The religious discussion thread

[Archangel]

This thread was created to bring a local new story to light, which can be viewed below:

JACKSON, Ohio (AP) — An Ohio school district decided Tuesday night to keep a portrait of Jesus hanging in the school where it's been 65 years, denying a federal lawsuit's claim the portrait's display unconstitutionally promotes religion in a public school.

The Jackson City Schools board offered a constitutional justification of its own in voting 4-0 to keep the portrait up in its middle school, saying it must protect students' free speech rights. The vote drew cheers and applause from the dozens of people gathered in the elementary school gymnasium.

Read all of it here: http://news.yahoo.com/ohio-school-b...xzBHB0A3N0b3J5cGFnZQR0ZXN0A1Rlc3RfQUZD;_ylv=3

I posted his here @ NP to see what ppl had to say on the issue. As it turns out, this sparked many debates. I've considered closing this thread but after multiple suggestions, I decided to keep it open. Feel free to join in the topics but per forum rules, please refrain from obscene, threatening, rude, or insulting posts.

 

[Archangel]

Wrong way. It's better to teach religion than this - "Schools could be made to teach pupils about gay marriage once it is passed into law"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167472/Schools-teach-pupils-gay-marriage-passed-law.html

I can't imagine that something like this happened in a Islamic country.

Wrong way.

The teaching about gay marriage is perfectly okay in my eyes. Preaching an opinion is wrong but teaching it isn’t bad. Is teaching about how the ignorant white ppl of earlier times idiotically claimed “ownerage” of blacks improper? No, it’s teaching is about the history (and ignorance) of our ancestors. Read the below comment for a better view of this.

You can teach religious studies without instilling religion. It's just like you can learn French without changing nationality.

You seem to think that all teaching of religion instills belief (maybe I'm wrong) but it needs more than just social interaction.

If people studied the dynamics of religion Americans would have more of an understanding of why things are different in the Ukraine or Portugal than they are in Canada or the US and vice versa.

Helps to bridge the gap a little.

In other words:

Catholicism is the .com of religions. Church of England is the co.uk and the American Evangelicals are the .me. The world is trying to establish the equivalence of the new gTLDs which run the gamut.


If this was simply about a painting hung in a school it would have no implications outside of the school. But yet here we are.

This is one of those rare DU posts I agree with. Christians are Christians but some are more feverish about it. Though some would be open-minded (like I am), you’ll have those close-minded Christians preaching and stopping short of an exorcism to create followers. These close-minded Christians are like horny teenage boys: Give them a little and they’ll want more. If a girl says “We can kiss but that’s it,” the closed-minded “teenage boys” will try to force themselves onto the girl. Otherwise: people don’t know their limits. There is, after all, a difference between telling ppl the story of Christ and preaching about how He loves everyone & how “gays will burn in hell so don’t ever turn gay” etc. like diehard Christians try to teach. Think of the teacher as a horny kid & the hot girl as he students. I wouldn’t ever want the students to be even around the horny kid, or else they’d likely get their minds molested by the devout religious side.

BTW It’s “simply” about a painting hung in an American school. Our laws ren’t identical to, say, Iran or Chile. They can treat religion however they want. I care about what happens here, not in a place thousands of miles away.

If US is not a country based on Christian values - i have nothing to say.
And, yes, you're right, I'm not in this country too.
I think Gilsan and me, we just see what's happening in the Europe for example, and looking on all of these with open eyes - this is why some posts and opinions are out of our understanding. Although can speak only for myself.

It isn’t. America was founded by them but people opened their eyes & mind to other religions throughout the 230+ years since America was founded.

You two, no offense, are not looking at this with open eyes. I’m being an open-minded Christian, saying that people should believe as they choose. You two are basically saying “You have to worship God. Shut up and don’t try to argue.” There are more religions out there & Christianity has numerous denominations. Only a closed-minded person would say that ppl aren’t allowed to have opinion but simply follow the sheep. Not all are as open-minded as I am, I know. And that makes me weep a little inside.

