I'm seeing none of that here, and I'm seeing a disturbing amount of questions that go along the lines of, "When did you realize you were better than the institution?"
I came here for intelligent discussion and rational debate about life, science, and such things. The majority of what I'm reading falls more along the lines of an average "Rebel" thread on the internet, with everyone patting themselves on the back telling themselves how cool they are.
Once again, you're confusing the stories of "The mean man made me say things I didn't like!" with "I received a valid Confirmation in the Holy Roman Catholic Church."
I took my Confirmation voluntarily. I as a rational, capable human being when I did so, and I did it of my own will. So many adults do so as well.
As for the children who claimed that they never wanted to do it... I'm actually on their side. I believe that schoolchildren should not have to get Confirmation, and it seems that many in the Church are shifting that way.
However, I simply ask people to remember that nobody forced them to agree to anything. "Peer pressure" is not a valid excuse, because I would expect the rational, intelligent people in here to choose their own path in life and have the cojones to stand up to things they don't believe in. The sticking point is that I believe that standing up should be done in a rational, mature way. I am seeing little of that here, and more of people sticking it to the man.
If you're going to argue Confirmation, then please do a little research. At the moment, you're denouncing something which is entirely of your own creation, something imaginary. The evil, evil occult ritual which you claim to dislike is one that is entirely of your own creation, with almost no basis in reality.
And yes, there are reasonable, thinking people that defend Confirmation. Reasonable, thinking men that see it as something besides some blood pact meant to coerce people into slavery.
I'm going to ask you again, because I don't think I've gotten a straight answer from you yet.
If someone says they believe in something, and then they voluntarily confirm their beliefs, should they not be held to their word?
I'm old-fashioned. I believe that, yes, people should be held accountable for what they say and do. Not because of a higher power, but because that's what mature individuals do. If you say you do not believe, so be it. But to say that you believe, and then say something along the lines of "Neener neener, had my fingers crossed!", can hardly be called intelligent denial. If anything, it's the opposite.
The original Sacraments established by Jesus Christ, however, are not flawed. As I said, a distorted sacrament that is done against the recipients will is an invalid sacrament. Therefore, as I said, when you argue against the coercive sacrament, you are arguing and fighting something that does not truly exist.
Such as rational thought, reasoning, and mastery of logic.
May I recommend Aquinas and, once again, Lewis?