azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Poorly done. You simply wish to make things appear worse than they are. In fact I think a person could ask a child themselves and ask "Do you feel abused by your parents teaching you there religion?"Not really, this was just a consolidated version of my more extensive argument above. You can ask the child if they feel abused and they can say no, but that does not mean they are not being abused. People can and too often are in abusive situations without recognizing that that is what they are. Abuse is not determined exclusively on the abused considering themselves to be abused, but upon the full context. As a child being indoctrinated into religion you have no way of appreciating the ways in which that will limit your perspective or your capacity for emotional and cognitive growth.Incredibly untrue especially since more churches are adding apologetic teachings to their ministries. That isn't close mindedness. In fact they were open minded going in. Most children barely care about church. Do you honestly think the child feels "abused"?Do the apologetic teachings state that God might not be real, that there may be no meaning to life, that there may be no free will, that there may be no objective good and evil, etc. and that this is consistent with the truth of the religion? If not, then my point stands. If these apologetics assert anything as a truth then they are not open minded. Whether or not the child cares about church does not change the fact of their exposure to unsubstantiated assumptions asserted as truth over and over; the child will integrate the ideas as truths without even realizing they are doing it regardless if they want to be there. And again, whether the child feels abused does not change the context of abuse.True. I would love to debate with you on other topics as well since you argue clear and fluidly, if you wouldn't mind of course. Certainly. Did you have anything particular in mind? Or do you merely anticipate bumping into each other again down the line?I shall not contest this since I completely agree.I see aversion to reality and the construction of attachment as innate to religion, however. I suspect this is where me differ on this issue?What I do not understand is the actual abuse. You seem to highlight the semi-agreed upon negatives of religion, but what about the positives felt by the child? I do not deny that there can be positives, but that does not mean there are no negatives. (A parent who feed their child, helps them with homework, etc. might also beat them.)
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

As a child being indoctrinated into religion you have no way of appreciating the ways in which that will limit your perspective or your capacity for emotional and cognitive growth.I see, but how will we know a child limitations on emotional and cognitive growth? What of some children will lack development in accordance to another who will develop further and not lack that of which it's fellow friend has? If you favor full cognitive development do explain how religion will hinder the growth of it. I'm curious to learn how. meaning to life, that there may be no free will, that there may be no objective good and evil, etc. and that this is consistent with the truth of the religion? If not, then my point stands. If these apologetics assert anything as a truth then they are not open minded.I'm not too sure. I'm going to hold your statement as valid anyhow.  Certainly. Did you have anything particular in mind? Or do you merely anticipate bumping into each other again down the line?Seeing as you are actually rather wise in rhetoric and debate skills I wouldn't mind bumping into down the road, but if a particular topic comes to mind I will challenge you to a debate and hopefully contest the knowledge you currently hold and may obtain. I see aversion to reality and the construction of attachment as innate to religion, however. I suspect this is where me differ on this issue?Indeed, this may be a debate on viewpoints rather than objective quantities.  I do not deny that there can be positives, but that does not mean there are no negatives. (A parent who feed their child, helps them with homework, etc. might also beat them.)I agree.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

I see, but how will we know a child limitations on emotional and cognitive growth? What of some children will lack development in accordance to another who will develop further and not lack that of which it's fellow friend has? If you favor full cognitive development do explain how religion will hinder the growth of it. I'm curious to learn how.I do not believe in "full" cognitive development, but in realizing varied degrees of cognitive potential. Religion restricts greater cognitive development because it teaches its mythology as the absolute and incontrovertible truth; it inherently constructs a world perspective resistant to critical analysis and evolving ideology. Religion also demands that this "truth" be taken on faith, without and in some cases even against actual evidence and/or reason; this inherently constructs a disposition against reason and critical thought. There are specific ideas which are also harmful to cognitive development, such as the concepts of evil and sin. There are some particular ideas common in religion which I consider damaging to emotional development as well. The assumption of afterlife, cosmic purpose/meaning, free will, etc. are not only all unsubstantiated, but actively substitute immediate emotional gratification for genuine emotional introspection and development. Rather than confront what is emotionally uncomfortable, religion teaches us to deny it.I'm not too sure. I'm going to hold your statement as valid anyhow. What statement? It was a question, followed by a conclusion if you answered in a particular way. If you are accepting that apologetics teach that any of those things are true (which was my angle), then you are also accepting that my conclusion is true. Unless you demonstrate that apologetics are not teaching any absolute truth, then your point falls.Seeing as you are actually rather wise in rhetoric and debate skills I wouldn't mind bumping into down the road, but if a particular topic comes to mind I will challenge you to a debate and hopefully contest the knowledge you currently hold and may obtain.Thank you, and I shall look forward to future debates on other issues.Indeed, this may be a debate on viewpoints rather than objective quantities. I think my viewpoint at least is grounded in the objective; holding perspective is not innately exclusive of objective reality. I agree.Okay.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Well, Jace I'm going to decide you the victor. I can't think of ways to over come your arguments. Seems like you have many years of experience.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

