Jump to content


Photo

Christianities Taboo's


  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#61 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,933 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 15 April 2018 - 04:43 PM

 

 Be really careful about allowing religious ceremonies (such as prayer) in the public schools.  If you allow the ceremonies of one faith, you will have to allow the practices of another.  Do you want your children being led in Islamic prayer.
 
Better yet .....
Would you allow the "Service of Mankind Church" to have their religious practices in public schools?  Hint:  Service of Mankind doesn't man humanity serving each other.  It has much more to do with men serving women.  (Note:  I will not post their link here .... search it on your own.)
Since this is a Country based on the Judeo Christian God of the Bible, the only prayers that should be required in schools should be to the only true and living God..

I only see Bible verses in the Supreme Court Building... That should kind of give you a hint..LOL.. Go look and see if there are any verses from the Koran up there... Surely you can figure it out..(I might be wrong)

 This is a country largely founded by (Christian) religious refugees fleeing persecution by other Christians.  They wanted no part of an established state religion.  The first amendment restriction against government "establishment" of a religion was intended specifically to prohibit favoring one religious belief over another.

 

As SN pointed out, your position makes second class citizens of those who have different religious beliefs for purely religious reasons.  This is not only unconstitutional, it is Un-American.



#62 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 15 April 2018 - 07:12 PM

Be really careful about allowing religious ceremonies (such as prayer) in the public schools.  If you allow the ceremonies of one faith, you will have to allow the practices of another.  Do you want your children being led in Islamic prayer.
 
Better yet .....
Would you allow the "Service of Mankind Church" to have their religious practices in public schools?  Hint:  Service of Mankind doesn't man humanity serving each other.  It has much more to do with men serving women.  (Note:  I will not post their link here .... search it on your own.)

Since this is a Country based on the Judeo Christian God of the Bible, the only prayers that should be required in schools should be to the only true and living God..
I only see Bible verses in the Supreme Court Building... That should kind of give you a hint..LOL.. Go look and see if there are any verses from the Koran up there... Surely you can figure it out..(I might be wrong)
 This is a country largely founded by (Christian) religious refugees fleeing persecution by other Christians.  They wanted no part of an established state religion.  The first amendment restriction against government "establishment" of a religion was intended specifically to prohibit favoring one religious belief over another.
 
As SN pointed out, your position makes second class citizens of those who have different religious beliefs for purely religious reasons.  This is not only unconstitutional, it is Un-American.


I only see Bible verses in the Supreme Court Building. Please tell us why they are there, why they were put there, and why there are ZERO verses from any other "Religious Texts" up there? If you dont know the answer, I can try to help.. Let me know!

#63 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 15 April 2018 - 07:29 PM

But you force ME to pay for teachers to indoctrinate kids into believing YOUR religion of Evolutionism and ONLY YOUR religion of Evolutionism on MY dime...

The first thing you need do is show evolution is a religion. Understand, when you try to take this to court, there will be a number of Christian scientists who will testify that evolution is the generally accepted scientific explanation, not religion.

With respect to those parents who do not wish their children exposed to current science, there are a number of options:

1) Substitute a school approved course covering basically the same subject matter but leaving out the religiously objectionable . (I've had parents do this.)
2) Make arrangements for your student to be given alternative assignments instead of the religiously objectionable material. (I've had parents do this too.)
3) Enroll your child in a private school that is consistent with your religious beliefs. (Be sure the school is accredited.)
4) Home school. Then you control the entire curriculum.



The term hypocrite doesnt quite do it justice does it..

Something about planks and motes comes to mind here ......
"The first thing you need do is show evolution is a religion."


So do you claim to know MORE about this subject then Ruse (AND MANY OTHERS) do?
He is an Evolutionist just like you are, in fact, a very famous
one. HE describes HIS religion as EVOLUTION.. So now you get to
tell us that people who follow THEIR OWN RELIGION don't have the
authority to do so because Piasan has made an Ipse Dixit claim
that their belief ISNT A RELIGION? (Even though THEY say it is?


Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. . . . Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.

=======================================================================

"There are a number of options"

1) Substitute a school approved course covering basically the same subject matter but leaving out the religiously objectionable . (I've had parents do this.)

Let us hear all about it.. Are you saying that some parents find
what you were going to "teach" them as "Religiously Objectionable?
Why? Is it because that all of those parents arent as "Educated" as
you are? Please tell us what you were going to teach them..


2) Make arrangements for your student to be given alternative assignments instead of the religiously objectionable material. (I've had parents do this too.)

More details. This is too vague. What was this "Religiously Objectionable" material?


3) Enroll your child in a private school that is consistent with your religious beliefs. (Be sure the school is accredited.)

Been there and done that.. Did you know that in the State of California, in order for a high school to be "Accredited" (Meaning that students who graduate qualify to be eligible to attend certain universities of "Higher Learning") That Biology MUST be taught from the State Run Textbook Curriculum as a well supported scientific theory with all of the lies and leading questions and indoctrination techniques (The same ones that YOU teach) included in those textbooks?

