Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would this be so bad if each side understood the other's beliefs??
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359
Ah, but there are more than two sides. I see the Wiccans demanding equal time. I see animal worshipers and Satan worshipers insisting on holding classes as well.
This business about giving each religion "equal time" just won't work. The only approach that does work is separation of church and state. Keep all religions out of the schools.
This thread has actually started me thinking. How about if after school open to the public they had a class where each session a different religion could share their beliefs and philosophies. If people would attend it might help promote understanding.
This thread has actually started me thinking. How about if after school open to the public they had a class where each session a different religion could share their beliefs and philosophies. If people would attend it might help promote understanding.
I understand what you're saying, but I don't want to mix my kids with an event that is open to the general public.
The idea of separation between church and state pretty much originated from Roger Williams in Rhode Island, and he wanted it totally separate.
Most liberals are not pushing teaching kindergartners about gay parents, but neither should it be a scarlet letter (which I'm sure you would like).
I'm primarily Buddhist. Why should I or my children have to listen to your fairy tales?
Not really true. All of the state constitutions still open with a direct reference to the provision of Almighty God. Also, the original Continental constitution was directly driven by a belief in the God of Scripture. The objection was against a state-sponsored religion.
-- Liberals seem willing to want to impose anything liberal - without boundaries - on anyone who disagrees with them. This most definitely includes proliferating their radical agenda among young children -- over the objections of most parents and other concerned adults. Further, the only 'truth standard' many typically recognize is their own views and opinions. The Bible is demonstrably and verifiably much more than that - which is why God and Scripture have been so violently opposed by non-believers over thousands of years (See: Ucanknowthetruth.com)
As one of the 800 million Buddhists (of 7 billion people in the world), you certainly have a right to express your beliefs in America, even though you are talking about a philosophy - not God. The notion of some that "all religions and holy books lead to God" is absolutely untrue and misleading. Buddhists neither consider Buddha God nor worship him as God. You are free to believe God, Jesus Christ and Scripture are only a fairy tale - at your own risk, but must everyone else believe the same?
The contention of a few people that they and their children will be permanently and irreparably harmed by prayers or any other public expression of faith and belief in God ... is nothing more than an attempt to impose their narrow views on others, while suppressing the rights of Christians (only) to express their faith outside of the 'church box.' - Not everything and anything is equal! That is only the view of post-modern relativists seeking to reject or suppress any concept of God or "Truth." However, they are dogmatically adamant about imposing the paradoxical 'absolute truth' that there is no 'absolute truth' on everyone else.
Not really true. All of the state constitutions still open with a direct reference to the provision of Almighty God. Also, the original Continental constitution was directly driven by a belief in the God of Scripture. The objection was against a state-sponsored religion.
-- Liberals seem willing to want to impose anything liberal - without boundaries - on anyone who disagrees with them. This most definitely includes proliferating their radical agenda among young children -- over the objections of most rational, thinking adults. Further, the only 'truth standard' many typically recognize is their own views and opinions. The Bible is demonstrably and verifiably much more than that - which is why God and Scripture have been so violently opposed by non-believers over thousands of years (See: Ucanknowthetruth.com)
As one of the 800 million Buddhists, you certainly have a right to express your beliefs, even though you are talking only about a philosophy - not God. The notion of some that "all religions and holy books lead to God" is absolutely untrue and misleading. Buddhists neither consider Buddha God nor worship him as God.
The contention of a few people that they and their children will be permanently and irreparably harmed by others expressing their faith and belief in God ... is utter nonsense. It typically seeks only impose their views on others, while suppressing the rights of Christians (only) to express their faith outside of the 'church box.' - The notion that everything and anything must be considered equal is nothing more than post-modern relativism than seeks to suppress concept of God or "Truth." Paradoxically, they seem only to embrace the 'absolute truth' that there is no 'absolute truth.'
I suggest you back early in this thread and read post 12. In this post, I indicated the test the US Supreme follows in determining whether a state or governmental entity is establishing a religion. One prong of this test asks whether a particular action has a "primary secular purpose". A Bible study class for public school children does not have a primary secular purpose. Therefore, it violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to have a Bible study class in public school.
