Should the state remove children from atheist homes?

[Walt]

It's HARD to believe some people DO think like that. I believe in God, and pray several times a day. But if atheist parents are treating their children right, loving them, and providing them with a good home, the children CAN'T be taken from them. This would be illegal, and could NOT be done.

It would be illegal under our current laws, but laws can be changed. And even if it should not be done, it can be done.

Obviously, after they get done with government confiscation of children of atheists, they will move on to the Jews, liberals, moderates, and everyone else who is not in the Alt Right. If we allow them to start, there will be no end.

[RB 60]

It would be illegal under our current laws, but laws can be changed. And even if it should not be done, it can be done.

Obviously, after they get done with government confiscation of children of atheists, they will move on to the Jews, liberals, moderates, and everyone else who is not in the Alt Right. If we allow them to start, there will be no end.

It can be done through Domestic Relations. They've taken kids from a decent parent over false
allegations in messy divorce cases, for one. They can make up shit on you and you're screwed.

Yeah, kinda like gun control.

[TexanManWithPlans]

I'm tempted to argue that, yes, it would be in the vested interest of the state to ban atheists from procreating, as well as to confiscate the children from atheist homes, and redistribute them to homes, such as Christian homes, grounded in some measure of morality or virtue.

An atheist, by mere virtue of it's own inferiority cannot be trusted around children, let alone allowed to have children of its own; for example, to an atheist, rape, murder, child molestations are not evils or moral ills, they are just alternate 'lifestyle preferences', or perhaps even a good thing.

So why on earth would we allow those to have children who can't even morally object to raping and harming children without stealing and appropriating Christian and "religious" morality?

---

So sorry atheists, ultimately your children are not yours anyway, they are first and foremost the children of God Almighty. And it is therefore the natural right and duty of a God-fearing state to remove them from you, and educate them in virtue, Christianity, and morality, as opposed to degeneracy, atheism, and vice and those ills which can lead a soul in the direction of hellfire. To allow an atheist, pagan, heathen, or other Godless ilk in the company of children is a rather heinous sin which should not be allowed unchecked.

This post looks like satire, but if it's not, then I will reply by stating that I'm an atheist and I don't condone murder or rape or any of the other acts you mention. In fact, I argue that we atheist are morally superior to religious people, because when we do good, we don't expect a heavenly reward. We don't expect any reward. And I would also argue that, if the only thing keeping you from murder and rape is the fear of a vengeful deity, then you have some serious issues.

[Nordberg]

Most people recognize and do the right thing. Religions claim it is because of them and their terrifying punishments. It is not. Are religious people claiming they would commit lots of crimes if they were not religious? Then that is revealing about them. Prisons are full of religious people with prayer meetings.I wish religion made people better. I do not see it.

[countryboy]

I'm tempted to argue that, yes, it would be in the vested interest of the state to ban atheists from procreating, as well as to confiscate the children from atheist homes, and redistribute them to homes, such as Christian homes, grounded in some measure of morality or virtue.

An atheist, by mere virtue of it's own inferiority cannot be trusted around children, let alone allowed to have children of its own; for example, to an atheist, rape, murder, child molestations are not evils or moral ills, they are just alternate 'lifestyle preferences', or perhaps even a good thing.

So why on earth would we allow those to have children who can't even morally object to raping and harming children without stealing and appropriating Christian and "religious" morality?

---

So sorry atheists, ultimately your children are not yours anyway, they are first and foremost the children of God Almighty. And it is therefore the natural right and duty of a God-fearing state to remove them from you, and educate them in virtue, Christianity, and morality, as opposed to degeneracy, atheism, and vice and those ills which can lead a soul in the direction of hellfire. To allow an atheist, pagan, heathen, or other Godless ilk in the company of children is a rather heinous sin which should not be allowed unchecked.

Seriously? You want to give the state the power to take your children? How about no.

[Nordberg]

Seriously? You want to give the state the power to take your children? How about no.

Not the state, but the religious state. He is arguing for a theocracy.

[Concart]

This post looks like satire, but if it's not, then I will reply by stating that I'm an atheist and I don't condone murder or rape or any of the other acts you mention. In fact, I argue that we atheist are morally superior to religious people, because when we do good, we don't expect a heavenly reward. We don't expect any reward. And I would also argue that, if the only thing keeping you from murder and rape is the fear of a vengeful deity, then you have some serious issues.

This guy has taken on a Nazi/White Supremacist persona to troll on this site. He isn't even very good at hiding it. The pond scum of the internet.

[Nordberg]

The state should seek atheist homes for children. They can learn how to think for themselves instead of being taught what to think. Then when a kid is old enough, he can make his own decision.
We all know religions thrive by pounding kids with religious training from beginning through home and school. All religions use that cruel and scary method. They know kids are mentally and psychologically dependent on adults and prone to absorbing and believing the doctrine thrust on them. It is cruelty. The terror of hell is real to kids. It is mean to teach them that made up shit is real.

[countryboy]

Not the state, but the religious state. He is arguing for a theocracy.

Most American Christians, myself included, want nothing to do with a theocracy. It's not even a part of Christian theology.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

The state should seek atheist homes for children. They can learn how to think for themselves instead of being taught what to think. Then when a kid is old enough, he can make his own decision.
We all know religions thrive by pounding kids with religious training from beginning through home and school. All religions use that cruel and scary method. They know kids are mentally and psychologically dependent on adults and prone to absorbing and believing the doctrine thrust on them. It is cruelty. The terror of hell is real to kids. It is mean to teach them that made up shit is real.

is pedophilia wrong?

[Nordberg]

Most American Christians, myself included, want nothing to do with a theocracy. It's not even a part of Christian theology.

Most? I do not agree.

[Nordberg]

is pedophilia wrong?

Is gang rape? How about robbery?

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

Is gang rape? How about robbery?

all are wrong. what's your take?

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

I humbly pray to our lord jesus christ and daddy god the father to send cosmic love rays into nordbergs heart and elevate his lost and fearful inner child to a vessel able to react to and pay forwards your love for all humanity. amen.

[countryboy]

Most? I do not agree.

Give me an example of ANY mainstream, respected, widely supported Christian leader, spokesperson, organization, politician, or theologian calling for an American theocracy.