@Dee


"William Lane Craig  is a man with a mission — the eradication of reason and belief instead  he wants reason replaced with nonsense and pseudoscience”

Prove your claim?

Where is your evidence, of the very quotation, of Mr. Craig, making the above statement?

Do you have a link to his statement?


And, I'll take your silence, as being a supporter of Richard Dawkins ideological views?

And I'm an independent from, "William Lane Craig."
He has zero influence in my life.

So you, recycling his name, over and over again, for your own interests, is on you, because you don't have a counter anti religious argument, to support your own words?

So thank you for educating me even more, on your anti religious education.

@AlofRI

"Mr. Dawkins opinion is his right, and it DOES count as much as anyone else."

No, he's wrong.

Is he a doctor, or can justifiably diagnose people, from a stage, and casually label Christian parents, as child abusers?

Like I expressed before, I believe that Mr. Dawkins appears to enjoy the attention from his own anti religious opinion?

And I reiterate the same argument below:

Another anti religious individual, thought, that he was being wise, by sharing Mr. Dawkins quotation, and thought that the other like minded anti religious individuals, like himself, would get a kick, out of such a statement, because this is the internet, and some of the anti religious individuals, can carry on with such unfounded statements, and no ones, going to challenge them on their anti religious, quotations, or opinions?

When the anti religious wants to make statements, about Christian parents, in regards to their kids, they're crossing a line, that they can't back up from, can they? 

"Is It Child Abuse to Teach Christianity to Your Children? "

"Dawkins Thinks So"

"Atheist Richard Dawkins claims that teaching children to accept their families’ religious beliefs is child abuse."

"Call it “child abuse” and you get everybody’s attention. That’s the latest headline-gaining tactic employed by atheists whose agenda is to “protect” children from their parents’ religion. The Daily Mail has tweaked the “twitters” once again by its article opening with “Professor Richard Dawkins has claimed that forcing a religion on children without questioning its merits is as bad as ‘child abuse.’”1

Atheist Richard Dawkins claims that teaching children to accept their families’ religious beliefs is child abuse. He considers this form of “abuse” to be more devastatingly and permanently harmful than sexual abuse. Though he has said this before, his remarks returned to headline status after he reiterated these claims April 21 at the Chipping Norton Literary Festival. "

"Misuse of the Term “Child Abuse”

"This gross misuse of the phrase “child abuse” by Dawkins is not unique to him. Just a few months ago, another outspoken atheist, Lawrence Krauss, labeled the teaching of young-earth creationism as “child abuse.” And a 1997 speech by Amnesty International spokesman Nicholas Humphrey proclaimed that “freedom of speech is too precious a freedom to be meddled with” and then just seconds later illogically and inconsistently proclaimed that society should protect children from their parents’ religious teaching.2 "

"The Attack on Christianity"

"Dawkins, Krauss, Humphrey, and countless others get a great deal of attention by claiming that teaching children to accept the religious beliefs of their parents is abusive. The particular anecdotal example Dawkins uses to “prove” his point—that religious teaching is a more crippling form of child abuse than physical abuse—is recounted in his 2006 book The God Delusion. Dawkins wrote the following: 

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.4

Dawkins says, “But the mental abuse of being told about Hell, she took years to get over.”5

Dawkins and others, like Humphrey, are very much in the habit of engaging in logical fallacies in their rhetoric attacking both Christianity and religious teaching for children. They condemn biblical Christianity along with other religions, including those that do have oppressive doctrinal tenets. They unjustly and erroneously blame cultural and societal evils (like the view that children and women are property) on biblical Christianity. They lump biblical Christianity in with cultic aberrations like the Jim Jones Kool-Aid drinkers and with greed-motivated, power-mongering, historical misuses of religion by those seeking personal gain and political power.6

Biblical history, in contrast to the assertions in these straw man arguments, reveals that the real cause of such evils is the sinful nature of man. God created man and woman—Adam and Eve—as perfectly good people, but they chose to rebel against God. The evils in the world are not God’s fault, but man’s. And likewise the evils perpetrated in the name of Christianity are man’s fault, not God’s. (For that matter, all the evils perpetrated regardless of the excuse given are man’s fault, not God’s.) And a proper understanding of biblical Christianity should not only arm people against falling for cultic claims and false rallying cries but also enable them to see that the claims made by people like Dawkins just don’t hold water. "

"How Dawkins Thinks We Should Teach Children"

"Dawkins claims that we should teach children about religions so that they can understand literature, but that we should discourage them from actually embracing any belief. “There is a value in teaching children about religion. You cannot really appreciate a lot of literature without knowing about religion. But we must not indoctrinate our children,” Dawkins says, adding, “What a child should be taught is that religion exists; that some people believe this and some people believe that.”7

Dawkins calls it child abuse for parents to teach their children that they should actually believewhat their parents believe (unless of course the parents embrace the religion of atheism, which Dawkins fails to acknowledge is itself a “religion”—a belief that God does not exist). He labels religious teaching “indoctrination.” As one journalist correctly observes, “Religious people, though, would argue that advancing Dawkins’ views on evolution and the lack of a deity would also constitute a form of indoctrination, especially if these elements are trumped as ‘reason’ and held above theological standing.” 8 Thus, Dawkins is not at all opposed to indoctrinating children so long as they are indoctrinated to believe as he does. Let’s examine his take on religious teaching for children from several angles."

