Christians bitch about lack or religion in schools

An atheist myself (so this will be biased), I see no reason to teach religion in schools. Name one scientific advance that the bible is directly responsible for, and I will give you 1000 that were furthered by the Scientific Method, not faith.

Who's religion would we teach in school? America is an incredibly diverse nation, and mentioning religion in the public arena typically offends people, so teaching Hindu's that the one true God is God may be unfair to them. There was something in the Constitution about RELIGION and seperating it from STATE (and public schools happen to fall under the broad range of "state").

One doesn't mention religion or politics in polite conversation because they are beliefs that few can change. So why do some Christians insist on being rude (stupid question; they're just assholes)? Don't they realize a theocracy built on the bible would turn us out as bad as the Muslims?

Science may be mentioned in polite conversation because it is not a belief system in the same way religion is. For instance; most physics can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in their accuracy. God cannot.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It is impossible to teach European history without studying religion. A student' study of religion does not have to entertain which religion is correct or wrong. I can study Islam without believing a thing of it.

Actually, at every gathering that I've gone to have discussed Adam and Eve, pedofile priests and politics.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Roman,

Here's the problem. After 9/11 a new curriculum was introduced at my second grade niece's school to help them understand Islam where they were shown how Muslims bow to pray, which way was Mecca and the girls got to make little fabric veils to wear. They even had mock pilgrimage to Mecca. No one would make a Muslim child pray ot the Infant Jesus and rightfully so, but why is one acceptable and the other not?

That same year, the Nativity and "Merry Christmas" were banned in the school. I think many Christians feel that because we are the majority, we can be insulted, discriminated against and put upon and it's no big deal. Why can't the schools pick the five largest religions in the US and let the kids learn about all of them in a culturally sensitive way? Then kids who are non-religious or part of a smaller religion can also share their views.

I agree science class is not the place for these things, Jesus never told anyone to be an idiot. However, I think that Christians are getting fed up with the PC double standard and that is causing the current backlash.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It is essential that religion be taught in schools since religion has been and continues to be a significant influence in the world.

However, it should not be acceptable to preach religion in state schools.

Kat

 

Here's the way I see it:

I send my daughter to school to get a "real" education. I want her to learn mathematics, English, the sciences, moving on to subjects such as business studies.

When and if I want my daughter to learn about religion, I can send her to a church, a synagogue or a mosque.

There are places to learn about science, and places to learn about god, leprechauns and mystical space cities. They do not belong together.

 

You can teach religion without trying to make people religious. The aim would be to analyze religion for what it really is.

 

Theoretically yes, but in practice it doesn't work out as one might hope. There are several reasons for this, but mainly bias. The school my daughter goes to wouldn't even bother going into the muslim, jewish, wiccan beliefs in any depth but would concentrate solely on that which "rules" (in this case christianity). At the very most they would only focus on the top 3 or 4 worldwide religions as if somehow the more believers a religion has, the more valid it becomes. This is quite clearly utter codswollop.

Further to that, I would point out that my daughter is four years old, and would indeed question her position to analyze or debate anything regarding the subject matter. When you're just a young child and someone says jesus died for your sins, who are you to argue, debate or research? In the same manner you would not debate the issue when your parents tell you a fat guy with a white beard will come down the chimney in December. In this instance it becomes more of a "recruitment ploy" than teaching - or do you disagree?

Many will say there is no harm in telling a child santa, the tooth fairy and god exist but I feel different about it. Basically it is nothing more than deception and confident lying. At it's very best its speculation and guess work.

Education and religion are two completely different things, and need to be kept apart from each other.

 

It worked for me.

But I am aware it might totally depend on the personal aims of the teacher.

 

Well it's not so much personal aims as it is curriculum. They have no choice but to teach it here, and the student has little choice but to listen to it. All the singing of kumbaya, and hark the herald angels sing might not seem worth fussing over, but the same position stands whereby if I wanted my daughter to focus on things of this nature, I would send her to a place relevant to it. The most recent example I can give was the assembly where they got the children to stand up and say "dear god, thank you for taking care of us.."

I didn't let my daughter go, and spent that time improving her maths, English, and reminding her to say thank you to her mother, who is the "real" being that takes care of her.

You'd think it would be different in London - one of the most religiously and culturally diverse cities on the planet.

 

Katazia, you said it sister!

It is extremely important to study religion, especially so if you are an atheist. Teaching ABOUT religion is not teaching people to be religious. It should start with ancient religions, shamanism, aztec and mayan religions, voodoo, native african religions, then later pagan gods, greek, roman, etc... Perhaps this kind of education will give people a sense of perspective that is lacking these days.

I even think religion should be allowed in school in the form of after-school clubs. I seems the separation of church and state is not really understood by alot of people. As long as the government does not endorse a religion over another, the subject can be freely discussed.

 

spidergoat,

I agree. The US government is not supposed to endorse any religious ideas over another including atheism. What's wrong with teaching kids that there are diffferent religions and people believe they are valid for different reasons? What's wrong with teaching kids to be accepting and appreciative rather than just marginally tolerant and even then, just so long as we never talk about anything? Teaching someone maths and sciences is wonderful but would lead to a very drab existence without music, art, literature and drama. All of these disciplines are subjective, but valid nonetheless.

 

God is Truth.

Why hide the Truth from the kids and lie to them?

Science may change theories, but God IS.

 

We are talking about the teaching of comparative religion, and not all religions contain the concept of God.

A lie is an intentional deception, are you saying that atheists actually know there is a God, and choose to decieve?

 

A lie is when you distort something that you know is a fact. So athiests are not lying for teaching their kids what they believe is the truth.

If there is a god out there he should have made more convincing evidences. Simple stuff is good enough for me. Like honest to goodness prophecies predicting uncommon events. God if he exists doesnt need to appear to me in person.

 

Are you kidding?

 

What you believe does NOT make it THE Truth, whether or not YOU think it is the truth. What an arrogant perspective!

Examine the times where kids were taught the earth was flat by people who BELIEVED it really was and who "knew" it to be "truth". Of course we now know that they were LYING when they said that. Conscious or unconscious, whether you choose to be cowardly and call it an "innocent mistake", or the best they could do at the time, it still does not make it any less of a LIE, now does it?

 

What does? The authority of a church heiarchy?...An orally transmitted mythology?...Human intuition?... Secondhand reports of miracles?...An army of angels descending from heaven with trumpets blaring?...A bloodstained shroud?

come on, why do you say God is truth?

 

The same goes with you my friend. What you believe does NOT make it the truth. What you have is just FAITH, NOT FACT.

And I am an agnostic. My answer to the question of theism is "I DONT KNOW". There may be a god or maybe there isnt. I just dont know because there no convincing evidences to prove which is which.

 

SouthStar,

You mean like ‘shit happens’ is truth?

Exactly - why teach kids that gods exist when any intelligent person knows that no such things exist.

Curious – try reading The History of God by Karen Armstrong. You’ll find that the definition for what is meant by God has been changing continuously for many thousands of years, and in far more ways I suspect than any scientific theories have ever existed.

God IS whatever man’s imagination, and current fashion wants it to mean. God is, in other words, a fantasy.

Kat

 

I don't even know what this is supposed to mean so I will leave it at that

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Fancy such arrogance, ridicule billions of men and women of ages past and today, and to top it off call yourself comparably "intelligent".

Romans 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Why do you persist in ridiculing yourself? God is not the definition "of" man. No one has ever said that He is, and if so, now you know that He is not. Since we have that established, that paragraph becomes totally senseless and useless to the discussion.

God reveals Him self TO man, not man revealing God. I hope you have that clarified, for I assure you, never in all of eternity would man have been able to "imagine", as you ludicrously claim, the "concept" of God. By claiming that God is "a fantasy", you yourself have admitted that He REMAINS 'fantastic' over "many thousands of years." Do you think man could have maintained this pretension for such an extended period of time?

Nay, it is man who has "changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man".

If there are things you don't understand, I suggest you look at Romans 1:22-

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.