Huzzah!! The importance of leaving SOME education to the home or parents can’t be overstated. To my mind this is paramount to generational learning. Elders ideas and ideologies being passed down to kids. Religion (with its presumed byproducts of empathy and equanimity) is number 1 on that list. For a government entity to dictate a religious policy to ANYONE is a huge conflict in terms, a distinctly unAmerican concept. In public/secular schools it’s comparable to indoctrination. But that doesn’t mean it compromises a religious education which should be provided by the home and family in the absence of a primary religious education. The opening simile here, of forcing a certain kind of lunch on schoolchildren perfectly and simply illustrates the point.
As a union official I discovered (as had many of my colleagues) that there are members who were more trouble than they were worth. In this case, defending against comments like those made above wastes valuable time we could spend elsewhere. We need to shut off the stupid questions/statements. Ridicule works sometimes, outright disdain for the comments does, too. But if we allow idiots to take potshots at us and then feel we need to defend our position, it is us doing the damage.
Education is one of the "seven mountains" of society which the Dominionist sect of xtians believe they must conquer. Everyone in their way is collateral damage. Insecure in their beliefs indeed.
It's the same kind of argument that posits same sex marriage devalues heterosexual marriages - how exactly?
Another dandy piece, Peter, but one quibble: You write, "The absence of religion does not mean the presence of atheism." Atheism cannot be "present." It is only a recognition of absence; the rejection of a belief in a deity that is active in human affairs. This is construed by Christians as a competing belief, thereby allowing, "This is your belief system, and I have my own (better one).
So wrong! There is no such thing as an education devoid of morality! By not teaching about a specific religion you teach that all religions are either equal or equally irrelevant at least when it pertains to education. That is itself a religious and philosophical viewpoint that is unacceptable to many. It it part of the state religion
... so you would have them teach.... Christianity?
Not saying that Christian schools are bad. Just pointing out that you have struck at our friends point with opaque motivations and zero alternative ideas.
... And, yes, I am guessing that you are Christian without looking at your profile, posts, or stack.
AMEN!!!
HALLELUJAH!!!
Huzzah!! The importance of leaving SOME education to the home or parents can’t be overstated. To my mind this is paramount to generational learning. Elders ideas and ideologies being passed down to kids. Religion (with its presumed byproducts of empathy and equanimity) is number 1 on that list. For a government entity to dictate a religious policy to ANYONE is a huge conflict in terms, a distinctly unAmerican concept. In public/secular schools it’s comparable to indoctrination. But that doesn’t mean it compromises a religious education which should be provided by the home and family in the absence of a primary religious education. The opening simile here, of forcing a certain kind of lunch on schoolchildren perfectly and simply illustrates the point.
As a union official I discovered (as had many of my colleagues) that there are members who were more trouble than they were worth. In this case, defending against comments like those made above wastes valuable time we could spend elsewhere. We need to shut off the stupid questions/statements. Ridicule works sometimes, outright disdain for the comments does, too. But if we allow idiots to take potshots at us and then feel we need to defend our position, it is us doing the damage.
Education is one of the "seven mountains" of society which the Dominionist sect of xtians believe they must conquer. Everyone in their way is collateral damage. Insecure in their beliefs indeed.
It's the same kind of argument that posits same sex marriage devalues heterosexual marriages - how exactly?
Another dandy piece, Peter, but one quibble: You write, "The absence of religion does not mean the presence of atheism." Atheism cannot be "present." It is only a recognition of absence; the rejection of a belief in a deity that is active in human affairs. This is construed by Christians as a competing belief, thereby allowing, "This is your belief system, and I have my own (better one).
Excellent piece. Thank you for stating it so clearly.
So wrong! There is no such thing as an education devoid of morality! By not teaching about a specific religion you teach that all religions are either equal or equally irrelevant at least when it pertains to education. That is itself a religious and philosophical viewpoint that is unacceptable to many. It it part of the state religion
... so you would have them teach.... Christianity?
Not saying that Christian schools are bad. Just pointing out that you have struck at our friends point with opaque motivations and zero alternative ideas.
... And, yes, I am guessing that you are Christian without looking at your profile, posts, or stack.
....And, yes, my guess is accurate.