Its really quite a simple issue. What I've never understood about the religions is why they insist on trying to co-opt the public schools into teaching the tenets of their faith? Why not do it at home? Why not do it over dinner or at night in lieu of television? That way the rest of us that may or may not believe what is taught don't have to participate. Kids can even pray at school if they want. I imagine many kids have prayed before a final examination. What we don't allow is school sponsored/state sponsored prayer or religious instruction.
Bible study shouldn't be taking place in the public schools.
In Utah (and in most, if not all states), Mormons have Seminary Meeting - early morning, sometimes afternoon classes similar to bible study - but they take place in church-owned buildings, separate from the school. It's perfectly fine for kids to go to bible study or any religious study program, if it's done outside of the public school (such as within a private denominational school, or at a separate site).
Frankly, I'm surprised no one had sued the school earlier. It's ridiculous that the school thought it was OK to host bible study courses, especially during normal class time. If they wanted to keep everything above board, they would have told the non-profit group (or whoever it was funding the instruction) to find a nearby building that could be used.
Not really true. All of the state constitutions still open with a direct reference to the provision of Almighty God. Also, the original Continental constitution was directly driven by a belief in the God of Scripture. The objection was against a state-sponsored religion.
-- Liberals seem willing to want to impose anything liberal - without boundaries - on anyone who disagrees with them. This most definitely includes proliferating their radical agenda among young children -- over the objections of most parents and other concerned adults. Further, the only 'truth standard' many typically recognize is their own views and opinions. The Bible is demonstrably and verifiably much more than that - which is why God and Scripture have been so violently opposed by non-believers over thousands of years (See: Ucanknowthetruth.com)
As one of the 800 million Buddhists (of 7 billion people in the world), you certainly have a right to express your beliefs in America, even though you are talking about a philosophy - not God. The notion of some that "all religions and holy books lead to God" is absolutely untrue and misleading. Buddhists neither consider Buddha God nor worship him as God. You are free to believe God, Jesus Christ and Scripture are only a fairy tale - at your own risk, but must everyone else believe the same?
The contention of a few people that they and their children will be permanently and irreparably harmed by prayers or any other public expression of faith and belief in God ... is nothing more than an attempt to impose their narrow views on others, while suppressing the rights of Christians (only) to express their faith outside of the 'church box.' - Not everything and anything is equal! That is only the view of post-modern relativists seeking to reject or suppress any concept of God or "Truth." However, they are dogmatically adamant about imposing the paradoxical 'absolute truth' that there is no 'absolute truth' on everyone else.
It's always interesting to me why a non-Buddhist tries to tell a Buddhist what Buddhism is about.
Even as a person who respects and sometimes reads the New Testament for inspiration and guidance, and attends Christian church a few times each year, I have no interest in fairy tale books and websites that purport to be "the truth".
And frankly, a real Christian wouldn't be putting down liberals, in general, since Christ was quite a liberal himself. While there is not, in my view, a "right" church, there are some "wrong" churches, as your favorite websites demonstrates.
Would this be so bad if each side understood the other's beliefs??
Public schools obviously need to teach the history of the religions and explain the tenents of the different religions, but should not allow practicing religion on the public school property.
Public schools obviously need to teach the history of the religions and explain the tenents of the different religions, but should not allow practicing religion on the public school property.
Sounds good except when it comes to Christianity. I don't think you could teach that one religion without being biased. And to be fair the world is full of so many religions I don't think you could cover them all.
Public schools obviously need to teach the history of the religions and explain the tenents of the different religions, but should not allow practicing religion on the public school property.
I'm not sure that public schools need to teach the tenants of each religion. There's far too many of them - it would make religion one of the primary subjects that students had to be taught, when we're already spending too little time on other subjects. Paring it down would mean only teaching "major" religions, which would be highly offensive to many people.
Take religion out of schools completely. We really don't need it. It's far better to understand people and societies. Besides, it's a lot easier to understand the religion when you understand where the religion started - when you know more about the people, the geography of their land, their everyday life, etc. We need more history, more sociology, and more understanding of geopolitics (in addition to English, Sciences, Mathematics, Arts, etc.).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