"Withhold Your Personal Beliefs From Your Children"

"First of all, consider the rather preposterous notion that Dawkins would have parents teach their children that people believe lots of things, yet they should refrain from teaching what they personally believe. Going even farther, the Daily Mail reports he said that when teaching religion and parental beliefs, “scorn should be poured on its claims.”9 Dawkins would therefore encourage all parents with religious convictions (Christian, Muslim, or otherwise) to lie to their children. Such a practice would in fact require Christian parents to weave a whole web of deception. And they should weave this web of deception in order to deprive their children of knowledge they themselves believe is valuable and even essential for life.

Aside from the complete lack of integrity such a behavior would require, such a nonsensical scenario would deprive a child of any knowledge of what or whom to believe, trust, and respect. Children so raised would have no idea of how to gain knowledge and understanding of the world—at least unless the state stepped in and indoctrinated them in accord with a Dawkins-style belief system.

For in truth, even the atheistic belief that there is no God is a religion. Atheists claim they are non-religious, but they use their set of beliefs as a way to explain life without God—they worship and serve the creation rather than the Creator (Romans 1:25). There is no such thing as a non-religious person—you are either for Jesus Christ or against Him (Matthew 12:30). Dawkins states that he is committed to a naturalistic worldview. Therefore, Dawkins has chosen to exclude all supernatural ideas about our origins and about his own eternal destiny. In essence, Dawkins is merely advocating that children be indoctrinated in accord with hisbeliefs rather than their parents’ beliefs. And because he is particularly bothered by the idea that there is an actual hell where some people will suffer for eternity, he labels such a teaching as “abusive.” "

"A Distorted Understanding Of Christianity"

"Secondly, Dawkins has a very distorted understanding of Christianity. In his oft-cited anecdote to justify the non-teaching of faith to children, he refers to “the mental abuse of being told about Hell.” In a January interview, Dawkins said, “‘It seems to me that telling children such that they really, really believe that people who sin are going to go to hell and roast forever … It seems to me to be intuitively entirely reasonable that that is a worse form of child abuse that will give more nightmares, that will give more genuine distress’ than being sexually abused.” 10 "

“Forcing” Religion On Your Children"

"Finally, Dawkins seems to think that teaching a child to identify with the parents’ faith is the same as “forcing” a religion on the child. He says, “What a child should never be taught is that you are a Catholic or Muslim child, therefore that is what you believe. That's child abuse.”

"Yet history, common sense, and the Bible make it clear that ultimately no person can be coerced to believe anything by another individual—God’s Word teaches that each person is held accountable for his or her own beliefs and actions. Freedom of religion is about being allowed to live in accordance with your own religious beliefs. (Furthermore, freedom of religion includes the freedom to teach your children your faith—the fundamental right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children.)11 "

"Throughout history parents have taught their children their own religious beliefs. And throughout history children have eventually evaluated these teachings for themselves—some reject their parents’ beliefs and others do not. We at Answers in Genesis emphasize the importance of giving children true biblical answers about life and life’s issues—not to indoctrinate them or to enslave their minds—but to equip them. We want children to grow up with the tools they need to make informed decisions about the most important decisions in life. The very name of our ministry, Answers in Genesis, makes it clear we are not indoctrinating and brainwashing with blind faith, but providing reasonable, scientific, and biblical answers for questions on origins. "

"Conclusion: What Really Harms a Child"

"Child abuse? We hate to abuse the term, as Dawkins and others do. Still, we have to point out that the very things Dawkins advocates—to deprive a child of living water (John 4:10–14) and the spiritual nourishment (1 Corinthians 3:2; Hebrews 5:14; 1 Corinthians 10:1–4) available in the Bible, to deprive a child of the knowledge that they were created by a God who loves them (John 3:16; Colossians 1:16; John 1:3–4,12–14), to deprive a child of the knowledge that the evils of life are rooted in man’s sinful decisions, to deprive a child of biblical answers for life’s greatest questions, to deprive a child of the truth about how to be saved now and forever, to deprive a child of the knowledge that “Jesus loves me” (Galatians 2:20)—can cripple and irreparably harm a child, for now and eternity."

