|
| Thread: Teaching religon: Heritage of hostility? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted July 06, 2009 03:46 PM |
|
|
TheDeath
Two points.
1) You quoted again. That shows you do either do not read all posts, not even those directed to you or that you don't care.
2) I won't tolerate hair-splitting and meandering off into the realms of word defining. Pulling out half a sentence and then murdring it is just the ill-will I think we should be spared.
It's obvious what the original poster means: school should only teach worldly facts that objective evidence can be shown for.
Do you really think that is worth debating about?
OP made a point, the meaning of which is clear. Do you have a different opinion? If yes, state it and make no fuss.
Edit: @ Baklava
Yes, the title change is radical indeed. Compare these two titles:
The Scourge of the OSM: Baklava's posts
Baklava's posts: The Scourge of the OSM?
I'm editing this post in answering to TheDeath's last post.
I think I DID explain the No-Quote rule a couple of times in this text. Is it too much asked for you to repeat something that was said in your own words, when you want to refer to it?
Second: Where is your point? Do you think that it doesn't matter what is taught, religion, biology, history, sociology, mathematics, Languages, all the same? Do you differ with OP in what is relevant here? Would you WANT religion to be taught? If so which one(s) and how?
Dangit, Death think CONSTRUCTIVE for a change. Don't just throw yourself upon a phrase and point to a semantic finesse just to toss a hair into the soup. Please. 
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 03:58 PM |
|
|
What's wrong with a single quote?
By the way, there is one thing to show the evidence, and another for the interpretation of the evidence. And that is taught, since "evidence" or data isn't even taught, it can just be shown.
The interpretation is subjective. If it weren't, all physicists for instance would agree perfectly with each other. Doesn't happen in the real world, since their interpretation, models and theories, are subjective.
I was taught specific theories in school. Kinda biased since right NOW I've changed my viewpoints on other theories after doing my own research. (on the internet of course)
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 04:44 PM |
|
|
|
Ok, removed the quote. Forgot the rules, sry.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 05:14 PM |
|
|
JJ:
While interfaith marriages are certainly rare, I don't think they necessarily present that much of a problem for the children. Obviously, the kids would be exposed to both religions (or, if one of the parents is an atheist, to atheism).
Bak:
You're rather optimistic about kids' critical thinking skills. While I'd like that to be true, from personal observation I've found that to be the exception rather than the rule. Parents who are Christians have children who are Christians. Parents who are Republicans have children who are Republicans. Etc.
Elodin:
I don't think anyone is suggesting that schools go out and say, "Christianity is wrong/right." What people are suggesting is that schools teach "Christianity exists. Christians believe X. Islam exists. Muslims believe X. This is how religions have interacted in the past... etc."
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 05:52 PM |
|
|
Since I can't quote you'll probably not even know what I'm talking about but meh.
@mvass: Not at all, if that were the case, we would never see diversity since someone must have changed their political stance by themselves in the past even if what you said was true -- but that nullifies the point. Many people take their own stance, not of their parents' necessarily. Sometimes it can feel like they actually are that way because of the parents, but that doesn't mean that they didn't choose it by their own will.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 05:56 PM |
|
|
I didn't say they never do it. I mean that them not changing their views is more common than them changing.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 07:46 PM |
|
|
Thread title changed.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 07:56 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 19:58, 06 Jul 2009.
|
@JJ
But you cliam no one can know that their beliefs are true. I dispute that claim. I know Christianity is true and have a right to teach Christianity as truth to my children. You demanding that I teach it to my children as possiblily untrue is requiring me to teach your religious beliefs.
And you didn't address why you should be able to stop me from practicing my religion. Judaism and Christianity both require parents to teach their children that there is only one God and to teach their children his Word. I quoted the relevant verses in my previous post.
I could care less if someone thinks Snoopy is the means of salvation. I should not have to teach that Snoopy might be the Savior and Jesus might just have been a delusional fool.
The fact that others don't believe in Jesus as the Savior is of no relavence when I teach my child the Way of salvation. Other than I taught my kids to respect people who disagree with them.
About Salvation:
No, God is not unfair. Eveyone who sins choses to sin. God also draws every person and reveals more light as the person embraces the light that he gives. No one has anly excuse. Of course you will reject my next statement. There have been instances of missionaries being transported by the Spirit to a village in Africa so they could share the gospel there because someone there had a hungry heart that was crying out to God and had been responsive to the light God had already given.
AND as I have explained in other threads children below the age of accountability (which is different for every person) are not accountable for sin because they are not yet able to discern good and evil. Now, in your example the child is 15 so he is probably accountable before God.
Quote:
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
You say a multi-god society will not care about what one god says. So? I don't believe in multiple Gods. I should not be required to teach that all those other "gods" might be true because I know there is only one God. If you want to teach your children ther are 50 million gods and 500 trillion ways of salvation I don't care. You teach your children what you believe and I'll teach my children what I believe.
Oh, lots of people convert from the religion they were taught as a child JJ.
@ del_diablo:
Perhaps you have a reading comprehension problem. I have been pretty clear in expressing myself, not blabbering nonsense as you claim. And this is a religious topic so quoting the Bible is quite appropriate. I have actual reasons for believing the things I believe.
