It is difficult to help deconvert a religious adult to atheism; however, many people have become atheists after reading my books. In some of my books, I simply quoted the anti-science, anti-women, anti-humanity, anti-compassion, anti-equality and anti-freedom verses and sayings of the Quran and the Hadith. Most people have no idea what the holy books really say. They just believe that whatever is written therein is all good. Since I started pointing out the ‘holy’ words that clearly advocate for cruelty, barbarity, inequality and injustice, many believers were shocked and started thinking – which is certainly not a norm that ordinary people follow; ultimately, they became atheists. One can never be sure how many days or months or years an adult person may need to become an atheist. Some take a few days, some need decades. It depends on their level of intelligence and understanding. I believe that many adults may remain religious even after reading piles of books on secular philosophy.
In contrast, as I have noticed, it is much easier to introduce innocent children to atheism, before – or even after – they get brainwashed with religion. I have no child. I have met cows, goats, ducks, dogs, cats, rats, birds, bees, and so forth; none of them believe in god. It is us humans that suffer from a god delusion.
I experienced how quickly my nephews and nieces got enlightened. I spent only a few days to encourage them to be atheists. When they were around 5, and started believing in someone sitting in the sky and watching everyone, I asked them, “Do you really believe fairy tales or fictions are facts? Do you really believe that a thing called god is sitting there, who is called most kind and most merciful but he will burn you in hell for eternity only if you do not pray to him or say that he is great? If he is all-knowing, then why did not he know simple Bengali? Why do you need to pray in Arabic? You know about angel Israfil? Why has Israfil been sitting for millions of years, holding a trumpet to his mouth? Why does Allah make him do that? I mean, He knows when the day of judgment is going to arrive, doesn’t He? Surely He could ask Israfil to pick up his trumpet and blow it when the time comes? Poor Israfil is having to stay put, not moving an inch. Did anyone see god? Why doesn’t god show up? Why should you believe something without any proof? Ask something now from god. Will he give you what you asked for? No. People created different gods in different countries in different times. People were definitely ignorant. You know what? No clever people believe in god. Most scientists, writers, artists, intellectuals, philosophers are atheists. You may say that some people you know are clever but believe in god. But you should not forget that they may be clever for somethings but not for everything. People who believe in god say that only humans will go to heaven. Okay, tell me why horses and dogs, or butterflies and birds would not go to heaven? The truth is, there is no heaven anywhere. Don’t get afraid of hell, there is no hell either.” They listened to me carefully. I was very patient. They asked me many questions. I answered all of their questions, even many of their not-so-bright ones.
Next day I bought them some children’s books about evolution and the universe. And read them out to them, aloud. We spent a whole weekend reading and discussing.
After a week, I took them to a natural history museum and spent all day there.
After a few weeks I caught them praying. A bearded man had been appointed to teach the kids how to read the Quran and how to pray to god. They were asked to wear skullcaps and veils. Observing them I started laughing. I laughed all evening. Then I said, “How could you do that? You look so stupid.” They looked ashamed of themselves. It worked. They rebelled against the bearded teacher. They already learned how the universe evolved and where they came from. They became atheists before they were 12-year-olds.
They all are now adults, leading wonderful lives without god.
.
I’m glad the kids have been armed against indoctrination, but is mocking them and making them feel bad for going along with what authority figures that they trust are telling them? Surely there’s ways to do this that doesn’t have to involve that sort of thing.
If they’re delusional as adults, by all means, mock away… I wouldn’t do that to kids though It just seems mean and wrong.
It doesn’t hurt them as children because they haven’t learned to identify with their beliefs yet. That kind of thing only hurts those who have been strongly indoctrinated.
My Quran Lesson is an easy way for you and your kids to learn the Holy Quran. All you need is a PC, headset with a microphone and a broadband internet connection.
http://www.myquranlesson.com/translation/
How amusing. There’s a much quicker way for anybody to learn the full ethos of the Quran, it goes like this:
“Because I say so Bitch!”
There, all the misogynistic violence and hatred preached in your wacky tome in condensed form.
Holy Cow! The bible says exactly the same thing as the Koran!
Dear opportunistic Quran Academy,
Thank you so much for bringing to my attention an opportunity to learn the Quran’s message of love, peace, tolerance, equality, fairness and non-domination of the world by any means possible.
I could not think of anything I would rather do than immerse myself in your class. So I thought a little harder and came up with about 4000 things and your delightful offer, I’m afraid, came in at position number 3999 – just above poking hot darning needles into my eyes. So thanks – but no thanks, but best of luck with your attempts at reaching the gullible. Have you tried advertising on christian sites? Scientologists could be fair game too.