Just out of curiosity.. We have known for 20 years that DNA and Red Blood Cells are found in Dinosaur remains.. Are THOSE mentioned in your State Run "Science" Textbook? Dont worry.. I already know the answer.. Do you TELL your students about it? Dont worry, I know the answer to that as well..


"One day I was thinking that after studying this stuff for over 20 years, that there isn't one thing that I know about it, that is true. I asked this question to various people and groups, including a very prestigious group of evolutionists in Chicago, and all I got was silence for a long time and then someone spoke up, "well, I know one thing, it shouldn't be taught in High School".

Colin Patterson Evolutionist / Chief Zoologist / Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History

#64 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 15 April 2018 - 07:51 PM

"The Supreme Court has ruled that.." Hmm.. Is that the same "Supreme Court" that ruled in 1973 that it was perfectly legal for a person to enter into a paid contract with a paid assassin to murder one of their relatives out of convenience?
WHY YES!!! YES IT IS!!..

It's the Supreme Court that is empowered by Article 2 of the Constitution to determine what is, or is not, permitted under the Constitution.
 
 

Sorry Stormy.. If something is wrong (Such as restricting free speech) then it is wrong.. (Even if 5 Activist "Judges" assert differently..

There 7 justices who voted on school prayer.  It was 6-1.
 
Be really careful about allowing religious ceremonies (such as prayer) in the public schools.  If you allow the ceremonies of one faith, you will have to allow the practices of another.  Do you want your children being led in Islamic prayer.
 
Better yet .....
Would you allow the "Service of Mankind Church" to have their religious practices in public schools?  Hint:  Service of Mankind doesn't man humanity serving each other.  It has much more to do with men serving women.  (Note:  I will not post their link here .... search it on your own.)

"Be really careful about allowing religious ceremonies (such as prayer) in the public schools."
Since this is a Country based on the Judeo Christian God of the Bible, the only prayers that should be required in schools should be to the only true and living God..
I only see Bible verses in the Supreme Court Building... That should kind of give you a hint..LOL.. Go look and see if there are any verses from the Koran up there... Surely you can figure it out..(I might be wrong)
 
So, in other words, people of other faiths are lesser citizens than you and must succumb to the tenants of your faith in public-funded forums????  I'm pretty sure that is the antithesis of the principles upon which this country was founded....


"So, in other words, people of other faiths are lesser citizens than you and must succumb to the tenants of your faith in public-funded forums?"

No.. That is not what Jesus taught.. Why are there only Bible verses displayed in the Supreme Court..(If you dont want to answer it, just say so so I dont have to keep asking)

#65 popoi

popoi

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Kentucky

Posted 15 April 2018 - 08:35 PM

So do you claim to know MORE about this subject then Ruse (AND MANY OTHERS) do?
He is an Evolutionist just like you are, in fact, a very famous
one. HE describes HIS religion as EVOLUTION.. So now you get to
tell us that people who follow THEIR OWN RELIGION don't have the
authority to do so because Piasan has made an Ipse Dixit claim
that their belief ISNT A RELIGION? (Even though THEY say it is?

Let's hear from the man himself:

So, what does our history tell us? Three things. First, if the claim is that all contemporary evolutionism is merely an excuse to promote moral and societal norms, this is simply false. Today's professional evolutionism is no more a secular religion than is industrial chemistry. Second, there is indeed a thriving area of more popular evolutionism, where evolution is used to underpin claims about the nature of the universe, the meaning of it all for us humans, and the way we should behave. I am not saying that this area is all bad or that it should be stamped out. I am all in favor of saving the rainforests. I am saying that this popular evolutionism—often an alternative to religion—exists. Third, we who cherish science should be careful to distinguish when we are doing science and when we are extrapolating from it, particularly when we are teaching our students. If it is science that is to be taught, then teach science and nothing more. Leave the other discussions for a more appropriate time.

Emphasis mine.

#66 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 15 April 2018 - 09:36 PM

So do you claim to know MORE about this subject then Ruse (AND MANY OTHERS) do?He is an Evolutionist just like you are, in fact, a very famousone. HE describes HIS religion as EVOLUTION.. So now you get totell us that people who follow THEIR OWN RELIGION don't have theauthority to do so because Piasan has made an Ipse Dixit claimthat their belief ISNT A RELIGION? (Even though THEY say it is?

Let's hear from the man himself:

So, what does our history tell us? Three things. First, if the claim is that all contemporary evolutionism is merely an excuse to promote moral and societal norms, this is simply false. Today's professional evolutionism is no more a secular religion than is industrial chemistry. Second, there is indeed a thriving area of more popular evolutionism, where evolution is used to underpin claims about the nature of the universe, the meaning of it all for us humans, and the way we should behave. I am not saying that this area is all bad or that it should be stamped out. I am all in favor of saving the rainforests. I am saying that this popular evolutionism—often an alternative to religion—exists. Third, we who cherish science should be careful to distinguish when we are doing science and when we are extrapolating from it, particularly when we are teaching our students. If it is science that is to be taught, then teach science and nothing more. Leave the other discussions for a more appropriate time.