You claim childhood baptism should be illegal. But children are capable of understanding and obeying the gospel of Christ. Baptism is a part of obeying the gospel of Christ. You have no right to forbid a child who wants to obey Christ from doing so.
Oh, you and JJ like to call religions cults. I consider atheism to be a cult too.
Now, I certainly don't believe in forced baptism. But if a child wants to obey the gospel of Christ he should have the right to be baptised.
It is amazing that you condemn others for saying they know the truth. In doing so you are saying you know they are wrong. Which is saying you know the truth.
@ bixie
I called the Ghandi quote "cute" becaue anti-Christian people like to use it and think that are "cute" in doing so.
Christ's teaching not to judge others does not mean that we can't say something is sin. It means not to think you are better than others.
The prophets, Christ, his apostles, and his disciples all preached against sin. Christ also had some very strong words for deliberately dishonest people.
Quote:
Mat 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Quote:
Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
As I have said MANY times, I taught my children to respect people of different religions. And like I have said many times. I taught my children to love, pray for, and do good to even their enemies, just as Jesus said.
I don't listen to televangelists. I am sure there are some honest ones and some wolves. "Bible basher" means a person who is attacking the Bible. I think you meant "Bible thumper." But a person who references the Bible is not a hypocrit. Jesus quoted the Old Testament quite often. Oh, and you may not believe in exorcism but Christ himself cast out demons.
@ mvassilev
Like I said, I am not opposed to teaching a oomparative religion class. But each religion should be given the opportunity of having someone of their religion to present their own beliefs rather than a public school teacher presenting the beliefs.
Even if the teacher is trying to be unbiased he will likely misrepresent some of the beliefs and would likely be unable to answer any questions the students had about the beliefs.
I think you would agree that a minister of the religion would be able to present the actual beliefs of the religion far better than an outsider. And supposedly the purpose of a comparative religion class is to help students better understand the beliefs of others.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 08:10 PM |
|
|
Quote:
And like I have said many times. I taught my children to love, pray for, and do good to even their enemies, just as Jesus said.
This sentence disturbs me as much as when I see young Palestinians indoctrination. After all, any can interpret different holy percepts under a different point of view, and this is the danger.
Being "good" because we follow someone else is equal to me to being bad "because we were taught to". No personal value.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 08:12 PM |
|
|
Elodin: Calm dowm. NOW! Your blabbering again. JJ is not saying that your going to say "Christanity is not true", so calm down FFS....
Also, they are not capabel of that before atleast the age of 5-6. The expression child-baptism is tecnicaly "baby-baptism", and you know that as well as i am.
And your next line is an off-topic definition insult, a cult is a smaller religion. But its usually used about "bad small religions", so thus they are equal. Its like large and larger.
And good you finaly say something that makes sense, i also agree that if they got faith they can praise the lord and sing the gospel. I do not agree on indoctring them into faith, which you think is ok so long its your religion/cult?
And also, do not attempt to lower atheism to your level, the expression is equal to monotheism.
____________
|
|
bixie
Promising
Legendary Hero
my common sense is tingling!
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 08:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Christ's teaching not to judge others does not mean that we can't say something is sin. It means not to think you are better than others.
there are so many shades of wrong in this statement.
saying something is a sin is very much being arrogant over other people.
"Those wretches live in squalor and sin, we are better off without it!"
"It's a Sin to do that, kill him!"
"if you have sinned against god, then you can come and repent for it."
these are the kind of vibes i get of fanatical christians (and I have met a few, though luckily day to day meetings is limited to our reverends son (whose father I have informed is being a little prick) and some mad woman across the street who thinks that her pet gerbil can talk) when I went to the St peters in rome, I was made massively unwelcome by a whole host of visitors because I wasn't catholic. In the states, when I went to Virginia to visit relatives, the fact that I didn't go to church meant I found an air of tangable disgust when walking around the town.
It's the arrogance of having Sins that annoys me so much. It's hidden intolerance.
Christ may have cast out demons, but he didn't beat them out of a homosexual man or a small girl until they almost died, did he?
____________
Love, Laugh, Learn, Live.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 08:59 PM |
|
|
Elodin:
The problem with using a minister of the religion is that each would claim that his religion is true.
bixie:
I'm an atheist, and I haven't really encountered anything like that - and I lived in the Bible Belt for 10 years. Yeah, there are some religious fundamentalists, but even they are usually okay people once you get to know them. It's easy to judge the faceless - that goes for atheists and Christians alike.
And from my experience, preachers' kids are pretty cool. My best friend is a preacher's son, and no religious fundamentalist.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 09:01 PM |
|
|
Bixie you are being inconsistent and putting words out of nowhere. What's with the "kill him" part? I didn't see anything like that in ANY post in this thread.
Take an example with a judge (normal judge by law). Just because you say to your friend that stealing is against the law DOES NOT mean that YOU judge him. You aren't a judge, and neither a lawyer (probably), the only thing you do is tell him it's against the law.