Many religious texts can be seen as irony and satire on the consumer society, and/or corrupt state politics. Humour alone does not supply electricity or clean water. For this, some science is necessary.All people should be told to think when it comes to religious texts. Then they can laugh at them.
Superb post. Yes, I was also became an atheist before attending 5th standard. Questioning was the major effective tool. The catalyst were soviet literature. When I was 13, I wanted to become a communist revolutionary. Although at the same time I was sent to a RSS-run “hindu” school. Even at the summer vacations I used to join Islamic Maktubs in my neighborhood. Both this HINDU and MUSLIM ideologies started conflicting with each other and as a result I became an atheist.
Well,next time try it on grown ups who have an ample amount of knowledge about their religions,, and let us know who laughed on whom,,,,, let these tender souls enjoy their childhood..
You mean “don’t interfere with religious teachers taking advantage of kids’ trust and ignorance, so their work of indoctrinating kids into fearing some almighty monster in the sky is not hampered”.
Great idea. Who’s letting tender souls enjoy their childhood here: The ones who threaten with imagined consequences, or the ones encouraging to think?
Wow. You use the irrational and anti-humanist methods of mocking children from your position of knowledge and authority to convince them of something without using evidence or logic and you’re proud of it? You’re a stranger to rationality, atheist for the wrong reasons and I hate that we nominally ‘share’ a movement with you.
Reading is fundamental Sarah, try again.
Ditto.
And you should be well acquainted with the value of ridicule.
Mind you, I may not have gone with telling the kids they look “stupid”, but it does notably differ from telling them they are stupid. (Although, actually, to be fair, it depends largely on her tone whether Taslima made a mistake here, and whether or not they interpreted it as “you are stupid”. Only 10% of communication is words, after all.)
Yep. Calling kids stupid is even worse than saying they look stupid and boasting about it on the internet. And stabbing is worse than a little light slashing? What was your point again?
That’s right, you didn’t have any, because to you there is nothing wrong with mockery of children and what they wear, as long as they’re the correct type of “other”. You wouldn’t accept someone mocking someone for their traditional ethnic clothes in an effort to get them to integrate better or any other aim – you shouldn’t accept it for groups you dislike either.
And that’s not to mention the power differential. When you’re a child an adult has an enormous amount of authority and respect, mocking the young and powerless is always a dangerous choice. You shouldn’t feel any more confident about doing it merely because the target is doing something that places them in an out-group. This is simple social justice and social science, educated humanist atheists should know this already!
I seriously doubt your kids will turn out better than mine, unless by “better” you mean “whingier.”
I don’t know. Lets wait and see. You try to mock and irrational your children into functional rational ethical actors and I’ll try bringing them up the way we want them to turn out and we’ll see which works.
I’m sure they’ll at least be bright enough to reply to the correct thread.
1. “Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.” -Thomas Jefferson
“You wouldn’t accept someone mocking someone for their traditional ethnic clothes in an effort to get them to integrate better or any other aim”
You seem really confused. Taslima was dealing with her own family members. They are all part of the same group, so this situation is in no way like ridiculing an “other.” Furthermore, Taslima is orginally from Pakistan, so the Shalwar Kameez would be the traditional ethnic costume, and the taqiyah (that she laughed at) would have been imported from saudi arabia.
“I’m sure they’ll at least be bright enough to reply to the correct thread.”
Uh oh, Sarah. Looks like you’re using the “caveman” method of ridiculing me for replying in the wrong place. Hypocrisy alert!
I’m assuming you’re not a child, of course. Is this a mistake? Should I treat you with kid-gloves?
So Thomas Jefferson was a supporter of irrational methods of communication and a-logical emotive forms of social coercion for means of control of people… and what of it? Didn’t he also keep slaves? His argument is nothing more than an assertion, and one that flies in the face of reason (why should we believe that the best way to spread rationality is with irrationality?).
That Talisma is happy to mock and irrationally engage children in her own family rather than other people’s is completely irrelevant. Engaging irrationally, using social techniques that are unrelated to the truth or evidence, such as mockery, is wrong for promoting rationality and an ethical life. To be happy to engage those who are part of out-groups (those engaged in religious practices) but not those who aren’t is hypocritical, which makes it worse, but does not affect the irrational nature of choosing to engage with ridicule.
