It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Schools War On Religion?

page: 6
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by leftystrat

Originally posted by KrazyJethro

It's not against the 1st amendment to teach religion in private schools that do not receive public funds. It only applies to the government and that which is funded by government.


Sorry, I missed the private part.

We agree.




Roger doger. Glad to hear it.

I do so love an adoring audience...




posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by theflamingswan92
reply to post by autowrench
 


I just feel that teachers should teach both instead of one over the other, not go into full detail, but just give students a taste, and let the students sit with their families and decide what they will choose to believe. When I have kids, me and my wife will sit with them and show them both sides of the coin, not just one, what they choose is their buisness


Well, OK then, I see your point. I too am just like that. I am a Wiccan of a very long time standing, I was married to a Christian, and had two children with her. She went to Church on Sunday, and she took the kids with her. When they came home, we (me and them) would have a discussion of what they had learned in church today. I would then fill in the blanks, and tell them the other stories of the time, and we all would voice our thoughts on the subject matter. If they had questions, I would either answer, or find the answer. When they reached a certain point of the learning curve they were on, they left the church and never looked back. They are their own master, and bow to no man. Since then, they are both in their 30s now, both have increased their knowledge, and when we are together the talk gets so intense no one else can talk with us. Knowledge is a great thing, and my point here is, there is a lot more knowledge out there, and one should not put lock, stock, and barrel into one book, and certainly not just one version of the book. Many Christians have told me that everything they need to know is contained in their Bible, and they take it in a literal sense, even metaphorical things. If you can look through the eyes of the men who wrote those stories, how things were then, the extent of their knowledge and terminology of their language at the time, you could easily see how an alien being could have done all these miraculous things you read about in there.

If you can simply take a look at the hierarchy of religion.....it all stems from the same source, and if you study into it as I have done, you will come to know what all book religions are based on. It is all about three things, friends, Money, Control, and Power



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 10:13 PM
link   
well if they teach creationalisim they should teach athiest eugenics and genocide. Kids should learn about christ AND Stalin they should learn about the crusades and the soviet mass graves made by their athiest leader



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by zaiger
well if they teach creationalisim they should teach athiest eugenics and genocide. Kids should learn about christ AND Stalin they should learn about the crusades and the soviet mass graves made by their athiest leader


I don't exactly get your point here. I think it's debatable that Stalin ruled in atheistic form, but that's really besides the point since atheism isn't really one belief structure outside of not believing in religion.

Who exactly are you insulting here? It seems like it's someone.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Why is faith at school completely nixed?
When my son has books in his school making fun of Christianity????
One he read last week, "Stop and go"(Or something like that) has the boy hero in the story say, "I think it's stupid praying to someone who isn't there" after his hateful, christian grandfather abused him!
Anti-religious is STILL RELIGION!



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 11:15 PM
link   
The reason you can not teach Creationism is that it is not science. You can observe evolution. Although a scientist does not have the time scale to observe every part, it can be observed. The day Benny Hinn prays over a bucket of dirt and makes a monkey pop out, then you can teach it.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 12:45 AM
link   
Simple answer? GREED

Because if you start saying what you believe and somebody doesnt agree and gets offended, they get mad and cause all sorts of trouble by suing anyone they can to line their own pockets. Greed is the source of almost every problem we have and this is no exception.

Greedy people sue because they are offended about something and so schools, wanting to protect their funds and employers, institute rules to protect them by taking away their freedoms (sound familiar?)

Just like our health care. Patient insurance would be so much cheaper if doctors didnt have to make a billion an hour to pay their own insurance to protect them from every sue-happy bum looking to make an easy dollar of the doctor who might not have done anything wrong at all. (This is not claiming doctors are perfect, I myself had two knee surgeries because my doc was an idiot but I never sued him, definitely would have been justified though)

Another reason is this false idea of separation of church and state that everybody has bought into (and taken to the extreme at that). I'll elaborate if needed...



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies

Anti-religious is STILL RELIGION!


How do you figure?

This idea is bandied about quite often and it's rubbish each time it's said.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by theflamingswan92
 


Because religion you learn at home. You realize there is more than one right??? Who is to say which one should be taught in a non-parochial school?

Religion taught in PUBLIC schools is not curriculum any longer, it is propaganda, coercion and manipulation.
Only a child's parents have a right to teach them from where (they believe) we came to this earth and why they think we are here.

This is called freedom of religion. If you teach an atheist couples child about God without their permission you are stealing their FREEDOM to be atheist.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 02:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Mykahel
 


Greed????!!!!

I disagree about this reasoning and think it is due to a little something called "freedom of religion".

