- Joined
- Apr 29, 2012
- Messages
- 17,873
- Reaction score
- 8,364
- Location
- On an island. Not that one!
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
In the US? could you provide a link for this statement?private religious schools also receive that same federal tax funding (as public schools)
No, you ignored my question in post #206 by accusing me of being atheist. I never said a word about or gave an opinion about atheism. So why don't you answer my question first and we'll go from there....Yes you did. In my post 207 I asked you, and you answered my question with a question, which is only something one does when the answer is in the affirmative and the asked wants to avoid admitting it. Maybe next time you try answering questions directly.
So what was the intent of posting the religious poster in a public funded school if not trolling non-christians?
I think it's a reasonable assumption to say that whoever hung up the religious poster was a Christian. Do you agree?It hasn't been established that the poster in question was owned by any church. For all we know, it was perchesed privately from an online vendor who likely sells a wide variety of posters from all genre, and hung by someone who was never a member of clergy, maybe by someone who doesn't even work at the school. It could have been a random parent who got a verbal ok from a lower administrator or the teacher of the classroom it was nearest to. It could have been a night janitor who thought it was just something nice to display, no harm/recruitment/intimidation/harassment/proselytizing intended. You don't know, but you're making a host of assumptions and reading novels of sub-text which isn't actually there.
Yes, I'm referring to organized religion and no, atheism is not considered a religion. So, it's probably not that difficult to deduce which particular religion put up the poster when you consider the schools location and the predominate Protestant Evangelical religion in the area and no, they don't pay taxes on the donations they recieve. But they probably should if they want to have "equal representation" to promote their beliefs in public schools, don't you think? So why not give them a choice, to either pay up or shut up?In context to the discussions thus far on this thread, "religion" refers to the private beliefs of individuals in the community, thus "cultural vestiges". We were not referring to religion as the organised variety by default. If that's what you mean, then that's what you have to go out of your way to specify: "organised"; and link to how you know exactly, by name, which specific church/temple was being represented by this poster as not all churches are 501c3 and it's possible that the church already does pay taxes.
Also, if religion is now being equated with philosophy, then if you're referring to *organised* religion, you are also therefore referring to organised atheism, so be prepared for that **** storm.
I have the government sending millions of federal dollars to private religious schools [ . . . ] This is in addition to all the federal funding which goes into the faith-based foster care my parent's are licensed through.
This is about a public high school in Virginia that has posted the Ten Commandments in a hallway of the school. There were protests and the poster with the Commandments was removed, more protests followed and the poster was re-installed. Now it is in court.
Why do the hyper-religious Christians continue to wast taxpayer dollars in fighting the lawsuits which they inevitably lose in court? For example, here in Florida, this past week - Bradford County Ten Commandments monument dedicated
How about this:
1) Thou shalt not run in thy hall.
2) Thou shalt not raise thy voice indoors as thou might outdoors.
3) Thou shalt not possess herbs in thy lockers.
4) Thou shalt not covet thy school cheerleaders.
5) Thou shalt not covet thy cheerleader's ass.
6) Thou shalt not make thyself late for home room.
7) Thou shalt not write false rumors on the walls.
8) Thou shalt not lock the meek in his locker.
9) Thou shalt not fornicate by hand or mouth whilst at school.
AND
10) Thou shalt NOT flee thy school before the last bell hath rungeth...
wow your commandments fully condemned left wing students:2wave:
Let me Google that for you.In the US? could you provide a link for this statement?
I had just seen a mod do that on another threadWhy didn't you include that link in your original post?
You act irritated that people ask you to back up what you said.
Welcome to DP.
There are distinct differences between teaching historical fact and religion.It occurs to me now, to remember that when I was in elementary school, in Santa Barbara, we were taught about the history of the area. In particular, I learned a fair amount about Friar Junípero Serra, and about the important role that he played in settling much of that part of California. He was responsible for the series of Catholic Mission buildings that were built across that part of the area in the 18th century. He was, of course, a religious man, and much of what he did had to do with spreading the Catholic faith. One cannot adequately learn about this part of California's history, without a detailed coverage of the religious aspects thereof.
I suppose that in the modern climate, with religion being treated as such a taboo subject in public schools, that many of today's schoolchildren from my home area are not being appropriately taught about the history of that area.
I had just seen a mod do that on another thread
It occurs to me now, to remember that when I was in elementary school, in Santa Barbara, we were taught about the history of the area. In particular, I learned a fair amount about Friar Junípero Serra, and about the important role that he played in settling much of that part of California. He was responsible for the series of Catholic Mission buildings that were built across that part of the area in the 18th century. He was, of course, a religious man, and much of what he did had to do with spreading the Catholic faith. One cannot adequately learn about this part of California's history, without a detailed coverage of the religious aspects thereof.
jerry-
just thought NOT trying to twist the debate to atheism is religion was more productive than mucking up the flow with rhetorical tap dancing.
