Quake3World

whatever happened to "Congress shall make no law respecting an institution of religion..."?

the enemy takeoever is complete...we need a revolution...u pussies game?...

http://www.macon.com/mld/macon/news/pol ... 144311.htm

*revolves once in office chair*

Let me know if you need anymore.

You gonna teach your kids the koran geoff?

Survivor wrote:You gonna teach your kids the koran geoff?

lol... you're a moron, idiot.

i already told them all religion is superstitious crap...

The only alarming thing about this is that "the bible is the course textbook"... Bible + ideological teacher = sermon. An ideal textbook would be one that collects opposing viewpoints and historical "reality" on who the authors of the bible were, talks about the mistranslation from Semetic language into western language, and so on.

The Daily Show had an interesting guest the other night. He had written a book called "Misqouting Jesus." Basicaly about how not only has the Bible been interpretted and mistranslated, but people have inserted entire new stories since the original Gospels were written. The story of Jesus forgiving the prostitute? Not in the original texts. That story didn't appear until about 300 years after the original texts were written.

The most interesting part? This guys used to be a born again literalist. He started studing the Bible and history and quickly figured out that it was all fucked up and then wrote a book explaining how it all happened.

Oh, and yeah, keep that crap out of public schools. Want kids to learn about religion? Take them to Sunday school or a private institution.

Fender wrote:The Daily Show had an interesting guest the other night. He had written a book called "Misqouting Jesus." Basicaly about how not only has the Bible been interpretted and mistranslated, but people have inserted entire new stories since the original Gospels were written. The story of Jesus forgiving the prostitute? Not in the original texts. That story didn't appear until about 300 years after the original texts were written.

The most interesting part? This guys used to be a born again literalist. He started studing the Bible and history and quickly figured out that it was all fucked up and then wrote a book explaining how it all happened.

Oh, and yeah, keep that crap out of public schools. Want kids to learn about religion? Take them to Sunday school or a private institution.

Well, there's learning about religion and there's learning about the history of religion which is a completely different approach. One teaches you the culture and practice of a dogma (which they can get at church on sunday), and the other teaches analysis and how one's ideology shapes how they report on events--accurately or not--and even the bible is not immune from or above petty politics.

Like that issue of the prostitute you just pointed out. What happed 300 years AD that caused the revision? If you want to teach the bible, teach that kind of thing. It happened 1700 years ago, but it's still a relevant feature to look out for today.

I think you can teach about Christinsanity in the schools, but you can't do it with the bible as your text because it's inherently flawed and biased

jesus never existed...anyone who claims otherwise is either a liar or a moron...

Dave wrote:

Fender wrote:The Daily Show had an interesting guest the other night. He had written a book called "Misqouting Jesus." Basicaly about how not only has the Bible been interpretted and mistranslated, but people have inserted entire new stories since the original Gospels were written. The story of Jesus forgiving the prostitute? Not in the original texts. That story didn't appear until about 300 years after the original texts were written.

The most interesting part? This guys used to be a born again literalist. He started studing the Bible and history and quickly figured out that it was all fucked up and then wrote a book explaining how it all happened.

Oh, and yeah, keep that crap out of public schools. Want kids to learn about religion? Take them to Sunday school or a private institution.

Well, there's learning about religion and there's learning about the history of religion which is a completely different approach. One teaches you the culture and practice of a dogma (which they can get at church on sunday), and the other teaches analysis and how one's ideology shapes how they report on events--accurately or not--and even the bible is not immune from or above petty politics.

Like that issue of the prostitute you just pointed out. What happed 300 years AD that caused the revision? If you want to teach the bible, teach that kind of thing. It happened 1700 years ago, but it's still a relevant feature to look out for today.

I think you can teach about Christinsanity in the schools, but you can't do it with the bible as your text because it's inherently flawed and biased

Having a class about Christianity alone? No, I don't think that's acceptable in public schools, even if it's an objective history.

Freakaloin wrote:whatever happened to "Congress shall make no law respecting an institution of religion..."?

the enemy takeoever is complete...we need a revolution...u pussies game?...

...it's a good thing you practice "catch and release" ...

The proposal also requires that the courses should be taught "in an objective and nondevotional manner with no attempt made to indoctrinate students."

its an elective, dont get ur knickers in a twist

Who cares if it's an elective?

How can you justify using a Buddhist's tax dollars to teach his kid about Christianity in school, excluding other religions?

No law respecting any religion, period. The bill of rights doesn't include a disclaimer saying you can break these amendments as long as you feel like you're doing it fairly.

how can you justify using a pacifits tax dollars to pay for a war? I dont have good knowledge of ur bill of rights, but as long as an elective can be set up on any other topic, why the issue with this one? Is the issue that congress is operating outside its remit???

I agree. I don't see any problem with having a class about the Bible, although I agree with Dave, in that it shouldn't be the only text. Tax dollars go to pay for education. It's up to the schools to determine what to teach.

There are schools that have a large emphasis on Home Ec., and less on Science, and I don't like having my tax money fund that... but I can't do anything about it unless I live in that district and demand change.

edit: nm about agreeing with R00k, misread his statement

Unless it's a purely historical class on Christianity I wouldn't think it wise to use public money to teach a religion class where it's one religion taught to the exclusion of all others. The history of an individual religion taught as an elective class seems fine, and to a lesser extent, as does a non-historical class teaching the modern doctrine of multiple religions without explicit favour of one over any other.

Except it's not officially excluding other religions. If it said only Bible classes can be taught, than that would be a problem.

Granted, the likelihood of anyone suggesting a class on the Koran is low, but it's not prohibited.

werldhed wrote:Except it's not officially excluding other religions. If it said only Bible classes can be taught, than that would be a problem.

Granted, the likelihood of anyone suggesting a class on the Koran is low, but it's not prohibited.

In practice, it's exactly that, not prohibition but exclusion of other religions. Just because it isn't enacted in law doesn't mean it's exclusion is any less significant.

I never made the distinction between official and non-official exclusion in my last post.

R00k wrote:

Dave wrote:

Fender wrote:The Daily Show had an interesting guest the other night. He had written a book called "Misqouting Jesus." Basicaly about how not only has the Bible been interpretted and mistranslated, but people have inserted entire new stories since the original Gospels were written. The story of Jesus forgiving the prostitute? Not in the original texts. That story didn't appear until about 300 years after the original texts were written.

The most interesting part? This guys used to be a born again literalist. He started studing the Bible and history and quickly figured out that it was all fucked up and then wrote a book explaining how it all happened.

Oh, and yeah, keep that crap out of public schools. Want kids to learn about religion? Take them to Sunday school or a private institution.

Well, there's learning about religion and there's learning about the history of religion which is a completely different approach. One teaches you the culture and practice of a dogma (which they can get at church on sunday), and the other teaches analysis and how one's ideology shapes how they report on events--accurately or not--and even the bible is not immune from or above petty politics.

Like that issue of the prostitute you just pointed out. What happed 300 years AD that caused the revision? If you want to teach the bible, teach that kind of thing. It happened 1700 years ago, but it's still a relevant feature to look out for today.

I think you can teach about Christinsanity in the schools, but you can't do it with the bible as your text because it's inherently flawed and biased

Having a class about Christianity alone? No, I don't think that's acceptable in public schools, even if it's an objective history.

Well, obviously I thought about that, but there's only so much you can type about a subject on a message board at any one time. The point I was trying to make is that the church and state separation thing seeks to separate practice from the state, not education about religion from the state. There's an entire department of religion at the state university I attend to prove it.

I had a kid who is refusing to study meiosis because it is about sex. He won't say the word. he spells it. Told me he won't do this because we are talking about 's-e-x'. I can't wait to get to evolution with this one.

How can he know it is even related to sex if he's not even allowed to say the word?

tnf wrote:I had a kid who is refusing to study meiosis because it is about sex. He won't say the word. he spells it. Told me he won't do this because we are talking about 's-e-x'. I can't wait to get to evolution with this one.

... i wonder how someone like that views the world. Does he become afraid when contemplating how he came into being, when he realises his parents have actually had sex? Does he feel guilty when he sees a pretty girl and gets nasty thoughts, or when he sees a dog licking his balls?

Life must scare him absolutely shitless, that poor kid.

Dave wrote:Well, obviously I thought about that, but there's only so much you can type about a subject on a message board at any one time. The point I was trying to make is that the church and state separation thing seeks to separate practice from the state, not education about religion from the state. There's an entire department of religion at the state university I attend to prove it.

I don't have a problem with that at all - classes about religion in general are probably good for society anyway.

But this one is called bible school, isn't it?