To come back to later

[velvetpage]

First, there's Good books? It's a humanist seeking to find books to enrich his child's life and give him skepticism in the face of his mother's deep beliefs.

Then there's this, where the author argues that children need a basis in faith before they are able to accept uncertainty.

I have a rebuttal forming for the second, but I don't have time for it now so I'll come back later. I suspect my rebuttal will involve concept from this video, first seen on Piet's journal and since spreading rapidly on my friends list:

Comments

[lovmelovmycats.livejournal.com]

Interesting articles.
A few weeks ago, I was reading Lizzie a library book from the "Laura's Star" series (where Laura has a "magic" star friend that does magical things for her), and found myself very offended by the emphasis on the supernatural in the book. I paused every few pages to say, "This is make-believe. This is imaginary. Do you understand?"
Later I thought I was probably venting my feelings way too much in that reading. I read the book to her at subsequent bedtimes without commentary. Lizzie is exposed to "magic" a lot, and to a quite lesser extent, "miracles". And that's ok (reminding myself).
I have emotional baggage from the way my Mom taught me religion, to the extent that I would agree with Dawkins' "child abuse" claim to some degree. But not all children get taught it the way I was.

[bodhifox.livejournal.com]

I have a very tough time with people who live exclusively by science OR religion.