Schools Teaching Religious Fundamentalism Are Endangering Creative Thinking WORLD-WIDE

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by adjensen

 

Well, that's fine, so long as you recognize that this is not what the author of the article is limiting herself to. As you are no doubt aware, extremists in the humanist camp are known to declare that ANY religious education is a form of child abuse,

SOME forms of religious education ARE child abuse. NOT ALL, but enough to have people like Newt Gingrich and Michelle Bachmann on capitol hill - do YOU want a theocracy here?

Of course not, and that's a non-sequitur -- how does anything I've ever said imply that I'm in favour of a theocracy, and how does the existence of religious conservatives necessitate religious education?

Do you want kids to grow up believing the Earth is only 6,000 years old? That it is the center of the universe? That dinosaurs are fake?

Well, my daughter did not, but that's the only kid that I have any personal responsibility for.

Where is it written that you or I should dictate what someone else believes? As I wrote in this post, the creationist view is, in my opinion, irrational, but it is, ultimately, completely defensible. To force someone to not believe that the Earth is 6000 years old is to, essentially, force them to believe that God does not exist (most Christians, including myself, do not believe that the Earth is 6000 years old, but as I note in that post, but the only way that the argument put forth by young Earth creationists can be successfully refuted is if there is no such thing as an omnipotent God.)

I don't have any plans to legislate anything, or take away anyone's kids, I just want our youths to be able to handle the MESS that they are inheriting.

But how do you plan on doing that? How can you prevent parents from teaching their kids what they believe to be true?

Religious training is the parent's responsibility, NOT THE SCHOOL'S, unless it is ONLY comparative religious studies that teach respect for diversity and a basic knowledge of which religions exist in the world.

Wait a second... where is the "respect for diversity" that allows fundamentalists to believe what they want? You seem to be saying that the fundamentalists need to respect the Muslims and atheists and whatever, but their own views need to be marginalized.

I agree that religious training is the parent's responsibility, not the school's, but that's exactly what we have right now, so I don't know what you're railing against, unless it is, again, the closure of parochial schools and the banning of home schooling. As I said, a homeschooling parent who believes that the Earth is 6000 years old isn't going to put on their "evolution hat" and properly teach the subject, so the only way to indoctrinate children into absolutely rejecting their parents' beliefs is to obviate parental influence on the matter entirely.

reply to post by wildtimes


I hope this doesn't come off wrong as I am fully aware of the enriched and open-minded Christians that dot the landscape in everywhere so I am not accusing all of them as being anti-fact but think about this:

Their very first book, Genesis, revolves around a story about being punished for trying to access knowledge. For trying to learn. That sort of sets the tone for how Abrahamic faiths are to view fact-based education, free from indoctrination and dogma.

Originally posted by Cuervo
reply to post by wildtimes

 

I hope this doesn't come off wrong as I am fully aware of the enriched and open-minded Christians that dot the landscape in everywhere so I am not accusing all of them as being anti-fact but think about this:

Their very first book, Genesis, revolves around a story about being punished for trying to access knowledge. For trying to learn. That sort of sets the tone for how Abrahamic faiths are to view fact-based education, free from indoctrination and dogma.

That would be a significantly minority view. The modern system of higher education in the west is derived from the Catholic monastic schools of the Middle Ages, and the church is not the Luddite institution that many people make it out to be -- Galileo didn't get in trouble for practicing science, he got in trouble for not proving his point, and then making the political mistake of dragging the Pope (who'd been his protector, of sorts,) into it.

The Catholic Church was arguably the first provider of schools and universities in England and continues to be a significant provider of education today.

Because the Church has always viewed education as vital to the formation and development of the whole person, it put the setting up of Catholic schools for the Catholic community ahead of building Churches, often using its schools in those early days as the place for worship for the parish. In 1905 the Catholic Education Council was established as the overarching organisation to promote Catholic Education in England and Wales on behalf of the Catholic Bishops (this later became the Catholic Education Service). (Source)

Throughout history, the church has been a patron and promoter of science, in part from the perspective that the more we know about reality, the more we can know about God.

Many people believe that faith and reason, or religion and science, are locked in an irreconcilable war of attrition against one another. One must choose to be a person of learning, science, and reason, or choose to embrace religion, dogma, and faith alone. On this view, the Church opposes science, and if one embraces science, then one ought to reject the Church.

The scientific method looks to evidence to settle questions, so perhaps it would be fair to look at evidence to answer the question whether the Catholic Church is opposed to science and reason. If the Catholic Church were opposed to science, we would expect to find no or very few Catholic scientists, no sponsorship of scientific research by Catholic institutions, and an explicit distrust of reason in general and scientific reasoning in particular taught in official Catholic teaching. In fact, we find none of these things. (Source)

I know that you do not believe that all Christians are young Earth creationists or similarly handicapped by a distrust or dislike of science, but the numbers of those that are are so minor that I am not even sure that there is any basis for your belief that the Bible actively encourages ignorance or a rejection of fact-based education.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Cuervo
reply to post by wildtimes

 

I hope this doesn't come off wrong as I am fully aware of the enriched and open-minded Christians that dot the landscape in everywhere so I am not accusing all of them as being anti-fact but think about this:

Their very first book, Genesis, revolves around a story about being punished for trying to access knowledge. For trying to learn. That sort of sets the tone for how Abrahamic faiths are to view fact-based education, free from indoctrination and dogma.

I know that you do not believe that all Christians are young Earth creationists or similarly handicapped by a distrust or dislike of science, but the numbers of those that are are so minor that I am not even sure that there is any basis for your belief that the Bible actively encourages ignorance or a rejection of fact-based education.

Yeah, I appreciate that you acknowledged I wasn't attacking. Even more, I wasn't really even speaking to the prevalence of those types. It's just simply a reason as to why the ones who do believe that way, believe that way.

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Cuervo
reply to post by wildtimes

 

I hope this doesn't come off wrong as I am fully aware of the enriched and open-minded Christians that dot the landscape in everywhere so I am not accusing all of them as being anti-fact but think about this:

Their very first book, Genesis, revolves around a story about being punished for trying to access knowledge. For trying to learn. That sort of sets the tone for how Abrahamic faiths are to view fact-based education, free from indoctrination and dogma.

I know that you do not believe that all Christians are young Earth creationists or similarly handicapped by a distrust or dislike of science, but the numbers of those that are are so minor that I am not even sure that there is any basis for your belief that the Bible actively encourages ignorance or a rejection of fact-based education.

Yeah, I appreciate that you acknowledged I wasn't attacking. Even more, I wasn't really even speaking to the prevalence of those types. It's just simply a reason as to why the ones who do believe that way, believe that way.

I think that they just got something into their head, and it's what they're going to believe, regardless of facts, and regardless of whether they have a rational basis for it. And it's not just them -- ATS is raft with people with that view. Find some conclusive evidence that terrorists caused 9/11, that vaccinations do not cause autism or that we actually landed on the moon, post it in the appropriate forum and see how many people say "oh yeah, see it now, I've been wrong all along."

reply to post by wildtimes


Right on Wildtimes! Stars and flag! It's terrifying how the conservative religious right wing has proceeded to take over public education in America! I feel sorry for our youth, but even more sorry for the college professors who will have to correct all this misinformation of those students who want to advance their education after their public education or their home schooling.

The plan in Texas to rewrite history textbooks to fit a right-wing agenda could pass this week. The Guardian profiles the evangelical Christian lawyer behind the push, Cynthia Dunbar, who has plenty of interesting ways of looking at history.

Dunbar was elected to the state board of education for her evangelical Christian credentials, but no real surprise there because we already know that Texas has a large number of crazies in positions of power. A proponent of home and Christian private schooling, Dunbar says that sending kids to public schools is like "throwing them in to the enemy's flames." But because of the sheer number of the state's textbook purchases, the changes suggested by Dunbar could eventually reach most of the states in America.

What kind of corrections? Some pretty big ones!

Remember that thing called the slave trade? Well, it turns out what you learned was all wrong, because it wasn't some evil buying and selling of human beings, it was simply "Atlantic triangular trade."

The Civil Rights Movement created "unrealistic expectations of equal outcomes" for minorities in America. And Martin Luther King, Jr? Pretty much a Black Panther.

Thomas Jefferson? He was an insignificant, God-hating heathen who made sure that church and state remained separate.

Senator Joe McCarthy was right to go after the Godless commies in Hollywood and Washington. He will be vindicated.

The right to bear arms is essential to democracy and kids really need to learn this in school.

Sir Isaac Newton didn't know #. We have military technology to thank for America's successes in science. So please, take the time to write Lockheed Martin and let them know that you appreciate everything they do for America.

Along with military technology, America can only flourish economically through "minimal government intrusion and taxation."

Capitalism was once a great word, but has been dragged through the mud by liberals. We now call it "free enterprise."

The Israel-Palestine conflict? Blame the whole thing on a bunch of dang fundamentalist Muslims.

And my favorite

Moses had a greater influence on the US Constitution than Thomas Jefferson did.

gawker.com...

More on Texas and rewriting history and scientific studies.

Texas Textbook MASSACRE: 'Ultraconservatives' Approve Radical Changes To State Education Curriculum

Teachers in Texas will be required to cover the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation's Founding Fathers, but not highlight the philosophical rationale for the separation of church and state. Curriculum standards also will describe the U.S. government as a "constitutional republic," rather than "democratic," and students will be required to study the decline in value of the U.S. dollar, including the abandonment of the gold standard.

"We have been about conservatism versus liberalism," said Democrat Mavis Knight of Dallas, explaining her vote against the standards. "We have manipulated strands to insert what we want it to be in the document, regardless as to whether or not it's appropriate."

And, just for fun and entertainment, here's on one Christian family's idea of a good education through home school!

reply to post by windword


...Wow. That's some scary stuff right there. Almost as bad as that Christian elementary exam about the dinosaurs.



Apparently, dinosaurs only lived a few hundred years ago, and they ate plants right alongside the humans. Even the ones with the sharp teeth. Because they're herbivores. ...Right.

Originally posted by adjensen

And, as a picture is worth a thousand words, here are two

(Bigger: files.abovetopsecret.com...)

How many poor families can afford to send their children to private school? Zero ! This means that the above statistic is weighted by the ability to afford an education. Poverty/low income also affects how parents interact with their children and what books they have in the home. So what you are showing with the above statistic is NOT the superiority of private over public but the distortion that wealth has on the education of children.

The only people who don't see this, or more likely find it inconvenient and thus dismiss it, are the selfish right.

If you compare the results split by socio-economic groups then public vs private makes little difference.

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by adjensen

And, as a picture is worth a thousand words, here are two

(Bigger: files.abovetopsecret.com...)

How many poor families can afford to send their children to private school? Zero ! This means that the above statistic is weighted by the ability to afford an education.

Um... are you saying that poor people are dumb and are skewing the results for public education?

While poor people are not likely to send their children to Ivy League prep schools, most parochial schools have scholarship programs, and there is nothing to prevent them from homeschooling. I have known several families who are not well off, but decided to make the necessary sacrifices required to educate their children through means other than the public schools.

Studies have shown that private schools and homeschooling are more effective at educating, period.

reply to post by wildtimes


ten commandments are pretty fundamental. Do you think we need to tell all kids its ok to murder,lie,cheat,steal ect?

Imagine how creative people could be if they could do those things without penalty.

Originally posted by Nephalim
reply to post by wildtimes

 

ten commandments are pretty fundamental. Do you think we need to tell all kids its ok to murder,lie,cheat,steal ect?

Imagine how creative people could be if they could do those things without penalty.

edit on 9-7-2013 by Nephalim because: (no reason given)

Moses walked the Jews out of Egypt in 13th century BCE. The Code of Hammurabi dates back to 1772 BCE, beating the 10 commandments a few hundred years. Why don't you credit our restraint to the Babylonians who wrote the 10 commandments before Moses did?

reply to post by Cuervo


Ok so youre saying you want to cred mr ham with those ten?

reply to post by Nephalim


Why do we need the 10 Commandments to teach things that are already against the law? Do you think they'd be better enforced or followed with a greater respect if school children were told that God commanded them to follow laws already in place? Why do religious people want to take credit for morality, as if people would be stealing, killing and raping if it weren't for the 10 Commandments?

How to do justify to a 5th grader who continues reading the story on after the advent of the 10 Commandments and sees that this same God orders murder, rape, stealing and slavery?

reply to post by adjensen

While poor people are not likely to send their children to Ivy League prep schools, most parochial schools have scholarship programs, and there is nothing to prevent them from homeschooling. I have known several families who are not well off, but decided to make the necessary sacrifices required to educate their children through means other than the public schools.

What an unrealistic and out of touch statement! You know several families that aren't well off, but home school? Well I know several families who aren't well off and both parents are working, and count on the public schools to supply their children with a "healthy" education. How many inner city kids are going to get scholarships from parochial schools?

reply to post by windword



:? ok, here let me give you an example. Native americans particularly around central america used to use sacrifical practice to ensure crop growth. Up until missionaries showed up and tried to teach them about the laws of moses. and for the poster above who is worried about academic accrediation, pretty sure meso american practices wer their own until folks showed up. What cares did they have of mr.ham? Yet....

Now are you going to tell me, that jesuits had nothing to do with education? Nothing to do with the very foundations of our country? The US is an agricultural state, should we start making human sacrifices to meso american gods because you think religion has nothing to do with education?

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen

 

While poor people are not likely to send their children to Ivy League prep schools, most parochial schools have scholarship programs, and there is nothing to prevent them from homeschooling. I have known several families who are not well off, but decided to make the necessary sacrifices required to educate their children through means other than the public schools.

What an unrealistic and out of touch statement! You know several families that aren't well off, but home school? Well I know several families who aren't well off and both parents are working, and count on the public schools to supply their children with a "healthy" education.

Why is your anecdotal evidence of any greater validity that mine? And yes, I've known two single mothers who home schooled their kids, and a couple of families who forewent things for themselves in order to send their kids to Catholic school.

How many inner city kids are going to get scholarships from parochial schools?

Well, that depends on the kids and the schools, doesn't it?

Seriously, do ten seconds of research before putting your foot in your mouth.

Following the Archdiocese of Chicago’s recent closures of several schools, nonprofit group Big Shoulders said it will provide $6.5 million in additional funding to inner-city families who want to send their children to Catholic schools.

Chicago-based Big Shoulders said the amount will add 1,100 three-year scholarships, titled Access Scholarships, for new students. The new scholarships will be in addition to the nearly 5,000 students already on scholarship this year, the organization said. (Source)

Just one of many instances of "inner city kids getting scholarships from parochial schools".

Originally posted by Nephalim
reply to post by windword

 

:? ok, here let me give you an example. Native americans particularly around central america used to use sacrifical practice to ensure crop growth. Up until missionaries showed up and tried to teach them about the laws of moses. and for the poster above who is worried about academic accrediation, pretty sure meso american practices wer their own until folks showed up. What cares did they have of mr.ham? Yet....

Link please?

Now are you going to tell me, that jesuits had nothing to do with education? Nothing to do with the very foundations of our country? The US is an agricultural state, should we start making human sacrifices to meso american gods because you think religion has nothing to do with education?

You mean these missionaries?

In the first few decades since 1492, it was thought that Indians did not have souls because they were "animals" in human form. Therefore, it was believed they could be hunted down like animals, which they were. It was only in 1530 CE that the Pope declared that the Indians were human. Having established their humanity, it was decided that they must be inducted into Christianity. As the Indians were unwilling, this was accomplished by force. Though the change in their status from animal to human might appear to be an improvement, in reality, little changed in their plight.

Unfortunately for the Indians, with the arrival of Christians would come the intolerance for their indigenous ways of life:

The Indian chief Hatuey fled with his people but was captured and burned alive.

As "they were tying him to the stake a Franciscan friar urged him to take Jesus to his heart so that his soul might go to heaven, rather than descend into hell. Hatuey replied that if heaven was where the Christians went, he would rather go to hell."

What happened to his people was described by an eyewitness:

"The Spaniards found pleasure in inventing all kinds of odd cruelties ... They built a long gibbet, long enough for the toes to touch the ground to prevent strangling, and hanged thirteen [natives] at a time in honor of Christ Our Saviour and the twelve Apostles... then, straw was wrapped around their torn bodies and they were burned alive." [SH72]
freetruth.50webs.org...

Separation of church and state needs to between maintained in our schools as well as our courthouses, doctor's office and legislative bills.

reply to post by adjensen


Are you kidding me? Oh no, you're not out of touch!

Chicago Public School Statistics

Students Enrolled:
Total: 404,151 (FY2011-2012)
Student enrollment Preschool: 24,232
Kindergarten: 29,594
Elementary (1-8): 236,452
Secondary (9-12): 113,873

Out of 404,151 students, you're offering 6100 scholarships. Yeah Ok.

Originally posted by Nephalim
reply to post by Cuervo

 

Ok so youre saying you want to cred mr ham with those ten?

No. My point was that people follow basic moral compasses in society because we have social contracts to uphold. Do you think atheists all just run around murdering and stealing? There is absolutely nothing unique or special about the 10 commandments. They are 10 smart rules to follow that most societies already do, aside from the religious commandments like "don't worship other gods or idols or knickknacks made in the image of JD Power awards, etc".

Believe me, I love religion. I really do. I love to discuss it, practice it, and debate it. However, it is not needed to guide society in civil discourse. If so, the planet would have burned down a long time ago.

reply to post by windword

The Indian chief Hatuey fled with his people but was captured and burned alive.

As "they were tying him to the stake a Franciscan friar urged him to take Jesus to his heart so that his soul might go to heaven, rather than descend into hell. Hatuey replied that if heaven was where the Christians went, he would rather go to hell."

I would have gladly shaken that chief's hand. There's something to be said for sticking to your guns, even in the face of those who would take your life rather than suffer you to live in defiance.