Current Affairs and Politics

God in Schools?

Reply
  Tools
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591
You never really have anything either interesting/funny/insightful to contribute do you?
macc4 +

i don't have cat, it died

macc4's Avatar
Joined
Jan '08
Times thanked
< 1,209
Posts
12,423
Well, I've recieved one like in this thread, so someone obviously thinks so. How many did you get?
dbb618 +

md5sum < /dev/urandom

dbb618's Avatar
Joined
May '06
Times thanked
< 1,753
Posts
14,861
Well, he wouldn't get a like from the Christian God ... that dude is notoriously standoffish. You think he'd once or twice get off his cloud and go:

"duudde ... I don't like the Jews either, but setting up a gas chamber, that's uncool"

or

"buddy, you're supposed to be representing me, please don't rape the kiddies"

or

"son, that was a nice job there inventing the combine harvester. Good work".
Hopped in the car and torpe'ed to the shack
Of Shaheed, "We gotta go back" when he said
"Why?" I said, "We gotta go
'Cause I left my wallet in El Segundo"

http://twitter.com/derekbradley
http://untappd.com/user/dbb618

https://plus.google.com/117630500124...73/posts?hl=en
horst +

Registered User

horst's Avatar
Joined
Sep '02
Times thanked
< 414
Posts
5,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whitey1981 View Post

And Horst, isn't the census filled out by every Australian (22.5 million) meaning it's findings would be more accurate than a survey of 1700 people? If not, why does the census exist if we can statistically infer its results?

Lots of reasons but probably the biggest one is that it gives you data on people in specific locations, picking the location from which to get your sample is a big nono in statistics because it biases the sample which makes it useless, and in the end that's the difference, what the census gives you is actual data not probabilities.
horst +

Registered User

horst's Avatar
Joined
Sep '02
Times thanked
< 414
Posts
5,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by macc4 View Post

Well, I've recieved one like in this thread, so someone obviously thinks so. How many did you get?

I have to say 'sect times' was a cracker
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591
Yes that was good, forgot it was from you.

But interesting and insightful's a stretch.
SpaceMonkey +

FOREVER DOLAN

SpaceMonkey's Avatar
Joined
Jul '02
Times thanked
< 6,411
Posts
33,963

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

If religion is on the decline and we're not actually a Christian nation, not by a long shot, then what's to be feared from Christian education in schools? Will the smallest Christian minority rise up and tip the balance again so we can return to the Dark Ages?

There's nothing to be feared from basket weaving lessons in schools, but I'd be annoyed if they were an opt-out part of the curriculum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdoodle View Post

not liking yoda is like knocking back a root when presented nude in a YD change room

Quote:

Originally Posted by mischa21 View Post

^mmmm all this talk of meat is getting me excited.

Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591
At least someone's thinking of the children.
Geezah +

Raaaaaaaaaaaaarrghh

Geezah's Avatar
Joined
Sep '03
Times thanked
< 1,658
Posts
12,196

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

If religion is on the decline and we're not actually a Christian nation, not by a long shot, then what's to be feared from Christian education in schools? Will the smallest Christian minority rise up and tip the balance again so we can return to the Dark Ages?

It's not about fear, it's about balance. I have no problems with religious studies. Religion is an historical fact as well as a contemporary fact, and as such should be taught on this basis. However teaching just Christianity is not giving children a full understanding of the nature of religion or irreligion as it were, it gives children a myopic vision of the world.

I went to a Catholic school. It taught Catholicism for the most part, as is its want, only developing to a wider philosophical outlook on religion in year 11/12. Throughout high school there wasn't even the pretense of looking at Catholicism throughout history with an objective eye. Is the faith of believers so weak that it can not withstand teaching the whole truth of their particular brand of faith? Is it so weak that it can not withstand the teaching of competing brands of religion? Is it so weak that it can not withstand the teaching of competing brands of religion as well as any other non-theological philosophy? Does faith tremble in the knowledge that morals and ethics have been exhibited in non-believers throughout history?

Surely if faith is strong enough it should withstand any argument that can be thrown at it.
Avatar artist: Dain Fagerholm
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geezah View Post

It's not about fear, it's about balance. I have no problems with religious studies. Religion is an historical fact as well as a contemporary fact, and as such should be taught on this basis. However teaching just Christianity is not giving children a full understanding of the nature of religion or irreligion as it were, it gives children a myopic vision of the world.

