• How to best Help change the current value of Religion Freedom Rights over Child Rights?
• Religion harm and a way to stop it’s Rights Violations?
• Child Religion Freedom Rights Violations?
• Religion Freedom Rights vs. Child Rights?

I am against Hereditary religion?

Here is what Hereditary religion means to me, a general expression of what I see as hereditary religion is a parent telling a child their religion is “ABC-whatever” and forcing this unchosen belief by the child on the child until they to say they believe as told. You know, like almost all religious parents do all over the world, all the while claiming the religion and or god(s) are a chosen belief when it’s just agreement to ones in power they accept as their own with little thinking in general but most defiantly if said religion is pushed on the magical thinking minds of children under 7 who tend to appeal to animism thinking, hypothesis, and conclusions when they are unsure or being creative.

Oppose the Force of Hereditary religion!

Religions slave no more?

How to best Help change the current value of Religion Freedom Rights over Child Rights?

Oppose the Force of Hereditary religion!

“Children usually acquire the religious views of their parents, although they may also be influenced by others they communicate with such as peers and teachers. Aspects of this subject include rites of passage, education and child psychology, as well as discussion of the moral issue of religious education of children. Some Christian churches practice infant baptism to enter children into the faith. Ritual circumcision is used to mark Jewish, Muslim, some Christians especially Coptic Christian and Ethiopian Orthodox Christian, whos infant males as belonging to the faith. Jewish boys and girls then confirm their belonging at a coming of age ceremony known as the Bar and Bat Mitzvah respectively. Some religious adherents have a form of confirmation ritual that occurs when the child has reached the age of reason and voluntarily accepts the religion.“ Ref

While these latter confirmation rituals occur when the child has reached the age of reason and voluntarily accepts the religion, it may not be all it seems within hidden dynamics of coercive religious indoctrination. So, while is not forcing Hereditary Religion to me as a general rule, but if there is heavy coercion, such as shunning (persistently avoid, ignore, or reject someone), then it still may be Hereditary Religion. “Shunning can be the act of social rejection, or emotional distance. In a religious context, shunning is a formal decision by a denomination or a congregation to cease interaction with an individual or a group, and follows a particular set of rules. It differs from, but may be associated with, excommunication. Social rejection occurs when a person or group deliberately avoids association with, and habitually keeps away from an individual or group. This can be a formal decision by a group, or a less formal group action which will spread to all members of the group as a form of solidarity. It is a sanction against association, often associated with religious groups and other tightly knit organizations and communities. Targets of shunning can include persons who have been labeled as apostates, whistleblowers, dissidents, strikebreakers, or anyone the group perceives as a threat or source of conflict. Social rejection has been established to cause psychological damage and has been categorized as torture or punishment. Mental rejection is a more individual action, where a person subconsciously or willfully ignores an idea, or a set of information related to a particular viewpoint. Some groups are made up of people who shun the same ideas.” Ref

I am Anti-Hereditary religion and to me, a general expression of what I see as hereditary religion, is a parent telling a child their religion is “ABC-whatever” and forcing this unchosen belief by the child on the child until they to say they believe as told. You know, like almost all religious parents do all over the world, all the while claiming the religion and or god(s) are a chosen belief when it’s just agreement to ones in power they accept as their own with little thinking in general but most defiantly if said religion is pushed on the magical thinking minds of children under 7 who tend to appeal to animism thinking, hypothesis, and conclusions when they are unsure or being creative.

Marquis Amon: “A child can not understand religion until the age of 7 when the mind is developed enough to distinguish reality from fantasy. So before then, a child could not distinguish between any religions before then, so it can not be a part of any religion truly by choice until it can. Then there is the intellectual requirement of religion. It would take delving into religious history, linguistics, and archaeology and other sciences to make an informed choice. The legal rights of children are often neglected. There are arguments where private institutions can limit rights, through the use of rules. In school systems, the first amendment is often limited. However, even if we take this into consideration no child could be forced to choose a religion. The part of the first amendment that reads Congress shall make no law respecting or prohibiting an establishment of religion means legally and philosophically there is no justification requirement for having or lacking any religion. That one cannot enforce religion on another human being because it is legally non-binding. So hereditary religion is in violation of U.S. law. The tax-exempt status is not exclusive to churches, there is no legal establishment of what a religion is in the U.S. nor can there be legal affiliation for that reason, so religion rightfully is to any U.S. citizen freely in this country. Child are citizens, they have rights, those rights should be protected.” – Marquis Amon