In the end, these are public schools, full of kids with different religions and no religion at all. Should be neutral.

A person would have to be pretty stupid to think school violence would decrease from allowing God in schools. Go to a baseball game and see how it is. Most ppl will respect the other teams’ fans but you will have a lot of bad blood flowing. Sometimes it’s reduced to name-calling on forums and others, it turns into violence. Having a large group of ppl who share different beliefs do that. School is no different. And considering how dumb kids are (in the social sense), you should expect to see a lot lot worse than your typical sports game. I’ve seen ppl bullied because they were black. I’ve seen it done to kids that were gay/lesbian. And I’ve seen it with non-Christians. Yeah, atheists get their asses kicked at school--BY CHRISTIANS! Such a boiling-pot in a public school would be madness, no matter how nicely religion was taught. The repercussion would be Pyrrhic at best. Schools being neutral of religion is the best way to be.

If you send your kids to public school, they will surely be exposed to some sort of religion through their peers. That's why I said kids at public schools can learn through "social interaction."

I completely agree with you that teachers should NOT install religious values. Kids should'nt have to stare at religious pictures while being forced to attend the public education system either.

They would, yeah, but not much. Really, kids rarely talk about religion in schools. They talk about music, movies, sex, and whatnot. There might be a public school where kids talk about their faith but those schools are microscopic in volume compared to the rest of the schools nationwide (at least the public ones). And with the minority that has kids talking about religion, well, religious teachers would more than likely simply be cheerleaders for a group’s beliefs. Read above about the “horny teenage boy” thing.

First of all let me put the record straight. I lived in California for 7 years, from 1975-1982, so I'm not exactly ignorant about the country. I traveled across part of the US, visiting Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Nebraska and up to Des Moines in Iowa. And because I lived in the US I have an added interest in it and what happens there.

Secondly when you say the US is not a Christian country I have to :lol:. What the hell do you call 80% Christian?

Let me tell you something, just be glad that it remains Christian for a very long time, because not every religion is as tolerant as the Christians are.

So what on earth are they teaching in Public Schools nowadays?

U.S. Public Education System FAIL!!! - YouTube

I'll bet if they asked these same kids about Video Games, movie stars, music artists, cell phones, iPads, reality shows or even the Kama Sutra these kids would answer the questions with flying colours.

I guess they have so many important other things to learn such as:

Sexual education classes at NYC public high schools and middle schools might feature some usually unmentioned lessons next year.
Among those lessons? Bestiality, anal sex, oral, sex, phone sex, porn and more,...

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...ach-on-oral-sex-and-bestiality_n_1028670.html

And if the girls get pregnant, that's not a problem; just go to an abortion clinic and get rid of it. Can't miss out on all that kinky sex can they?

One final question: What will happen if one student objects to having to learn about, lets say; Bestiality or Porno in school. Will the courts take it off the curriculum? Will JB Lions, Archangel and others be incensed and make a big fuss about it?

I’ll give you some props for a well-thought out rely.

To answer your question: Yes, ppl will make a fuss and yes, it might be removed from teaching. That is “democracy.” I could bring in a few ppl to this tread, to discuss the schools and their stance on, say, child vaccinations, but that wouldn’t be a smart idea. It would never end :p

General Rule: Public schools may not teach religion, although teaching about religion in a secular context is permitted.

One can't remove religion from schools. Why was America founded? Who was Cromwell and what was his beef? What was the holocaust about? What about the Crusades? Who was Calvin? Why was he important? Who was Luther? Henry the 8th? Discuss the growth of the Medici family without using religion?

What about China and its policies? Toward Tibet? What about Turkey and its relationship to Iraq? What about Israel? Why was it created? How? How can we discuss peace issues?

If you make no attempt to study religion then history, literary studies and the arts are a waste of time.

The constitutionalist view is archaic outdated and should have been dumped in the 18th century. America is one of the most modernized countries in the world with people that lean on the most anachronistic principles ever devised.

Rather than taking the brilliance of the founding fathers (some of them truly were) and constantly striving to improve we look back to some ancient principles as the be all end all and do nothing but stifle.

