A dog had followed his owner to school. His owner was a fourth grader at a public elementary school. However, when the bell rang, the dog sidled inside the building and made it all the way to the child's classroom before a teacher noticed and shoo'ed him outside, closing the door behind him. The dog sat down, whimpered and stared at the closed doors. Then God appeared beside the dog, patted his head, and said, "Don't feel bad fella'.... they won't let ME in either."
-
Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/
Sad, huh?
- Thread starter bczoom
- Start date
You mean all those times I silently prayed for the right answer on the exam, God couldn't hear me? I though God was everywhere! I didn't know I needed some external trappings of one of the hundreds of religions which profess to be the best way to reach God; I thought He was watching me wherever I am.
Yes, I knew exactrly what it meant. It meant that the folks who are pushing one of those hundreds of religions want their trappings to be the ones that all the other folks are forced to use. It means that one of those religions is so lacking in self confidence they have to force their beliefs on everyone else. It means they are so desperate for conversions they hope thier brainwashing will create more members for them. It means that they are so intolerant of other religions that they want to exclude those others from public expression while only their own is permitted.
It means that they are so self-important they think they are above the Constitution of the United States. It means that they want to worm their way into classrooms, textbooks, lesson plans and anywhere else they think they can get the legitimacy they can't achieve on their own.
It doesn't matter which religion is the one trying to force their way in; it could be one of the Protestant fundamentalist religions in the United States, it could be Catholic religions in Ireland, or it could be the Wahabbi Muslim sects in Saudi Arabia; it's all the same thing: one religion trying to get the upper hand over all other religions.
Well, I hope to God it never happens in any schools here!
It means that they are so self-important they think they are above the Constitution of the United States. It means that they want to worm their way into classrooms, textbooks, lesson plans and anywhere else they think they can get the legitimacy they can't achieve on their own.
It doesn't matter which religion is the one trying to force their way in; it could be one of the Protestant fundamentalist religions in the United States, it could be Catholic religions in Ireland, or it could be the Wahabbi Muslim sects in Saudi Arabia; it's all the same thing: one religion trying to get the upper hand over all other religions.
Well, I hope to God it never happens in any schools here!
Don, I disagree with you. I think there is a simple mistake being made and I think it has to do with people who misunderstand both sides.
First, there are people who want religion taught in schools, for those people I suggest they send their kids to a church operated school.
Second, there are those people, who, like Don seems to be, want all references to God/religion banished from school. To those people I suggest that they come to terms with history.
The fact that many religions are based on historical figures cannot be disputed. The fact that modern nations based their laws on Judeo-Christian ethics also cannot be disputed. Therefore it is reasonable to discuss, within some contexts, how some of these things affect our lives today. That does not mean that we should push any religion, or we should teach creationism in science class. What it means is that the fabric of our society is intertwined with some sort of religion and to gain a better understanding of society it is reasonable to discuss some issues like "morality and civil law."
Further, to better understand places like Iraq, Palestine, India, Japan or Tibet, it is reasonable discuss Muhammad, the Koran, Budda and the Dali Lama. There is virtually no way to understand those nations without doing that. However, under the strict rules of the anti-religion crowd we have to protect our children from this knowledge. That, my friends, is simply a way to keep our kids ignorant, and ultimately it will create even larger divides between nations.
First, there are people who want religion taught in schools, for those people I suggest they send their kids to a church operated school.
Second, there are those people, who, like Don seems to be, want all references to God/religion banished from school. To those people I suggest that they come to terms with history.
The fact that many religions are based on historical figures cannot be disputed. The fact that modern nations based their laws on Judeo-Christian ethics also cannot be disputed. Therefore it is reasonable to discuss, within some contexts, how some of these things affect our lives today. That does not mean that we should push any religion, or we should teach creationism in science class. What it means is that the fabric of our society is intertwined with some sort of religion and to gain a better understanding of society it is reasonable to discuss some issues like "morality and civil law."
Further, to better understand places like Iraq, Palestine, India, Japan or Tibet, it is reasonable discuss Muhammad, the Koran, Budda and the Dali Lama. There is virtually no way to understand those nations without doing that. However, under the strict rules of the anti-religion crowd we have to protect our children from this knowledge. That, my friends, is simply a way to keep our kids ignorant, and ultimately it will create even larger divides between nations.
B_Skurka said:
Just a small note here. I am not in any way shape or form a religious person. I firmly believe in the complete separation of church and state (with full recognition of your historical references).
However!
