Would you force your religion on your kids?

[dthmstr254]

i dont believe in homeschooling. public schools teach kids more than just academics, they teach them how to interact with other members of society successfully, as well as provide a place where a child can learn to live without his parents around him all the time. Home schooled kids are at a major loss when the time comes for college or higher academics.

public schools play a major role in developing a childs social skills

Fact: Students who graduate from homeschool have higher SAT scores than in public schools.

Fact: Students who graduate from public school have an average of a 6th grade reading ability. Homeschoolers graduate and 50% of them are in dual enrollment. Some graduate with an associates degree in the bag. It stands to follow that they have a higher reading ability than public schoolers.

As for social skills, there are homeschool groups, conventions, and multiple other things. A good percentage go into public clubs and mentoring programs. They are people who graduate a lot of the time with scholarships similar to Florida's Bright Futures, which requires 70 hours a year of community service. I spent mine helping out the Florida SIDS Alliance.

Conclusion: Homeschooled students are more well-rounded and educated than public schooled. They have more chances for academic development. There is no reason not to homeschool if you consider the student's well being. Most students in public school are put there and left there by there parents to fend for themselves. Sometimes it is better to be in prison than in a public school. The top example of this is Jacksonville's RIbault High.

 

[dthmstr254]

But would you say that social skills neccisarily outweighs academics, and the academic benefit that home schooled kids receive over public school kids?

Yeah, school's important for socialization, but there are other ways of doing that. Sign the kid up for soccer and little league, boy scouts, after school programs at the Y. I don't know if this goes for anywhere else, but back at my old high school it was possible for home schooled kids to come to high school for a couple of classes, so they can get the socialization without having to sacrifice the benefits of home schooling.

And I'll admit, the home schooled kids I've met have all been a little weird, but they've also been by FAR more knowledgable than any of the other kids their age. And who's to say that being a little weird is neccisarily a bad thing?

YEah, you ask me, it isn't a requirement to be a little wierd, but it sure helps to be. I agree with this as well.

 

[::Major_Baker::]

I would beat my kids if they became religious, and call them ****ing idiots daily.

 

[dthmstr254]

I'm pretty sure scientifically, the stance on the origins is "We don't know". So yeah, if you think you know anything about how it all started, from the get go, it'll involve faith.

Can you describe Jay Wile for me?

Well, the way the schools teach it, it is a fact of life that we evolved from single celled organisms and that life is a random mistake on a shot in the dark chance that caused the first cell. Go figure. Why aren't the scientists combatting by actually saying they don't really know?

Dr Jay Wile writes a series of science books for Apologia. They show the formulas of the science and the facts that are proven by known formulas and experiments.

Personally, since we don't really know how the world began, or how the universe began (both things we will never know unless someone invents a time machine), I would prefer a school that taught both side by side with no bias.

 

[dthmstr254]

I would beat my kids if they became religious, and call them ****ing idiots daily.

And in three days, you would go to jail and the kids would be gone from your life.

You know, if I spun that right, I could already have them taken away on the basis that you are a possible threat to their lives, based on that post.

 

[Makhno]

I don't have kids but if I did I would teach them morals, sure these morals would also be taught in religion, but I'd rather them make their own mind up about what religion (if any) was 'for them'.

 

[Befuddled_Stoner]

And in three days, you would go to jail and the kids would be gone from your life.

You know, if I spun that right, I could already have them taken away on the basis that you are a possible threat to their lives, based on that post.

That's interesting, you could actually have someone's children taken away for tongue in cheek posts on an internet forum? :shock:

Hmm, makes me wonder; how many men do you think are currently in prison for flying into a murderous rage when someone used bullshit reasons to threaten the well being of their children?

 

[dthmstr254]

That's interesting, you could actually have someone's children taken away for tongue in cheek posts on an internet forum? :shock:

Hmm, makes me wonder; how many men do you think are currently in prison for flying into a murderous rage when someone used bullshit reasons to threaten the well being of their children?

He said that if they did something that is not against the law and is not wrong in any way, shape or form (get religion), he would "beat my kids... and call them ****ing idiots daily." That is a felony at worst, a misdemeanor at best.

Threats are hard to prove. This is something I can print off and show the hyperlink to the judge and have acquaintances who know him say is his username. That is all I need and I have a slam dunk. A threat, however, is not a reason to kill someone unless the person has the means to carry through that threat at the time they make it. If a guy threatens to shoot someone and doesn't have a gun at the time, is he any sort of immediate danger? of course not. You have time to get away from him. If he does, shoot to kill. Unless you are a trained shooter, you probably don't have the aim to hit a no-kill area anyways.

 

[dthmstr254]

My first semester at college I took a Geology class, and the way the teacher dealt with it I think was just about perfect. He just said "I'm just teaching what we know, and I'll go as far back as that. We don't know how everything began, and so this does not rule out what we call the 'God factor'." And then he taught science.

I have a problem with science teachers trying to teach that God doesn't exist, but I also have a problem with science teachers teaching things that aren't science as science. I believe in Intelligent Design, but it's not a scientific belief. Scientifically, all I know is that we evolved through a series of seemingly random mutations, and through natural selection those who had the beneficial mutations survived, and those who did not died off (in so many words). That's all the science of it. Now I believe that God's hand was in those mutations, and that there's reason to what it seemingly random, and we just don't understand the reason, but that's not science, that's faith.

The only hole is that there is no observable evidence for evolution. Otherwise, I agree with this post. Scientifically, I don't think it is an impossibility that someone could disprove God's existence by proving evolution. It is improbable asking me, and if God does exist, impossible. I do want to know, what if the first cell had an unbeneficial mutation and died off. How many years does that set evolution off by? Because it is back in the abiogenesis stage if that happens and the chances of a cell coming together by random occurence is the same chances of dropping a bunch of coins, five coins thick layer, over the USA, and one be marked, blindfold a guy, and his chances of finding the coin that is marked when he has one chance.

 

[Stace]

And in three days, you would go to jail and the kids would be gone from your life.

You know, if I spun that right, I could already have them taken away on the basis that you are a possible threat to their lives, based on that post.

Apparently, you don't understand sarcasm very well.

 

[DeeJayH]

I don't have any children but when I do I think I will let them know what I beleive in but also show them other religions and let them make up their own minds what they choose to beleive in. So if you have kids or don't would you force your religion on them?

doesnt seem to say much for what you believe in

 

[talloulou]

I voted no opinion mainly because I don't think most parents view a religious education as "force" so much as foundation building. I was raised Catholic. I'm no longer religious and my mother is worried that my kids aren't getting any "religious foundation." I always answer all my kids questions honestly and when it comes to God they know that I don't profess to know anything for sure. They also know I'm skeptical of anyone who does profess to know all there is to know for sure. I expose my kids to a variety of religions without having picked any of them as the right one or the truth. But I do think that some people really believe their religion is the right one. So they arn't so much forcing religion as they are passing down what they supposedly know the same way they might promote the benefits of brushing ones teeth. Parents naturally indoctrinate their kids into many beliefs....not all of them involving religion. Then the kids reach a certain age, rebel against almost everything, and then mature and finally make up their own minds about everything. My kids may well indeed rebel by becoming devout Catholics. :rofl

 

[Jerry]

The only hole is that there is no observable evidence for evolution. Otherwise, I agree with this post. Scientifically, I don't think it is an impossibility that someone could disprove God's existence by proving evolution. It is improbable asking me, and if God does exist, impossible. I do want to know, what if the first cell had an unbeneficial mutation and died off. How many years does that set evolution off by? Because it is back in the abiogenesis stage if that happens and the chances of a cell coming together by random occurence is the same chances of dropping a bunch of coins, five coins thick layer, over the USA, and one be marked, blindfold a guy, and his chances of finding the coin that is marked when he has one chance.

True, it's a theory, not fact. What I'd say to your questions about the improbability of cells coming together by random occurance, that since the universe is seemingly infinite, and the seemingly infinite amount of time that has gone on, that just about everything that can happen has happened somewhere, probably several times.

Believing that life on earth started by mere chance requires infinitely more blind faith than does believing in God, yet "believers" are the ones ridiculed. Go figure.

 

[dthmstr254]

True, it's a theory, not fact. What I'd say to your questions about the improbability of cells coming together by random occurance, that since the universe is seemingly infinite, and the seemingly infinite amount of time that has gone on, that just about everything that can happen has happened somewhere, probably several times.

read Jerry's post, that is my opinion. Either way, both should be taught as theories, not either one as scientific fact.

 

[clone]

Fact: Students who graduate from homeschool have higher SAT scores than in public schools.

Fact: Students who graduate from public school have an average of a 6th grade reading ability. Homeschoolers graduate and 50% of them are in dual enrollment. Some graduate with an associates degree in the bag. It stands to follow that they have a higher reading ability than public schoolers.

As for social skills, there are homeschool groups, conventions, and multiple other things. A good percentage go into public clubs and mentoring programs. They are people who graduate a lot of the time with scholarships similar to Florida's Bright Futures, which requires 70 hours a year of community service. I spent mine helping out the Florida SIDS Alliance.

Conclusion: Homeschooled students are more well-rounded and educated than public schooled. They have more chances for academic development. There is no reason not to homeschool if you consider the student's well being. Most students in public school are put there and left there by there parents to fend for themselves. Sometimes it is better to be in prison than in a public school. The top example of this is Jacksonville's RIbault High.

Fending for yourself is one of the things your supposed to learn in school. When i said homeschooled kids would have trouble in college, i didnt mean academically. Rather they would struggle with the enviorment change. Going to college is a big enough change as it is, but being sheltered all your life by overprotective parents only makes it much worse. And actually, in my experience, kids who have overprotective parents tend to be the ones who really getting drunk and get in trouble once they finally gain their independance.

 

[Tinker]

Raise them up in the way that they should go and when they are old they will not depart from it.

If you teach your children that there is nor right religion, or that you don't really know what is right, then theat is they way they will grow up. Confused.

If you are completely convinced and convicted in your religion, regardless of what it is, then your children will more than like grow up to believe the same way. Perhaps a different religion, but they will be as passionate about it.

My kids go to church with me every week. They go to our Wednesday hoem study group meetings every week. They see what I believe, they see how I worship, they know where I stand. They have the choice to believe or not. It is up to them. One is 10 and the other is 12. Neither have as yet claimed the salvation that is Jesus Christ. And I won't force that on them. I won't pressure them. But I will talk to them about it.

Regardless it will be their choice. I have tied my hands with the same rope of free choice that God has.

 

[Jerry]

And here's where we differ. Evolution is science. Whether or not you think it's guided by God is faith. I personally believe in Intelligent Design, but I can guarantee you that it's not my beliefs in science that make me think that there's a plan in all that is (and has been) goin on. There is no scientific evidence to back up the belief that God had anything to do with it, while evolution at least is to a degree observable.

I say they should explain that there is nothing that disproves God in science, and that we only know so much, and then teach science. Science only is as important as it is due to its integrity, and if we decide to compramise that because we're afraid we haven't imparted enough of our beliefs on them for them to survive a high school science class, then we risk losing science.

And I support you in teaching your kids on your own. You're clearly pretty knowledgable about this, and you clearly take this **** appropriately seriously. But in public schools, the line should be drawn at science teachers teaching science.

Only Literalist Creationism is not science.

There is a strong case to be made regarding extra tarestrial interference on a pre- modern man.

Also, we have archaeological evidence for past global civilizations and global economies, etc, with the aperant long term social pattern of society starting off united and "Godly", only to decay and divide as time goes on. According to ancient texts, we are in the 7th. of such a cycle, with our society degrading ever more. The widely accepted killing of our unborn and gay marriage are but 2 hot topic evidences of societies inevitable decline.

See this entry on Yuga for a basic rundown.

 

[talloulou]

If you teach your children that there is nor right religion, or that you don't really know what is right, then theat is they way they will grow up. Confused.

I disagree completely. There is nothing confusing about answering a question with "I don't know." I don't know is often a very legitimate honest answer. The world would be much better off if people admitted when they didn't have all the answers and merely stated "I don't know" instead of a bunch of bs in all regards...not just religion.

Granted if you are a strong believer and feel you "do know" then you aren't passing on bullshite. But admitting you don't know isn't confusing and furthermore it's good for the imagination.

 

[talloulou]

There is a strong case to be made regarding extra tarestrial interference on a pre- modern man.

I agree.....there's a very strong case to be made.

 

[Gibberish]

I disagree completely. There is nothing confusing about answering a question with "I don't know." I don't know is often a very legitimate honest answer. The world would be much better off if people admitted when they didn't have all the answers and merely stated "I don't know" instead of a bunch of bs in all regards...not just religion.

I wish more parents would follow this logic. If you as a parent don't know then you should tell your children such. Making up bs so you look like you have all the answers only mis-educates the child and makes them have lower respect for your intelligence when they find out you are really ignorant of the subject. If you don't know tell your children so and perhaps try to find the answer together. This teaches children that not knowing is not a bad thing but a chance to learn.

My father would always tell me an answer to everything if he knew the answer or not. When I found out he was wrong I was not allowed to correct him in anyway. I think a parent should be comfortable with some levels of humility in front of their children and allowed to be wrong or unknowing at times.

 

[dthmstr254]

Fending for yourself is one of the things your supposed to learn in school. When i said homeschooled kids would have trouble in college, i didnt mean academically. Rather they would struggle with the enviorment change. Going to college is a big enough change as it is, but being sheltered all your life by overprotective parents only makes it much worse. And actually, in my experience, kids who have overprotective parents tend to be the ones who really getting drunk and get in trouble once they finally gain their independance.

That is what dual enrollment is for. Plus, I am now in college. That argument doesn't stand in my experience, and I wasn't dual enrolled.

 

[Static]

Your premise is flawed. You argue that you shouldn't force your religon, and that people should be exposed to different beliefs. This requires your admitance that you don't believe that YOUR religon is 100% true.

Christianity requires your belief that the ONLY way to heaven is through our lord Jesus Christ. Not through works, or "being a good person"

Exposing them to anything else and attempting to parallel it to the truth is against the will of God. God says that any man who knowingly leads another away from Christ is a sinner. As Christians, we are called to be the light of the world, leading others from darkness; not leading them to "whatever they feel like believing in"

 

[talloulou]

Your premise is flawed. You argue that you shouldn't force your religon, and that people should be exposed to different beliefs. This requires your admitance that you don't believe that YOUR religon is 100% true.

Christianity requires your belief that the ONLY way to heaven is through our lord Jesus Christ. Not through works, or "being a good person"

Exposing them to anything else and attempting to parallel it to the truth is against the will of God. God says that any man who knowingly leads another away from Christ is a sinner. As Christians, we are called to be the light of the world, leading others from darkness; not leading them to "whatever they feel like believing in"

Well clearly if my indoctrinatnion into christianity had "took" as apparently yours did I'd probably agree with you. Obviously since it didn't, I don't.:rofl Fortunately my mother is and always has been very open minded and while she attends Catholic mass every Sunday to this very day she doesn't feel the need to tell people often and loudly that they're wrong and/or condemning themselves.

 

[dthmstr254]

And here's where we differ. Evolution is science. Whether or not you think it's guided by God is faith. I personally believe in Intelligent Design, but I can guarantee you that it's not my beliefs in science that make me think that there's a plan in all that is (and has been) goin on. There is no scientific evidence to back up the belief that God had anything to do with it, while evolution at least is to a degree observable.

I say they should explain that there is nothing that disproves God in science, and that we only know so much, and then teach science. Science only is as important as it is due to its integrity, and if we decide to compramise that because we're afraid we haven't imparted enough of our beliefs on them for them to survive a high school science class, then we risk losing science.

And I support you in teaching your kids on your own. You're clearly pretty knowledgable about this, and you clearly take this **** appropriately seriously. But in public schools, the line should be drawn at science teachers teaching science.

Observable science for the mutation of a single celled organism into a multicelled organism. Unless you can give evidence of the action of evolution, in both observable science and experimental science, it is not science. Both are viable in philosophy related classes, but only one is taught. One student taking grad classes at Tennessee Temple University was kicked out of a masters program for turning in a defense for a biblical worldview into a philosophy class.

Ps:Just to level this out, worldview and philosophy are synonomous. I vote that since the levels at which it can be proven is far above high school levels, it should not be taught until honors and college classes if you want to. Evolution is evidently so complicated that to prove it, you don't use experiments or observations, so it shouldn't be taught so as to lessen confusion. They are, however, both viable in philosophy classes.

 

[Static]

Well clearly if my indoctrinatnion into christianity had "took" as apparently yours did I'd probably agree with you. Obviously since it didn't, I don't.:rofl Fortunately my mother is and always has been very open minded and while she attends Catholic mass every Sunday to this very day she doesn't feel the need to tell people often and loudly that they're wrong and/or condemning themselves.

Attending mass won't keep you out of Hell, nor will having an "open mind"

The only way to heaven is through Christ, neither your church, your family, your friends, your works, nor your deeds can get you there:

Believe : John 3:15 : "That whosoever believeth in him should not perish , but have eternal life."

Believe : John 3:16 : "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish , but have everlasting life ."

The Sinner: "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Romans 3:23

The Sentence: "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 6:23

The Saviour: "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Romans 5:8

The Solution: "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Romans 10:9

The Timing: "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation." II Corinthians 6:2

The Prayer: Lord Jesus Christ, be merciful to me a sinner. I do now receive you as my personal Lord and Saviour.

The Result: If you sincerely prayed the above prayer, you are now born again! (John 3:3)


There will come a day when you will believe every word that procedes from the mouth of the Lord.

Anyone who is truly saved will have a fire for the Lord in their heart. Christians are called not to deny Christ before men, but to be as a city on a hill, a candle in the darkness, a light to the world. Christians are called to witness, and true Christians do. James 1:22: But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.


Anyone who knows the word and falsely leads another from it is condemned.

~God Bless