Replace "against the law" with "sin" and "judge" with "God".
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 09:04 PM |
|
|
TheDeath: get out of the tread now, unless you got an actual argument. This tread is not regular OSM territory.
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 09:06 PM |
|
|
What?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 09:29 PM |
|
|
Calm down, everyone, please. The facts, no matter how they look, won't change because we slam about with statements.
@ Elodin
I think absolute knowledge is the realm of the god(s). Whether you dispute the claim or not, whether you believe that you know the truth or not - you cannot prove it. Not that I want to compare you with them, but there are enough people who claim to act, because god told them to - should we believe them? I think not. If you find the message of Jesus convincing and take that as kind of "proof", you trust on something that can't be proven either: the authenticity of the script. Nicae Council under Constantine determined how the New Testament would look.
So if I was the state - which I'm not, but if I was - I would ADVISE (not order) EVERYONE to teach their children that there are a lot of differing opinions, even among Christianity, and that you are as sure about what you believe as a human can be, but that a human is NOT god and can NEVER be perfect nor have absolute knowledge about anything.
What you say about salvation - yes, I reject that. You didn't answer to the point, though. The point is, if someone like you, only a member of anther cult or religion, teaches his children the same way like you, you cannot actually hold it against the children when they believe their father whom they love, whether he's misguided or not. If I accept your view for a moment, that will make it infinitely more difficult for a child or youth to find that hunger for truth in them - after all they have found it already.
I have a slight problem with your statement as well, that you teach your children to love their ENEMIES. What enemies can they possibly have? Or better, what makes them think they have enemies?
About schools, I don't share your view about presentation. You'll have to limit it to the main themes anyway, and there is just not enough time to go into detail. I'd advocate a very basic comparative class, with the option, starting at a certain age, to go into detail later on, and THAT class, later on, when children were old enough, could be held by everyone the agents of a specific curch or religion would deem fit for it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a daughter. Her mother, dead for nearly 6 years, has been raised Catholic, but was, then, what I would call a Christian. We were not married when we got her - deliberately -, and we had a row about baptizing her or not. My opinion was the same as now - baby-baptism is bad, but she wanted, and after some arguing, I decided, what the heck, if it's so important for her, so be it.
Interestingly and surprisingly, not long AFTER she had been baptised, my wife had second thoughts and said I'd been right with my view. What happend then was, that we answered all questions as best and as honestly as we could and never forced her to anything. Since she WAS Catholic we left her in the CathRel class, but when she expressed a certain displeasure with that we took her out (that was in elementary school). She did not go to Relgion classes anymore until later on. In Germany in high school you can choose between Philosophy or a specific Religion and she took Protestant Religion and kept it. She is now 20. She believes in Jesus and that abortion is murder. She doesn't go into any church. Believing in Jesus seems to be enough for her.
I have no problem with that. She found her way. I didn't "teach" her anything and neither did my wife, except that you have to find your own way. For her it seemed to have worked.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 10:28 PM |
|
|
@MVass's reply to my post
Your parents are atheists and you're an atheist - but they, as I think you said once or twice, always let you have a choice and never imposed their opinion on you.
Why would it be different with Christian parents?
There is perhaps subconscious influence; but unless we forbid parents to have any personal religious views at all (both theist, atheist, heck - even agnostic), that can't be avoided.
Sure, there are families which impose their religious (theist or atheist) views on their children. But that's not the reason for forbidding every parent in the state to show their attitude toward religion.
I'm not optimistic about kids' critical thinking skills. I'm just pessimistic about the notion that adults' critical thinking skills are superior to kids'. 
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 10:33 PM |
|
Edited by angelito at 22:33, 06 Jul 2009.
|
@ Elodin
As long as you are not able to seperate the terms "knowledge" and "belief", discussions about religion is close to imposible to have with you. But just for the record, I think the same about "knowledge" and "disbelief"...just to make that point clear..
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
smvuy
Known Hero
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 11:25 PM |
|
|
there's plenty of other stuff you can teach as "heritage" origins, language food a bit of familiy history, why teach dogma? why validate an irrational belief as something good to teach our sons and daughters?
to me is just plain adoctrination to make the children a clone of their parents in terms of religion.
that's just plain wrong to me, teaching a kid to become a man or woman is responsabilty and capacity of taking decisions by themselves and that includes of to worship any god or simply rely on he plainly evident ans detectable via senses or instruments (we cannot see UV rays but we can detect them)
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted July 06, 2009 11:26 PM |
|
|
JJ:
A side thought regarding infant baptism - some churches really focus heavily on their young people in order to get them baptised at the "age of reason". But churches that practice infant baptism don't. Food for thought there.
Bak:
Let me illustrate with an analogy. Let's say your parents only ate one food: bread. When you went to school, everyone around you only ate bread. Then you hear about this food called "zaxlebax". You look up what it is. "Looks weird," you think, being only used to the bread. And so, even though your parents may not have ever made you eat bread, you will probably eat bread for the rest of your life.
(For me, it's different because even though my parents "only ate bread", everyone outside my family "ate zaxlebax", so I was exposed to both.)
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
| |
|
|