You practice what you want and I practice what I want and the kids just learn math English, history, geography etc. Just learning the required subjects is a full day at any school. If I were a teacher I would not want to impose my particular faith on my students.

Religion should taught by example and if a child likes what they see from your example, the way you treat people, the way you live, they will copy you and want to learn your religion and why you do what you do - all on their own.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by theflamingswan92
 


And I guess you could claim the churches have a war on schools since I don't hear any human EVOLUTION taught there either.

Why not keep public schools free of religion and the churches free of math and all that sex ed they keep wanting to teach the alter boys?



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 04:04 AM
link   
I remember a long, long time ago in a far away land, when i was still in highschool, the question came up, whether we wanna have a religion class.

All of us were baptised as orthodox christians, all except this one girl who was a catholic.

So we discussed it in plenum and we decided we won't discriminate, not even against one single person, and those who want to learn more about religion are free to study it on their own or go to church or something else.

Religion does not belong in school, education and religious beliefs are two separate things and each country in this world has both educational and religious institutions and people, at least in most countries, are free to attend both. There is no reason whatsoever to mix the two in one institution.

However I feel teaching History of Religion in schools is not just a good idea, but a necessary one. Kids, regardless of their religion or lack of a religion should be taught the history of all religions, in a balanced, neutral manner. It's the only way to work out our differences, ignoring something is never a good idea, knowledge and better understanding bring tolerance and solve conflicts.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 05:25 AM
link   


Why is it that they teach evalution and not creationism?


I went to a normal school, and we were taught both of those.. i thought all schools taught people that.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by theflamingswan92
Why is it that you can not ask a student or a student ask a teacher thier religious beliefs? Why is it that they teach evalution and not creationism?

Theory of evolution would be taught in science.. why would they teach creationism in science? It is part of religion. Which creationism do you want them to teach? Hinduism, Scientology, Christianity, egyptology? They are religions not sciences

Why is it that some teachers were suspended and fired for even saying God in a classroom? I will tell you why. They don't want you to think outside the box.

No. In America you are meant to have a seperation between church and state. They were fired because they BROKE THE LAW. Teaching children creationism in a public school is trying to indoctrinate kids into a religion without parental consent. Imo you are not thinking outside the box as you are crying foul because your religion won't be taught in a public classroom. Would you be okay with the idea of your children being exposed to the creational teachings of scientology or buddhism?

didn't think so..



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
In all actuality, a teacher can be asked what they believe and say exactly that without fear of being fired in many schools. I have numerous friends who are teachers and they have told me that they cannot initiate a conversation about G-d or their beliefs, but if asked they can have the conversation.

I agree that religion should not be taught in schools from the standpoint of teaching one over the other, but some education is necessary for a proper understanding of history. America's own history would fall apart (and now has) if you remove the religious implications and foundations of what was done and why.


What really concerns me is that schools are teaching more and more about sex and related issues. Is this not also a topic that should be reserved for home? STD's may be appropriate for health class but that's about as much sex education a student needs to get from our government. They are bringing this stuff to younger and younger kids. If sex is fair game in school, then religion should be as well.

Also, there is a difference between promoting a religion and allowing for religion. Many schools still allow for a christian group to meet in the school for their own club/extra-curricular activities.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   
My biggest issue with this whole thing...


My problem with the Intelligent design vs. evolution curriculum in schools is that evolution has not been proven either (at the very least, not to the extent at which it has been taught). Science, in a way, is another religion if you think about it. They often times claim things that cannot be proven and make you believe certain things based on those conclusions. It tries to give answers for how we got here, what we are, and tries to give meaning to life. Is that not religion?

All of these theories that science has that are not proven beyond a shadow of a doubt should also be banned from the classroom if we are talking about not allowing belief systems to be taught in class. Should theories like Global Warming be taught as fact in our schools even though we know how corrupt the science behind it is?



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Speaking as a teacher.....

I am given a curriculum by the state that tells me what I am required to teach. If you are interested in that curriculum, google your state department of education and it will be on their website. Those curriculums do vary state to state, by the way.

When I present any scientific idea that is somewhat controversial, I let the students know its controversial and why. Makes a great lesson on thinking creatively. Of course, that assumes the students are at the developmentally appropriate level for such a lesson.

As a teacher, I've been asked many times about my personal belief and faith. I can discuss that with the student and with the class.....but what I cannot do is present my belief as absolute TRUTH. In other words, I can say "This is what I believe and why...." Usually such discussions occur in a one-on-one setting, like after school or whatnot.

Separation of church and state is more than just keeping religious dogma out of schools. It also separates what churches can do with regards to government. It boils down to the fact that our government is not a theocracy and keeping things separated helps insure it stays that wayl.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
The thing is, it is a Constitutional issue. Check this:


Briefly, state-supported prayer amounts to the establishment of a religious practice. This is true whether the state actually prescribes the prayer to be said, or allows teachers and students to compose the prayer as they see fit. Let's use the famous Engle v. Vitale case to illustrate our argument.

Engle v. Vitale revolved around a New York law that required school officials to publically recite each school day the following prayer, composed by the New York Board of Regents:

Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our country.

The Court ruled, correctly in our opinion, that the New York law violated the First Amendment. Indeed it's difficult to image how the Court could have ruled otherwise. Prayer is, without question, a religious exercise, and when the state requires that a prayer be recited, it is establishing a religious practice. Additionally, it violates free exercise for the state to expose students to prayer against their will, or to force students to absent themselves from the classroom to avoid a prayer they do not want to hear. Finally, we note that, despite the fact that this prayer was written to be as general and non-sectarian as possible, it still establishes religious beliefs, beliefs that surely do not reflect the religious sensibilities of many students. Christians, for example, might justifiably complain that the prayer is not offered in the name of Christ, while polytheists and adherents to new-age religions might have problems with the implied assertion that there is a single God, or that this God is almighty. And non-theists would certainly object to repeating words that imply that they are "dependent" on a God in which they do not believe. No matter how charitably one views the facts of Engle v. Vitale, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the Regents' prayer would not be acceptable to many students.

source

THE BASICS OF SEPARATION

History of the Separation of Church and State in America

WHAT THE FOUNDERS BELIEVED ABOUT SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE

Jefferson's Bill for Religious Freedom

RESPONDING TO THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT:

James Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance

Benjamin F. Underwood: The Practical Separation of Church and State (1876)



Teachers and school administrators, when acting in those
capacities, are representatives of the state, and, in those capacities, are themselves prohibited from encouraging or soliciting student religious or anti-religious activity. Similarly, when acting in their official capacities, teachers may not engage in religious activities with their students. However, teachers may engage in private religious activity in faculty lounges.


Students may be taught about religion, but public schools may not teach religion. As the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly said, "t might well be said that one's education is not complete without a study of comparative religion, or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization." It would be difficult to teach art, music, literature and most social studies without considering religious influences.

Religion in the Public Schools: A Joint Statement of Current Law



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


Man, it just shows itself more and more as the years go by, and it SCARES me.

What I am speaking of is our complete inability to find factual records of history. Many Christians (myself among them) make the claim that the founding fathers and other important historical figures included faith in with government, and often viewed the two as being entwined. They use quotations, letters, documents, you name it.

Others claim the extreme opposite and use the same materials to prove their point that the fathers wanted the government to be as far from religion as possible.

Both parties claim proof. The thing that makes this more disturbing than current events being lied about and covered up is that if some historical event happened, all it takes today is for somebody to write something claiming it didn't. So many books written, both past and present, are filled with opinion rather than fact. They make up quotes and events to fit their agenda. How can we ever know what is True any more? Even the holocaust has been denied and there are books "proving" both sides of the argument. How can such a huge thing not be beyond refute one way or another?

Man, I wish our histories were being kept by professional scribes or something. Like back in the OLD days.



posted on Feb, 10 2010 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Its because the bibles explination of reality is moronic.

Children should not be taught stupid useless LIES...... Well only if its an example of what NOT to be when you grow up. Pat robertson is a perfect example of the STUPIDITY religion creates.

[edit on 9-2-2010 by Wertdagf]


Wertdagf, for you to say the Bible's explanation of reality is moronic... that must mean that you have an explanation for reality? Please share with us so that we may print you over a billion times in hundreds of different languages and share your thoughts with the world! We desire your great knowledge.

Children should not be taught stupid useless LIES... exactly. So therefore public schools before the college level need to stop TEACHING THEORY. When one pays for the education, then they can choose to delve into theory.

Religion does not need to be taught in schools... the government would have a greater monopoly on peoples' lives and that's just not good! However, people should be allowed to talk about what THEY BELIEVE. It shouldn't be a required course, but WHY IS IT A CRIME TO SPEAK YOUR MIND?!

It's okay to send your kids home with something to think about... but don't present it as fact. Let them find out for themselves about both God and science. Public schools responsibility is simply to get our kids ready to participate in society with the proper tools to live. A college education is NOT a requirement for this.

If people so choose to be -taught- religion, then they can go to a university/college for it. If people so choose to be -taught- science theory or any theory, they can go to a university/college for it.

If people want the truth, they will seek it wherever they are in the world... and money doesn't buy truth.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join