“Many legal experts have argued that the government should create laws in the interests of the welfare of children, irrespective of the religion of their parents. Nicholas Humphrey has argued that children “have a human right not to have their minds crippled by exposure to other people’s bad ideas,” and should have the ability to question the religious views of their parents. “Parents’ religion and children’s welfare: debunking the doctrine of parents’ rights, Philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer spoke of the subject in the 19th century: ‘And as the capacity for believing is strongest in childhood, special care is taken to make sure of this tender age. This has much more to do with the doctrines of belief taking root than threats and reports of miracles. If, in early childhood, certain fundamental views and doctrines are paraded with unusual solemnity, and an air of the greatest earnestness never before visible in anything else; if, at the same time, the possibility of a doubt about them be completely passed over, or touched upon only to indicate that doubt is the first step to eternal perdition, the resulting impression will be so deep that, as a rule, that is, in almost every case, doubt about them will be almost as impossible as doubt about one’s own existence.’ — Arthur Schopenhauer, On Religion: A Dialogue. Several authors have been critical of religious indoctrination of children, such as Nicolas Humphrey, Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins. Christopher Hitchens and Dawkins use the term child abuse to describe the harm that some religious upbringings inflict on children. A. C. Grayling has argued “we are all born atheists… and it takes a certain amount of work on the part of the adults in our community to persuade [children] differently.” Dawkins states that he is angered by the labels “Muslim child” or “Catholic child”. He asks how a young child can be considered intellectually mature enough to have such independent views on the cosmos and humanity’s place within it. By contrast, Dawkins points out, no reasonable person would speak of a “Marxist child” or a “Tory child.” He suggests there is little controversy over such labeling because of the “weirdly privileged status of religion”. On several occasions Dawkins made the claim that sexually abusing a child is “arguably less” damaging than “the long term psychological damage inflicted by bringing up a child Catholic in the first place”. As a means to transmit his opinions directly to children Dawkins wrote a profusely illustrated book of scientific divulgation, The Magic of Reality, in which some natural phenomena that’s usually left explained to them by means of the action of gods or other mythical creatures are demystified. Each chapter book is devoted to a single natural phenomenon, such as earthquakes, always starting with a myth or folklore of world’s major religions followed by an actual scientific explanation that debunks the latter.” Ref

Religion harm and a way to stop it’s Rights Violations?

“Religious Trauma Syndrome: How Some Organized Religion Leads to Mental Health Problems. Groups that demand obedience and conformity produce fear, not love and growth.” – Valerie Tarico Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington, and the founder of Wisdom Commons. She is the author of “Trusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light” and “Deas and Other Imaginings.” Her articles can be found at valerietarico.com.

Oppose the Force of Hereditary religion!

“For the past twenty years, Dr. Marlene Winell a human development consultant: has counseled men and women in recovery from various forms of fundamentalist religion including the Assemblies of God denomination in which she was raised. Winell is the author of Leaving the Fold – A Guide for Former Fundamentalists and Others Leaving their Religion (link), written during her years of private practice in psychology. Over the years, Winell has provided assistance to clients whose religious experiences were even more damaging than mine. Some of them are people whose psychological symptoms weren’t just exacerbated by their religion, but actually caused by it. Then Dr. Winell made waves by formally labeling what she calls “Religious Trauma Syndrome” (RTS) and beginning to write and speak on the subject for professional audiences. When the British Association of Behavioral and Cognitive Psychologists published a series of articles on the topic, members of a Christian counseling association protested what they called excessive attention to a “relatively niche topic.” One commenter said, “A religion, faith or book cannot be abuse but the people interpreting can make anything abusive.” Is toxic religion simply misinterpretation? What is religious trauma? Why does Winell believe religious trauma merits its own diagnostic label? Let’s start this interview with the basics. What exactly is religious trauma syndrome?” Ref

“According to Dr. Marlene Winell: Religious trauma syndrome (RTS) is a set of symptoms and characteristics that tend to go together and which are related to harmful experiences with religion. They are the result of two things: immersion in a controlling religion and the secondary impact of leaving a religious group. The RTS label provides a name and description that affected people often recognize immediately. Many other people are surprised by the idea of RTS, because in our culture it is generally assumed that religion is benign or good for you. Just like telling kids about Santa Claus and letting them work out their beliefs later, people see no harm in teaching religion to children. But in reality, religious teachings and practices sometimes cause serious mental health damage. The public is somewhat familiar with sexual and physical abuse in a religious context. As Journalist Janet Heimlich has documented in, Breaking Their Will, Bible-based religious groups that emphasize patriarchal authority in family structure and use harsh parenting methods can be destructive. But the problem isn’t just physical and sexual abuse. Emotional and mental treatment in authoritarian religious groups also can be damaging because of 1) toxic teachings like eternal damnation or original sin 2) religious practices or mindset, such as punishment, black and white thinking, or sexual guilt, and 3) neglect that prevents a person from having the information or opportunities to develop normally.” https://www.alternet.org/belief/religious-trauma-syndrome-how-some-organized-religion-leads-mental-health-problems“In addressing Hereditary Religion, one idea I have is the foster care system in my area is full of Christians who force creationism on children who are not theirs. It’s disturbing that they care so much about brainwashing and so little about helping the child recurve basic needs. There are a few children in my class that are living it. Don’t get me wrong, I am thankful they have taken the child in. I just wish they would respect their rights to religious freedom.” – Anonymous Atheist Teacher

Child Religion Freedom Rights Violations?

