Would you support public schools being required to teach religion classes?

[mobobuff]

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Not a chance. If I want my child to learn about religion they can go to a church, temple, etc.
The separation of church and state is becoming far too frighteningly narrow.

You have a freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

You are a tool.

 

[BigToque]

Originally posted by: mobobuff

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Not a chance. If I want my child to learn about religion they can go to a church, temple, etc.
The separation of church and state is becoming far too frighteningly narrow.

You have a freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

You are a tool.

You certainly make a strong case for yourself :roll:

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

Why would I want public schools spending classtime to teach religion as part of a core curriculum? I wouldn't oppose an elective class, but seriously there is no reason at all to impose a required religion course on students.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Not a chance. If I want my child to learn about religion they can go to a church, temple, etc.
The separation of church and state is becoming far too frighteningly narrow.

You have a freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

So you don't believe we should have freedom from religion?

 

[vi edit]

When I was in high school, I took a "cultures" class that taught you about the principles/basics of the different religions.

- Difference between monotheistic/polytheistic and names of the deities for each.
- How Christianity/Islam/Judaism/Toaism/Confucianism were founded
- General beliefs held of each religion
- What parts of the world they were predominent in
- Important days of the year for those religions

It was more of an awareness than "teaching". It was very objective and actually very interesting. Religion is so intertwined with ancient history that having some foundation of what they people belived in at the time made other classes easier to understand.

It certainly shouldn't be a requirement, but I'd have zero issues with it being an elective. I'd encourage my child to take similar class if offered. A class teaching you the different faiths out there certainly isn't going to convert you overnight into a Hindu if that's what people are afraid of.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: Amol

Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy
Learning a little bit about various religions in history class isn't a problem, but I defenitely wouldn't want an entire class for it.

They do that in Junior High social studies

:thumbsup:, yea and anything more then that would be fscking annoying. I really could care less about religions and would not want them to be forced down my throat. Separation of church and state is the best thing since sliced bread!

 

[quakefiend420]

Originally posted by: ribbon13
Intitutionalized Religion

:laugh:

 

[pyonir]

Originally posted by: notfred
I wouldn't being opposed to a "intro to world religions" class being offered as a high school elective, but I don't think it should be a requirement.

:thumbsup:

Then again...IMO that's what college electives are for.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: malak
I haven't seen a single shred of evidence for macro evolution, so I can't see how believing in it is any better.

Australia?

An island taken over by british jailbirds? WTF does that have to do with macro evolution?

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: shimsham
on one hand, i say no. theres no place for religion to be a requirement in school.(seperation of church and state)

on the other, i think that creation is the flip side of the evolution coin, and both sides should be represented.

what i really feel is christians (because, lets face it, thats who we are really talking about here) pay a substantial amount of taxes, if not the majority of, and should have representation on that basis alone. i mean, "no taxation without representation" right? is it ok to shut their viewpoint out when they pay for the majority of our public schools? no matter what you believe, that cant be fair.

IMO, i think evolution/creationism/all theories on the origin of life should be taught alongside eachtother, just to be fair to all parties involved. which is what a democracy should be all about. but, both sides have their head shoved so far up their respective asses that it will never happen unfortunatly. because, really, no one knows, and refusing to consider on or the other is foolish no matter what your stance on it all is.

I disagree. Evolution is a scientific theory, hence it belongs in a science class.
I also find it amusing that you start out saying that since "christians pay the most taxes" they should teach creationism in public schools, but then you say we should be fair to all parties in a democracy.
We're all different religions, so religion belongs at home and church. Why would you want someone who knows very little about your religion to be teaching about it in schools, when they could well likely be misrepresenting it? Suppose the person teaching the class is a rabid atheist? Or zealous muslim? Or the "wrong sect" of christian? Or (etc, etc)...

 

[vi edit]

Some people just can't get past the word "religion". They see it and turn sour.

I do not agree with schools being allowed to(or forced to!) display the 10 Commandmends.

But offering a class covering the creation, principles, and practices of ALL world religions in an objective manner is certainly not something that is going to harm anyone. It's honestly nothing more than a world civilizations class and is very related to world civilizations and how cultures evolved throughout the ages.

Having a bit of an education on various beliefs is certainly a positive thing in the multicultured world we live in.

 

[Miramonti]

I think its good to learn about different religions around the world.

 

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Not a chance. If I want my child to learn about religion they can go to a church, temple, etc.
The separation of church and state is becoming far too frighteningly narrow.

You have a freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

That's bordering on a troll post. You know that assertion is false, you're making it just to spark discussion.

I think it should be an elective (like it is in many schools), but absolutely, in no way shape or form, a requirement.

what i really feel is christians (because, lets face it, thats who we are really talking about here) pay a substantial amount of taxes, if not the majority of, and should have representation on that basis alone. i mean, "no taxation without representation" right? is it ok to shut their viewpoint out when they pay for the majority of our public schools? no matter what you believe, that cant be fair.

A certain religious group paying taxes does not exclude them from the separation of church and state. If they want religion taught in school, they should send their kids to a private christian/catholic school.

 

[Armitage]

Originally posted by: notfred
I wouldn't being opposed to a "intro to world religions" class being offered as a high school elective, but I don't think it should be a requirement.

:thumbsup:

 

[0roo0roo]

we don't have enough money to fund the core classes, science, literature, history.. let alone physical education so the kids don't become tubs of lard. repubs aren't for funding schools, they are for tax cuts. to even begin talking of religious classes is silly.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Not a chance. If I want my child to learn about religion they can go to a church, temple, etc.
The separation of church and state is becoming far too frighteningly narrow.

You have a freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

That's bordering on a troll post. You know that assertion is false, you're making it just to spark discussion.

I think it should be an elective (like it is in many schools), but absolutely, in no way shape or form, a requirement.

what i really feel is christians (because, lets face it, thats who we are really talking about here) pay a substantial amount of taxes, if not the majority of, and should have representation on that basis alone. i mean, "no taxation without representation" right? is it ok to shut their viewpoint out when they pay for the majority of our public schools? no matter what you believe, that cant be fair.

A certain religious group paying taxes does not exclude them from the separation of church and state. If they want religion taught in school, they should send their kids to a private christian/catholic school.

:thumbsup: totally agree. fairness for all dosnet include forcing yor viewpoint on everyone else. just because us christians pay most of the taxes, we must drum christianity is best into these kids is the worst idea i ever heard of!

also, i have the freedom to be atheist, you cant stop me. YOU DO HAVE FREEDOM FROM RELIGION.

"Freedom and justice FOR ALL"

Notice it's not for christians only or for people with a religion, America respects everybody no matter your beliefs. your narrow veiwpoints and discriminatory ways are HIGHLY disturbing.

 

[BigToque]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
So you don't believe we should have freedom from religion?

The way I see things is that everyone is free to believe the things they do.

To have freedom from religion (in my mind - and maybe this is where my post isn't very clear) is to say that people who do believe in some religion are forced to keep quiet because it infringes on another persons "right" to live in a world without religion. I believe that infringes on the right of the religious to express their beliefs.

I don't think I worded that as well as I wanted to, but I hope you see what I'm trying to say.

Originally posted by: SampSon
That's bordering on a troll post. You know that assertion is false, you're making it just to spark discussion.

That wasn't my intention. I hope the explanation above shows that.

 

[Pepsei]

Originally posted by: notfred
I wouldn't being opposed to a "intro to world religions" class being offered as a high school elective, but I don't think it should be a requirement.

Yes, and make it writinig intensive too. :thumbsup:

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Stefan
The way I see things is that everyone is free to believe the things they do.

To have freedom from religion (in my mind - and maybe this is where my post isn't very clear) is to say that people who do believe in some religion are forced to keep quiet because it infringes on another persons "right" to live in a world without religion. I believe that infringes on the right of the religious to express their beliefs.

It's easy to feel that way when you're in the majority. Try being one of the minority religions and constantly have "Jesus" this, and "God" that shoved in your face constantly. It sucks.

 

[dornick]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Not a chance. If I want my child to learn about religion they can go to a church, temple, etc.
The separation of church and state is becoming far too frighteningly narrow.

You have a freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

So you don't believe we should have freedom from religion?

Freedom from religion (properly defined as a world-view based on faith) is a myth. Everybody makes assumptions that can't be proven and everybody follows something as God.

 

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
So you don't believe we should have freedom from religion?

The way I see things is that everyone is free to believe the things they do.

To have freedom from religion (in my mind - and maybe this is where my post isn't very clear) is to say that people who do believe in some religion are forced to keep quiet because it infringes on another persons "right" to live in a world without religion. I believe that infringes on the right of the religious to express their beliefs.

I don't think I worded that as well as I wanted to, but I hope you see what I'm trying to say.

Originally posted by: SampSon
That's bordering on a troll post. You know that assertion is false, you're making it just to spark discussion.

That wasn't my intention. I hope the explanation above shows that.

Sure, but since the public schools are a govt. institution the freedom of religion no longer exists. People are not restricted from expressing their views, but they are restricted from expressing their religious views as a state sponsored required school curriculum.

I think it's pretty cut and dry.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: dornick

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Not a chance. If I want my child to learn about religion they can go to a church, temple, etc.
The separation of church and state is becoming far too frighteningly narrow.

You have a freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

So you don't believe we should have freedom from religion?

Freedom from religion (properly defined as a world-view based on faith) is a myth. Everybody makes assumptions that can't be proven and everybody follows something as God.

Umm, what? Please explain that.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: dornick

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Not a chance. If I want my child to learn about religion they can go to a church, temple, etc.
The separation of church and state is becoming far too frighteningly narrow.

You have a freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

So you don't believe we should have freedom from religion?

Freedom from religion (properly defined as a world-view based on faith) is a myth. Everybody makes assumptions that can't be proven and everybody follows something as God.

Try thinking about it as "Freedom from the religion of other people."

 

[BigToque]

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
So you don't believe we should have freedom from religion?

The way I see things is that everyone is free to believe the things they do.

To have freedom from religion (in my mind - and maybe this is where my post isn't very clear) is to say that people who do believe in some religion are forced to keep quiet because it infringes on another persons "right" to live in a world without religion. I believe that infringes on the right of the religious to express their beliefs.

I don't think I worded that as well as I wanted to, but I hope you see what I'm trying to say.

Originally posted by: SampSon
That's bordering on a troll post. You know that assertion is false, you're making it just to spark discussion.

That wasn't my intention. I hope the explanation above shows that.

Sure, but since the public schools are a govt. institution the freedom of religion no longer exists. People are not restricted from expressing their views, but they are restricted from expressing their religious views as a state sponsored required school curriculum.

I think it's pretty cut and dry.

They are required to not support or endorse any particular religion, but that doesn't mean public schools can't educate people about the topic.

 

[dornick]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: dornick

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
Not a chance. If I want my child to learn about religion they can go to a church, temple, etc.
The separation of church and state is becoming far too frighteningly narrow.

You have a freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

So you don't believe we should have freedom from religion?

Freedom from religion (properly defined as a world-view based on faith) is a myth. Everybody makes assumptions that can't be proven and everybody follows something as God.

Umm, what? Please explain that.

Basically, everybody has some sort of ultimate concern in life. It might be the Christian God, money, science, pleasing the small green men from Mars, etc... People make life decisions based on their ultimate concern.