I went to a Catholic school. It taught Catholicism for the most part, as is its want, only developing to a wider philosophical outlook on religion in year 11/12. Throughout high school there wasn't even the pretense of looking at Catholicism throughout history with an objective eye. Is the faith of believers so weak that it can not withstand teaching the whole truth of their particular brand of faith? Is it so weak that it can not withstand the teaching of competing brands of religion? Is it so weak that it can not withstand the teaching of competing brands of religion as well as any other non-theological philosophy? Does faith tremble in the knowledge that morals and ethics have been exhibited in non-believers throughout history?

Surely if faith is strong enough it should withstand any argument that can be thrown at it.

How can I make sense of what you're asking here?

Are you conflating the teaching of Christianity and religion in schools with the faith of believers in a general sense? I understand the insinuations against the Church and I know its track record is not great, but what is the issue here; the implementation of the Church's instruction or the folly of those people who stray from the rules?

If you want to talk about an objective eye, then our religious classes would have to include every contribution to philosophy, charity and education made by the Church throughout history. To be perfectly honest though, I'm quite sure that this approach still wouldn't satisfy most who have objected in this forum, and so I'd conclude that it's not "objectivity" at all that's the end goal here.

"Faith" is not the crux of Catholicism, but something that grew in popularity from the Reformation. It was the way in which Lutherans could connect with God on their own through "faith"; subverting the role of the priests and the Church. So when you use the word, do you really mean belief or are you using it in the Protestant sense?
didjeridude +

Random Rhythm Generator

didjeridude's Avatar
Joined
Jan '02
Times thanked
< 482
Posts
4,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

If you want to talk about an objective eye, then our religious classes would have to include every contribution to philosophy, charity and education made by the Church throughout history. To be perfectly honest though, I'm quite sure that this approach still wouldn't satisfy most who have objected in this forum, and so I'd conclude that it's not "objectivity" at all that's the end goal here.

Most people in this thread have objected to compulsory religious classes without an opt-out. Most people (myself included and stated as such previously) are happy for religion, or rather theology, to be taught in schools. Theology could/should be an elective subject in high school just the same as music or woodwork is an elective and not a core subject like maths and english. A subject such as this could very easily encompass contributions to philosophy, charity and education, but if it were truly objective it would also cover lessons concerning on the greed, power and brutality of the catholic church throughout its entire history, the spanish inquisition, the many wars in the name of religion, the colonialisation and indoctrination of african and south american peoples, religious extremism and modern controversies such as objection to gay marriage, stem cell research and abortion.
Reality: To be or not to be? The Adventures of Dr Shroom (and Captain Jones)
jdoodle +

in on the killtaker

jdoodle's Avatar
Joined
Nov '01
Times thanked
< 2,202
Posts
16,874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

If religion is on the decline and we're not actually a Christian nation, not by a long shot, then what's to be feared from Christian education in schools? Will the smallest Christian minority rise up and tip the balance again so we can return to the Dark Ages?

because its a waste of time
kids are better off doing pe or learning maths
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." John Stuart Mill
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591

Quote:

Originally Posted by didjeridude View Post

Most people in this thread have objected to compulsory religious classes without an opt-out. Most people (myself included and stated as such previously) are happy for religion, or rather theology, to be taught in schools. Theology could/should be an elective subject in high school just the same as music or woodwork is an elective and not a core subject like maths and english. A subject such as this could very easily encompass contributions to philosophy, charity and education, but if it were truly objective it would also cover lessons concerning on the greed, power and brutality of the catholic church throughout its entire history, the spanish inquisition, the many wars in the name of religion, the colonialisation and indoctrination of african and south american peoples, religious extremism and modern controversies such as objection to gay marriage, stem cell research and abortion.

I wouldn't object to that at all. I think it would be far more beneficial to have students exposed to these controversies and the history of the institution rather than forcing a total ban on its teaching in schools, either government or independent.
dbb618 +

md5sum < /dev/urandom

dbb618's Avatar
Joined
May '06
Times thanked
< 1,753
Posts
14,861
You are missing the point, nobody wants to ban teaching Christianity. You can opt in.