Scholarly study generally focuses children’s rights by identifying them with individual rights. The following rights “allow children to grow up healthy and free”:

• Freedom of speech
• Freedom of thought
• Freedom from fear
• Freedom of choice and the right to make decisions
• Ownership over one’s body

“Children’s rights are the human rights of children with particular attention to the rights of special protection and care afforded to minors. The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) defines a child as “any human being below the age of eighteen years, unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.” Children’s rights includes their right to association with both parents, human identity as well as the basic needs for physical protection, food, universal state-paid education, health care, and criminal laws appropriate for the age and development of the child, equal protection of the child’s civil rights, and freedom from discrimination on the basis of the child’s race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, disability, color, ethnicity, or other characteristics. Interpretations of children’s rights range from allowing children the capacity for autonomous action to the enforcement of children being physically, mentally and emotionally free from abuse, though what constitutes “abuse” is a matter of debate. Other definitions include the rights to care and nurturing. As minors by law, children do not have autonomy or the right to make decisions on their own for themselves in any known jurisdiction of the world. Instead their adult caregivers, including parents, social workers, teachers, youth workers, and others, are vested with that authority, depending on the circumstances. Some believe that this state of affairs gives children insufficient control over their own lives and causes them to be vulnerable. Louis Althusser has gone so far as to describe this legal machinery, as it applies to children, as “repressive state apparatuses.” Structures such as government policy have been held by some commentators to mask the ways adults abuse and exploit children, resulting in child poverty, lack of educational opportunities, and child labour. On this view, children are to be regarded as a minority group towards whom society needs to reconsider the way it behaves. Researchers have identified children as needing to be recognized as participants in society whose rights and responsibilities need to be recognized at all ages. Ref

“[There] is a mass of human rights law, both treaty and ‘soft law’, both general and child-specific, which recognizes the distinct status and particular requirements of children. [Children], owing to their particular vulnerability and their significance as the future generation, are entitled to special treatment generally, and, in situations of danger, to priority in the receipt of assistance and protection.” — Jenny Kuper, International law concerning child civilians in armed conflict (1997, Clarendon Press)

Parental powers: “Parent are given sufficient powers to fulfill their duties to the child.” – Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book One, Chapter Sixteen (1765-1769). link

According to an article titled: “The Child’s Right to Religion. Religious Education as a Human Right?” published in, Human Rights and Religion in Educational Contexts pp 161-170” stated that although most people are quite unaware of it, religious education is a human right.

“The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) states (Article 26) the right of parents “to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children”, after having stated that education “shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups” (which again implies religious education). Moreover, religious education can be understood as part of the “freedom of thought, conscience and religion” guaranteed in Article 18 as a basic human right. Since these articles refer to parents’ rights (and duties) in the first place, the question of children’s right to religion is more open. The most pertinent document, the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), includes references to this right but these references cannot be considered fully satisfactory from an educational point of view. According to an article that explains and considers the legal situation, especially from the perspective of religious education and in the light of inter-religious education, that there is a clear need for further developing the understanding of children’s religious rights in a multi-religious context and vis-à-vis the challenges of inter-religious education.” link

All lovers of TRUE “Thinking Freedom” should oppose the force of hereditary religion! If religion is about what is true, why do so many feel the need to force it? Freedom of Religion, not Coercive Hereditary Religion.

I am for letting kids decide their stance on religions for themselves. And as children can’t think without magical explanations until around 7 years old, it must be after then but I would like 18 years old before they feel they actually are choosing to freely decide or at least after reaching a teenage as is the standard in the Twenty-sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution which prohibits states and the federal government from denying the right to vote once a citizen reaches 18 years old. I think that both the issue of age of intellectual consent ability and the self-directed right of a child to make this choice freely is also an important child rights issue in both freedoms of speech and a citizen’s self-chosen right to religious liberty choices in the freedom of religion issue. Moreover, in the United States, freedom of religion is a constitutionally protected right provided in the religion clauses of the First Amendment. So too religious civil liberties are guaranteed by the First Amendment is being violated when a parent is using force indoctrination on a child. removing the child’s right to freely choose or choose not to have a religion at all, as should be guaranteed them as an American citizen of the United States and generally speaking by being born in the United States or one of its territories the “acquisition” of citizenship has occurred thus one is a legal citizen at birth thus rights are deserved from birth, not after one leaves a parent as a young adult after 18 years old. Thus, to me, coercive hereditary religion is most often an expression of a rights violation against children who have an equal birthright citizenship involved under the religion clauses of the First Amendment just as the parents would if they are also citizens of the United States. However, I believe this or a similar standard was adopted all over the world and not just limited to the United States, freedom of religion and first amendment freedom of speech. According to a study of The Global Religious Landscape by the Pew Research Center, nearly three-quarters (73%) of the world’s religious people live in countries in which their religious group makes up a majority of the population. So, religious persuasion belief, is more likely, to connect to aspects attributed to hereditary religion than a matter of a chosen “Thinking Freedom” belief based on some valid and reliable justification of truth. And, to me, a great majority of why we have religions can largely be attributed to hereditary religion (someone in power forcing religion on a child).

Why hereditary religion does so well the world over is in its victims it learned “Authority bias“, “Illusion of truth effect”, “Status quo bias“, “Anchoring bias”, “Confirmation bias” and “Post-purchase rationalization.”

*Authority bias: “The tendency to attribute greater accuracy to the opinion of an authority figure (unrelated to its content) and be more influenced by that opinion.”

*Illusion of truth effect: “That people are more likely to identify as true statements those they have previously heard (even if they cannot consciously remember having heard them), regardless of the actual validity of the statement. In other words, a person is more likely to believe a familiar statement than an unfamiliar one.”

*Status quo bias: “The tendency to like things to stay relatively the same (see also loss aversion, endowment effect, and system justification).”

*Anchoring bias: “The tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information offered (the “anchor”) when making decisions and anchoring also occurs when individuals use an initial piece of information to make subsequent judgments. Once an anchor is set, other judgments are made by adjusting away from that anchor, and there is a bias toward interpreting other information around the anchor. For example, the initial price offered for a religion sets the standard for the rest of the negotiations, so that prices lower than the initial price seem more reasonable even if they are still higher than what the car is really worth.

