Kentucky to allow public schools to teach from the bible

[Younigue]

The people I know who went to Catholic school as children were wild when they were kids and do not practice religion as adults... Just sayin'

Hell maybe this is the best way to obliterate the most ridiculous aspects of Christianity.

Still don't want it in schools though.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Let me get this straight. You're recommending that the state impose religion on children under threat of physical abuse?

They've already got catholic priests doing that for them.

 

[thilanliyan]

For those that did not get the message at home, or at church we used to paddle asses. Even the threat of a paddling kept people in line.

NOW we dont teach kids how to behave, we embrace atheism in schools and we dont even have the guts to paddle misbehavior.

Why is a lack of discipline/decency a result of atheism? One doesn't directly lead to the other.

I myself have been "rulered" at school (not a western country) but can't say that works for every child...some will grow up with a lot of hate and resentment from that kind of thing, which is why I wouldn't want it for my own kids for example if/when I have any.

 

[glenn1]

The Bible can be a good thing to refer to for fables and what not, it's a good window into the past. However it should never be used as a scientific tool. I get into arguments every once in a blue moon down here in Texas over this kind of stuff. Scientific progress has not gone forward from studying the bible and won't, are people really hell bent in forcing us to go back to the middle ages? I just don't understand why so many of these super religious people are so opposed to the progress of the human race, why can't we coexist?

Actually the scientific method and modern thought pretty much directly arose from those fables and 'men of God' like Thomas Aquinas and Roger Bacon. If you don't understand the ideas and and environment that they lived in and motivated them (which requires a base level understanding of Christianity, and a hat tip to Islam which preserved the knowledge of Aristotle and others) then it's hard to grasp the line of descent from religious thought to other historical minds like Copernicus, Galileo and others who built upon them and developed the true principles of science.

 

[theeedude]

What I love are Republicans destroying their kids future to troll mysterious liberals who give a shit.

 

[Stokely]

Not to open this whole can of worms, but the whole "paddling of asses" didn't work out so well anecdotally for just about anyone I know who got their ass paddled. The two "worst" kids I knew (as far as getting into trouble) got hit with belts. Yeah, they said it hurt, but it's over in a few minutes and done. It's lazy parenting and ineffectual, and personally I'm not in favor of "might makes right" and solving problems through violence. If I whacked my dumbass coworker over something he did, not matter how annoying or wrong, I'd be fired. That's what gets me: we teach the paddled kids that this is the way to punish--until you are adult, then it becomes assault if you hit anyone but your own kids Makes...sense...? No.

But hey, my opinion only matters to me and my family, you want to beat your kids have at it. Just don't touch mine and we'll be good!

 

[Younigue]

Not to open this whole can of worms, but the whole "paddling of asses" didn't work out so well anecdotally for just about anyone I know who got their ass paddled. The two "worst" kids I knew (as far as getting into trouble) got hit with belts. Yeah, they said it hurt, but it's over in a few minutes and done. It's lazy parenting and ineffectual, and personally I'm not in favor of "might makes right" and solving problems through violence. If I whacked my dumbass coworker over something he did, not matter how annoying or wrong, I'd be fired. That's what gets me: we teach the paddled kids that this is the way to punish--until you are adult, then it becomes assault if you hit anyone but your own kids Makes...sense...? No.

But hey, my opinion only matters to me and my family, you want to beat your kids have at it. Just don't touch mine and we'll be good!

I agree, except I do believe in a swat on the bum to get a distracted yet focused child's attention... example: nephew mesmerized by the guard rails to the cliff we were sightseeing. He wanted to climb everything back then. I spoke to him, spoke to him again... then swat and my nephew's impending death was averted and we moved about our day. Spanking on the other hand is debasing, degrading and doesn't serve the intended purpose. I still think my father was a moron for lining his many children up in the cellar to await a spanking, oldest to youngest, when we wouldn't turn each other in for one of us doing something we weren't supposed to. His children (all of them) turned out to be decent, law abiding adults not because of him but because our mother was kind, and gentle and loved unconditionally with the express messages of "do the crime, do the time" AND "I'll turn you in myself". She was blindly faithful (boggled my mind) but raised us to find our own path religiously/spiritually. Not one of her children followed in her beliefs and though her church thought she should be appalled and demanding with ultimatum (the congregation, not the Minister <--- coolest hippy I ever met. Still love him even though I haven't seen him in 30 years.) she dismissed that and loved us anyway, without pause or hesitation. She was why we became decent people. She was an amazing example. My dad, not so much. There are few traits of his I'd be proud to exhibit.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Not to open this whole can of worms, but the whole "paddling of asses" didn't work out so well anecdotally for just about anyone I know who got their ass paddled. The two "worst" kids I knew (as far as getting into trouble) got hit with belts.

It does not work out empirically either. Study after study has shown that spanking, in all it's forms, has an immediate effect on behavior but no long term changes in behavior. If you want to stop a child from doing an action right now, paddle him, if you want to teach him not to do it in the future you need a different method.