Can you imagine a 21 st century business looking at its 17th century founders for guidance?

The US needs a upgrade of its boardroom.

The US is antiquated. You know this, DU, as well as we do. Every time Uncle Sam wants to fart, he looks at our founding fathers to see if they had any advice of some sort on it. We aren’t capable of taking a step without pondering, “What would our forefathers do?” That’s why we even have this stupid issue, to begin with.

 

[GILSAN]

Archangel said:

If a girl says “We can kiss but that’s it,” the closed-minded “teenage boys” will try to force themselves onto the girl.

Your “horny teenage boy” story is not very convincing. You fail to mention that perhaps he got horny because she was dressed with a very short mini skirt and her breasts popping out. That it a provocation to a teenage boy that may be hard to control. That boy cannot be blamed completely in that situation. She is also to blame because she looked or perhaps behaved... how can I say... slutty?

"A person would have to be pretty stupid to think school violence would decrease from allowing God in schools."

I'm willing to bet that the opposite is true. Common sense tells me so.

"I’ve seen ppl bullied because they were black. I’ve seen it done to kids that were gay/lesbian. And I’ve seen it with non-Christians. Yeah, atheists get their asses kicked at school--BY CHRISTIANS!"

From your posts you give the impression that Christians are the evil ones in most cases. Gays, blacks, atheists are always the victims, they never cause any problems, right?

"Is teaching about how the ignorant white ppl of earlier times idiotically claimed “ownerage” of blacks improper? No, it’s teaching is about the history (and ignorance) of our ancestors."

Are you telling me that all white people were slave owners in the US? If the answer is NO, then why should these "ignorant white ancestors" as you call them, have to feel "white guilt" if they had nothing to do with slavery?

"I could bring in a few ppl to this tread, to discuss the schools and their stance on, say, child vaccinations, but that wouldn’t be a smart idea. It would never end"

Actually I think that would be a smart idea :tu:

I just couldn't resist putting this article that came out today:

Sex Week at the University of Chicago

Some highlights of the many events include “Atheism and Sex,” “Great Oral Sex,” “Anal 101,” “Sex Work 101,” “Genitalia: The Musical,” “Menstrual Ed 101,” “Star Wars XXX: A Porn Parody,” and “Sex Ed for Kids.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/14/u-chicago-sex-week-events-include-sex-for-kids-anal-101/

Next year they will probably add "Pedophilia 101"

 

[Archangel]

GILSAN, you never made sense before & you're inventing arguments that don't exist. I can't and won't talk to a brick wall. Have fun believing you're open-minded & that your points are relevant

 

[JB Lions]

Some highlights of the many events include “Atheism and Sex,” “Great Oral Sex,” “Anal 101,” “Sex Work 101,” “Genitalia: The Musical,” “Menstrual Ed 101,” “Star Wars XXX: A Porn Parody,” and “Sex Ed for Kids.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/14/u-chicago-sex-week-events-include-sex-for-kids-anal-101/

Next year they will probably add "Pedophilia 101"

You're a weirdo. So a college is having some normal sexual topics and pedophilia pops into your mind.

 

[Archangel]

Is there really any true comparison between public school & college? lol I've been to college. They teach things in there that would never be even brought up in public schools. So yeah, he;s making arguments that have no point. That's his only defense.

You're a weirdo. So a college is having some normal sexual topics and pedophilia pops into your mind.

 

[verbster]

Personally, I'd much rather have a God that truly is all things to all people at all times. Life and death would be so much better.

 

[twomoon]

My dear friends, the only thing I want to say now, that fully describes my point of view is:

You could be very liberal, tolerant to everything, you could love everyone and everything - because people are soooo different. Let the stuff about gay people would be learned in your schools, let the pictures of Jesus won't be in these schools, let the Christmas Tree would be "cubic", btw why do you need the crosses on the churches? (maybe the offend someone too) etc. etc. But spend just 2 minutes of your life and think about in what society would you children live in. Especially keeping in mind that children in other religions and cultures generally have not so liberal parents as you are. They raise men and women, with their very strong traditions and understanding that the man need to be a man and the woman need to the woman.
But, guys, don't forget the world we'are leaving in. One of the main rules of the Nature is that the strong eat the weak. Now who would be the weak? I know the answer. And you? I guess you simply don't care. Your choice.