*Confirmation bias: “The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a way that confirms one’s preconceptions.”

*Post-purchase rationalization: “The tendency to persuade oneself through rational argument that a purchase was good value.”

Sorce: List of cognitive biases: link

Religion Freedom Rights vs. Child Rights?

Children also have the right to freedom of religion or belief, and that must be protected. – The United Nations NEW YORK / GENEVA (23 October 2015) – The United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Heiner Bielefeldt, on Thursday called on all Governments represented at the UN General Assembly “to respect religious practices by children and their families and support families in fulfilling their role in providing an enabling environment for the realization of the rights of the child. Every individual child is a rights holder in his or her own capacity (self-ownership rights) as recognized in Article 14 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child,” – The United Nations Special Rapporteur Heiner Bielefeldt recalled during the presentation of his special report* on the rights of the child and their parents in the area of freedom of religion or belief. link

Article 14 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, guaranteeing the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. It is part of the series, A Commentary on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. link

Article 14 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child: A Commentary on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Article 14: The Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion. Scope of Article 14:# 1: ‘States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion’; Freedom of Thought; Freedom of Conscience; Freedom of Religion; # 2: ‘States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child.’; # 3: ‘Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.’. Ref

From the FACT SHEET: A summary of the rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child*Article 1 (Definition of the child): The Convention defines a ‘child’ as a person below the age of 18, unless the laws of a particular country set the legal age for adulthood younger. The Committee on the Rights of the Child, the monitoring body for the Convention, has encouraged States to review the age of majority if it is set below 18 and to increase the level of protection for all children under 18.*Article 2 (Non-discrimination): The Convention applies to all children, whatever their race, religion or abilities; whatever they think or say, whatever type of family they come from. It doesn’t matter where children live, what language they speak, what their parents do, whether they are boys or girls, what their culture is, whether they have a disability or whether they are rich or poor. No child should be treated unfairly on any basis.*Article 3 (Best interests of the child): The best interests of children must be the primary concern in making decisions that may affect them. All adults should do what is best for children. When adults make decisions, they should think about how their decisions will affect children. This particularly applies to budget, policy and law makers.*Article 4 (Protection of rights): Governments have a responsibility to take all available measures to make sure children’s rights are respected, protected and fulfilled. When countries ratify the Convention, they agree to review their laws relating to children. This involves assessing their social services, legal, health and educational systems, as well as levels of funding for these services. Governments are then obliged to take all necessary steps to ensure that the minimum standards set by the Convention in these areas are being met. They must help families protect children’s rights and create an environment where they can grow and reach their potential. In some instances, this may involve changing existing laws or creating new ones. Such legislative changes are not imposed, but come about through the same process by which any law is created or reformed within a country. Article 41 of the Convention points out the when a country already has higher legal standards than those seen in the Convention, the higher standards always prevail.*Article 5 (Parental guidance): Governments should respect the rights and responsibilities of families to direct and guide their children so that, as they grow, they learn to use their rights properly. Helping children to understand their rights does not mean pushing them to make choices with consequences that they are too young to handle. Article 5 encourages parents to deal with rights issues “in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child”. The Convention does not take responsibility for children away from their parents and give more authority to governments. It does place on governments the responsibility to protect and assist families in fulfilling their essential role as nurturers of children. The rights expert also urged religious communities across the world to ensure respect for the freedom of religion or belief of children within their teaching and community practices, bearing in mind the status of the child as a rights holder.*Article 12 (Respect for the views of the child): When adults are making decisions that affect children, children have the right to say what they think should happen and have their opinions taken into account. This does not mean that children can now tell their parents what to do. This Convention encourages adults to listen to the opinions of children and involve them in decision-making — not give children authority over adults. Article 12 does not interfere with parents’ right and responsibility to express their views on matters affecting their children. Moreover, the Convention recognizes that the level of a child’s participation in decisions must be appropriate to the child’s level of maturity. Children’s ability to form and express their opinions develops with age and most adults will naturally give the views of teenagers greater weight than those of a preschooler, whether in family, legal or administrative decisions.*Article 13 (Freedom of expression): Children have the right to get and share information, as long as the information is not damaging to them or others. In exercising the right to freedom of expression, children have the responsibility to also respect the rights, freedoms and reputations of others. The freedom of expression includes the right to share information in any way they choose, including by talking, drawing or writing.*Article 14 (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion): Children have the right to think and believe what they want and to practice their religion, as long as they are not stopping other people from enjoying their rights. Parents should help guide their children in these matters. The Convention respects the rights and duties of parents in providing religious and moral guidance to their children. Religious groups around the world have expressed support for the Convention, which indicates that it in no way prevents parents from bringing their children up within a religious tradition. At the same time, the Convention recognizes that as children mature and are able to form their own views, some may question certain religious practices or cultural traditions. The Convention supports children’s right to examine their beliefs, but it also states that their right to express their beliefs implies respect for the rights and freedoms of others.*Article 15 (Freedom of association): Children have the right to meet together and to join groups and organisations, as long as it does not stop other people from enjoying their rights. In exercising their rights, children have the responsibility to respect the rights, freedoms and reputations of others.*Article 17 (Access to information; mass media): Children have the right to get information that is important to their health and well-being. Governments should encourage mass media – radio, television, newspapers and Internet content sources – to provide information that children can understand and to not promote materials that could harm children. Mass media should particularly be encouraged to supply information in languages that minority and indigenous children can understand. Children should also have access to children’s books.*Article 18 (Parental responsibilities; state assistance): Both parents share responsibility for bringing up their children, and should always consider what is best for each child. Governments must respect the responsibility of parents for providing appropriate guidance to their children – the Convention does not take responsibility for children away from their parents and give more authority to governments. It places a responsibility on governments to provide support services to parents, especially if both parents work outside the home.*Article 19 (Protection from all forms of violence): Children have the right to be protected from beinghurt and mistreated, physically or mentally. Governments should ensure that children are properly cared for and protect them from violence, abuse and neglect by their parents, or anyone else who looks after. “Violations of freedom of religion or belief often affect the rights of children and their parents. Children, typically girls, from religious minorities for example, are abducted and forcibly converted to another religion through forced early marriage. Religious community leaders should support the elimination of harmful practices inflicted on children, including by publicly challenging problematic religious justifications for such practices whenever they occur.” – UN Special Reporter Heiner Bielefeldt With regard to possible conflicts, the Special Rapporteur stressed the need for due diligence by the State when dealing with conflicting human rights concerns, ensuring non-discriminatory family laws and the settlement of family-related conflicts, and combating harmful practices. “While in many situations of violations the rights of the child and the rights of his or her parents may be affected in conjunction, it is not always the case. The interests of parents and children are not necessarily identical, including in the area of freedom of religion or belief.” – UN Special Reporter Heiner Bielefeldt The expert highlighted that parents or legal guardians have the right and duty to direct the child in the exercise of his or her freedom of religion or belief. “Such direction should be given in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child in order to facilitate a more and more active role of the child in exercising his or her freedom of religion or belief, thus paying respect to the child as a rights holder from early on. Parents are also not obliged to provide a religiously ‘neutral’ upbringing in the name of the child’s right to an ‘open future. The rights of parents to freedom of religion or belief include their rights to educate their children according to their own conviction and to introduce their children to religious initiation rites.” – UN Special Reporter Heiner Bielefeldt The UN Special Reporter’s research discusses issues related to religious socialization; religious instruction within the family; participation in religious community life; religious education in schools; the voluntary display of religious symbols in schools; respect for the evolving capacities of the maturing child; and non-discrimination on the basis of religion or belief. (*) Check the Special Rapporteur’s report to the General Assembly (A/70/286): link