Not always, religion is designed to steer people in the right direction, not to close their minds; in the olden days, it may have been the case that religious faculty were strictly against science and its principles, but it is no longer the case.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Not always, religion is designed to steer people in the right direction, not to close their mindsOh, really? Please explain how teaching an unsubstantiated and even actively invalidated set of beliefs as absolute and incontestable truth does not encourage a closed mind. Add to that that a failure to believe is usually accompanied by threats of eternal damnation, and I think your claim becomes even more fallible. Religion is a power structure that evolved as a mechanism of social control. It functions by compelling obedience to certain norms by teaching an absolute truth, threatening punishment, and feeding off of and perpetuating common human insecurities. If you want to call that the "right direction"...in the olden days, it may have been the case that religious faculty were strictly against science and its principles, but it is no longer the case.Again, seriously? Religion still resists science, frequently. Reference the evolution "debate", for instance. Or consider stem cell research, or sexual orientation, or just about every pertinent issue where science contradicts a religiously derived belief.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Religions should be same as alcohol an cigarettes from 21+ .
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Especially if it's a bad one, like Christianity
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

Especially if it's a bad one, like ChristianityYeah, because the number two religion in the world is oh-so-tolerant of different ideas right?
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Just as a form of mental abuse - something like this, a belief is an intrinsic part of someone and it is unfair to use force to get someone to do something. In the end, it is the child's choice - disparate from asking a child to do his/her homework. Religion is a commitment and forcing your child to conform to someone else's personal beliefs should not be tolerated. How is it not different from a form of suppression?Even though your child will come to harm from having a religion you may not agree with - forcing them to conform to your way, although it might be better for them shouldn't be the response. Clearly the child would need guidance and support but never be forced into something. This will ultimately have a negative effect, especially upon a relationship.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

Is forcing your child to subscribe to political viewpoints, like supporting feminism, child abuse?
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Political viewpoints such as feminism is about improving and equalizing the human race. Religion/faith does none of that. Forcing a child to believe in something that you do, regardless is a form of child neglect.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

Wow, if you honestly believe that then you have been brainwashed by fear mongering and propaganda and you dont think for yourself, how does religion not do that?Anyone who uses religion as an excuse for violence is extremely misled and should rethink their views, that doesnt mean religion itself is bad.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

That is true - a gun is made to kill by the hands of the owner.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Yes. Forced indoctrination of a child into any ideology is abusive. However, that secular indoctrination can occur is in no way a negation of the reality that forced religious indoctrination is still also a form of child abuse.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

So, if we can't "indoctrinate" children with any viewpoint, how do we teach them?
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

You emphasize the process not the conclusion; teach children how to think critically about ideas and to form their own viewpoints based on their observations independent of any presumed "truths" (religious or otherwise).
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

I honestly doubt that would work. Nearly all young children lack the critical thinking skills to be able to make informed decisions.While allowing children to hold whatever viewpoint they want seems alright to me, that doesn't mean we should let them do whatever they think is acceptable either.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