 

[Puffnstuff]

It does not work out empirically either. Study after study has shown that spanking, in all it's forms, has an immediate effect on behavior but no long term changes in behavior. If you want to stop a child from doing an action right now, paddle him, if you want to teach him not to do it in the future you need a different method.

The bible says to raise up a child in the ways that he should go so when he is older he will not depart from it. You're correct in that spanking by itself will not yield desirable results and must be combined with instruction to achieve a positive outcome.

A teacher yelling at her student that he's not doing it right will do nothing but discourage that child. A teacher who explains that they're doing it wrong and then offers correction to help them understand where they went wrong so they can correct themselves will promote learning allowing the child to move forward with a positive attitude.

 

[sportage]

Me want to see the look on their face when the Rapture occurs and they'd be left behind.
Talk about your W*H*A*T*!!!? experience....
"Me no go to cities of gold and streets lined with jewels?"
"What da ya mean lord that I'm an asshole?"
"That'd disqualify me?"
"Then just go F yourself....oh lord."

 

[bshole]

Actually the scientific method and modern thought pretty much directly arose from those fables and 'men of God' like Thomas Aquinas and Roger Bacon. If you don't understand the ideas and and environment that they lived in and motivated them (which requires a base level understanding of Christianity, and a hat tip to Islam which preserved the knowledge of Aristotle and others) then it's hard to grasp the line of descent from religious thought to other historical minds like Copernicus, Galileo and others who built upon them and developed the true principles of science.

Why do conservative Christians attack the scientific method so relentlessly? Go watch the King Crocoduck vs Kent Hovind debate. Kent was denying E=mC2 in a pathetic attempt to get out of the ancient starlight problem.

We have the most scientific illiterate people in the country attempting to foist their ignorance and stupidity on all public school students. I have watched many debates on this topic and not a single young earth creationist that I have listened to has demonstrated anything higher than a middle school level understanding of the theory. It would be nice if the people arguing for this craziness were first forced to take and PASS a college level course in evolutionary biology, run a f-ucking experiment and publish a f-ucking paper..... f-ucking wankers......

 

[Puffnstuff]

Why do conservative Christians attack the scientific method so relentlessly? Go watch the King Crocoduck vs Kent Hovind debate. Kent was denying E=mC2 in a pathetic attempt to get out of the ancient starlight problem.

We have the most scientific illiterate people in the country attempting to foist their ignorance and stupidity on all public school students. I have watched many debates on this topic and not a single young earth creationist that I have listened to has demonstrated anything higher than a middle school level understanding of the theory. It would be nice if the people arguing for this craziness were first forced to take and PASS a college level course in evolutionary biology, run a f-ucking experiment and publish a f-ucking paper..... f-ucking wankers......

Religious classical conditioning prevents them from breaking free from the learned helplessness church has taught them. Funny how they can barely pass high school but want to run their mouths at people who've demonstrated that they possess critical thinking skills leading them to question everything rather than just blindly accept what they are told.

BShole I am a bona fide Christian who will go to see God when I leave this life and I reject them along with religion just as hard as you do. Christianity is a philosophy that is lived out by the believer rather than something that is acted out like you see at church. People who behave one way all week then put on fine clothes and get together on Sunday to impress the rest of the attendees in a social setting. As for the rapture the doctrine is in the bible, however, when it happens I don't believe that you'll be worried about looking for the few missing folks that actually vanish.

 

[piasabird]

I could see a study of the Bible count as Sociology, philosophy, or as a literature class. If everyone read the Bible at least once they could get something out of it. I would not see it as a required class. I could see references in the bible might help a class like Western Civilization which usually starts around the time of the Bible or just prior to that time.

 

[piasabird]

When I took western civilization we looked at different religions and how they affected the different cultures. Even in Europe, religious philosophy played a major role in different cultures from Romans to Catholics, to Vikings, Greeks, Normans, Celts, etc.

For instance, what exactly did St Patrick do?

 

[ch33zw1z]

When I took western civilization we looked at different religions and how they affected the different cultures. Even in Europe, religious philosophy played a major role in different cultures from Romans to Catholics, to Vikings, Greeks, Normans, Celts, etc.

For instance, what exactly did St Patrick do?

He got drunk and lost a pot of gold to a bunch of little people.

Religion obviously has played a part in our history. No one will debate that. Going forward, how much influence should we let it have. Do you want to teach fact or fiction.

 

[glenn1]

He got drunk and lost a pot of gold to a bunch of little people.

Religion obviously has played a part in our history. No one will debate that. Going forward, how much influence should we let it have. Do you want to teach fact or fiction.