 

[enlytend]

"A person would have to be pretty stupid to think school violence would decrease from allowing God in schools."

I'm willing to bet that the opposite is true. Common sense tells me so.

If god exists and is all-powerful, why would (s)he need to be "allowed" in schools in the first place? Wouldn't (s)he just go there? Why would (s)he need permission from the school board, and why would presence or absence of a picture matter?

Now who would be the weak? I know the answer. And you? I guess you simply don't care. Your choice.

You don't know the answer - you have an opinion, just like the rest of us.

Throughout history, the strong are the ones who can adapt to change. Those that can't adapt become extinct.

 

[twomoon]

You don't know the answer - you have an opinion, just like the rest of us.

Throughout history, the strong are the ones who can adapt to change. Those that can't adapt become extinct.

Actually you can't adapt something that is more powerful than you, you can't adapt something that don't want to be adapted.

 

[Keith]

They would, yeah, but not much. Really, kids rarely talk about religion in schools. They talk about music, movies, sex, and whatnot. There might be a public school where kids talk about their faith but those schools are microscopic in volume compared to the rest of the schools nationwide

That's the beauty of it. The kids will be mildly exposed to religion through their peers, if at all.

Public school is not the place to formally teach religion or promote it in any way. As a parent, you can take your kids to church or send them to private school if you feel that strongly about the scripture.

 

[enlytend]

Actually you can't adapt something that is more powerful than you, you can't adapt something that don't want to be adapted.

(??? That doesn't make sense in the context of the discussion...)

Adapt = Become adjusted to new/changing conditions.

In a sentence: Dinosaurs are extinct because they couldn't adapt to the changing climate, volcanos, disease, or whatever happened at the beginning of the Cretaceous period which killed off 70% of all species.

or

People who can't adapt to modern technology often have a difficult time in our increasingly techno-centric world.

Change is the only true constant in life. We live in a very different and more interconnected world than what existed a couple thousand years ago.

 

[DU]

That's the beauty of it. The kids will be mildly exposed to religion through their peers, if at all.

Public school is not the place to formally teach religion or promote it in any way. As a parent, you can take your kids to church or send them to private school if you feel that strongly about the scripture.

Here's a religious summary for the children.

Who needs education when you can sum it up in one chart, eh?

Your method discounts herd mentality, what being a minority it, secular teaching. Religious education is not about teaching scripture - it's about putting religion in a historically and worldly context.

What and who was Jesus? How did he survive with all those dinosaurs running around? How did he end up with such a poor suntan?

---------- Post added at 09:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:42 AM ----------

There is, after all, a difference between telling ppl the story of Christ and preaching about how He loves everyone & how “gays will burn in hell so don’t ever turn gay” etc.

Jesus loves everyone? Even gays?

A study of religion in debate might discuss the concept of Jesus loving everyone as an opinion but that's not what would be taught.

Religious education is educating about a religion, its basis and its impact and not a real commentary on its merits or failures (except in the form of open discussion).

It can work. It was mandatory when I was in school and we learned a lot about Sikhism, Buddhism, Islam and Christianity which were religions all healthily present in my school.

 

[twomoon]

(??? That doesn't make sense in the context of the discussion...)

Adapt = Become adjusted to new/changing conditions.

In a sentence: Dinosaurs are extinct because they couldn't adapt to the changing climate, volcanos, disease, or whatever happened at the beginning of the Cretaceous period which killed off 70% of all species.

or

People who can't adapt to modern technology often have a difficult time in our increasingly techno-centric world.

Change is the only true constant in life. We live in a very different and more interconnected world than what existed a couple thousand years ago.

Maybe i was not correct in my reply.