Emphasis mine.

I didn't read where he withdrew his claim.. Did you?

"Today's professional evolutionism is no more a secular religion.."

Notice he said it isn't a "Secular" Religion. but he DID SAY it is a RELIGION! (There is a big difference)


"Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. . . .

EVOLUTION IS A RELIGION.

This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. Ruse..


Emphasis mine.

#67 StormanNorman

StormanNorman

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,159 posts
  • Age: 46
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 16 April 2018 - 04:15 AM

"The Supreme Court has ruled that.." Hmm.. Is that the same "Supreme Court" that ruled in 1973 that it was perfectly legal for a person to enter into a paid contract with a paid assassin to murder one of their relatives out of convenience?
WHY YES!!! YES IT IS!!..

It's the Supreme Court that is empowered by Article 2 of the Constitution to determine what is, or is not, permitted under the Constitution.
 
 

Sorry Stormy.. If something is wrong (Such as restricting free speech) then it is wrong.. (Even if 5 Activist "Judges" assert differently..

There 7 justices who voted on school prayer.  It was 6-1.
 
Be really careful about allowing religious ceremonies (such as prayer) in the public schools.  If you allow the ceremonies of one faith, you will have to allow the practices of another.  Do you want your children being led in Islamic prayer.
 
Better yet .....
Would you allow the "Service of Mankind Church" to have their religious practices in public schools?  Hint:  Service of Mankind doesn't man humanity serving each other.  It has much more to do with men serving women.  (Note:  I will not post their link here .... search it on your own.)

"Be really careful about allowing religious ceremonies (such as prayer) in the public schools."
Since this is a Country based on the Judeo Christian God of the Bible, the only prayers that should be required in schools should be to the only true and living God..
I only see Bible verses in the Supreme Court Building... That should kind of give you a hint..LOL.. Go look and see if there are any verses from the Koran up there... Surely you can figure it out..(I might be wrong)
 
So, in other words, people of other faiths are lesser citizens than you and must succumb to the tenants of your faith in public-funded forums????  I'm pretty sure that is the antithesis of the principles upon which this country was founded....

"So, in other words, people of other faiths are lesser citizens than you and must succumb to the tenants of your faith in public-funded forums?"
No.. That is not what Jesus taught.. Why are there only Bible verses displayed in the Supreme Court..(If you dont want to answer it, just say so so I dont have to keep asking)

Just a guess, when they built the Supreme Court building and others, people like yourself were a much bigger portion of the population than you do today....so, your way of thinking held more sway. Of course, at one time, the thinking that slavery is a natural and acceptable condition also held more sway.

But, the thing is, blitz, the legal opinions and jurisprudence that comes from the Supreme Court is far more important than its building...those are what drive the US legal system.

So, why are there no bible verses in the US Constitution and no mention of Christianity whatsoever? That is the document that established our country, it's legal systems, etc.....

#68 popoi

popoi

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 867 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Kentucky

Posted 16 April 2018 - 06:23 AM

I didn't read where he withdrew his claim.. Did you?

So far I haven’t seen much reason to believe that’s what he was actually claiming in the first place. That quote seems to be a popular one for creationists to bring up, and I haven’t generally found quotes presented out of context like that to be honest representations of the views of their authors. In fact Ruse brings it up in the piece
 

Notice he said it isn't a "Secular" Religion. but he DID SAY it is a RELIGION! (There is a big difference)

No, he didn’t. He said it was no more a secular religion than industrial chemistry. If your interpretation of that sentence is that evolution is a religion just not a secular one (?) then that would seem to imply that Ruse thinks industrial chemistry is also such a religion. Do you think that is his position?

Let’s hear a little more from him:
https://www.huffingt...n_b_904828.html

So, what about Darwinism? I don’t think believing that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution through natural selection (his version or today’s version) commits you to religious belief. I think that if, as I myself would, you extend the scope of the theory to an understanding of knowledge acquisition and justification and the same for morality — evolutionary epistemology and evolutionary ethics — then it can act as a religion substitute or alternative.

You could get this out of the first thing I linked if you read a little bit between the lines instead of stopping halfway through them. In both pieces Ruse draws a distinction between evolution as in the scientific theory and evolution as in attempts to apply those ideas to other questions. Ruse is pretty clearly only applying terms like “secular religion” to the latter. Equivocating between the two is 1) dishonest, and 2) against the rules of this forum. I’d recommend you stop on both grounds.

#69 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 16 April 2018 - 10:40 AM

I didn't read where he withdrew his claim.. Did you?