I find that the acedemic study of religions is absolutely one of the most fascinating subjects I have ever studied!
Indifference or even objection to religion does not have to go hand in hand with ignorance.
Me weird person.
DaveNay said:
Dave, I will agree with the intent of your entire post. But the line you wrote above is the most important. There is, unfortunately, a movement to 'clense' all religion out of our society and that will lead to absolute ignorance. Further, it will make it very difficult for us to understand many other cultures that are very different than our Judeo-Christian based society, and our Judeo-Christian based governments (that included virutally all the governments of developed Western nations).
B_Skurka said:
The same people that want to "cleanse" religion from schools are usually the same people that want to promote their own agendas (ie. gay marriage and "safe" sex) in the schools.
I honestly think that aetheism needs to be classified as a religion so it can be purged from the schools too.
Let's keep it all on a level playing ground. If you want to limit or restrict one set of beliefs then your set of beliefs is fair game too.
thcri
Gone But Not Forgotten
B_Skurka said:
Bob,
Your post was a great one. However, in my case I am not one to push religion in schools but I do believe we should teach creation as much as we teach evolution. Right now in the public school systems they force evolution down our kids' throats. I believe each kid should be allowed to decide for themselves. And it is not fair to push evolution and to keep creation totally out of the picture. The local kids wanted to meet for prayer but was told they could but would have to outside the school. So they met by the flag and then was told that was not outside enough. But magazines and books about evolution is allowed along with porn, because that is free speech.
As far as going to a christian based school. That is exactly what about 30 parents did in our town of 80k people. Ten years later this school that we created now has over 400 students in it. Along with 2 other schools started because of the lazy school system that only knows how to spend money and the home schoolers they have lost over 1200 students. That is a lot of money the schools themselves have lost.
So my final words are "Take God's Creation out of schools you best take evolution out too.
murph
There is an enormous difference between teaching about religions and what was obviously the gist of the "joke". "Keeping God out of school" is a code-word phrase which means, "Keeping prayer out of schools" or "keeping the display of the 10 commandments out of schools" and other similar goals of many religions.
Bob and others are putting words in my mouth or trying to put a spin on what they think I believe. I can't stop them, but I surely wish they'd ask me what I believe before they try to (incorrectly) explain it. Their explanations are almost always in terms of what they believe. Everyone should go back and read what I wrote over again, and see if there is anything, anywhere, that shows me trying to tell others what I think they believe. I just don't do it, and I resent it when others do it to me.
That said, my intention is not to "...want all references to God/religion banished from school." What I intend is to banish all references to any one single view of God from school.
When I grew up, it was a less complicated time. We had a prayer in school every morning. It was a Christian prayer, full of the usual references to Jesus. We all had to stand and show reverence for this prayer, as if we all agreed with it. I didn;t see anything wrong with it; it was the same thing I heard at home and in Sunday School. But then, I grew a little older, and made friends who were not exactly like me. One of them was Jewish. From him, I discovered that acceptance of Jesus as the Son of God is not a part of the Jewish faith. I also discovered that this is neither right nor wrong; it's just different. I also discovered that he resented the fact that he had to stand and show reverence for the prayer, with the implication that he believed it. I also discovered that his parents were concerned that exposure to the prayer would, in some way, influence their son to doubt the word of his parents or their religion. After all, if one hears it in school, it must be right, right?
They could have petitioned the school board to substitute a prayer more suitable for Jews, but as a minority, they did not have the political clout to make it happen. Therefore, you begin to see the a political influence of religion -- the majority were able to force the minority to mimic participation.
This is wrong. And, of course, in this exponentially more complicated world, there can be any number of students, of any number of faiths, or no faith at all, in any classroom. There is no universal prayer that can possibly satisfy them all. "Dear Possibility of a Higher Power who may or may not have Created us..."
The moment that you get more specific than that, you are "establishing" one religion, or one group of religions, over another, or over no religion, and that "establishment" is against our Constitution. Since there is no way to do it and be fair to all, then it can't be done.
The courts understand this; that's why it is the law of the land, regardless of whether the judges are liberal or conservative, believer or non-believer.
Politicians, on the other hand, while they may understand the reality very well, pander to people who do not understand. If a political party wants to gain the votes of fundamentalist Christians, for example, they promise to restore Christian prayer in school. The fundamentalists, for their part, don't give a rat's patootie about the law or the courts or the reality or the feelings of others; all they want is a single-minded return to the forced displays of my youth. So, they vote for the people who make the promises.