Mr. Heiner Bielefeldt (Germany) is Professor of Human Rights and Human Rights Politics at the University of Erlangen-Nürnberg. The Special Reporter’s research interests include various interdisciplinary facets of human rights theory and practice, with a focus on freedom of religion or belief. UN Special Reporter Heiner Bielefeldt was the first human rights expert that conducted an official country visit to Cyprus in the March/April 2012. Learn more, log on to: link

The Special Reporters are part of what is known as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. Special Procedures, the largest body of independent experts in the UN Human Rights system, is the general name of the Council’s independent fact-finding and monitoring mechanisms that address either specific country situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world. Special Procedures’ experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity. Check the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief: link

I am a caring firebrand atheist, wishing to be hard on ideas but kind to people.

Oppose the Force of Hereditary religion!

My life; the good, the bad, and the ugly on the road to the Mental Freedom of Atheism

I Believe Archaeology, not Myths & Why Not, as the Religious Myths Already Violate Reason!

Archaeological, Scientific, & Philosophic evidence shows the god myth is man-made nonsense.

I am not the thing abuse made, I am a shooting star blazing bright, shining far pass my past.

Psychological certainty and Epistemic certainty?

Losing My Religion and MY Faith Addiction

god Claims are a Non-Reality Commodity

My Blogs on the Evolution of RELIGION

Explaining My thoughts on the Evolution of Religion

My Blogs Somewhat Relating to Science

If you think you believe in a god, “what do you mean by god,” saying a name tells me not one thing about the thing I am asking to know “its” beingness/thingness/attributes/qualities. Thus, what is the thing “god” to which you are talking about and I want you to explain its beingness/thingness/attributes/qualities? Religious/theistic people with supernatural beliefs often seem as though they haven’t thought much about and that is something we can help using ontology questions about the beingness/thingness/attributes/qualities they are trying to refer too. What do you mean by god, when you use the term god? And, I am not asking you for the name you attach to the thing you label as a god. I don’t need to know what the god you believe is known “by.” I am asking, what is the thing you are naming as a god and what that thing is, its qualities every detail like all things have if they are real. Are you just making stuff up or guessing/hoping or just promoting unjustified ideas you want to believe, what is a god?

Do you want what is true or want what you believe without concern for what may actually be true?

Religion and it’s god myths are like a spiritually transmitted disease of the mind. This infection even once cured holds mental disruption which can linger on for a lifetime.

If you are a religious believer, may I remind you that faith in the acquisition of knowledge is not a valid method worth believing in. Because, what proof is “faith”, of anything religion claims by faith, as many people have different faith even in the same religion?

