Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!sun!daw
From: daw@sun.uucp (Doug Ward)
Newsgroups: net.singles,net.kids
Subject: Re: Parents' "rights" and responsibilities
Message-ID: <1652@sun.uucp>
Date: Tue, 28-Aug-84 01:03:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.1652
Posted: Tue Aug 28 01:03:06 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 30-Aug-84 08:58:37 EDT
References: <1734@uw-june>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 23

This isn't meant as a flame, though I'm sure that one's opinions will flavor 
ones perception.

Joe P.:
>...the Flat Earth Society has at least as compelling a position as the 
>athiests.

I ask you, compelling to who?  How can you compare two completely different
groups.  The athiests arguement is a rational one based on a lack of evidence
for the existence for gods/god (cf. "a + theos"), whereas the Flat Earth  
Society's argument is based on the rejection of repeatable experimentation
and the contradiction of direct observation.

The mind of a child will be educated. Withholding rational explanations
works only if mystical/religious/spiritual explanations are offered instead.
This is why children *must* be taught about gods/God, for otherwise they
would develop a spirituality slightly different than that of their parents,
due to their uninhibited different perception of the world around them.  It
could of course be argued that no perception can really be uninhibited, so
parents should provide some *guidelines*, like a religious framework.

					-albie