What the Victorian government wants to do is to ban "not teaching" Christianity. You cannot opt out without suffering adverse consequences.
Hopped in the car and torpe'ed to the shack
Of Shaheed, "We gotta go back" when he said
"Why?" I said, "We gotta go
'Cause I left my wallet in El Segundo"

http://twitter.com/derekbradley
http://untappd.com/user/dbb618

https://plus.google.com/117630500124...73/posts?hl=en
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591
No I am not missing the point, I was responding to what people in this forum have said regarding Christian religious education in schools. I think we stopped talking about the Victorian proposal on page 1
custaro +

Thirsty Critter

custaro's Avatar
Joined
Jun '01
Times thanked
< 682
Posts
7,440

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

I wouldn't object to that at all. I think it would be far more beneficial to have students exposed to these controversies and the history of the institution rather than forcing a total ban on its teaching in schools, either government or independent.

I'm cool with that. Like others have suggested - just move it into the history curriculum.
you're in my hut now
austraboy +

I like toast

austraboy's Avatar
Joined
Sep '07
Times thanked
< 146
Posts
912

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbb618 View Post

You are missing the point, nobody wants to ban teaching Christianity. You can opt in.

What the Victorian government wants to do is to ban "not teaching" Christianity. You cannot opt out without suffering adverse consequences.

Pretty much... from what I understand they want to change the word "may" to "must" in regards to rules relating to the teaching of scripture at schools.

Kids who attend scripture should do so as a sacrifice for something else as didjeridude suggested. A student who doesn't attend scripture should not be forced to just sit in a room and do nothing... (although most kids are probably pretty happy with that)...

Throughout my high school years scripture was on every Friday morning during the 1st period. If you didn't attend you went were forced to just sit in the library supervised by teachers up until Year 10.

I actually attended Anglican scripture... pretty much to just bust chops...
horst +

Registered User

horst's Avatar
Joined
Sep '02
Times thanked
< 414
Posts
5,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbb618 View Post

You are missing the point, nobody wants to ban teaching Christianity. You can opt in.

What the Victorian government wants to do is to ban "not teaching" Christianity. You cannot opt out without suffering adverse consequences.

The education department not the government, and it's probably just one guy. I bet it would not even take 5 minutes to find a link between the head of the Victorian education department and some wacky religious sect.

I wouldn't be surprised if this was a pre-emptive strike in response to the nsw decision of letting non religious kids go to ethics classes instead of twiddling their thumbs, the stipulation that students can't be engaged in secular classes at the same time is a bit of a give away. And I can fully appreciate the panic, giving kids the tools to think for themselves is the greatest danger the church has ever faced.
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591

Quote:

Originally Posted by horst View Post

The education department not the government, and it's probably just one guy. I bet it would not even take 5 minutes to find a link between the head of the Victorian education department and some wacky religious sect.

I wouldn't be surprised if this was a pre-emptive strike in response to the nsw decision of letting non religious kids go to ethics classes instead of twiddling their thumbs, the stipulation that students can't be engaged in secular classes at the same time is a bit of a give away. And I can fully appreciate the panic, giving kids the tools to think for themselves is the greatest danger the church has ever faced.

"
Yes, let's do away with education as a whole so we can have "children think for themselves".

Let's scrap economics and commerce classes because it's all part of a capitalist system of indoctrination of our child comrades.

While we're at it let's scrap all of the history curriculm because historians will assure us that we can't be truly objective.

In the science curriculum we're going to strive to be objective as well, so we're going to have to include the very positive contributions made by scientists to nuclear weaponry and eugenics.

I still struggle to comprehend why religion and religious education is seen to have this ultimate power to control the minds of our impressionable youth in a totally different manner than any other subject.
dbb618 +

md5sum < /dev/urandom

dbb618's Avatar
Joined
May '06
Times thanked
< 1,753
Posts
14,861
because Religion is made up fairy tales.