Do think attempting to combine the 10 Commandments with Protestant Work Ethic as an amalgamate of our heritage and a stand alone like George Crossing the Delaware is flawed.
If the old Testament/10 Commandants/Moses's wanderings is part of the Philosophy class AND other topics of discussion were posted as well.... maybe.
Now the slap that is given all the Glory unto the PWE.
Hard workers are not Protestant only..
Odd thing is the PWE was 'practiced' by Catholic immigrants such as the Irish, Poles, and Eye-talians. It doesn't take a lot of research to find the tenants of Capitalism and the work as vocation in Europe before The Reform. Many historians argue that no matter the religion of any part of Europe it was the secular social structure that helped or hindered capitalism.
Calvinism is given the lead in creating Gawd and work equals good. However factual evidence it did is lacking. I've been to Scotland and seen the buildings designed by the Calvinists and all I can say is we have found the set for '1984'.
Now lets look at the PWE in the USofA-
If that is the case, then I have just as much right, if I were a teacher, to make my students bow down to Allah, or worship Buddha, talk like a pirate to the flying spaghetti monster, or get on their knees to Cthulhu. After all, we are talking about freedom of religion here. I think that, with separation of church and state, our forefathers also had another idea in mind.... Freedom FROM religion.
4th graders all over California are making Missions out of Styrofoam and many don't know anything about Catholicism.
You don't need to know anything about religious philosophy to study the history of California. The missionaries were teaching their beliefs to the natives. That's all you need to know.
Thats ridiculous. You don't need to learn theology in order to learn history.This seems to perfectly illustrate my point.
What is the point of making models of missions, and learning about their existence, in the absence of an understanding of their purpose? What you describe is a half-assed attempt at teaching, deciding that essential and relevant parts of the whole lesson aren't anything that the students need to know. The beliefs on which Friar Serra was acting are directly relevant to his accomplishments, and an understating of them is necessary in order to understand the significance that he had in our history. Any students who are being taught about Friar Serra, but not about his beliefs, are not being properly educated about him and relevance to the history of the area.
This seems to perfectly illustrate my point.
What is the point of making models of missions, and learning about their existence, in the absence of an understanding of their purpose? What you describe is a half-assed attempt at teaching, deciding that essential and relevant parts of the whole lesson aren't anything that the students need to know. The beliefs on which Friar Serra was acting are directly relevant to his accomplishments, and an understating of them is necessary in order to understand the significance that he had in our history. Any students who are being taught about Friar Serra, but not about his beliefs, are not being properly educated about him and relevance to the history of the area.
Then why does it need to post religious law? What's it's purpose if not to teach and proselytize religious teachings? What's the secular value of the ten commandments being posted in a hallway?
History
Then they should go to the source and post the code of Hammurabi, since it pre-dates the 10 commandments and also contains all of them, and has considerably more historical significance, being the first example of written law.
The Code of Ur-Nammu is the oldest known tablet containing a law code surviving today. It was written in the Sumerian language c. 2100–2050 BC. Although the preface directly credits the laws to king Ur-Nammu of Ur (2112–2095 BC), some historians think they should rather be ascribed to his son Shulgi.
The first copy of the code, in two fragments found at Nippur, was translated by Samuel Kramer in 1952; owing to its partial preservation, only the prologue and 5 of the laws were discernible[1]. Further tablets were found in Ur and translated in 1965, allowing some 40 of the 57 laws to be reconstructed.[2] Another copy found in Sippar contains slight variants.
Although it is known that earlier law-codes existed, such as the Code of Urukagina, this represents the earliest legal text that is extant. It predated the Code of Hammurabi by some three centuries.
(1) Kramer, History begins at Sumer, pp. 52–55.
(2) Gurney and Kramer, "Two Fragments of Sumerian Laws," 16 Assyriological Studies, pp. 13–19
Then they should go to the source and post the code of Hammurabi, since it pre-dates the 10 commandments and also contains all of them, and has considerably more historical significance, being the first example of written law.
That's fine, but are you saying to the exclusion of?
Why?
j-mac
Because our laws are not based on the 10 Commandments. It would be like posting the rules of Sharia law for women "in the name of history" for the entire school year.
Even the Golden Rule would be more relevant than the 10 Commandments. At least it doesn't project the idea that the 10 Commandments are more important in history, and therefore should be more important to everyone, no matter their beliefs, than other religious and cultural rules and laws.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?