I was talking about religion groups and society. All this changes that I was talking about (teaching at schools that people can be gay and it's okay, outstanding tolerance to everything etc.) it's not a progress but regress.
By the more powerful I meant the religions that have more straight and powerful positions than Christians right now.
In religion the strongest are those who follow their strong traditions.

 

[enlytend]

In religion the strongest are those who follow their strong traditions.

The RELIGION is strong, because the dogma is pushed upon every generation. Is that really a good thing? Is intolerance productive in an increasingly interconnected and diverse world?

 

[JB Lions]

My dear friends, the only thing I want to say now, that fully describes my point of view is:

You could be very liberal, tolerant to everything, you could love everyone and everything - because people are soooo different. Let the stuff about gay people would be learned in your schools, let the pictures of Jesus won't be in these schools, let the Christmas Tree would be "cubic", btw why do you need the crosses on the churches? (maybe the offend someone too) etc. etc. But spend just 2 minutes of your life and think about in what society would you children live in. Especially keeping in mind that children in other religions and cultures generally have not so liberal parents as you are. They raise men and women, with their very strong traditions and understanding that the man need to be a man and the woman need to the woman.
But, guys, don't forget the world we'are leaving in. One of the main rules of the Nature is that the strong eat the weak. Now who would be the weak? I know the answer. And you? I guess you simply don't care. Your choice.

What? So you're saying these other cultures where the "woman need to be the woman" which is usually second class citizens, is better, more powerful, something like that? And if you're against gays and such, that makes you a strong society etc.? If so, you have it ass backwards. A strong society is one that is open and not fearful of bs. I don't remember if it was you or somebody else in some other thread talking about how society would crumble if such things were allowed to happen. And then me asking Gilsan, did Portugal crumble because they allow gay marriage now? Of course not. You're just repeating some fearful nonsense you were taught. You would get a pass if you were a child and your parents taught you this, because parents are a child's foundation. But there comes a time in life where you should have grown up, become an adult, think for yourself and forgive your parents, knowing they were just passing down the same nonsense they were taught. Eventually you have to break the cycle.

A society fearful of 2 women getting married is not strong, it's weak as hell. Beware the lesbians*, boo.

That's for the 2 women that fought for those rights in Portugal, and now they can legally wed.

 

[Keith]

Religious education is not about teaching scripture - it's about putting religion in a historically and worldly context.

It can work. It was mandatory when I was in school and we learned a lot about Sikhism, Buddhism, Islam and Christianity which were religions all healthily present in my school.

Most of my schooling was done at a Christian academy. My family spent many Sundays at a baptist church. My experience at both places was the scripture being rammed down my throat. History had little to do with it. The basic message was, you better believe in god or else you're screwed!

Your educational experience sounds much different. Were you taught at a public school, payed for with tax money? My wife is a teacher, I've never heard of such a diverse school as yours but I'll ask her.

 

[DU]

Your educational experience sounds much different. Were you taught at a public school, payed for with tax money? My wife is a teacher, I've never heard of such a diverse school as yours but I'll ask her.

UK. May have been C of E.

My first RE teacher was a christian who taught primarily from a C of E bent but it was still looking at the bible from a non-religious context. He also taught about Sikhism, Buddhism but was clearly not quite as comfortable. Being in the UK meant a lot of my friends were 1st generation English Indians. It was an interesting time to see them be brought up in England with many of them having very traditional parents.

It was tax payer and my parents hated the concept of RE (they are atheist). The reality was that I thoroughly enjoyed learning about the different religions (after all, many of my friends were Sikh, for example). My parents were a but shocked to find out I liked it.

History in general covered religion in a different way. How can you learn about the Protestant Reformation without understanding relgion? How can you discuss Kant vs Hume without understanding religion? Most people are shocked to learn that Newton and Darwin were religious (Darwin studied to become a clergyman). This fact adds a lot to the story of evolution.

I don't believe that evolution destroys the concept of God.. and I don't believe the concept of God destroys evolution and I think I can do that because I can respect both positions. This I think stems in part from how religion was addressed as a much more critical thought. (Some people will be upset that I say concept of God - that's to be expected right now.)

I find fundamentalism of all kinds annoying. Fundamentalist atheism is no better than fundamentalist evangelism.

I do believe that what you practise should be private and I think the biggest reality and difference though between then (my schooling) and now is that religion just wasn't that big a deal and now it has become a real problem.

I don't believe the U.S. is built to handle religious education in public schools right now. We can teach black history and women's suffrage so it's just a matter of getting to a place where people are more comfortable talking openly about things ... I'd like to believe it can be done.

Education should be about learning to understand each other and not about teaching the other

Hope that makes sense.

 

[GILSAN]

DU... what´s rhe meaning of C of E

 

[enlytend]

Church of England

I was raised in the US offshoot of the C of E - can't speak for the original, but the US version is a very accepting and inclusive denomination.

 

[DU]

DU... what´s rhe meaning of C of E

Church of England... But the more I think I dont think it was. We did have assembly and hymns though which I largely ignored.

Theyre a scientific school now according to the website.

Times change!

 

[GILSAN]

When I was in school in my history lessons we learned about Martin Luther breaking away from the Catholic church in Germany in protest to certain teachings and started the Protestant doctrines, or about the Anglican (Church of England) and how it succeeded from the influence of Rome, or the many Catholic and Protestant missionaries in Africa, Asia and the Americas.

The Catholic Inquisition, the Muslim conquests and invasions, the African slave trade, the Barbary Pirates (virtually no one talks about them) whose main purpose of attacks along the Mediterranean coast, to as far north as the UK and even to my own Madeira Island was to capture Christian slaves (especially women) for the Islamic market in North Africa and the Middle East. Most of these things were done in the name of God or Allah or whatever. We learned about all these things, not in great detail, but enough to give us a better understanding and in the correct context of History.

So it’s impossible, as DU rightly says, to separate Religion from History.

 

[JB Lions]

"So it’s impossible, as DU rightly says, to separate Religion from History."

I don't really seeing anybody saying that. What you just posted is factual/historic type stuff. The point is, in a public school with various backgrounds, you shouldn't favor/push one religion over another. It could be something like what this thread is about or praising Jesus/saying a prayer before a football game.

 

[Archangel]

This is.. interesting, to say the least:

Schools use KKK ruling to keep Jesus painting

In a legal sense, Jackson City Schools is likening the display of a painting of Jesus in a middle school to a Ku Klux Klan cross outside the Ohio Statehouse.

Rejecting the state’s argument that such displays represented a government endorsement of religion, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1995 that the KKK was entitled to place a Christmastime cross in a “public forum” such as the Statehouse grounds.

The court found that the cross was protected private speech because Capitol Square has long served as a public sounding board; even a religious message near the heart of government was legal if privately sponsored.

Officials in the southern Ohio school district and their attorneys cited the case, filed on behalf of a Klan leader by the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, in defending the display of the painting against a lawsuit seeking its removal as an unconstitutional intermingling of church and state.

Read it all here http://www.dispatch.com/content/sto...ls-use-kkk-ruling-to-keep-jesus-painting.html

 

[Keith]

This is.. interesting, to say the least:

Schools use KKK ruling to keep Jesus painting



Read it all here http://www.dispatch.com/content/sto...ls-use-kkk-ruling-to-keep-jesus-painting.html

The kkk display was a law passed for temporary placement. The school and it's lawyers are typical in the sense that they used whatever they could to push their agenda. I hope they lose if the case moves forward!

 

[Archangel]

Some (like GILSAN) argue with me and that's okay. The thing here that irks me the most is that when the schools here see students doing anything that disrupts the educational system, they end it via suspension or whathaveyou. This painting issue is the biggest disruption of education we've ever had (my hometown, Wellston, had a teachers' strike in the late 90s). This is making students, teachers etc take their focus away from the educational process. Had a student came to school with a religious shirt on, he'd face suspension. But this is "okay" because it's related to their religion of choice and thus, a blind eye is turned to the issue, as though there is no "disruption" at all. Filthy hypocrites.