"god told me you smeared soap on the bathroom mirror."

[Ian David]

According to my daughter, this is what happened in school yesterday:

She was in the bathroom with a younger girl (who she thinks was five years old).

The girl asked my daughter if she was the one who smeared soap on the bathroom mirror.

My daughter said, "No."

The younger girl tells her, "Well, god told me you did it," and then I'm not sure whether the rest was monologue or dialogue, but apparently god is someone who lives in the sky and in your heart and can tell the little girl who smears soap on things.

I told my daughter that next time, she should say, "The difference between religious people and crazy people, is that religious people talk to god, and crazy people hear god talking back."

Thank you, crazy religious child, for teaching my daughter this first important lesson outside the home about why listening to an believing in an imaginary friend in the sky is stupid.

[pleah]

1. K&R LMAO!

:thumbsup:

[RKP5637]

2. Your daughter is so fortunate for the experience and for you. Sadly not all children have

constructive parents such as you that help them learn reality from nonsense.

[laconicsax]

3. Maybe the girl just doesn't realize that she's the little voice in her head.

[Ian David]

4. Maybe her parents think the little girl is a holy oracle.

"What did god tell you today, little poopkins?"

"god told me you have to buy me a pony. And that I never have to do homework again."

"Well, if that's what god wants..."

"And god also told me we have to kill grandma."

"I'll go get a knife, little sweetums."

"I want to do it. I like the way the blood makes me feel. I want the blood! I want the blood!"

[roguevalley]

5. let me interject the thought that always comes into my mind when

I read something like this: This stuff, this idiot 'religion' is to real practicing Christians who actually try to follow the practices of Jesus like people follow Buddha and the like, what creationist 'science' is to science. Dumbass, dimwitted and not indicative of good people who follow the teachings of Jesus. I feel the same way about the creationist 'museum' folks regarding science.

[Ian David]

9. That's why I said that religious people talk to god, crazy people hear god. n/t

[roguevalley]

13. and you be right Ian David. I will keep that line. its a good one.

Happy holidays to you and yours. :)

[struggle4progress]

6. I myself like five year olds and think they deserve pleasant gentleness from their elders

[Ian David]

10. I think that particular five year-old needs therapy. n/t

[struggle4progress]

11. *yawn*

:zzz:

[Festivito]

7. Berating a five-year-old to push your own values?

That seems pretty low.

[Ian David]

8. You're right. It's my daughter's own fault for making god tattle on her.

:sarcasm:

[Festivito]

14. You're missing my point, and the sarcasm only keeps you further from it.

From the story you told, you instruct your daughter to tell the five-year-old that that five-year-old should consider herself crazy, perhaps leaving her to note that even a mommy said so.

Chances are the five-year-old is inaccurately reproducing something she heard hoping to see how an older child reacts. She doesn't need to be called crazy. She may indeed need help, not name calling.

[Silent3]

12. Berating?

You call this "berating"? Really?

The OP merely relates the story, the events as they occurred, then in commenting on those events, the sharpest words that could be said to be against the girl are, "Thank you, crazy religious child". These words are written here, in the OP, it's not like they were shouted into the child's face.

Is your oh-I'm-so-sensitive-why-aren't-you dial always cranked up to 11, or only when religion is the subject?

Or perhaps you're just crass enough to disingenuously play the "Oh! Think of the children!" card, to try paint someone you disagree with as doing terrible things to poor innocent children?

[Festivito]

15. Yes.

Yes. Yes.

Whether shouted or spoken, "Thank you, crazy religious child" seems too much for a five-year-old to hear about herself, at least for me it feels that way.

No, no.

No.

[Silent3]

16. To hear about herself?

What? You think word of this comment is going to get back to the 5 year old from here? From an comment written after an anecdote given without places or names in a forum on a web site which is probably unknown to the girl or her friends and family?

These are such deeply scathing words that no one should even take the tiniest chance that could happen?

Or did you just misread the OP and leap to some completely absurd conclusion that the OP actually spoke those words to, or in front of, said "crazy religious child"?

[Festivito]

17. Yes, again.

Maybe, maybe not. I neither inferred or stated outright that it would get back to the five-year-old. I would hope it could get back to the older one.

Such words can be scathing to a five-year-old. There are better things to say and ways to help.

No, no, no, and reiterating name calling is low.

[Silent3]

20. If you think people should carefully modulate everything they say...

...based on incredibly remote chances of delicate ears hearing something that might cause momentary offense, that's a complete untenable standard.

I think your estimation of the sensitivities of the average 5-year old are way off too. She probably gets worse from her peers from time to time, and with much more malice. Continued patterns of verbal abuse that eat away over time are what cause real damage. Only a parent or other close relation can deeply hurt with a single remark, and that would have to be a particular cutting remark to having much affect in a single instance. Even five year olds can pretty easily shrug off a mild remark like "crazy religious child" from a distant stranger -- the words probably wouldn't even mean much to her if by some 1 in 1000 or worse chance she ever did catch wind of them anyway.

I'm sure you'll try to pretend that this really is your usual standard for the conduct of dialog, but I doubt you'd do well yourself if everything you said were monitored and judged by this ludicrous standard.

I think the real story here is that you've just been called out on pompous grandstanding, and you don't want to admit it.

[Ian David]

18. Thank you, crazy religious poster. god told me you're nuts. n/t

[Festivito]

19. Oooooo. Name calling. Oh my. Can't answer your own post either.

God does not have to tell me about you. It's obvious.

You run away from a post that is too clear perhaps. Made just for you.

So, instead you post after someone else's post.

Hopefully, you're not trying to fool yourself.

[Ian David]

21. I'm still not clear what your beef is. n/t

[Festivito]

22. Why not try responding behind the post that describes it then?

If it's spelling, if it's grammar, if it's word choice, too many words, too few, certain phrases, I'd be glad to help.

Address what I've said.

[Ian David]

23. Oh. Good. I'm glad you agree that the little girl may need help. n/t

[darkstar3]

24. I think you missed something

Where was a 5-year-old berated? The OP simply educated their daughter on the fact that it is abnormal for someone to believe that God is speaking to them personally. I see no harm in that.

Perhaps you are referring to what will now happen at school, where the OP's daughter and the disturbed god-talking child may now exchange ideas on the truth about gods talking to people? This is yet another example where no harm will be done.

No five year olds were harmed in the making of this OP. Your hijacking post was simply a way for you to piss and moan about the fact that a child is not being brought up to believe in things that you obviously consider sacred. :eyes: