Is bringing the option of atheism to people worse than the potential
harm done to a child by an «obey or your will be sent to hell» message?
While the question of what to do with information about
harm done to a child or an elderly person is important, it is the myriad of more mundane questions such as these that are more likely to have an effect on the church's day - to - day ministry.
You might try focusing on
the harm done to the children by staying together and being miserable, fighting, and leading tense, unhappy, and unproductive lives.
My case was widely reported because it was the first time that the British Court of Appeal had accepted that British relocation law relegated
the harm done to children.
What idiot would stick with a position after seeing
the harm it does to children?
To be plainly clear, econonomic neodenialism — as advocated here on Climate Etc by posters like Peter Lang, Latimer Alder, and Tomas Milanovic — is morally wrong because of evil
harms done to children by short - sighted future discounting associated to economic neodenialism.
In addition, many parents are understandably angry when a daycare is negligent and want to seek justice for
the harm done to their child.
You might try focusing on
the harm done to the children by staying together and being miserable, fighting, and leading tense, unhappy, and unproductive lives.
This, to our mind, is a landmark judgment, with the court, in this instance, placing the emotional harm caused by parental alienation on an equal footing with physical abuse, and accepting that
the harm done to the child met the threshold criteria of significant harm.
She has at the same time been trying to make professionals aware of
the harm done to children when the child is separated from one - or both - parent / - s without just cause, and at the same time has had his or her thoughts reformed (PA) based on an implacable hostility.
Not exact matches
And, according
to researchers, it can
do you — and, more particularly, young
children —
harm.
But substantive debates on actual issues - or even the occasional bickering disagreement about the best route
to grandma's - won't
do your
child any
harm.
In an article in the Daily Mail, Google chief Eric Schmidt outlined his company's multi - pronged approach
to «
do everything in our power
to protect
children from
harm.»
While Judaism contains the oldest known humane limits on the use of animals (e.g.,
harming an animal is punishable, slaughter must be painless, they must be fed before one's
children, they are
to rest on the Sabbath, etc.), it
does not eliminate animals for use as food, manufacture, or for ritual.
«Whatever you
do to the least of my brothers, you
do unto me» «Love your neighbour as yourself» «If anyone
harms a
child, it would be better if he had been thrown into the millpond with the millstone around his neck» «Let he little ones come
to me for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven»
People have the right
to leave church and organized religion, they have a right
to question an institution that will
do anything
to save face even if it means letting
children be
harmed (and trust me, there are Priests that have issues with girls - my mom when
to an all girls» Catholic school in the 60s and talks about how many of the priests used
to «hang out» with the young girls out and girls have been abused), churches that are not practicing social justice.
He is grieved because we are his
children and he sees the
harm we
do to ourselves and others.
Who can calculate the
harm done to babies born out of wedlock,
to children affected by divorce?
8 With respect
to those who refuse
to accept Castilian sovereignty and the Christian faith the document includes this clause: «If you
do not
do it... with the help of God I will use all my power against you and will battle you everywhere and in every possible way, and you will be subject
to the yoke and obedience of the Church and their Highnesses, and I will take your people and your women and
children, and make them slaves, and as much I will send them, and I will inflict on you all the
harm and damage possible.»
We are not
harming our
children, you would be the one
doing that - no decent loving parent raises their
child to think that if they fail
to worship god, they will be tortured in a burning pit.
For real, 100 %: most atheists are not like you 6
to 10 regular posters who constantly berate and insult me with names like «delusional» or snide remarks like «don't
harm children.»
All seemingly turned from God except Noah / God repents / and saves a core group
to start over / trying
to protect His
children is a common theme in the OT / I don't know much of resistance or pacifism, but if you tried
to harm my grandaughter I would probably respond with whatever it took.
Gwynne demands that youths memorize them, and he has a four - word reply
to educators who maintain that memorization and grammar itself
harm the budding egos of
children: «
Do not believe it.»
The ones who have
done no
harm to children?
