Discussion by: Steven93
As professor Dawkins labours to raise awareness of the importance of critical thinking and of how religion is a hinderance to it, he raises the interesting point of not labeling children as a 'Christian child' but rather as a 'child of Christian parents'. In doing so the child is given a chance to choose for itself. Furthermore awareness is raised that the deity in question does not have to propagate itself 'naturally' just because this it is deemed inherently so by the community that the child belongs to. Could phrases such as 'Oh my God',' thank God he arrived on time','Cleanliness is Godliness' and other variations on this theme be in need of a reviewing by an awareness-raising atheist?
Linguistic relativity (known to some as the The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis) postulates that specific types of language and/or specific usage of that language could influence the way we think and how we act towards others and could shape the entire culture of a people.
This is not a new concept but has, in my opinion, not been sufficiently extrapolated to take a look at the things we say in general. These common day to day utterances, platitutes if you will, concerned with religion are in my view a reinforcing factor for religion and should best be avoided.
Do you think this is a valid point?