This is bad for the nation, because it puts the liars and panderers into power.
On the other hand, I can't imagine a logical, thinking person who would deny that religion has had an influence, good or bad, on the state of our current world. And, I can't imagine a person so stupid as to want to deny teaching that history to our students. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
Of course, the fact that most of the influence of religion in history has been so bad and/or so wrong might lead some to wonder how the teaching of religion would do anything except destroy religion, so I wonder why fundamentalists are so keen to get it into the schools? Or, could it be that they only want their version to be taught?
And so, we come back to the beginning of this circular argument. Why not just accept it that our courts have set the reality, and let it go at that.
As for the joke, I made my point in my first response -- God is not kept out of the school; individual religions are kept out of the school, and that is an entirely different thing. If it had been Pat Robertson patting the dog on the head and saying he's being kept out, also, that would have been funny. Especially since it puts Pat Robertson at the same level as the dog.
Bob and others are putting words in my mouth or trying to put a spin on what they think I believe. I can't stop them, but I surely wish they'd ask me what I believe before they try to (incorrectly) explain it. Their explanations are almost always in terms of what they believe. Everyone should go back and read what I wrote over again, and see if there is anything, anywhere, that shows me trying to tell others what I think they believe. I just don't do it, and I resent it when others do it to me.
That said, my intention is not to "...want all references to God/religion banished from school." What I intend is to banish all references to any one single view of God from school.
When I grew up, it was a less complicated time. We had a prayer in school every morning. It was a Christian prayer, full of the usual references to Jesus. We all had to stand and show reverence for this prayer, as if we all agreed with it. I didn;t see anything wrong with it; it was the same thing I heard at home and in Sunday School. But then, I grew a little older, and made friends who were not exactly like me. One of them was Jewish. From him, I discovered that acceptance of Jesus as the Son of God is not a part of the Jewish faith. I also discovered that this is neither right nor wrong; it's just different. I also discovered that he resented the fact that he had to stand and show reverence for the prayer, with the implication that he believed it. I also discovered that his parents were concerned that exposure to the prayer would, in some way, influence their son to doubt the word of his parents or their religion. After all, if one hears it in school, it must be right, right?
They could have petitioned the school board to substitute a prayer more suitable for Jews, but as a minority, they did not have the political clout to make it happen. Therefore, you begin to see the a political influence of religion -- the majority were able to force the minority to mimic participation.
This is wrong. And, of course, in this exponentially more complicated world, there can be any number of students, of any number of faiths, or no faith at all, in any classroom. There is no universal prayer that can possibly satisfy them all. "Dear Possibility of a Higher Power who may or may not have Created us..."
The moment that you get more specific than that, you are "establishing" one religion, or one group of religions, over another, or over no religion, and that "establishment" is against our Constitution. Since there is no way to do it and be fair to all, then it can't be done.
The courts understand this; that's why it is the law of the land, regardless of whether the judges are liberal or conservative, believer or non-believer.
Politicians, on the other hand, while they may understand the reality very well, pander to people who do not understand. If a political party wants to gain the votes of fundamentalist Christians, for example, they promise to restore Christian prayer in school. The fundamentalists, for their part, don't give a rat's patootie about the law or the courts or the reality or the feelings of others; all they want is a single-minded return to the forced displays of my youth. So, they vote for the people who make the promises.
This is bad for the nation, because it puts the liars and panderers into power.
On the other hand, I can't imagine a logical, thinking person who would deny that religion has had an influence, good or bad, on the state of our current world. And, I can't imagine a person so stupid as to want to deny teaching that history to our students. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
Of course, the fact that most of the influence of religion in history has been so bad and/or so wrong might lead some to wonder how the teaching of religion would do anything except destroy religion, so I wonder why fundamentalists are so keen to get it into the schools? Or, could it be that they only want their version to be taught?
And so, we come back to the beginning of this circular argument. Why not just accept it that our courts have set the reality, and let it go at that.
As for the joke, I made my point in my first response -- God is not kept out of the school; individual religions are kept out of the school, and that is an entirely different thing. If it had been Pat Robertson patting the dog on the head and saying he's being kept out, also, that would have been funny. Especially since it puts Pat Robertson at the same level as the dog.
Atheism is not taught in schools, any more than any single religion is allowed to gain an upper hand. The absence of religious trappings is not the same as atheism.PBinWA said:
Absolutely. That's exactly what I said. "...your set of beliefs" (or my set of beliefs) is "one set of beliefs", so it's restricted by definition!PBinWA said: