jpwright said:I agree. I think the article does a good job of pointing out why the selection of the Bible alone shows a clear difference between reading religious works for literary purposes and reading them with more hidden motives.
jpwright said:And even aside from that, I think it's pointless to be reading religious works in school.
jpwright said:Kids aren't going to get anything out of reading extremely religious books that they aren't interested in or despise.
jpwright said:There are plenty of other great novels that would provide better education for a class and would avoid consequences such as having the state of Florida down your back.
walrus said:What I find really ironic about this is that I am guessing most people disagreeing with this are probably either non or anti-religious,
walrus said:Reading them with hidden motives? Do you mean the students? Who cares what motives the students have in reading them.? Do you mean the teachers have hidden motives in having the students read them?
walrus said:What I find really ironic about this is that I am guessing most people disagreeing with this are probably either non or anti-religious, however, you are granting the Bible a magical level of power. You seem to be saying that this book, more than any other that a student might study, has the power to mysteriously influence the minds of those who read it. I hope you realize that about 85% of the Bible does not contain Judeo-Christian cosmological or mystical teachings. A large part of it is simply the history of the Hebrews. A lot of it is moral stories (and these morals are for the most part are shared by every religious group on Earth). A lot of it is poetry. There are HUGE sections of the Bible which can be studied as literature without the dangers of religion seeping into your child's apprarently vulnerable and indiscriminate mind.
walrus said:Why do these same people (for the most part) who believe in a total abscence of censorship in school reading lists have such a great terror of the Bible that they make this book the one exception to the rule?
walrus said:Yeah, absolutely pointless. I can't see anything helpful in being familiar with the beliefs of 80% of your fellow citizens and 1.5 billion of the world's inhabitants. No point whatsoever in having knowledge of the literary work which has done more to shape the history and culture of Western man than any other. By all means, study "Lord of the Flies" instead as it has had far more impact on history, literature, sociology, government, and culture than the Bible.
walrus said:So, we should base our reading lists on what kids like or are interested in? Might as well throw Shakespeare out the window. Funnily enough, no English teacher of professor I ever had ever seemed concerned whether or not I despised a work I was instructed to read. They just expected me to read it and understand it. I didn't have to agree with it, I didn't have to adopt it's principles in my life; but I did have to read it. As to the Bible being extremely religious, I have no idea what that means. There are religious teachings contained in it, as well as many other things worthy of study.
walrus said:So, we should allow popular opinion to decide what our children are taught? Does that sound right to you?
walrus said:Anybody who can not study the Bible as a literary work, and separate it's religious and literary significance, has severe critical analysis problems. I was under the impression that school was a place for growing minds to be introduced to different beliefs and to learn the skills needed to know for themselves what their OWN beliefs are. Do we teach this by "protecting" our children from beliefs that we disagree with?
So, we should base our reading lists on what kids like or are interested in? Might as well throw Shakespeare out the window. Funnily enough, no English teacher of professor I ever had ever seemed concerned whether or not I despised a work I was instructed to read. They just expected me to read it and understand it. I didn't have to agree with it, I didn't have to adopt it's principles in my life; but I did have to read it. As to the Bible being extremely religious, I have no idea what that means. There are religious teachings contained in it, as well as many other things worthy of study.
Yeah, absolutely pointless. I can't see anything helpful in being familiar with the beliefs of 80% of your fellow citizens and 1.5 billion of the world's inhabitants. No point whatsoever in having knowledge of the literary work which has done more to shape the history and culture of Western man than any other. By all means, study "Lord of the Flies" instead as it has had far more impact on history, literature, sociology, government, and culture than the Bible.
The Noyse said:it's for a good cause...seriously...it's not a joke...read it and sign the petition if you feel as we do...
http://www.thenoyse.com/battle.php
here's the direct link to just sign the petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/noyse/petition.html
thanks, and pass it around!
Quertol said:There is a difference between reading the Bible as a literary work, and as a theological one, if they are reading the book of Genesis, I see no reason why that would be a problem. As long as they are doing so within the boundries of the law, in which they are.
WiseRufus said::beer: I don't see no reason either. ::Hiccup:: Those there kids need some good readin'. Genesis is a great ::Belch:: piece of literary work, full of some of that good English language and ::Hiccup:: grammar. :slapme:
WiseRufus said::beer: I don't see no reason either. ::Hiccup:: Those there kids need some good readin'. Genesis is a great ::Belch:: piece of literary work, full of some of that good English language and ::Hiccup:: grammar. :slapme:
dogger807 said:Reading the genisis story is theists trying to get a version of religion into the system because they fear evolution theory.
dogger807 said:I wonder ...
... is the year they wish to introduce the manditory reading the same year they teach evolution?
leejosepho said:... evolution (a bigoted religion) ...
It should also be noted that a huge number of Western literary works contain outright and subtle allusions to parts of the Bible.Quertol said:There is a difference between reading the Bible as a literary work, and as a theological one, if they are reading the book of Genesis, I see no reason why that would be a problem. As long as they are doing so within the boundries of the law, in which they are.
leejosepho said:Intentionally or not, there is a bit of spin in that statement, dogger807, but I do believe you are seeing the target: Certain people are concerned or even appalled that evolution (a bigoted religion) is taught as scientific fact (or at least as a defensible theory), and they want the scientifically believable fact of creation presented also ... and neither side clearly understands (or is completely willing and able to acknowledge) that matter apart from religion.
Certainly not, for evolution teaching permeates government (public) schooling from virtually day number one ...
... just as those concerned about that should have already been teaching their children themselves.
dogger807 said:I would have to disagree with the statement that evolution is a religion in any form ... [other than as] a way to theorize the beginning of man ... but [that] is only one aspect of what makes a religion.
dogger807 said:Evolution does not tell people to think or act a certain way ...
dogger807 said:It is a SCIENTIFIC theory ...
leejosepho said:Agreed ... no big argument from me there.
... other than to misrepresent a flawed and easily-disproved theory as fact, and to further vehemently say the fact of creation is but a religious myth!
Agreed, but neverthess a fallacy in the face of continual degradation.
However, all of that is about as much argument as will come from me here, for this particular subject is one about which I only know just enough to be dangerous!
dogger807 said:No.. there is no continual degradation. Science doesn't work that way.
dogger807 said:Theists will argue ever little fact and every bit of collected data that supports evolution ...
dogger807 said:... but they have yet to disprove or even degrade it.
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?