You cannot legitimately reduce the scope of the debate to include only those children too young to be incapable of thinking. Even if you do, you would necessarily be discussing children too young to fully grasp the religious ideologies they are being taught. Even were that not the case, then I would contend that it is more abusive to indoctrinate children into unsubstantiated, harmful ideologies before they have the capacity to critically consider them. Not indoctrinating children into a religious ideology is not at all the same thing as "letting them do whatever they think is acceptable."
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Exactly. all you can do is guide them - you can't stop someone being depressed or taking drugs if that is what they want.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Technically, neither depression nor drug addiction are willful (even under the common assumption that we have free will). More accurate to say that we cannot entirely prevent depression and drug addiction from occurring, so rather than teach our children to condemn both as immoral/sinful we teach them how to engage with both effectively when they do arise.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Do you have to ask? Teach them morality, humanity, honesty and love. Then let them choose for themselves - your parents don't make your decisions for you like who you love and get married to in the future! Do they want to/ have to?
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

your parents don't make your decisions for you like who you love and get married to in the future!Those are decisions people make for themselves, as adults. Not really relevant.Teach them morality,That's gonna be pretty tricky without delving into politics and religion.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

No, but is supporting feminism potentially life - changing or irreversibly damaging?
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Potentially, yes.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

No. Why would it be? Does the child scream and cry for help when you teach him a particular religion? No. I don't see how it could ever be child abuse. If it is then teaching your child anything and not letting them find out for themselves is child abuse.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

Nor would a child scream and cry for help if you were to sexually touch them. The point is whether 1) it infringes a child's right to autonomy 2) it causes long term harm.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

Nor would a child scream and cry for help if you were to sexually touch themI'm fairly positive the child will say something if the parent is doing something of this nature. Either that be a scream, shout, or a yell. it infringes a child's right to autonomyWho says that right exists? Rights are simply mental constructs for the benefit of those that fit under it description. I don't think rights exist at all. Humans just share ideas and argee or disagree on what they find to be beneficial. Even if the right to autonomy is granted what about the parents right to autonomy by wishing to indoctrinate her child? Shall you prohibit one to allow the other? it causes long term harm.What is the long-term harm of teaching a child a religion?
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

I'm fairly positive the child will say something if the parent is doing something of this nature. Either that be a scream, shout, or a yell.Not at all. If it is done by a trusted adult, young children do whatever that adult says as their body is forced to feel things that they don't have the capacity to process. The child smiles through their abuse and only later when they comprehend what has happened to them do they realise how it has effected their development.I don't think rights exist at all. Okay. Then nor does morality. This is a valid argument but not something I can ascribe to. Rights are, at least in part, social constructs but this does not mean they do not exist.What is the long-term harm of teaching a child a religion?It disconnects them from reality. It teaches them that there is a creature in the sky that is more important than their friends, their family and anything else on the Earth and that this creature should be valued above everything else. This is a very dangerous. It leads to a complete lack of empathy and disregard for a shared morality that is normally developed through natural interaction with others within society.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

This is the part of the argument I wish to focus on. It disconnects them from reality.Religion cannot completely disconnect you from reality. Especially Christianity since it requires you to practice the faith within reality. I don't see how a disconnection within reality constitutes abuse. People with mental disabilities can be seen as disconnected from the world. Are they abusing themselves? No. There is no abuse at all.  It teaches them that there is a creature in the sky that is more important than their friends, their family and anything else on the Earth and that this creature should be valued above everything else.So? Most humans will put themselves before anything else. This "big man in the sky" is seen as the grand master protector for those who follow the faith. It's not like they shut out friends and family, in fact their doctrine teaches them to care for one another and to care for their enemies.  This is a very dangerous. It leads to a complete lack of empathy and disregard for a shared morality that is normally developed through natural interaction with others within society.Prove it. You know it doesn't. Christianity for example, as stated above, pushes for a moral good in absolute truth. Christians are to suscribe to the law of the land, thus they must follow the rules everybody else follows. This is in no way dangerous. In fact it is beneficial since Christian are not to be arrogant to law or humanity. That isn't abuse. Your argument doesn't constitute anything to uphold you position in this debate. Okay. Then nor does morality. This is a valid argument but not something I can ascribe to. Rights are, at least in part, social constructs but this does not mean they do not exist.Rights don't exist. Unless you can hand me my rights. You cannot. You can hand me a paper communicating what "rights" you wish to give me, but what if I chose something else? Are my other "rights" not as valid as yours? What about someone who wishes to have malicious "rights"?  Not at all.Incorrect sir. In fact most abuse cases actually constitute abuse since they involve neglect and present scarring and damage. Either mentally, physically, cognitively, or emotionally. Neglect is a prime factor with abuse. Thus a child will, in fact, scream, kick, shout, when being abused.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: Yes

People with mental disabilities can be seen as disconnected from the world. Are they abusing themselves? No. There is no abuse at all.And if someone makes someone mentally disabled to the point where they cannot connect with reality? This is abuse. Most humans will put themselves before anything elseTo me I put my friends and family before anything else. No Christian can ever say this.hristianity for example, as stated above, pushes for a moral good in absolute truthThere you have the problem. It is this 'pushing'. Christians, disconnected from the morals we share, feel duty bound to push society towards their own believes. I can't blame them. If I believed that something was right then I'd push for it too. The problem is that this believe does not come from the process of their own interactions with other people, but rather it comes from "The Big Book of Morals" (The Bible). This allows them to campaign for the persecution of gays, women etc. Sometimes 'persecution' may be justified if those people are doing something morally wrong (e.g. it is justifiable to persecute criminals for their activities) but when the only basis is a big book... how do you expect an atheist to react? How can you justify that your book isn't dangerous when you use it to advocate suffering of people you see as immoral? Neglect is a prime factor with abuse. Thus a child will, in fact, scream, kick, shout, when being abusedRead about sexual abuse. You clearly have no idea. If a father touches their small child inappropriate they do not go running and screaming out of the house. It is different to many other forms of abuse and the child doesn't always recognise that what is happening to them is an abuse.
Debate: Is forcing your child to be a certain religion, a form of child abuse?
Side: No

And if someone makes someone mentally disabled to the point where they cannot connect with reality? This is abuse.I agree, but if you wish to link that to religion you are taking too many leaps since religion requires you to interact with reality.  To me I put my friends and family before anything else. No Christian can ever say this.This is the internet, you can be as brave as you wish, but when the predicament strikes most people will fend for themselves. It's human nature. Also, you are not a representative sample of 7 billion people. It doesn't matter if a Christian can say it or not. It doesn't constitute abuse. There you have the problem. It is this 'pushing'. Christians, disconnected from the morals we share, feel duty bound to push society towards their own believes.Christians are not disconnected to shared morals. In fact morality is highly subjective. Thus interpretation and opinions vary between individuals. Christians, Muslims, Taoists, etc, wish to share their views. Their morality is their own, the same as your own. Your views on what's right and what's wrong are subjective. Same for Christians.Again, this doesn't constitute abuse. The problem is that this believe does not come from the process of their own interactions with other people, but rather it comes from "The Big Book of Morals" (The Bible). This allows them to campaign for the persecution of gays, women etc.Interactions with other people? No. You obtain morals by what has been written by past humans. The laws they have set you live by. Christians do the same. Again, doesn't constitute abuse. Sometimes 'persecution' may be justified if those people are doing something morally wrong (e.g. it is justifiable to persecute criminals for their activities) but when the only basis is a big book... how do you expect an atheist to react?The bible is a book of laws. America, or any nation, has a book of laws that tell us what we can and cannot do. What's the difference? Still, you aren't displaying what abuse is in play. How can you justify that your book isn't dangerous when you use it to advocate suffering of people you see as immoral?First, do not call it my book. It isn't my book. Second, Atheists say we simply cease to exist. Oblivion, I'd say that worse. I'd rather have a shot at eternal life. Also what if purgatory exists? How do we know if God is not Odin? Or Ra? Read about sexual abuse. You clearly have no idea. If a father touches their small child inappropriate they do not go running and screaming out of the house. It is different to many other forms of abuse and the child doesn't always recognise that what is happening to them is an abuse.So how does that relate to teaching a child a religion as abuse? You have yet to do so and are getting off topic.