I wonder then why Mr. Nye is wasting so much oxygen complaining about the great «
harm» the teaching of Creationism
does to children... though I may not personally agree with the tenets of Creationism, I
do believe in the right of parents
to pass their personal religious beliefs on
to their
children - whether those beliefs are Christian, Hindu, Muslim, etc....
Don't you think
harming children for life is a little more serious than Nouns being too involved with social justice!!?? Behaviors like these continue
to make the Catholic Church look bad.
Communications and travel make people aware of the
harm done to workers, women and
children and
to the environment — in rich countries as well as poor.
praising your imaginary friend on an internet blog is useless... he doesn't exist and if he
did he certainly wouldn't be paying attention
to this site... he's too busy allowing the catholic cult of peds
to get away with
harming children
God would never allow «HIS PRIESTS»
to do any
harm to any of «HIS
CHILDREN.»
It is crucial for us
to understand that the
child of faith will not be
harmed «if the body is clothed in secular dress, dwells in unconsecrated places, eats and drinks as others
do,
does not pray aloud, and neglects
to do all those «religious» things which some decree... one thing, and one thing only is necessary for us
to know righteousness, life and freedom.
If it doesn't bring
harm to God's
children and isn't clearly, blatantly defined as sinful (which I would argue Jesus made causing
harm =
to sin), then don't judge.
This thinking
did so much
harm to both the parents and the
children, and now a few years later they are still recovering.
Jesus talking about
harm being
done to little
children should count for pedophilia.
Perhaps the humanity of the unborn
child that everyone instinctively recognises is easier
to suppress if you don't wake up in the night feeling a baby turning somersaults inside you nor be expected
to accept chronic sickness because taking anti-nausea drugsmight
harm the tiny life you are incubating.
Wouldn't he have helped the
child rather than deny the
child, as the church
does to protect its own reputation over the
harm of
child?
More than a few questions linger in the wake of these six attempts
to reimage redemption: How, one may ask, can we experience the process of letting - go without falling victim
to the surrender imagery that has
done such
harm to women and
children, particularly in abusive situations?
Please don't teach creationism
to your
children, or others, you will be
doing them a great
harm academically.
If we don't push back, we become enablers of a major attempt
to harm children.
«For those amonst ye who
do bad things
to my gentle gay
children will reap the
harm that ye have sown.»
If they hold a Seder in their homes on the first night of the Passover, or take their families
to a synagogue on the Day of Atonement, it is only because they feel that it won't
do the
children any
harm, and may even
do them a mite of good,
to be exposed
to a sentimental observance of old folk customs that are part of their heritage.
What he
does to bring
harm to another might just come back
to his
children and he will pay for the evil bile he is foisting upon all of us citizens, disgracing our country for his dreamed of chance for be elected again and
to again live off the government's payroll.
How
do you live with yourself knowing the group you are involved with covers up the
harm to innocent
children and keeps the monsters safe?
Churches involved in this kind of hands - on ministry see firsthand the power and influence of the abortion industry, and the
harm it
does to women,
children, and communities.
But English law doesn't exclude that as a reason for getting abortion, because the law only requires two doctors
to certify that the woman will be
harmed mentally or physically by having the
child.
This is why it is necessary
to remind ourselves that desiring a
child is not sufficient grounds for adoption, and that apparently simple solutions based on compassion are not always good solutions: Much
harm can be
done in the name of the good.
I
did much
harm to myself and husband and
children by trying
to turn us into a wonderful Christian family for many years.
The glorifying of this act in the media is
harming our
children by exposing them
to this at a confusing time in their lives» Well yeah, I suppose glorifying that the pope made a statement
does do that but what can you
do?
This is why it is necessary
to remind ourselves that desiring a
child is not sufficient grounds for adoption, and that solutions based on compassion and that appear simple are not always good solutions: much
harm can be
done in the name of the good.
How then should we protect our
children from those seeking
to do harm if we remove our means of protecting them?
It is the rapist, not the
child, who should be punished... We don't want
to harm women, but there must be no intervention through choice
to kill the baby... We accept there can be natural abortions, but that is the biological will of the body, not the chosen will of the human mind».