I Don’t Have to Respect Ideas

People get confused ideas are not alive nor do they have beingness, Ideas don’t have rights nor the right to even exist only people have such a right. Ideas don’t have dignity nor can they feel violation only people if you attack them personally. Ideas don’t deserve any special anything they have no feelings and cannot be shamed they are open to the most brutal merciless attack and challenge without any protection and deserve none nor will I give them any if they are found wanting in evidence or reason. I will never respect Ideas if they are devoid of merit I only respect people. When I was young it was all about me, I wanted to be liked. Then I got older and it was even more about me, I wanted power. Now I am beyond a toxic ego and it is not just about me, I want to make a difference. Sexism is that evil weed that can sadly grow even in the well-tended garden of the individual with an otherwise developed mind. Which is why it particularly needs to be attacked and exposed; and is why I support feminism. Here are four blogs on that: Activism Labels Matter, thus Feminism is Needed, Feminist atheists as far back as the 1800s?, Sexism in the Major World Religions and Rape, Sexism and Religion?

Having privilege in race, gender, sexuality, ability, class, nationality, etc. does not mean one did not have it hard in life, it just was not hard due to race, gender, sexuality, ability, class, nationality, etc. if one has privilege in that area.

Empathy: think in another’s thinking, try to feel their feeling, and care about their experience.

Theism is presented as adding love to your life… But to me, more often it peddles in ignorance (pseudo-science, pseudo-history, and pseudo-morality), tribalism (strong in-group loyalty if you believe like them and aversion to difference; like shunning: social rejection, emotional distance, or ostracism), and psychological terrorism; primarily targeting well being both safety and comfort (you are born a sinner, you are evil by nature, you are guilty of thought crimes, threats of misfortune, suffering, and torture “hell”).

Hell yes, I am against the fraud that is the world religions.

Why not be against the promotion of woo-woo pseudo-truth, when I am very against all pseudo-science, pseudo-history, and pseudo-morality and the harm they can produce. Along with the hate, such as sexism and homophobia are too often seen or the forced indoctrination of children. And this coercive indoctrination of the world religions, with their pseudo-science, pseudo-history, and pseudo-morality mainly furthered by forced Hereditary Religion (family or cultural, religious beliefs forced on children because the parent or caregiver believes that way). This is sadly done, even before a child can be expected to successfully navigate reason; it’s almost as if religious parents believe their “woo-woo pseudo-truth” lies will not be so easily accepted if they wait on a mind that can make its own choice. Because we do see how hard it is for the ones forced into Hereditary Religion. It seems difficult for them to successfully navigate reason in relation to their woo-woo pseudo-truth, found in a religion they were indoctrinationally taught to prefer, because after being instructed on how to discern pseudo-truth as truth than just wishing that their blind servitude belief in a brand of religious pseudo-truth devoid of justified, valid or reliable reason and evidence. I care because I am a rationalist, as well as an atheist.

Thus, this religious set of “woo-woo pseudo-truth” pushed on the simple-minded as truth bothers me greatly. So, here it is as simple as I can make it you first need a good thinking standard to address beliefs one may approach as a possible belief warranted to be believed. I wish to smash that lying pig of religion with the Hammer of Truth: Ontology, Epistemology, and Axiology Questions (a methodological use of philosophy). Overall, I wish to promote in my self and for others; to value a worthy belief etiquette, one that desires a sound accuracy and correspondence to the truth: Reasoned belief acquisitions, good belief maintenance, and honest belief relinquishment. May we all be authenticly truthful rationalists that put facts over faith.

I have made many mistakes in my life but the most common one of all is my being resistant to change. However, now I wish to be more, to be better, as I desire my openness to change if needed, not letting uncomfortable change hold me back. May I be a rationalist, holding fast to a valued belief etiquette: demanding reasoned belief acquisitions, good belief maintenance, and honest belief relinquishment.

Truth Navigation: Techniques for Discussions or Debates

Ok, I am a kind of “Militant” Atheist

I want a war of ideas where the loser is ignorance or hate and the victor is kindness and a rational mind. Not another religious war with people where the loser is always humanity no matter the victor. What I hope for with my discussions or expressed ideas is not so much to strive to change people’s mind. But instead, I wish to inspire your mind to reason and to thrive on the search for valid and reliable evidence as well as a high standard n your ethics of belief. This ethics of belief I hope everyone adopts is something like this: reasoned belief acquisitions, good belief maintenance, and honest belief relinquishment. Sadly the professed thing of hope, “Religion” can be an and too often is an easy excuse to do horrible things, which is clear throughout history.I am a BIG fan of the truth. “Where did you find it?! Mankind has been diligently seeking truth since time memorial!” – Challenger 

My response, Your statement is a “truth claim” right after asking about truth: “Where did you find it?! Mankind has been diligently seeking truth since time memorial! (a “truth claim” emphasized with two exclamation marks seeming to demonstrate that you believed you had said a confirmed truth. So you do believe you have found a truth while acting as if you don’t know, and seemingly by your strength of assertion, believe I guess, that no one can but here I am teaching you truth!!!I have been asked before, how can I stand to deal with illogical, ones lacking critical thinking, the unreasonable, misinformed but fully believe, deliberately uninformed or deluded people, often so kindly? Well, I believe in others, or at least their ability to reason even if you don’t know how or are not paying attention currently. I can do deal with most people as I am often fighting for them even if they only feel I am against them and it usually is not that hard to do with a heart of compassion, as I care for the future of humanity and people have value. And, if people don’t listen or grasp logic, I try something else like reasoning. If they will not listen or grasp reasoning, I will try just getting them to think, maybe on something they can agree or they do understand trying to work them back to the rationalism they are not getting or are avoiding. Then, if I can get them to reason, I build that up to logic. If they don’t seem to get them to thinking or are trying to avoid I can draw them back to feelings, maybe on something they can agree or they do understand trying to work them back to thinking, then reasoning, and then finally back to logic with which they are not getting or are avoiding. In a general way, all reality, in a philosophic sense, is an emergent property of reason, and knowing how reason accrues does not remove its warrant. Feelings are experienced then perceived, leading to thinking, right thinking is reason, right reason is logic, right logic is mathematics, right mathematics is physics and from there all science.