So far I haven’t seen much reason to believe that’s what he was actually claiming in the first place. That quote seems to be a popular one for creationists to bring up, and I haven’t generally found quotes presented out of context like that to be honest representations of the views of their authors. In fact Ruse brings it up in the piece 

Notice he said it isn't a "Secular" Religion. but he DID SAY it is a RELIGION! (There is a big difference)

No, he didn’t. He said it was no more a secular religion than industrial chemistry. If your interpretation of that sentence is that evolution is a religion just not a secular one (?) then that would seem to imply that Ruse thinks industrial chemistry is also such a religion. Do you think that is his position?Let’s hear a little more from him:https://www.huffingt...n_b_904828.html

So, what about Darwinism? I don’t think believing that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution through natural selection (his version or today’s version) commits you to religious belief. I think that if, as I myself would, you extend the scope of the theory to an understanding of knowledge acquisition and justification and the same for morality — evolutionary epistemology and evolutionary ethics — then it can act as a religion substitute or alternative.

You could get this out of the first thing I linked if you read a little bit between the lines instead of stopping halfway through them. In both pieces Ruse draws a distinction between evolution as in the scientific theory and evolution as in attempts to apply those ideas to other questions. Ruse is pretty clearly only applying terms like “secular religion” to the latter. Equivocating between the two is 1) dishonest, and 2) against the rules of this forum. I’d recommend you stop on both grounds.


Ruse is pretty clearly only applying terms like “secular religion” to the latter. Equivocating between the two is 1) dishonest, and 2) against the rules of this forum. I’d recommend you stop on both grounds.


I agree... "EVOLUTION IS A RELIGION." Ruse...

#70 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,933 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 17 April 2018 - 09:37 AM

 

 This is a country largely founded by (Christian) religious refugees fleeing persecution by other Christians.  They wanted no part of an established state religion.  The first amendment restriction against government "establishment" of a religion was intended specifically to prohibit favoring one religious belief over another.

 
As SN pointed out, your position makes second class citizens of those who have different religious beliefs for purely religious reasons.  This is not only unconstitutional, it is Un-American.
I only see Bible verses in the Supreme Court Building. Please tell us why they are there, why they were put there, and why there are ZERO verses from any other "Religious Texts" up there? If you dont know the answer, I can try to help.. Let me know!

It's probably because the bulk of our laws are traced back to the ten commandments.  The same basic legal foundation is the case with virtually all societies... even those without a Christian history..  Laws against murder, theft, fraud, etc. are pretty much universal whether the society has a Biblical history or not.

 

Your argument that only Christian beliefs are to be practiced in schools is still UN-American.


  • StormanNorman likes this

#71 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,933 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 17 April 2018 - 10:45 AM

 

 

But you force ME to pay for teachers to indoctrinate kids into believing YOUR religion of Evolutionism and ONLY YOUR religion of Evolutionism on MY dime...

The first thing you need do is show evolution is a religion. Understand, when you try to take this to court, there will be a number of Christian scientists who will testify that evolution is the generally accepted scientific explanation, not religion.
So do you claim to know MORE about this subject then Ruse (AND MANY OTHERS) do?
He is an Evolutionist just like you are, in fact, a very famous
one. HE describes HIS religion as EVOLUTION.. So now you get to
tell us that people who follow THEIR OWN RELIGION don't have the
authority to do so because Piasan has made an Ipse Dixit claim
that their belief ISNT A RELIGION? (Even though THEY say it is?

Nope.

 

I claim that when you go to court, there will be a large number of Christian scientists who will testify that evolution is the generally accepted scientific explanation not a religious belief.

 

Ruse may, or may not.  But he is still only one scientist.

 

There will also be a number of creationist scientists who will appear and testify that evolution is a religious belief and not scientific at all.   The court will evaluate the evidence from both sides, Apply the "Lemon Test" ( You do know about the 3 prong "Lemon Test" don't you?)  Then they will make their ruling.  Any decision by a lower court in this matter will almost certainly be appealed to the Supreme Court who will make a final ruling on the matter.

 

BTW, the courts have already mentioned that if evolution is, in fact, a religion, the proper course of action would be to stop the teaching of evolution,  not introduce creationism to the curriculum.

 

 

 

With respect to those parents who do not wish their children exposed to current science, there are a number of options:


1) Substitute a school approved course covering basically the same subject matter but leaving out the religiously objectionable . (I've had parents do this.)
Let us hear all about it.. Are you saying that some parents find
what you were going to "teach" them as "Religiously Objectionable?
Why? Is it because that all of those parents arent as "Educated" as
you are? Please tell us what you were going to teach them..

Most parents aren't aware of all their rights in this regard.  These particular parents were.

 

They objected to their children being taught evolution because it is in conflict with their religious (YEC) beliefs.  They knew I would be teaching from the textbook provided by the school and that book had a section on evolution.   They got together with school administrators and arranged for their child to take an on-line biology course in the 2nd semester (when we would cover evolution in class).  

 

It has nothing at all to do with how "educated" either of us are/were.  The decision was based entirely on their religious objection to the material that would be covered in class.

 

 

 

2) Make arrangements for your student to be given alternative assignments instead of the religiously objectionable material. (I've had parents do this too.)


More details. This is too vague. What was this "Religiously Objectionable" material?

