In this modern world we live in many couples do not get married. We used to know it as living in sin. The child from such a union was always called a bast**d. Should that term be stricken from religious teaching. We live in a changing world and religion should change with it. I am a married person with grown up kids but it is their world now.
2007-11-15 04:22:38 · 36 answers · asked by soñador 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
that's a really good question. I think that it's safer for children to have happy married parents but I think in this day and age it's not going to happen like it used to. I think it would be a good thing to take that out of the teachings. I don't believe that God sees his children bas*ards even if they have unwed parents. God loves all his children and I think it should be removed from teachings. The world is ever changing and I think religion should change with it. ^.^ I personally felt like I needed to be married before my daughter was born but I got pregnant before I was married and married before she was born.
2007-11-15 04:30:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
First let me say that I am the mother of 2 and I am not married, though I have been with my spouse for almost 11 years now. I am also an atheist. To me the term 'bastard' is something religious people use to tell others they are not good enough for them. Fine by me if I or my children are not good enough for them, they just don't have to go around calling people names. As an atheist I do not believe in the whole sin thing so they can think whatever they want about me. The only thing that would really make me pissed is if someone told my children that they were bastards and that they're parents aren't going to heaven. They are too young to understand, and they don't need to be scared by all that nonsense.
As for it being removed from religious teaching, sure why not. And as long as your updating you might want to look through the whole old testament too.
2007-11-15 04:39:11 · answer #2 · answered by ☼ɣɐʃʃɜƾ ɰɐɽɨɲɜɽɨƾ♀ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is a word that man came up with, not Christians, so lay the blame where it belongs. And as one poster said, the word means "born out of wedlock" so if the people don't want comments made, get married and then have children and the children won't have to live with the repercussions and sad to say, the kids are the ones that pay for the sins of their parents which is wrong because they are totally innocent in all this. That is the order God intended, it's man that has removed the sanctity of marriage and family.
2007-11-15 04:38:01 · answer #3 · answered by KittyKat 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Historically it was a term pertaining to inheritance and rights to the father's estate, and claim to bloodlines which could in the case of nobility be more important than either. From a social point of view, a bastard was a child who was denied as blood by the father. In an age of DNA testing, none of these reasons are viable any longer, as the father is held accountable no matter what and only in rare cases do children care all that much whether they are in the will of a parent who had no active involvement in their lives.
2007-11-15 04:30:49 · answer #4 · answered by <Sweet-Innocence> 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think the term bastard child should not be used anymore. Wedlock is not as sacred as it once was. The divorce rate in the US is about 50%. I'd rather see a child born out of wedlock with two loving parents, then a child born into a very damaged and unhealthy marriage.
2007-11-15 04:27:19 · answer #5 · answered by My Mutt is NEUTERED! 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not religious but I have always been brought up to believe that you should be married before you have children, therefore the children grow up in a stable family unit. I will probably get thumbs down for that but thats what I believe in and I don't think its wrong.
The term 'bastard' is not very nice though, afterall it is not the fault of the child. Like I say I'm not religious.
2007-11-15 04:27:01 · answer #6 · answered by Bonnie 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree
and I think that bastard is a horrible
thing to call any child
my best friend has had
a child out of wedlock and
shes not with the guy any more at all
but she is taking care of the baby and doing
a great job
If "god" looks down on that then
religion should change
2007-11-15 04:27:00 · answer #7 · answered by Shanda S 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes but isnt everything we do sin? I think if "God" thought it was a sin to have kids out of wedlock he wouldnt let them people have kids in the first place. Having children is part of life I'm pretty sure animals dont get married to the ones they have kids with LOL.
2007-11-15 04:28:31 · answer #8 · answered by Mo Money 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jesus hasnt changed from yesterday to today....he is the same yesterday,today and forever....it applies today as it did then...sad but true....people just dont look at it like we did back then...everything has gone to the dogs....I feel so sorry for the children growing up now in these times,all the elders are dieing off that knows from then and helps mold the children of today...We just have to stick to what we have been taught and teach them the right way....God bless you and God bless america and the children of today.....
2007-11-15 04:29:28 · answer #9 · answered by hotmommadru 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Society should not have the influence to change relgion. Religions are a set of spiritual (and often times moral) values, that people of that faith hold. It is well with in a persons right, to have a belief that you disagree with.
In short no, religion should not be altered for society. If anything, the current society, needs a good reworking, to restore some proper moral values (not necissarily religious).
however, again, thats just my opinion.
2007-11-15 04:29:13 · answer #10 · answered by Super_Vegeta 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