"As Christian parents, when you ponder your responsibility to teach your children what the Bible says, remember that they can best build genuine faith in Jesus Christ through God’s powerful Word (Romans 10:17; Romans 1:16; Hebrews 4:12). It is no wonder that self-appointed enemies of Jesus Christ—like Dawkins and Krauss—are afraid for you to teach Scripture to your children. It is no wonder that the enemies of God want to stigmatize religion—and especially Christianity—by the inflammatory epithet of “child abuse.” Take heart and don’t fail in your God-given responsibility. Don’t be intimidated by the twenty-first century echoes of the mantra espoused by so many parents during the last few decades of the twentieth—to let their children grow up with no religious instruction under the illusion they would one day seek out any information they need. Instead, remember daily what the Apostle Paul told to his protégé Timothy, recalling that Timothy’s mother and grandmother had taught him God’s Word from childhood:

But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 2:13–17) "

I get the impression that maybe, Mr. Dawkins, enjoys the spotlight, that via, his own mouth, self created for himself?

The below, is from reference material for you.

https://answersingenesis.org/world-religions/atheism/is-it-child-abuse-to-teach-christianity-to-your-children-dawkins-thinks-so/ 

@AIofRI

Anyone can make statements, but unless there is evidence, beyond the very words outside of an anti religious individuals unfounded opinion, they are but expelled air, coming out ones own mouth, after speaking.

And some, of the anti religious individuals, have mastered that anti religious practice, of wasting the air from their own lungs, to justify the anti religious attitudes, residing within their own minds?

All children are equal, and all parents are equal, whether they are religious oriented, or anti religious oriented?

Being that this is the internet, you're going to get two types of answers;

The anti religious point of view answer.

And the religious point of view answer.

Religion based questions, are just as popular as the political based questions are.

God exists, Jesus exists, the Bible exists, and the religious buildings exists.

And millions of people around the globe, go to a mass, or a religious service weekly, of all ages.

I view the question, from the existence of those happenings.

Because unless an anti religious person has a time machine, and can go back to the time when Jesus walked the face of this earth, and can say conclusively with their own eyes, that they didn't see him, with the help of that time machine?

Then the religious answer, is just as good, as the, anti religious answer is.

@John_C_87

Marijuana isn't legalized for the entire country.

It's been legalized where those states, are apparently poor, because of how their taxation and revenue coffers, have apparently, been mismanaged?

But the legalization of weed, is a tool of malpractice, being utilized by those marijuana addict parents, against their own unborn babies, toddlers, kids, children, and families.

Regardless of how you, or some, of the other pro marijuana industry individuals, want the rest of the United States, to view your biases, and one sided pro marijuana politics?

Based on your individual say so's?

@piloteer

@Plaffelvohfen

@ZeusAres42

@John_C_87

Recreational marijuana legalization, is a nationwide fraud. 

@John_C_87

The below was addressed to you as well:

Not just your opinion, from your own mouth? 

Back your words up?

"To answer your question. Narcotics officers are waging a war against all those cultures."

Prove it?

"All except the Caucasian one!!!!!"

So if a black police officer busted a black marijuana addict, is that black police officer, waging a war against his own culture? 

Prove it? 

"And yes, you should reach out to 60 minutes. I dare you to."

And who is this "We," that you're referring to?

Maybe the African American culture?

The Caucasian culture? 

The Caucasian culture, has had plenty of white marijuana addicts getting arrested, for their marijuana addiction, possession, and drug dealing, haven't they?

Are you going to defend the Caucasian marijuana addict, with your weed is good, and society accepts it, pro marijuana industry talk?

The Hispanic culture?

Are you going to defend the Hispanic marijuana addict, with your weed is good, and society accepts it, pro marijuana industry talk?

The illegal immigrant, or alien culture?

Are you going to defend the illegal immigrant addict,  or alien addict culture, with your weed is good, and society accepts it, pro marijuana industry talk, as well? 

"We all know you won't get them to do a story about this, because there is no story."

Weed is good, and society accepts it? 

Is that what the marijuana addicted, moms and dads, are telling themselves, while they get high in front of their kids?

Lie to their kids, because through the fog of marijuana addict high, they're lying to their kids, telling them your pro marijuana excuse, weed is good, and society accepts it? 

Is that what the marijuana addict mother, with the unborn baby, inside of her womb, tells their unborn child, while they're high, and pregnant at the same time? 

Marijuana isnt good, being that teenagers have committed suicide, because marijuana messed with their lives.

And their stories, are available on the "Parents Opposed to Pot" website.

You use the word "society?"

That's a small word, when it comes to the pro marijuana industry philosophy.

The United States as a whole, is smarter than the marijuana industry is, and it's smarter, than the marijuana addicts are.

Because the rest of the states, that haven't legalized marijuana, they know how to manage their taxation and revenue budgets, don't they? 

"Weed is good, and society accepts it."

"And you can't do anything about it."

The country as a whole, doesn't have to do anything about the marijuana addicts, marijuana addiction problems.

The marijuana addicts, get to live with their prideful addictions all by themselves.

And messing up their kids, and family lives, at the same time.