The other courses are not (well, History is pretty much a winner's perspective, but can at least be tied back to objective fact)
Hopped in the car and torpe'ed to the shack
Of Shaheed, "We gotta go back" when he said
"Why?" I said, "We gotta go
'Cause I left my wallet in El Segundo"

http://twitter.com/derekbradley
http://untappd.com/user/dbb618

https://plus.google.com/117630500124...73/posts?hl=en
austraboy +

I like toast

austraboy's Avatar
Joined
Sep '07
Times thanked
< 146
Posts
912

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

"
Yes, let's do away with education as a whole so we can have "children think for themselves".

Let's scrap economics and commerce classes because it's all part of a capitalist system of indoctrination of our child comrades.

While we're at it let's scrap all of the history curriculm because historians will assure us that we can't be truly objective.

In the science curriculum we're going to strive to be objective as well, so we're going to have to include the very positive contributions made by scientists to nuclear weaponry and eugenics.

I still struggle to comprehend why religion and religious education is seen to have this ultimate power to control the minds of our impressionable youth in a totally different manner than any other subject.

because F=ma
&
Jesus = dude thought to be some people as the son of a God of which noone can prove exists
horst +

Registered User

horst's Avatar
Joined
Sep '02
Times thanked
< 414
Posts
5,444

Quote:

Originally Posted by austraboy View Post

because F=ma
&
Jesus = dude thought to be some people as the son of a God of which noone can prove exists

There is not even any evidence other than the new testament that Jesus existed, he is not mentioned in any other documents or letters, this isn't actually surprising because the story of Jesus was more than likely misappropriated from the Egyptian myth of Horus.
Derelict +

Derpcore gets the derpy dollars

Derelict's Avatar
Joined
Oct '08
Times thanked
< 5,332
Posts
27,145
My $0.02: God has no place anywhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunningWithScissors View Post

PM derelict for manual labour shit

Quote:

Originally Posted by jarrardscott View Post

I think you obviously dont understand what i'm trying to say.

Nardo +

nobody's fault but yours

Nardo's Avatar
Joined
Feb '01
Times thanked
< 35
Posts
2,679
the new testament = evidence?

you must be kidding.
horst +

Registered User

horst's Avatar
Joined
Sep '02
Times thanked
< 414
Posts
5,444
Touché
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591
Can you tell me if there's been any other hoax that's lasted so long?
Nardo +

nobody's fault but yours

Nardo's Avatar
Joined
Feb '01
Times thanked
< 35
Posts
2,679
hoax isn't the right word. your vocabulary is either too limited, or you are trying to introduce a distraction to the debate.

a hoax is the sort of thing that people do when they take a photo of a frisbee at night and claim to have proof of aliens.

i don't think that the development of christianity is due to some sort of mastermind effort by a group of unknown persons wishing to get into the national enquirer from thousands of years ago and it just sort of grew from there.

it's more the result of countless little exaggerations, simplifications, hearsay, and repeated variations from the truth. the majority of these people who participated in this epic game of chinese whispers probably did so with good intentions. however the truth remains, that what is taught by christian churches is now a great work of fiction and nothing else. it is on par with scientology.

i don't think it's appropriate to teach fiction as fact.
austraboy +

I like toast

austraboy's Avatar
Joined
Sep '07
Times thanked
< 146
Posts
912

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

Can you tell me if there's been any other hoax that's lasted so long?

As discussed early, Christianity isn't the oldest religion... not by a long shot...

You simply can't use longevity as proof...

If you imply that Christianity must be true because people have believed in it for so long, then you therefore must also agree that Hinduism and Buddism are also true. Islam is also not that far behind Christianity in terms of how long it's been around.
dbb618 +

md5sum < /dev/urandom

dbb618's Avatar
Joined
May '06
Times thanked
< 1,753
Posts
14,861
and by extension the Aborginal Dreaming is more valid than any of the above.

kids should learn about the rainbow serpent instead of the Abrahamic God
Hopped in the car and torpe'ed to the shack
Of Shaheed, "We gotta go back" when he said
"Why?" I said, "We gotta go
'Cause I left my wallet in El Segundo"

http://twitter.com/derekbradley
http://untappd.com/user/dbb618

https://plus.google.com/117630500124...73/posts?hl=en
big eddie +

Got soju?

big eddie's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 15,474
Posts
49,998
Yeah Tiddalik the frog was a pretty cool guy, eh drinks water and doesn't afraid of anyone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gotamangina View Post

I hate it when you're right and I'm not.

Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nardo View Post

hoax isn't the right word. your vocabulary is either too limited, or you are trying to introduce a distraction to the debate.

a hoax is the sort of thing that people do when they take a photo of a frisbee at night and claim to have proof of aliens.

i don't think that the development of christianity is due to some sort of mastermind effort by a group of unknown persons wishing to get into the national enquirer from thousands of years ago and it just sort of grew from there.

it's more the result of countless little exaggerations, simplifications, hearsay, and repeated variations from the truth. the majority of these people who participated in this epic game of chinese whispers probably did so with good intentions. however the truth remains, that what is taught by christian churches is now a great work of fiction and nothing else. it is on par with scientology.

i don't think it's appropriate to teach fiction as fact.

If what you say is indeed true, then what is the "truth" at the source of these moments of hearsay, exaggerations, simplifications and repeated variations?

A hoax is something that has been established by fraudulent means, according to an online dictionary, and judging by the perception of the New Testament from some posts here to which I responded, I would've thought hoax would've been appropriate.

As far as evidence is concerned though, it goes well beyond Chinese whispers. Yes the authorship can be questioned, but what historical text from over 2000 years ago could not?

Yes, longevity is not proof, wouldn't someone have mentioned the Jews in response to that though? Seemed more fitting...
Weinertron +

random shoutbox generator

Weinertron's Avatar
Joined
Sep '03
Times thanked
< 931
Posts
3,648
:troll:
Fuck Everything Forever
GoodLove +

likes this

GoodLove's Avatar
Joined
Mar '09
Times thanked
< 3,737
Posts
6,253
Subject: FW: David Thorne

From: David Thorne
Date: Wednesday 10 March 2010 7.12pm
To: Darryl Robinson
Subject: Permission Slip

Dear Darryl,

I have received your permission slip featuring what I can only assume is a levitating rabbit about to drop an egg on Jesus.

Thank you for pre-ticking the permission box as this has saved me not only from having to make a choice, but also from having to make my own forty five degree downward stroke followed by a twenty percent longer forty five degree upward stroke. Without your guidance, I may have drawn a picture of a cactus wearing a hat by mistake.

As I trust my offspring's ability to separate fact from fantasy, I am happy for him to participate in your indoctrination process on the proviso that all references to 'Jesus' are replaced with the term 'Purportedly Magic Jew.'

Regards, David.

From: Darryl Robinson
Date: Thursday 11 March 2010 9.18am
To: David Thorne
Subject: Re: Permission Slip

Hello David

The tick in the box already was a mistake I noticed after printing them all. I've seen the play and it's not indoctrinating anyone. It's a fun play performed by a great bunch of kids. You do not have to be religious to enjoy it. You are welcome to attend if you have any concerns.

Darryl Robinson, School Chaplain

From: David Thorne
Date: Thursday 11 March 2010 11.02am
To: Darryl Robinson
Subject: Re: Re: Permission Slip

Dear Darryl,

Thank you for the kind offer, being unable to think of anything more exciting than attending your entertaining and fun filled afternoon, I tried harder and thought of about four hundred things.

I was actually in a Bible based play once and played the role of 'Annoyed about having to do this.' My scene involved offering a pot plant, as nobody knew what Myrrh was, to a plastic baby Jesus then standing between 'I forgot my costume so am wearing the teachers poncho' and 'I don't feel very well'. Highlights of the play included a nervous donkey with diarrhoea causing 'I don't feel very well' to vomit onto the back of Mary's head, and the lighting system, designed to provide a halo effect around the manger, overheating and setting it alight. The teacher, later criticised for dousing an electrical fire with a bucket of water and endangering the lives of children, left the building in tears and the audience in silence. We only saw her again briefly when she came to the school to collect her poncho.

Also, your inference that I am without religion is incorrect and I am actually torn between two faiths; while your god's promise of eternal life is very persuasive, the Papua New Guinean mud god, Pikkiwoki, is promising a pig and as many coconuts as you can carry.

Regards, David.

From: Darryl Robinson
Date: Thursday 11 March 2010 2.52pm
To: David Thorne
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Permission Slip

Hello David

While it would be a pity for Seb to miss out on the important message of hope that the story of the resurrection gives, if you don't want him to attend the presentation on Monday then just tick the box that says I do not give my child permission to attend.

Darryl Robinson, School Chaplain

From: David Thorne
Date: Thursday 11 March 2010 5.09pm
To: Darryl Robinson
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Permission Slip

Dear Darryl,

I understand the importance the resurrection story holds in your particular religion. If I too knew some guy that had been killed and placed inside a cave with a rock in front of it and I visited the cave to find the rock moved and his body gone, the only logical assumption would be that he had risen from the dead and is the son of God. Once, my friend Simon was rushed to hospital to have his appendix removed and I visited him the next day to find his bed empty. I immediately sacrificed a goat and burnt a witch in his name but it turned out that he had not had appendicitis, just needed a good poo, and was at home playing Playstation.

Someone probably should have asked "So the rock has been moved and he's gone... has anyone checked his house?" I realise Playstation was not around in those days but they probably had the equivalent. A muddy stick or something. I would have said "Can someone please check if Jesus is at home playing with his muddy stick, if not, then and only then should we all assume, logically, that he has risen from the dead and is the son of God."

If we accept though, that Jesus was the son of an Infinite Being capable of anything, he probably did have a Playstation. Probably a Playstation 7. I know I have to get my offspring all the latest gadgets. God would probably have said to him, "I was going to wait another two thousand years to give you this but seeing as you have been good... just don't tell your mother about Grand Theft Auto."

Also, is it true that Jesus can be stabbed during a sword fight and be ok due to the fact that he can only die if he gets his head chopped off?

Regards, David.

From: Darryl Robinson
Date: Friday 12 March 2010 10.13am
To: David Thorne
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Permission Slip

Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus have a sword fight. Learning the teachings of the Bible is not just about religion. It teaches a set of ethics that are sadly not taught by parents nowadays.

Darryl Robinson, School Chaplain

From: David Thorne
Date: Friday 12 March 2010 2.23pm
To: Darryl Robinson
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Permission Slip

Dear Darryl,

You raise a valid point and I appreciate you pointing out my failings as a parent. Practising a system of ethics based on the promise of a reward, in your case an afterlife, is certainly preferable to practising a system of ethics based on it simply being the right thing to do.

Many years ago, I lived next door to a Christian named Mr Stevens. You could tell he was a Christian because he had a fish sticker on his Datsun. He used to wave at us kids from his bathroom window on hot summer days as we played in the sprinkler. I learnt a lot from Mr Stevens. Mainly about wrestling holds. The trick is to oil up really well making it hard for the other person to hold you down. I would often lie on his living room rug looking up at the pictures of sunsets behind quotes from Psalms while waiting for him to unwrap his legs from around my torso.

Your job would be made much easier if, after making the school children sit through an hour of church youth group teens dancing, singing and re-enacting Jewish magic tricks, you simply told them that it was just a small taste of what hell is like and if they didn't believe in Jesus they would have to sit through it again.

When I was at school, we were forced to attend a similar presentation. Herded into the gym under the pretence of free chips, we were assaulted with an hour of hippies playing guitars and a dance routine featuring some kind of colourful coat and a lot of looking upwards. Due to the air-conditioning in the packed gym not working and it being a hot day, the hippie wearing the colourful coat blacked out mid performance and struck his head against the front edge of the stage spraying the first row of cross-legged children with blood. Unconscious, he also urinated. There was a bit of screaming and an ambulance involved and everyone agreed it was the best play they had ever seen.

Regards, David.

From: Darryl Robinson
Date: Friday 12 March 2010 2.47pm
To: David Thorne
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Permission Slip

Hello David

I don't see what any of that has to do with this play. It's important for children to have balance in their life and spirituality is as important in a childs life as everything else. There's an old saying that life without religion is life without beauty.

Darryl Robinson, School Chaplain

From: David Thorne
Date: Friday 12 March 2010 3.36pm
To: Darryl Robinson
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Permission Slip

Dear Darryl,

I agree completely that balance is an important component of a child's education. I will assume then that you will also be organising a class excursion to a play depicting the fifteen billion year expansion of the universe from its initial particle soup moments following the big bang through to molecule coalescion, galaxy and planetary formation and eventually life?

Perhaps your church youth group could put together an interpretive dance routine representing the behaviour of Saturn's moon Hyperion, shattered by an ancient collision and falling randomly back together, tugged to and fro by the gravitational pull of Titan, sixteen sister moons, the multi-billionfold moonlets of Saturn’s rings, Saturn’s gravitational field, companion planets, the variability’s of Sol, stars, galaxy, neighbouring galaxies... or possibly not, according to an old saying, there is no beauty in this.

Also, while I understand that the play is to be held outside school grounds, due to the fact that it is illegal to present medieval metaphysic propaganda in public schools, it is also my understanding that you are now required by law, as of last year, to go by the title Christian Volunteer rather than School Chaplain. A memo you may have missed or filed in your overflowing 'facts that cease to exist when they are ignored' tray.

Regards, David.

From: Darryl Robinson
Date: Monday 15 March 2010 9.22am
To: David Thorne
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Permission Slip

I'm not going to waste any more precious time replying to your stupid emails. If you don't want your child to attend the play just indicate that on the permission slip.

From: David Thorne
Date: Monday 15 March 2010 11.04am
To: Darryl Robinson
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Permission Slip



From: Darryl Robinson
Date: Monday 15 March 2010 2.11pm
To: David Thorne
Subject: No Subject

I will pray for you.

From: David Thorne
Date: Monday 15 March 2010 2.19pm
To: Darryl Robinson
Subject: Re: No Subject

Thanks. Mention that I want a Toyota Prado if you get the chance. A white one. With dark grey leather interior and sat nav.

Regards, David.

From: Darryl Robinson
Date: Tuesday 16 March 2010 9.20am
To: David Thorne
Subject: Re: Re: No Subject

I've had enough of your nonsense. Dont email me again.

From: GOD
Date: Tuesday 16 March 2010 10.18am
To: Darryl Robinson
Subject: Word of God

DARYL, THIS IS GOD. BUY DAVID A TOYOTA PRADO. A WHITE ONE. WITH DARK GREY LEATHER INTERIOR AND SAT NAV.

From: Darryl Robinson
Date: Tuesday 16 March 2010 2.35pm
To: GOD Cc: David Thorne
Subject: Re: Word of God

I'm serious.

From: GOD
Date: Tuesday 16 March 2010 2.48pm
To: Darryl Robinson
Subject: Re: Re: Word of God

OK.

Quote:

Originally Posted by big eddie View Post

Western Australian renaissance man (who knows that feel)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derelict View Post

Why do people call it a back pedal every time somebody explains themselves on the internet?

didjeridude +

Random Rhythm Generator

didjeridude's Avatar
Joined
Jan '02
Times thanked
< 482
Posts
4,424

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

If what you say is indeed true, then what is the "truth" at the source of these moments of hearsay, exaggerations, simplifications and repeated variations?

A hoax is something that has been established by fraudulent means, according to an online dictionary, and judging by the perception of the New Testament from some posts here to which I responded, I would've thought hoax would've been appropriate.

As far as evidence is concerned though, it goes well beyond Chinese whispers. Yes the authorship can be questioned, but what historical text from over 2000 years ago could not?

Yes, longevity is not proof, wouldn't someone have mentioned the Jews in response to that though? Seemed more fitting...

“I know what I believe. I will continue to articulate what I believe and what I believe - I believe what I believe is right.”

George W. Bush.

Similarly, just because you believe the bible to be a "historical text" does not make it so. Since the bible is not a historical text then using it as some form of 'evidence' to prove a point is meaningless. In fact it seems you use this 'belief as factual evidence' strategy quite often (probably without even realising it).... usually covered by a 20ft thick layer of non-sequitur, in your arguments.
Reality: To be or not to be? The Adventures of Dr Shroom (and Captain Jones)
Geezah +

Raaaaaaaaaaaaarrghh

Geezah's Avatar
Joined
Sep '03
Times thanked
< 1,658
Posts
12,196

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

How can I make sense of what you're asking here?

Are you conflating the teaching of Christianity and religion in schools with the faith of believers in a general sense? I understand the insinuations against the Church and I know its track record is not great, but what is the issue here; the implementation of the Church's instruction or the folly of those people who stray from the rules?