If you’re so set on ridicule, simply use it now, demonstrate your intellectual credibility and that of substance-less vitriol and we can see if it’s better than evidence and rational debate. I’m sure you won’t change your mind, but it’s interesting that you’re attempting to defend the value and morality of abandoning logic for mockery… with logical arguments.
“So Thomas Jefferson was a supporter of irrational methods of communication”
Nope. He was just smart enough to realise that ridicule and logic are not mutually exclusive. You can use both. How about that? Too bad, for all your professed reasoning abilities, you’re still too dim to see that.
“Engaging irrationally, using social techniques that are unrelated to the truth or evidence, such as mockery, is wrong for promoting rationality and an ethical life.”
Phew! Good thing ridicule can be related to the truth.
I don’t think we’re going to be able to have a rational debate when all you do is spew rhetoric.
Look, mynameischeese, it’s obvious you’re getting emotional and not reading very closely. I’ve already said that I agree they are not mutually exclusive. Your belief that I think they are is wrong, and always was.
Thomas Jefferson was a moral cripple, much like yourself, who owned slaves and he was wrong to support slavery and to believe that mockery and anti-rational, non-truth related methods of persuasion are rational and useful to the rational human being.
What they’re very useful for is irrational people and the spread of illogical emotion driven ideologies and religions. You might think that you can beat religions on their own turf, but like the proverbial pig, they will drag you down into the mud and beat you with experience, then you will feel bad for engaging in anti-rational methods of persuasion (if you’ve learned anything) and losing
Hey, Sarah, Here’s some more “anti-humanist” child abuse for you to get enraged at:
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoCaUnBiGGg&w=420&h=315%5D
I’m totally prepared to tell my kids they look stupid. For instance, when I first catch one of them with a cigarette in mouth.
You can choose to raise your children as poorly as you like. Those of us raising our children with logic, empathy and rational discourse instead of emotional browbeating and shaming will raise better children than those who choose to use such caveman-like methods.
Consider that there is most likely a tenderness between Taslima and her nieces and nephews that doesn’t necessarily translate from one language or culture to another. Languages and cultures differ; love for our children is universal.
Taslima has certainly demonstrated her concern for others, not that she should have to prove anything to you.
So you’re saying she doesn’t speak very good English and failed to communicate properly? – Unlikely, she’s very well educated, and there aren’t many other ways you can read “I laughed at them. It worked”
“Taslima has certainly demonstrated her concern for others, not that she should have to prove anything to you.”
Yes. Because people who have demonstrated a concern for others never do anything wrong… ? She need not prove anything to anyone, but that doesn’t make mocking kids for what they’re wearing and boasting about it on the internet an ethical action.
I keep waiting you for you to make some kind of argument about why mocking kids for something they wear/do/choose isn’t ethical instead of just spewing half-baked self righteousness. Guess I shouldn’t hold my breath on that one.
You need to know why mocking and laughing at children is a bad thing? Why changing minds with rational argument, empathy and logic is a good thing?
“changing minds with rational argument, empathy and logic”
Holy crap. You sound like one of those drones from the early 20th century who really believed in Reason (with a capital R).
And yeah, I’m going to need you to demonstrate your magical Reasoning abilities by forming an argument about why mockery and things like logic are mutually exclusive because most people who employ logic will conclude that they aren’t.
Who said they were mutually exclusive? One is good, the other is bad. You can do both and you’ll be doing good and doing bad.
If you don’t understand the value of rationality, reason, atheism, logic, empathy, humanism and ethical treatment of each other then it would take more than a comment on a website to show you why you’re wrong.
Those who abandon ‘Reason’ will end up like you – pretending that an argument against anti-humanist and anti-rational methods of persuasion is actually an argument that anti-humanist and anti-rational methods of persuasion and rational ethical methods of persuasion are mutually exclusive.
To put it simply, so all the long words don’t confuse people who reject Reason. Bad stuff is bad, there’s no time to defend humanism as a whole here, bad stuff can be done at the same time as good stuff, but only you suggested that anyone thinks it can’t – apparently as some sort of bizarre way of rationalising your inherently foolish position, and to find a way that “Reason and humanism are good” could possibly be wrong. You did not manage to find a successful way.
I understand from your reply that you don’t understand what “mutually exclusive means.” Got it.
Classic humanist wisdom right here: “Bad stuff is bad.”
LOL! Going to go post that as my FB status update.
You have no idea what you’re talking about do you?
No one mentioned mutually exclusive except you.
We agree they are not mutually exclusive.
You seem to think this is relevant, presumably because you’re not too bright.
For those of you reading along at home, I can only apologise, I couldn’t control the quality of replies to my comment, and we appear to have gone down a particularly stupid blind alley.