Facts and fiction can both be useful to teach given the right lesson to be learned and your reasons for wanting that lesson taught. Knowledge isn't the same as proselytizing although I sadly understand where that's not the case often in practice. Our kids should be able to learn useful information about religious subjects so they can understand "aha, so that's what inspired that Shakespeare quote and Michelangelo painting" but I realize that many unscrupulous troglodytes wouldn't be able to pass up the opportunity to indoctrinate and recruit for their chosen faith while doing so.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Facts and fiction can both be useful to teach given the right lesson to be learned and your reasons for wanting that lesson taught. Knowledge isn't the same as proselytizing although I sadly understand where that's not the case often in practice. Our kids should be able to learn useful information about religious subjects so they can understand "aha, so that's what inspired that Shakespeare quote and Michelangelo painting" but I realize that many unscrupulous troglodytes wouldn't be able to pass up the opportunity to indoctrinate and recruit for their chosen faith while doing so.

drugs are bad, mmkay.

 

[glenn1]

drugs are bad, mmkay.

Unsure where you're going with this. You can call it government anti-drug indoctrination but at least the "drugs are bad" message is basically factual. No one can argue with a straight face that smoking in carcinogens (with some THC included) is a good idea or injecting highly addictive substances into your veins is a good health practice akin to exercise or eating your recommended amount of vegetables. I have no moral objections to drugs and think the drug war is stupid but we likewise should still discourage people from using them for the same reason we discourage them from other legal but unhealthy acts.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I said you're the example of why drugs are bad, you must be high if you think people concerned with teaching facts over fiction are attempting to indoctrinate children. Religion has that cornered, been doing it for centuries.

You're example is fine, as religion has influenced our history, but pretending like it still should...must be high.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

He's high on his own homemade jenkem, seeing as he has his head so far up his ass he can see that cheeseburger he had at the 1983 memorial day cookout...

 

[glenn1]

I said you're the example of why drugs are bad, you must be high is you think people concerned with teaching facts over fiction are attempting to indoctrinate children. Religion has that cornered, been doing it for centuries.

You're example is fine, as religion has influenced our history, but pretending like it still should...must be high.

I think you're missing my point. I'm not trying to turn this into a statement about 'facts over fiction' in the context of any current controversy (such as global warming). Most religions are a mix of facts and fiction. For example it's generally agreed that Biblical figures like Jesus and Paul (earlier Saul) of Tarsus were real people. Some is disputed or contradictory 'factual fictions' like Jesus' lineage (given completely different ones in the gospels of Matthew and Luke to emphasize his kingly nature or priestly nature depending on the author's objective). Some is just outright fiction or belief shoehorned in for political purposes in later times such as the Virgin Birth. Other religions are the same way, you have a mix of the factual ("Mohammed was a real person") to the fanciful ("and he flew to heaven on a winged horse from the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem.")

In an ideal world even those who were believers and tasked with teaching religion for historical, literary, and cultural purposes would recognize these mixes of truth and fiction and teach them honestly. I have very little faith in the ability of those teachers to provide a balanced presentation of the facts and fiction thus my statement.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Are teachers dishonest or intentionally indoctrinating children? Keep moving stuff around.

Bottom line, religion belongs at home. It's not up to school funded with public money to prop up a belief system just because it has historical context, definitely not an entire class on it.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Facts and fiction can both be useful to teach given the right lesson to be learned and your reasons for wanting that lesson taught. Knowledge isn't the same as proselytizing although I sadly understand where that's not the case often in practice. Our kids should be able to learn useful information about religious subjects so they can understand "aha, so that's what inspired that Shakespeare quote and Michelangelo painting" but I realize that many unscrupulous troglodytes wouldn't be able to pass up the opportunity to indoctrinate and recruit for their chosen faith while doing so.

And factual information about religion can already be taught. There is no rule that says that a teacher can not talk about where Michelangelo got his inspiration, or what images he painted were meant to represent, or the importance of the Roman Catholic Church played as a patron of the arts.

 

[Paratus]

Are teachers dishonest or intentionally indoctrinating children? Keep moving stuff around.

Bottom line, religion belongs at home. It's not up to school funded with public money to prop up a belief system just because it has historical context, definitely not an entire class on it.

While I generally don't agree with @glenn1 on much of anything, (e.g. Climate change, politics, etc) I actually don't have an issue with this post if I'm understanding it correctly.

Facts and fiction can both be useful to teach given the right lesson to be learned and your reasons for wanting that lesson taught. Knowledge isn't the same as proselytizing although I sadly understand where that's not the case often in practice. Our kids should be able to learn useful information about religious subjects so they can understand "aha, so that's what inspired that Shakespeare quote and Michelangelo painting" but I realize that many unscrupulous troglodytes wouldn't be able to pass up the opportunity to indoctrinate and recruit for their chosen faith while doing so.

He's simply saying religion has factually been a part of history and has a place to be taught in history class but that those who teach it may use incorrectly use that subject as a chance to proselytize.

In my own experience my HS European history class definitely discussed the role of the church as it affected European history. In a couple of college level history classes on the history of western technology, religion was also tangentially touched on. Both times without it being proselytizing.

 

[ch33zw1z]

That seems reasonable, as there's no denying religion's influence in our history.

Seeing as how this is in reference to Kentucky, I seriously doubt there will be such portrayal.