 

 

With respect to those parents who do not wish their children exposed to current science, there are a number of options:


1) Substitute a school approved course covering basically the same subject matter but leaving out the religiously objectionable . (I've had parents do this.)
2) Make arrangements for your student to be given alternative assignments instead of the religiously objectionable material. (I've had parents do this too.)
3) Enroll your child in a private school that is consistent with your religious beliefs. (Be sure the school is accredited.)
4) Home school. Then you control the entire curriculum.

1) Substitute a school approved course covering basically the same subject matter but leaving out the religiously objectionable . (I've had parents do this.)

Let us hear all about it.. Are you saying that some parents find
what you were going to "teach" them as "Religiously Objectionable?
Why? Is it because that all of those parents arent as "Educated" as
you are? Please tell us what you were going to teach them..


2) Make arrangements for your student to be given alternative assignments instead of the religiously objectionable material. (I've had parents do this too.)

More details. This is too vague. What was this "Religiously Objectionable" material?


3) Enroll your child in a private school that is consistent with your religious beliefs. (Be sure the school is accredited.)

Been there and done that.. Did you know that in the State of California, in order for a high school to be "Accredited" (Meaning that students who graduate qualify to be eligible to attend certain universities of "Higher Learning") That Biology MUST be taught from the State Run Textbook Curriculum as a well supported scientific theory with all of the lies and leading questions and indoctrination techniques (The same ones that YOU teach) included in those textbooks?

Just out of curiosity.. We have known for 20 years that DNA and Red Blood Cells are found in Dinosaur remains.. Are THOSE mentioned in your State Run "Science" Textbook? Dont worry.. I already know the answer.. Do you TELL your students about it? Dont worry, I know the answer to that as well..


"One day I was thinking that after studying this stuff for over 20 years, that there isn't one thing that I know about it, that is true. I asked this question to various people and groups, including a very prestigious group of evolutionists in Chicago, and all I got was silence for a long time and then someone spoke up, "well, I know one thing, it shouldn't be taught in High School".

Colin Patterson Evolutionist / Chief Zoologist / Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History

 



#72 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 17 April 2018 - 07:29 PM

"The Supreme Court has ruled that.." Hmm.. Is that the same "Supreme Court" that ruled in 1973 that it was perfectly legal for a person to enter into a paid contract with a paid assassin to murder one of their relatives out of convenience?
WHY YES!!! YES IT IS!!..

It's the Supreme Court that is empowered by Article 2 of the Constitution to determine what is, or is not, permitted under the Constitution.
 
 

Sorry Stormy.. If something is wrong (Such as restricting free speech) then it is wrong.. (Even if 5 Activist "Judges" assert differently..

There 7 justices who voted on school prayer.  It was 6-1.
 
Be really careful about allowing religious ceremonies (such as prayer) in the public schools.  If you allow the ceremonies of one faith, you will have to allow the practices of another.  Do you want your children being led in Islamic prayer.
 
Better yet .....
Would you allow the "Service of Mankind Church" to have their religious practices in public schools?  Hint:  Service of Mankind doesn't man humanity serving each other.  It has much more to do with men serving women.  (Note:  I will not post their link here .... search it on your own.)

"Be really careful about allowing religious ceremonies (such as prayer) in the public schools."
Since this is a Country based on the Judeo Christian God of the Bible, the only prayers that should be required in schools should be to the only true and living God..
I only see Bible verses in the Supreme Court Building... That should kind of give you a hint..LOL.. Go look and see if there are any verses from the Koran up there... Surely you can figure it out..(I might be wrong)
 
So, in other words, people of other faiths are lesser citizens than you and must succumb to the tenants of your faith in public-funded forums????  I'm pretty sure that is the antithesis of the principles upon which this country was founded....

"So, in other words, people of other faiths are lesser citizens than you and must succumb to the tenants of your faith in public-funded forums?"
No.. That is not what Jesus taught.. Why are there only Bible verses displayed in the Supreme Court..(If you dont want to answer it, just say so so I dont have to keep asking)

Just a guess, when they built the Supreme Court building and others, people like yourself were a much bigger portion of the population than you do today....so, your way of thinking held more sway. Of course, at one time, the thinking that slavery is a natural and acceptable condition also held more sway.
But, the thing is, blitz, the legal opinions and jurisprudence that comes from the Supreme Court is far more important than its building...those are what drive the US legal system.
So, why are there no bible verses in the US Constitution and no mention of Christianity whatsoever? That is the document that established our country, it's legal systems, etc.....



"So, your way of thinking held more sway. Of course, at one time, the thinking that slavery is a natural and acceptable condition also held more sway."

Until Christians like William Wilberforce and many others fought to abolish it..

Of course, ever since you Atheists got prayer removed from school things are now getting better each day!... A Godless utopia....




The Effects of Removing Prayer and the Bible From the Schools in 1962
The article published in the Examiner in September of this year discusses the effects that removing God from schools has had on America. The evidence is overwhelming and the solution is clear; God, the Bible and prayer.

“Remember the quote from Forrest Gump, “stupid is as stupid does”?

It is not Biblical but is sure displays the lack of wisdom of doing things that seems to make sense and not changing when the results are consistently bad. Persisting in behavior when all the facts show that you are wrong is the definition of irrationality.

Has anyone bothered to take inventory of removing prayer and the Bible as a standard for morality? Someone eloquently said the philosophy of the school room in one generation will become the philosophy of government in the next.http://www.forerunne...ca_stopped.html

It is beyond a coincidence that every social indicator took a nose dive once prayer and the Bible were removed from our standard. Add in the fact that relativism was added and the gray area of no absolute right or wrong became individual standards of vacillation, and it should not surprise anyone of the following results;

Criminal arrest of teens is up 150% according to the US Bureau of Census; Parents sue school for teaching child the bibleteen suicides in ages 15-19 years up 450% according to the National Center of Health Services; illegal drug activity is up 6000% according to the National Institute of Drug Abuse; child abuse cases up 2300% according to the US Department of Health and Human Services; divorce up 350% according to the US Department of Commerce, and SAT scores fell 10% even though the SAT questions have been revamped to be easier to answer.

Violent crime has risen 350%, national morality figures have plummeted, and teen pregnancy escalated dramatically after prayer and the Bible were removed from the schools.

One of the most damning statistics is to follow s@x education in the schools. As the school’s involvement in s@x education increased from grade level to grade level, promiscuity followed and the increase of premarital s@x increased. Without any firm foundation to discourage S@xual experimentation, unplanned pregnancies exploded. When right or wrong becomes relative to the individual, a natural consequence is to self-approve immoral behavior.

http://www.metacafe...._effect_barton/

It does not occur to these geniuses that their approach could be in error. As these psycho-babblers pushed S@xual education into high school, down the grades 12, 11, 10 and 9; then they pushed their agenda into middle school grades 8, 7 and 6; down through elementary school…and illicit S@xual activity followed the same path. Now these gurus want to implement S@xual education down to second grade, first grade, and even kindergarten…..BRILLIANT!!

http://www.guttmache...ls/3018898.html

Knowledge without wisdom is a dangerous thing and the Bible warns that there is a way that seems right unto a man, but in the end are the ways of death. Our education system teaches our kids how to put a c*ndom on a banana but fail to give the students reasons to avoid the situation in the first place.

We have our schools training our kids that they are accidents of chance, are nothing more thTeen fights for Pledgean evolved animals, and should adjust their moral compass based on the situation. There is no absolute right or wrong and each person can be right in their own eyes. Then our pontificating professors of learning are amazed when students start putting Darwinian thinking in action…to wit: law of the jungle, survival of the fittest, and dominating your environment at all costs. The skyrocketing categories of the aforementioned crime and falling morality is a testament to removing the Biblical standards that worked quite well for America generations upon generations.

Unfortunately the results of removing the Bible and prayer are NEVER addressed and the colossal failure of the more liberal morality standards is not even in the conversation. All that is repeated is “we are a modern society and those old-fashion methods in the Bible are just not workable in our progressive era”.

Was it Albert Einstein who said, “doing the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity”?

Stupid IS as stupid does.”




Do You Think It Could Happen In America?
In "america"
Religious Liberty Becoming a "Second-Tier" Right?
In "america"
What is it Going to Take to Set Our Country Back on the Right Course?

#73 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,299 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 18 April 2018 - 06:43 PM

 

 This is a country largely founded by (Christian) religious refugees fleeing persecution by other Christians.  They wanted no part of an established state religion.  The first amendment restriction against government "establishment" of a religion was intended specifically to prohibit favoring one religious belief over another.

 

As SN pointed out, your position makes second class citizens of those who have different religious beliefs for purely religious reasons.  This is not only unconstitutional, it is Un-American.

 

 

To quote:
 

 

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

 

1. Congress. That's the central government's legislative government. 

2. It's about establishing a state religion for the whole united states, like e.g. the Anglican Church. 

3. It doesn't regulate what state or county governments do or shouldn't do. 

4. It's a double edged sword. Central government can't prohibit exercise of religion neither. 

5. Prohibiting prayer  in schools (by central government fiat) would be unconstitutional as well. A problem would be, if there is no consent by the learners (or their parents). But that's no central government matter neither. 

 

A post establishment of constitution problem is the emergence of secular ideologies, arguably those aren't religions, but functionally they still should be considered as such. 

 

I think one needs to consider the presuppositions of a text and that includes legal texts. They assumed either existing American citizens or immigrants from Europe, who'd be Christians of some sort. They'd also assume that communities would sort out their own issues without interference from the central government, whose role was limited. Constitution/Bill of Rights/ Amendments served as legal recourse against tyranny or domination by either majorities, powerful minorities or a central government. 

 

This has also important implications:
 

 

From the Declaration of Independence

 
We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed....

There is an assumption being made. Without it the constitution would actually lose it's validity. Now should (government)schools teach stuff that goes against it?



#74 StormanNorman

StormanNorman

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,159 posts
  • Age: 46
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 18 April 2018 - 08:03 PM

 

 

 This is a country largely founded by (Christian) religious refugees fleeing persecution by other Christians.  They wanted no part of an established state religion.  The first amendment restriction against government "establishment" of a religion was intended specifically to prohibit favoring one religious belief over another.

 

As SN pointed out, your position makes second class citizens of those who have different religious beliefs for purely religious reasons.  This is not only unconstitutional, it is Un-American.

 

 

To quote:
 

 

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

 

1. Congress. That's the central government's legislative government. 

2. It's about establishing a state religion for the whole united states, like e.g. the Anglican Church. 

3. It doesn't regulate what state or county governments do or shouldn't do. 

4. It's a double edged sword. Central government can't prohibit exercise of religion neither. 

5. Prohibiting prayer  in schools (by central government fiat) would be unconstitutional as well. A problem would be, if there is no consent by the learners (or their parents). But that's no central government matter neither. 

 

 

 

 

What you said above, Mark....was correct in the United States up until about 1866.  Prior to 1866, some states had state religions; in the south, there were laws forbidding the publication of anti-slavery writings, etc.  In fact, an 1829 Supreme Court ruling explicitly stated that the Bill of Rights only applies to the federal government and not to state and local governments.  However, in 1866, the 14th Amendment was passed which states

 

 

 

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

Since the passing of the 14th Amendment, several Supreme Court rulings have interpreted the amendment...more specifically, the Privileges or Immunities Clause.... to incorporate the restrictions defined by the Bill of Rights at the state and local government levels as well.  For example, today state and local governments cannot restrict the freedom of speech and freedom of the press any more so than the federal government can.  And the same is true with regards to the Establishment Clause.



#75 Goku

Goku

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,139 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 25
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • USA

Posted 18 April 2018 - 08:28 PM

5. Prohibiting prayer  in schools (by central government fiat) would be unconstitutional as well. A problem would be, if there is no consent by the learners (or their parents). But that's no central government matter neither.

 

Prayer isn't prohibited in school; you can pray as much as you want (so long as it doesn't disrupt the class or something), it is just that faculty-led prayer is prohibited (in public school).

 

While education is done at the State and local level in America, they still have to follow federal law, and public school teachers being employees of the government means that if they lead the class in prayer then that would equate to the government endorsing religion which would be a violation of the establishment clause.

 

I agree the establishment clause can be a double-edged sword or can arrive at two contradictory conclusions, but I don't think most prayer cases are that ambiguous. I am more open to short, generic, praises of God during various special events like graduation. If a teacher gets up at a graduation ceremony and says "praise God for the class of...." or something like that I'm not going care, or if a teacher briefly mentions God or Heaven at a memorial for a student that died I don't have a problem with that, even if that is technically illegal. I know some atheists will go nuts if things like that happen, but I think you have to use a little common sense too. Sort of how the military providing chaplains for service members can be seen as promoting religion, but common sense, I think, would say that promotion is outweighed by the free expression of religion in that instance, and in the case of military service they have earned the comforts of a chaplain of their preferred religion. 



#76 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,933 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 18 April 2018 - 09:26 PM

The Effects of Removing Prayer and the Bible From the Schools in 1962
The article published in the Examiner in September of this year discusses the effects that removing God from schools has had on America. The evidence is overwhelming and the solution is clear; God, the Bible and prayer.

“Remember the quote from Forrest Gump, “stupid is as stupid does”?

It is not Biblical but is sure displays the lack of wisdom of doing things that seems to make sense and not changing when the results are consistently bad. Persisting in behavior when all the facts show that you are wrong is the definition of irrationality.

Has anyone bothered to take inventory of removing prayer and the Bible as a standard for morality? Someone eloquently said the philosophy of the school room in one generation will become the philosophy of government in the next.http://www.forerunne...ca_stopped.html

It is beyond a coincidence that every social indicator took a nose dive once prayer and the Bible were removed from our standard. Add in the fact that relativism was added and the gray area of no absolute right or wrong became individual standards of vacillation, and it should not surprise anyone of the following results;

First, let's make this absolutely, explicitly clear ..... it is not the responsibility of the public schools to teach your child religion. 

 

You've heard this term before and you're about to hear it again .....

 

PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY.

 

In 1962, I was a high school sophomore about 30 miles north east of San Francisco.  My first 3 years of university were in San Francisco.  That gets us up to late 1967. 

 

There was a lot more than a school prayer ban going on at that time ..... the introduction of "the pill;" the "Free Speech" movement; the hippie movement.  This didn't all happen because a minute of so of prayer in school had been dropped.