Classic humanist wisdom right here: “Bad stuff is bad.”
LOL! Going to go post that as my FB status update.
Great. You’ll remember to preface it with:
“I was not able to understand “This is irrational and anti-humanist and therefore bad” did not mean “Rational and irrational methods of persuasion are mutually exclusive” so it had to be boiled down for me to “Bad Stuff is Bad” – and I still didn’t get that it had nothing to do with being “mutually exclusive” LOL!”
Right?
I had a great time reading your article and I found it interesting. This is such a beautiful topic that me and my friends are talking about. Thanks for this blog, we are enlightened. Tv on internet
Sarah, you clearly didn’t read the whole article. She used logic, answered questions, read to them, took them to a museum to see scientific evidence. And, yes, she mocked them. Sometimes it takes a shock to make a person think about what they’re doing and whether it’s really something they want or if it’s just something they’ve been pushed into doing. Clearly, these kids were just going along with the orders of adults who had power over them. It seems to me that the mocking make it clear to them that they had a choice and they didn’t just have to let themselves be brainwashed. I wouldn’t be surprised if the kids look back on that encounter as a turning point in their young lives, when they learned that they can stand on their own two feet and use their brain actively instead of passively.
What is wrong with everyone here? She laughed at them, she didn’t tell them that they would be tortured forever in a pit of damnation for it. There were plenty of people willing to tell these kids they would be in pain forever if they disobeyed. Laughter diffuses the seriousness that other authority figures try to inject into silly rituals.
I’m glad it turned out ok but am also in general not for public shaming. It’s a question of what tools do you have available and under what circumstances. It could be that mocking was the best choice at the time but I’m inclined to think other options were available.
Well, first, I became an atheist as a young child and didn’t need anyone to mock me or even tell me about atheism for it to happen. I’ve taken a really passive approach with my kid, but by the time he was 4, he was already asking the right questions (like, “How does Santa fit down the chimney?” “Magic.” “That’s silly. Magic isn’t real.”).
But on one occassion, this friend of a friend (a grown man) was trying to convert me and it was so absurd I started laughing at him and mocking his beliefs. Normally I wouldn’t bother mocking a person’s beliefs, but he was pushing them on me and it was so hilarious, I couldn’t help it. He didn’t speak to me for years. Then he was at a friend’s party and he came up to me and thanked me for making him an atheist. I was really confused as I would never bother converting someone to atheism. I just don’t see the point. He said, “Remember? You just ridiculed me. You forced me to look into things. I started reading up on history and philosophy and science and then I was forced to admit to myself that I’m an atheist.”
So I guess if you did want to convert someone, laughing at them is highly effective.
Personally, though, I prefer to just lead a good life. It gives people who are sick of their religion ideas.
Didn’t your siblings (parents of the kids) get up in arms about your blasphemy?
I’m interested in this as well, and how to handle it if/when they make a big stink about it. My sister just popped out #2 and I’d rather my niece and nephew not grow up to be shitheads.
My brothers and sisters know I am an atheist. They saw I was teaching evolution to their children. They did not believe that children would start thinking seriously about everything I told them. They thought children would ultimately follow the path of their parents. My siblings were wrong.
“In contrast, as I have noticed, it is much easier to introduce innocent children to atheism, before – or even after – they get brainwashed with religion.”
I understand what you are saying, but this statement would be easy to misinterpret and misrepresent from the other side of the coin. As non-believers, we need to be careful that we aren’t guilty of the same sort of indoctrination. Don’t get me wrong, I am not accusing you of doing that, but I think we need to be aware of possible stances of critics in order to overcome their psychological walls. It’s hard to build a wall if there are no bricks, if that makes sense.
I am for teaching critical thinking, questioning skills, deductive logic etc., but I don’t think that teaching these skills should be considered as an “introduction to atheism.” These are lessons in scientific reasoning. If our goal is to inform children of how to logically view the world, then the correlations to religion and its fallacy will naturally follow or at least be open as a child matures. If our goal is to introduce children to atheism at a young age, then I think we are in danger of hypocrisy.
Like I said, I understand and agree with the point of this post, but if you want to change an opposing view, you have to eliminate possible obvious points of contention in order to accomplish a greater goal.
Skeptifem has it right:
Exactly. This.
Everyone taking an issue with Taslima’s use of mockery and laughter (including poster Sarah), please take a step back and re-read her account. The relationship between Taslima and her niece-nephew isn’t simply one of power and authority; there is undoubtedly tenderness and mutual affection there. She took time to explain things to them and patiently answer their (naturally) many questions. She even engaged them intellectually otherwise:
baal said:
Where exactly did you find any instance of ‘public shaming’ in Taslima’s account?
Deadline said:
Good point, Deadline, and also here, as you say:
However, there is an important cultural divide here. The part of the world that Taslima comes from is very different in many ways from other parts of the world. From the time an infant starts to recognize the surrounding environment, it is put under tremendous pressure of religion and things with overwhelmingly religious connotations, including imagery, so much so that in a religious (even a moderately religious) household, acquiescence to religion is almost the only thing the infant learns during the formative years. Even when the child starts going to school, critical thinking, questioning skills, deductive logic etc. – that you indicated – are not taught, emphasized or even encouraged.
Given this cultural context, mockery and ridicule of religion and meaningless religious practices by an adult and loved member of the family can go a long way in instilling the seeds of doubt in a child – doubt that leads to a questioning attitude. In addition, since children in this culture often emulate the adults, the very presence of someone who can boldly and brashly mock and ridicule religion in the family can be a positive influence, which is clearly what happened in the instance of Taslima’s niece-nephew.
Point taken. The cultural aspect was not something that I had put much thought into on this topic.
NOBODY becomes an atheist at age 12 or lower, anymore than they become christian or muslim or anything else at age 12 or lower.
What you did, Taslima, was bully children.
Pure and simple, you bullied them. You may have spent hours beforehand doing great educational work with them, but you followed it up with simple bullying. Maybe they were being bullied by some bearded asshole as well, but that doesn’t make your laughter and mocking of children acceptable under any circumstances. ANY fucking circumstances.
We are atheists because it is logical to be atheists. We are not members of a fucking religion, Taslima. We do not bring people to our side by bullying. That is what priests and imams and fucking cult leaders do. You fucking hypocrite.
‘NOBODY becomes an atheist at age 12 or lower!’ Do you think they were religious before 12? At what age one can become religious? Why do you think children know nothing about logic?
No fucking children become fucking atheists before fucking twelve? You were fucking bullying children?
Hmm… so let me get this straight. Children are born religious? Babies are born with a knowledge of god? Children are not TAUGHT to become religious? Fuck me jimmypants that is the most fucking retarded fucking statement I’ve ever fucking heard and if I continue to fucking use the word ‘fucking’, I’m sure you will be fucking bullied into fucking agreeing with me. Or were you saying the word ‘fucking’ repeatedly to be friendly and polite? Fucking tosser.
jimmypants – Arbitrary cutpoints are rarely useful. Unless you honestly think that there is no way that I became atheist at 11. I had never met another atheist and didn’t even know what the word meant, but I did know that I didn’t believe in God anymore. As Taslima says, this isn’t all that different than I felt before my parents decided to start dragging me to church (at 6 or 7 years old), it just added the extra steps of learning and then rejecting religion.
Teaching children to think rationally is not the same as indoctrination – that is a creationist fallacy. Personally, rather than teasing, I just talk to children like they are rational adults, only using slightly smaller words. Teasing feels too much like shaming, and I remember being a sensitive little girl. But methods for dealing with kids are not “one size fits all”. Some kids may do better with the extra jolt of laughter to stimulate serious thought – it can teach them how people outside their narrow world may see them as ridiculous.
How do you know those animals don’t believe in a God? You don’t know what they are thinking.
An excellent article! I enjoyed it, and I think the children in question are very lucky to have an aunt like that.
Yes, it would be possible to bully a child into atheism, and yes, that would be a wrong thing – although if other people were trying to indoctrinate a child into a religion it would then be a case of choosing between evils.
But it doesn’t sound like that’s what happened here. The “laughing at them” seems to have been done kindly and properly.
Wouldn’t it be a wonderful tool for helping children to grow up if it was pointed out to them that they had been fooled about Santa and the Tooth Fairy – and they’d look pretty silly if they were being fooled the same way about God?
Mockery is definitely an educational tool, it shouldn’t be the 1st tool used but… For example your child decides to wear scuba flippers, track pants with underwear on the outside, no shirt and a fez, nothing inherently wrong with that. The parent realizing this in not a socially acceptable outfit, explains rationally the bad choice made, but the child refuses to listen to ration. The parent knows that the child will be ridiculed outside the home. Is it loving to let the child leave the house? The child will be ridiculed by the rest of the world, would it have not been better to lovingly mock the child so they don’t feel the embarrassment from the rest of the world, and possibly resent the parents for not doing everything possible to prevent the ridicule?