“Damien, what I find interesting is how an atheist like you spends so much time and energy on God and religion.” – Challenger

My response, Well, let’s see, maybe because we atheists and anti-religionists care to inform our fellow humans who have been lied to and are lying to others and often forcing religion on children indoctrinating them with lies over truth and it’s harming us all. You know, all the religious hate groups and religious violence stuff and the like. What I find interesting is how could a responsible caring ethical person stay silent against religions, that my friend is a much better question.

What is it to be Rational? I am a Rationalist.

As an atheist rationalist, I tend to filter everything through reason, empirical facts, and ethics before they can be accepted as justified, true or good.

A Rational Mind Values Humanity

A truly rational mind sees the need for humanity, as they too live in the world and see themselves as they actually are an alone body in the world seeking comfort and safety. Thus, see the value of everyone around them, as they too are the same and therefore, rationally as well a humanistically, we should work for this humanity we are part of. Moreover, we simply can either dwell in or help its flourishing (the humanity we are part of), as we are all in a metaphoric way, are in the hands of each other and communally need each other. We rise by helping each other and we may fail if we keep going as hurtful as humans too often are to each other. May we be good humans. We can be builders of life or its destruction. The person is political so the actions of my life are the expression of my political values even before I tell you what brand I may claim. We are not our past, though we are bound to it. We are also not our future self yet. So, just be the best you in the here and now. May the actions of my life be written deep with the poetry of my humanity. What do your actions say?

We as humanity must work together as one people and one human race. We can no longer sit back and watch the world burn. We are accountable for the world staying the same thus leading to extended suffering, or change the world to start alleviating suffering. For too long we have gotten comfortable with eyes of hate, which only seem to find victims, instead of eyes of love, helping us find friends. I am not calling for fighting for a political party; I am trying to inspire humanitarian flourishing not limited to even a country. As I wish to look to the big picture, that we are all global citizens, and I say it’s time we start acting like it. I, as others, promise to strive to help be the change so needed in this world. Will you join us?

True Morality Not the Golden Rule…

Axiology, Morality and the Dignity Being:  “Human Entity”

Axiological Ethics not Pseudo Morality

To me, true morality is not starting with an “us” or “me” focused morality, as morality is a social interaction exchange, thus it must be other focused. Some would say what about, “treating others as they should be treated?” To me, I see everyone as owning themselves all equal, in this right as humans. Moreover, to me morality is behavioral and a social property, there is no immoral thing one can do to themselves as one cannot violate themselves or their own consent as they choose their own actions. Thus, to me, all morality is about others and our interactions with them and them with us. So, morality arises in a social context with all things not that all things have the same moral weight. Therefore, moral relationships with life outside humans have a different moral weight or value. I am not worried that you will be offended by the truth, as I am at how your beliefs offend the truth. Facts are facts, so if you have nonfact beliefs fine but don’t feel bad when I question them.

Reason, Morality, and Emotions?

It saddens me when proponents of atheism also seem to be proponents of anti-intellectualism either in rejecting philosophy or science. I am against all pseudoscience, pseudohistory, and pseudo-morality and the harm they can produce. I am a rationalist, as well as an atheist. Therefore, I am happy to correct the errors in thinking many atheists, agnostics, and skeptics may have, mainly because of the overconfidence in skepticism and the lack of a respect for the supremacy reason needed for logic which is needed to standardize validity. Religion should be seen as ancient mythology to be marveled and laughed at, rather than promoted as truth when it is only feeble pseudo-truth. And why do we so often error it thinking to wish on myths and not believe in scientific proven “godless-reality”, is because We are emotional beings who have a thinking strategy called reason we only sometimes use. Simply, We are not rational beings who have a bonding strategy called emotions we sometimes use. Atheists talk about gods and religions for the same reason doctors talk about cancer, they are looking for a cure or a firefighter talking about fires because they burn people and they care to stop them. We atheists too often feel a need to help the victim’s of mental slavery, held in the bondage that is the false beliefs of gods and the conspiracy theories of reality found in religions.

People all the time talk about, “I believe” in regards to religion and gods. No, likely you never had a chance to first investigate all the facts then choose what to believe or not believe. You like everyone else raised in a religious house where indoctrinated to the same religion your family held before your birth. So you did not so much “believe” as “give in and slavishly agreed” to what you were told. Thus, you are more rightly called an agreer then a believer, especially when you don’t read the holy book you say you totally believe in. It seems to me, religious believers are usually ignorant of the truth or willfully uninformed, foolish or indoctrinated to keep believing these conspiracy theories of reality that religions are with their magic claims, when presented with the facts and stupid or brainwashed to keep believing when they realize that the beliefs they have contained falsehoods, inaccurate information, or lies.