 

One other, more important factor.  Many more moms went to work.  There's a big difference to a child between mom being there when you get home and her getting back around 6PM tired from a day's work.   PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY

 

 

One of the most damning statistics is to follow s@x education in the schools. As the school’s involvement in s@x education increased from grade level to grade level, promiscuity followed and the increase of premarital s@x increased. Without any firm foundation to discourage S@xual experimentation, unplanned pregnancies exploded. When right or wrong becomes relative to the individual, a natural consequence is to self-approve immoral behavior.

http://www.metacafe...._effect_barton/

It does not occur to these geniuses that their approach could be in error. As these psycho-babblers pushed S@xual education into high school, down the grades 12, 11, 10 and 9; then they pushed their agenda into middle school grades 8, 7 and 6; down through elementary school…and illicit S@xual activity followed the same path. Now these gurus want to implement S@xual education down to second grade, first grade, and even kindergarten…..BRILLIANT!!

http://www.guttmache...ls/3018898.html

Do you know why schools got involved in s@x ed?

 

Hint:    PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY

 

Frankly, it's a topic parents don't want to touch.  One year when I was teaching biology, I finished the normal material a couple weeks early and checked with the principal if I should cover human anatomy.  He said to go ahead but get parental permission for the reproductive videos I planned to show.  So I copied the covers of the videos on a "permission slip."  The positive response was 100% with the majority adding a "thank you" on the slip.

 

The short story .... schools got involved because parents weren't.

 

 

Knowledge without wisdom is a dangerous thing and the Bible warns that there is a way that seems right unto a man, but in the end are the ways of death. Our education system teaches our kids how to put a c*ndom on a banana but fail to give the students reasons to avoid the situation in the first place.

All of the schools where I have taught over the last 17 years have had abstinence based s@x-ed.  I know because for a couple years, the course was conducted in my class by "Why W8" personnel.  I think the program starts in the sixth grade and ends around grade 10.

 

If you want s@x-ed out of the public schools, I'm all for it.  Frankly, I have too little time to teach the normal curriculum.

 

 

We have our schools training our kids that they are accidents of chance, are nothing more thTeen fights for Pledgean evolved animals, and should adjust their moral compass based on the situation. There is no absolute right or wrong and each person can be right in their own eyes. Then our pontificating professors of learning are amazed when students start putting Darwinian thinking in action…to wit: law of the jungle, survival of the fittest, and dominating your environment at all costs. The skyrocketing categories of the aforementioned crime and falling morality is a testament to removing the Biblical standards that worked quite well for America generations upon generations.

We spend a lot more time teaching cooperation, tolerance, and environmental responsibility than we do on evil-ooo-shun.



#77 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,933 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:15 PM

Seems I hit "post"  a bit soon on this one .....

 

2) Make arrangements for your student to be given alternative assignments instead of the religiously objectionable material. (I've had parents do this too.)

More details. This is too vague. What was this "Religiously Objectionable" material?

Same parents as the alternative course mentioned as (1).  In this case, the material they objected to was the "Big Bang."  I gave an alternative astronomy assignment.

 

 

 

2) Make arrangements for your student to be given alternative assignments instead of the religiously objectionable material. (I've had parents do this too.)
3) Enroll your child in a private school that is consistent with your religious beliefs. (Be sure the school is accredited.)
4) Home school. Then you control the entire curriculum.

Been there and done that.. Did you know that in the State of California, in order for a high school to be "Accredited" (Meaning that students who graduate qualify to be eligible to attend certain universities of "Higher Learning") That Biology MUST be taught from the State Run Textbook Curriculum as a well supported scientific theory with all of the lies and leading questions and indoctrination techniques

When I went to school, biology wasn't required.   I had to take two lab courses and chose Chemistry and Physics.

 

 

Just out of curiosity.. We have known for 20 years that DNA and Red Blood Cells are found in Dinosaur remains.. Are THOSE mentioned in your State Run "Science" Textbook? Dont worry..

No.  But not for the reason you think.

 

I last taught biology 12 years ago from a textbook that was 7 years old.  It takes at least 2 years to update a book and get it approved.  That's 21 years.

 

I have no knowledge of what's in current text books.

 

 

We have known for 20 years that DNA and Red Blood Cells are found in Dinosaur remains.. ...... Do you TELL your students about it? Dont worry, I know the answer to that as well.

As a matter of fact, I did. 

 

It is important students understand science is constantly learning new stuff that opens up tremendous possibilities.  Further, I use the discovery as an example of serendipity in science.  No one had ever opened up a dino bone before.  Intact bones are far too precious for that.  Due to weight restrictions they had to split the bone and ship it in two pieces.  If Switzer didn't have to open the bone to remove it, the discovery would never have happened.

 

The presence of DNA fragments opens up the possibility that some day dinosaurs can be cloned.  Exciting stuff.  Shades of Jurassic Park.  The kids love it ! ! !



#78 KillurBluff

KillurBluff

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 160 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:S.W. Indiana
  • Interests:Theology, Acoustics, Planting Fruit Trees on my Property.
  • Age: 52
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • In.

Posted 18 April 2018 - 10:38 PM

TIME OUT!!!  :gilligan: 100% off topic Gents. Please let us get back on track please and remain focused by all means please. :yoda: 



#79 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,933 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 20 April 2018 - 12:42 AM

I defer to the author of the OP. 

 

  :worship:






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users