I'm up for an argument

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Silvia on January 17, 2008 at 7:46pm

Ooooh Im definatly up for an argument. Well actually I've just been craving a little debate action!

Alright so there is something that drives me completely off the wall. I have a passion for literature, and anyone that wants to partake in this passion and understands the enjoyment of reading may understand my argument better. I read the Golden Compass about 4 years ago, in Grade 10. Loved the book, it was part of a trilogy (People may be familiar with it, they made a movie about it which did not do justice to the books). Netherthelss, after all the publicity of the movie came religious extremists that wanted the book banned. It infuriates me, because it is good literature, and it sparks imagination in children. Banning books, is taking away knowledge from people.
Reasons for banning the book were:
1. In the third book the characters kill "God". No, in the third book the characters kill a fictional angel. There is a difference.
2. The writer is an atheist (We can't start banning books on the beliefs of authors now)
I do believe in God, but I think it is to extreme to ban books from children. This has been going on long enough with Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings. I think that the people who want to ban the books should first read them, and then they can openly argue back an educated opinion.

Anyways Jordan that's something that drives me crazy. It's cool that you're taking the other side because it takes creativity to argue agains something opposite that you may believe in too :P

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Flamekebab on January 17, 2008 at 7:56pm

I'm wondering if any controversy like this occurred in the UK, it may have done and I've missed it, but from what I've seen these kind of bizarre extremist actions happen primarily in the US. So much for "land of the free" I guess.

Is there just a particularly high concentration of people who are fucking retarded, figuratively speaking, over there? Why does anyone listen to these people?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Silvia on January 17, 2008 at 8:28pm

Actually Im from Canada so I guess there may be a highconcentration of these people in all of North America. I think there's so many of them that they listen to each other and thrive in self affirmation. Apperently "magic" equates to the devil......right......the children of today should have a boxed up one dimensional view of the world for fear they might encounter the devil Eeeek!

Im considering moving to the UK after your comment. :P

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jordan on January 17, 2008 at 9:28pm

People can decide that for their specific community, a specific church for example, a certain book or even idea is banned, and there's nothing wrong with that at all because all the people in that specific community made a concious decision to join and practice.

People can even BELIEVE that a certain book should be abnned for everyone, and there's nothing wrong with that belief. You understand that people can believe whatever they want to believe. They can even believe that they have a right ot impose their beliefs on others, whether or not they actually have that right.

So there's nothing wrong with people thinking or believing that a book should be banned, and there's nothing wrong with them trying to instill that belief into others, because at the end of the day everyone makes a personal choice on whether or not to agree with them.

So a book should Not be banned from the general population, but people can BELIEVE it should be banned if they so choose to believe that way. There is a big difference between how things are and how people think things should be... so there's nothing wrong with people thinking a book should be banned-because thinking a book should be banned is not the same as that book being banned.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Silvia on January 17, 2008 at 9:49pm

Yes, that's definatly a good point about the difference between "believing" and actually banning. People do have a right to an opinion, and it's only natural that opinions will differ from mine.

Well I did some research to see if people did take action on banning this book, and as an example here is one instance where the Catholic school board successfully voted on banning the trilogy of books from the school. The reason this peeves me is because these adults are making the decision for the children, and I dont find the books harmful in any way. If anything they may interest children into the world of literature and develop their reading and writing skills. It's not as if the books are advocating murder or sexually explicit content. Religion is a touchy subject, but when I read them the books did not steer my beliefs in any sort.

Anyways Im getting caught up in it again, here's the link to the article:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071220/book_b...

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jordan on January 17, 2008 at 9:58pm

Interesting that you would bring this up. A Catholic School Board is obviously not a public school.. i.e. not funded by government money/tax money. It is a Private School-so as a parent you would have to make a concious effort to send your child to this school-which means that you would have to want.. REALLY WANT your child to go to this school. We must protect everyone's right to raise their child as they wish, to instill whatever system of beliefs and morals they so choose into their child. They have a right to raise their child to believe that anything about "magic" is work of the devil, if that's how they want to raise their kid-and regardless of how idiotic it may seem to you or me. And, once again, we must remember this is not a public school, it is a private school. Just as the State decides what's taught in public schools because the State is the one that provides the funding, Whoever provides the funding for a private school will most likely have a major influence on deciding what's taught at that private school.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Flamekebab on January 17, 2008 at 10:50pm

I disagree that everyone has the right to believe whatever they want. Certain views are, from my viewpoint at least, exclusively negative and destructive. Of course, in saying this I don't mean that people's beliefs need to be policed or anything, merely that certain beliefs should not be tolerated in modern society. Things like "it's okay to drink and drive" or "child abuse isn't a big deal" for example. Is it okay for someone to believe those things?

I want to be clear that what I say here shouldn't be extrapolated too far, a mistake many people seem to make, claiming I'm a fascist, for example (that one was because I think Ireland's ban on incandescent lightbulbs is a sensible use of government intervention as leaving it up to the free market and an apathetic populace won't push such a move any time soon and the benefits to the environment justify said ban). I do my best to think "live and let live", mostly. I don't always succeed, mainly because I keep encountering people with what appear to me to be worryingly low IQs and horrendously poor judgement. The very idea of giving these people any power or influence seems an exercise in sadism.

I'm far more inclined to think we earn our rights, rather than are granted them by default (I'm not specifying which rights because I haven't thought about it enough to clarify yet, give it time). I've lived in situations where I have very few rights and very little freedom and I find that I appreciate the freedoms I do have far more than so many others who seem to not even understand what they mean. Perhaps it is a case of "use them or lose them", but I've not thought about that one enough to take a standpoint, I'm more just "throwing it out there" to see what you think.

My views aren't set in stone, I'm constantly tinkering with them and attempting to create a superior combination to the last tinkering's results.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jason on January 17, 2008 at 10:08pm

"and there's nothing wrong with them trying to instill that belief into others"

This statement is bollocks. This is the reason wars are fought in the name of religion.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jordan on January 17, 2008 at 10:15pm

So you are saying that If I believe that the sky is purple and the flying spaghetti monster will save us all, I have no right to raise my child with those beliefs?(If I had a child and If i believed those things) Or are you saying that If I believed those things I'd have no right to try to get you to believe them?

People have the right to try to get other people to think the way they do. Persuasion and recruitment into ideas/beliefs is perfectly fine-because ultimately, no matter how good of an argument you make to get someone to believe a certain way, ultimately it's that someone that has to decide whether they think/believe like that or not, And everyone does have a right to try to get others to believe like they do.

trying to get other people to believe like you do is not the same as forcing them.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Silvia on January 17, 2008 at 10:30pm

I went to a Catholic school merely because it was the closest one in my district. Sure my situations is a bit different than others, and it only makes sense that parents would want to instill their beliefs on their children (they feel it's for their own good) The question is....is it always for their own good? I mean protecting children from certain things may want them to be more exposed to it.

Anyways Jordan your comment made me curious. So I was wondering if you would have kids would you raise them with your beliefs (be it Catholic/atheist/agnostic). Im just curious its not some trick debate question for me to prove a point.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jordan on January 17, 2008 at 10:41pm

If I were to have kids I would let them choose whether or not they were going to be religious, and if so what religion they would want to practice. I would however try to raise them with a basic set of morals.. things like don't steal, don't fight unless your cause is just, treat others the way you want to be treated... etc. etc.

With regards to "The question is...is it always for their own good?" ... well we can decide for ourselves if we agree or disagree with the way they are raising their child-and we can even try to convince them to raise their child a different way if we were that concerned and nosy, But in NO way can we Force anyone to raise their child with a certain set of beliefs or morals.

Just like if you were raising a child-and say people didn't agree with the way you were doing it.. well they can disagree and they can even tell you you're doing it wrong and try to convince you to do it their way-But they can't force you to do it that way, in the end it's the parent's decision alone on what ideas/beliefs/morals they choose to instill or not instill into their children

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Flamekebab on January 17, 2008 at 10:40pm

I would say that if you're as persuasive as some of us can be then the line between choosing or being made to believe is very fuzzy.

I also disagree about it being a "right" to raise children to believe whatever the parent feels like, regardless of any sanity. I personally feel that in this particular case the idea of a group wanting to ban a book that clearly poses no threat to anyone suggests a dangerous lack of critical thinking and analytical skills. Just as I wouldn't entrust someone with severe learning difficulties with the power to make decisions over others, I don't consider it to be sensible to have these kind of people wielding power.

It does seem that there are very few people intelligent enough or strong enough to not be corrupted by power. It's why I have massive objections to organised religion holding power. It's not that I have a problem with the views, per se, although I sometimes think they're idiotic and childlike, it's that when people are united they can easily be influenced by a power figure. Unfortunately, in many cases, this rush of power seems to affect the judgement of said leader. Either that or their judgement was never anything special to begin with and the extra exposure and increased sway of their will exposes the many cracks in their thinking.

It is very hard to draw a generalistic line in the sand and say "that's the point it becomes wrong". In fact, by doing so I feel one falls into the trap of rigid dogma which seems to frequently result in obeying the letter of the law rather than the spirit of it (which appears to be what has happened to much of Christendom).

My apologies if this post isn't quite as well argued as it should be, it's nearly 0600 here and I really should be in bed.

▶ Reply to This

• 1
• 2