Well since the Mighty Men Conference was mentioend this morning, I did some digging and have found some interesting facts that are worth knowing.

Multiple Google sources are quoted below.
I have quoted some interesting bits here and it is important that we look at Angus Buchan background in order to understand the man behind the message.

http://technorati.com/lifestyle/article/controversial-religious-movement-gaining-ground/

Buchan believes his brand of Christianity will “restore men to their rightful place” in life, a message extremely attractive to men going through the conditions that Dreyer describes. However, the very name, “MIGHTY MEN,” speaks volumes.

While sharing a message about this “rightful place,” which he does “ad nauseam,” — a brief phrase easily missed in the midst of everything else mentioned — raised some concerns. The red flag, of sorts, came in the form of these words, which no doubt betrayed his stance and attitude: “We must make our wives in to the people God intended them to be.” This quote sounds rather musty and old, but also dangerous as it assumes some disturbing notions.

Interesting comments from him.
I get very nervous when someone starts talking about "rightful place" it means that there is also a "wrongful place".


http://factonista.org/2008/09/17/potato-preacher/

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=139&art_id=vn20080915143121108C500724

Buchan subscribes to a conservative moral code, making it clear that homosexuality, divorce and pre-marital sex cannot be condoned.

In a press conference just after his talk, Buchan explained his stance, adding that many gay and lesbian people had become heterosexual through prayer.

"I cannot ever agree that homosexuality is right, I cannot bless it. I love them though, but they need help. We have prayed for them and God has changed their hearts."

I am fascinated to find out how homosexuality resides in the heart when there is overwhelming theories that it is genetic.

http://www.iam.org.za/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=256&Itemid=99

The above is an entire paper on Angus's stance and his opinions.
Makes for interesting reading.

I am concerned that he is delivering the wrong message to so many people.
Impressionable minds of a groupe of people that are feeling discarded and a message of "rightful place" is a dangerous combination.

Don't underestimate the power of guessing.

Very informal.

The further away from faith my brain stays, the happier I am.

Sorry Jason, accidentally clicked on the vote down button after voting up.

Sorry Jason, accidentally clicked on the vote down button after voting up.

There. I fixed it.

I think going into the future it is better if religion was not organized and the general public can follow their own beliefs, unless of course they choose to subscribe to organized religion.

Religious extremism, that is something I have an issue with because before long it leads to massive misconception and attacks on the pillars of the modern world.

Yes, that has happened from generation to generation.

Nowadays though I am seeing a trend where people are starting to relax about religion. In my case, I am giving my child the choice. I am not forcing anything on him, as much as I'd like to steer him in a certain direction I have consciously decided to let him be, within the constraints of my moral code and rules on my house.

The Christian church lately likes to harp on about co-habitating couples. My wife and I lived together before we got married- a very necessary step in our case. But the churches go absolutely bananas about it because it is "morally wrong" etc... Today's world is too full of psychos and other deviants, you have to "test-drive" before you commit, I know that is really blunt but it boils down to that.

I think the morals and ethics are the important parts that a parent can instill and also by the same token hold themselves true to.
The rest is probably best left to the individuals to decide for themselves.

Sorry to perhaps burst this (very popular) bubble, but most of the evidence suggests that parenting has very little to do with the way kids turn out. Read "The Nurture Assumption" and "No Two Alike" by Judith Rich Harris if you want to look at the data.

Sure there is nothing wrong with a parent giving a child information about the religion they perhaps believe strongly in.
This needs to balanced though by giving that same child some information about other religions and belief systems or at least make the child aware of these so that they may investigate further if they wish.
It is this balance that is missing.

If you're a devout believer, is this balance possible? In other words, would you be able to present an objective view of competing beliefs, in cases where you believe those beliefs to be not only wrong, but responsible for leading people to damnation?