someone gave to the people long ago. The 'what should be' never did exist, but people keep trying to live up to it. There is no 'what should be,' there is only what is." - Lenny Bruce

"Satan goes to church, did you know that?" - Godsands

"And Genisis 1 does match modern science... you just have to try really hard." - GR33K FR33K5
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 7:03:43 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 6:16:20 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
At 8/6/2009 5:39:59 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 8/6/2009 4:37:39 PM, patsox834 wrote:
At 8/6/2009 8:43:00 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That's a complicated question. The best answer is yes, but I've never been within 3000 miles of said girlfriend :).

...how does that work?

I feel rather odd asking that.

The same way you have an argument without being within 3000 miles. Basically all interaction is online text.

You know you've broken up when you find that you're blocked from their instant messenger.

Lasted almost a year or so.
On the plus side both parties know that you don't just like each other for bodies/money/whatever. ^_^

This is interesting to say the least. So exactly what was it that made you and this girl a couple? Cyber sex? Was this the older lady you spoke of some time ago?

Yes, it was the older lady. No, cyber sex is not a sufficient criterion, otherwise my count of such relationships up to this point would be >1, not =1. Obviously the emotion known as "lurv" makes the "couple." The declared intention of both parties to get married when geographically possible serves as a slightly more concrete indicator of course.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2009 7:12:27 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I'm a parent... long story.

I figured out when I was 3-ish that I could lie and get away with it. That's how I smuggled by action figures into day care. Of course, I learned one day that lying was bad because my nose was going to grow really long if I kept lying.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2009 10:34:59 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Actually, it was officially declared by you-can-figure-out-who not a soft side but a marshmallow core.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2009 3:05:42 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/6/2009 4:59:34 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 8/6/2009 3:36:10 PM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 8/5/2009 11:50:07 PM, sherlockmethod wrote:
DATC,
The child is not lying. The child probably associates pointing toward his penis with getting out of the playpen. He may not associate it with going to the potty, and may, depending on how this situation is handled, associate the potty with going back into the playpen so he avoids it.
1. point to penis get out of playpen
2. potty, go back in playpen
3. point to penis, avoid potty so I do have to go back into the playpen.

We are talking about children here, very young children, and his father's religion has nothing to do with the child wanting out of the playpen and associating an action, pointing, with a desired response ... getting out of the playpen. The child is not capable of lying in any significant sense.

Yes, the child IS lying.. you are merely describing the water.
I would SOON put a stop to it.

No, the child is NOT lying. Scientists have done tests to see if you can get a bird to do irrational things by getting it to associate certain actions with a certain outcome. They got the bird to bob his head and they would then feed the bird. After repeatedly doing this, the bird thought that by bobbing his head, he will be rewarded with food. Just like the child pointing down, he associates that with getting out of the play pen. It's not a lie, it's that a certain action is associated with a certain outcome.

"They got the bird to bob his head and they would then feed the bird."

"the bird thought that by bobbing his head, he will be rewarded with food."

Now WHY would the bird have thought that?

The Child does NOT want to urinate.

The child DOES want out of the play pen.

The child indicates it wants to urinate in order to escape play pen.

The indication of a NON-EXISTENT need to urinate IS (anyway you look at it) a LIE.
The Cross.. the Cross.