As an atheist, I feel more wonder than I did as a theist because I thought, “big deal” to any wonder I experienced, thinking god could do anything. So with such an unrealistic mindset, everything lost its wonder but it’s the opposite as an atheist. As a theist, the world was full of superstitions and supernatural magic possibilities and thus utilized thinking that was not in the real world. As an atheist all I have now is the real world, not that all atheists seem to get this, we all are in a real world devoid of magic anything, therefore, everything adds to my feeling of awe. There should be little debate with atheist acknowledging discernable reality compared to theists with non-reality claims. Yes, I have way more awe and wonder as an atheist than I ever had as a theist because as a theist anything was possible with god. Therefore, as a theist things where not that amazing. However, as an atheist grasping what an absolute accidental or how random things are, with a 95 to 99 % of all life ever existing on this planet went extinct. I am thoroughly amazed we are even here the evolved children of ancient exploded stars, likely born in galaxies born in supermassive black holes, it’s all amazing. I am all for free thinking, if the evidence is there. Great, go down the rabbit hole but do not eat the rabbit shit offered as real; when its proof disappears like a mental mirage, gone in a poof magic as simple as the magical thinking that inspires all manner of flawed beliefs.

If the only rights you fight for are your own, then you have a lot to learn about the value of rights.

Religion has been a reason for violence and harm and at times a promoter of peace. Science does not need to fill the gap of religion. We need to remove it as it was always an abstraction not a realistic thing to being with. Not one thing religion offers that is thought of as good that cannot be done by persons not following any religion. Atheist generally is simply life with religion removed, all its pseudo meaning as well as pseudoscience, pseudohistory, and pseudo-morality. We have real science, realistic history and can access real morality with a blend of philosophy, anthropology, psychology, sociology and cognitive science.

World, do you hear me now, because you were nothing but silent as I suffered extreme religious oppression and to this news, you simply spit in my face telling my religious freedom and all I can think is, no, you mean my parent’s religious freedom, which may I remind you is a violation of my religious freedom and was instead my religious oppression. Where are you now, while millions await this same fate if you keep doing nothing?

If the only rights you fight for are your own, then you have a lot to learn about the value of rights.

Childhood Indoctrination is often the gateway drug, to a life of irrational magical thinking superstitions, like ghosts, gods, or guardian spirits. The Mental Parasite Called God? God is not simply a myth, it a mental parasite feeding off your life, is like a mental prison concept, disemboweling you, and any religion that supports the concept of god(s), becomes like a controlling jailer to the mind of the god believer. What is love, if it is so cheap, that it is for wholesale to myths? To me, it is truly a sad thing, when you have people offer more love to an unknown and at best unproven thing they call god; not even evident in this world, over real people, even loved ones, which are known in this world. Sadly, all too often a mind full of god(s) myths have no appetite for reason.I am an anti-religionist, not just an atheist, and here is why summed up in three ideas I am against. And, in which these three things are common in all religions: “pseudo-science”, “pseudo-history”, and “pseudo-morality”. And my biggest thing of all is the widespread forced indoctrination of children, violating their free choice of what to not believe or believe, I hate forced hereditary religion. And my biggest thing of all is the widespread forced indoctrination of children, violating their free choice of what to not believe or believe, I hate forced hereditary religion. As well as wish to offer strong critiques regarding the pseudo-meaning of the “three letter noise” people call “G.o.d” (group originated delusion)!

It seems, in general, the less education and

higher poverty have a higher correlation to being religious.

Am I a survivor?

I fell as you tripped me again and from your hate, I remove myself from such mind and being corruption freely walking into the gates of love so longed for. You have not beaten me, you cannot stop me, you don’t want me to live, to thrive, to be all the best I can be but you hate and yet I am still here, a survivor, a full life liver, a thriver, as well as a warrior for kindness and compassion, reaching the care I was rarely offered, as a gift to the ones so desperately oppressed under your harsh gaze. May we all be free and the positive best we can be, I know I am as best I can. I am here growing stronger every day. Who am I, you ask, I respond loud and proud, I am a survivor and even in these chains from my past, you will not stop me. Sometimes, we need to see the truth, that many people are liers and deniers while claiming they are believers. Once we stop seeing the dignity of others we feel free to violate them with impunity. But when dignity is a friend respect has become once path. I am a survivor!

“Child’s Eyes”

I find a sanctuary of hope, in the Armageddon of my life. I see a sweet young child and I think if we are all born with love. Where do we learn to hate? And why? I look into the eyes of the young child Only finding a gentle love with an uncorrupted honesty. I think, how I wish not to know, hate! I wish only for the innocence of love. I wish the dark postcards of my heart were blank but how can a piece of wood turn back into a tree? How can I forget the pain inside of me? I wish to forget. I wish to unlearn. To be cleansed by love and set free. I look down into the child’s eyes wishing for what I can never have again, My own innocence, religion you robbed me of that!

May I not be a silent watcher as millions of children are subjugated almost before their birth let alone when they can understand thought and are forcibly coerced, compelled, constrained, and indoctrinated in the mental pollution that religion can be. My main goal against religion is to fully stop as much as possible forced indoctrination, one could ask but then why do I challenge all adults faith? well, who do you think is doing the lying to children in the first place. End Hereditary religion, if its a belief let them the equal right to choose to believe. Don’t give up, think of all the people who you get to prove wrong with your success. Oppose the Force of Hereditary religion!

So, are you against Hereditary religion?