If you want to talk about an objective eye, then our religious classes would have to include every contribution to philosophy, charity and education made by the Church throughout history. To be perfectly honest though, I'm quite sure that this approach still wouldn't satisfy most who have objected in this forum, and so I'd conclude that it's not "objectivity" at all that's the end goal here.

"Faith" is not the crux of Catholicism, but something that grew in popularity from the Reformation. It was the way in which Lutherans could connect with God on their own through "faith"; subverting the role of the priests and the Church. So when you use the word, do you really mean belief or are you using it in the Protestant sense?

1. I'm saying if Christianity is to be taught it should be taught as an history or philosophy subject which also includes all the other religions recorded throughout history. They can only be studied empirically through the history lens not through any evidence of their contentions.

2. When religions get the opportunity to teach their contents they don't do a very good job. They gloss over or skip the inherent contradictions within their holy books. And they tend not to talk about the violence in their history, the hypocrisy in their history, relying only on an emphasis on their good deeds in their history e.g. my Catholic schooling.

3. The reason religion should only be taught as an history or philosophy subject is because it makes scientific claims about the origins of material existence that can not be verified by any scientific means. Science offers a better, clearer, more readily verifiable if not entirely complete explanation of material existence. It admits its gaps, its errors, but is always trying to discover ways of filling the gaps through experimentation. When it can not discover a way of verifying or explaining the gaps it plugs them with theories that can be tested and retested until proven or just left there with other competing theories but always it is ready to admit that it is only a theory that is the plug.
Avatar artist: Dain Fagerholm

Last edited by Geezah: 01-Apr-11 at 06:33pm

Reason: Optional

Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591

Quote:

Originally Posted by didjeridude View Post

Similarly, just because you believe the bible to be a "historical text" does not make it so. Since the bible is not a historical text then using it as some form of 'evidence' to prove a point is meaningless. In fact it seems you use this 'belief as factual evidence' strategy quite often (probably without even realising it).... usually covered by a 20ft thick layer of non-sequitur, in your arguments.

Of course it's an historical text! What a ludicrous assertion.

Just because you don't believe it is doesn't make it so either. It's a book written in the past about past events. To me that qualifies it is an historical text.

I never claimed that the Bible was the sole written evidence for the existence of Jesus, nor have I claimed that "belief is factual evidence". Show me if I've got this wrong with a reference to a post of mine, I'm not sure you've understood what I've said.
big eddie +

Got soju?

big eddie's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 15,474
Posts
49,998
By that rational the Odyssey is a historical text too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gotamangina View Post

I hate it when you're right and I'm not.

macc4 +

i don't have cat, it died

macc4's Avatar
Joined
Jan '08
Times thanked
< 1,209
Posts
12,423

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

Can you tell me if there's been any other hoax that's lasted so long?

buddha
ganesha
the rainbow serpent
zeus

all of which are just as 'credible' as your beloved jesus
Weinertron +

random shoutbox generator

Weinertron's Avatar
Joined
Sep '03
Times thanked
< 931
Posts
3,648

Quote:

Originally Posted by macc4 View Post

buddha
ganesha
the rainbow serpent
zeus


all of which are just as 'credible' as your beloved jesus


this is the crux of the issue imo. "Credibility". None of the main religions have ANY credibility when it comes to their big men in the sky. Ergo, all of these dieties should be given equal footing in schools.
Fuck Everything Forever
Geezah +

Raaaaaaaaaaaaarrghh

Geezah's Avatar
Joined
Sep '03
Times thanked
< 1,658
Posts
12,196

Quote:

Originally Posted by macc4 View Post

buddha
ganesha
the rainbow serpent
zeus

all of which are just as 'credible' as your beloved jesus

I would say that Jesus is more likely to be a credible or actual historical figure. I think a better corollary would be those gods you mention with the Christian, Jewish and Muslim, God.

Jesus though, may very well have existed as a physical human entity. This is something that could be scientifically validated (however unlikely). His claims accorded to him by the Bible about there being a transcendental deity, and he being the physical incarnation of that deity, as well as the Bibles contention that he was able to reanimate himself after dying, and then transmogrify back into spiritual form discarding his nom de plume Jesus, and sitting back once again, after regaining the powers of omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence, as just plain God, are things that science certainly can't validate because of their deliberate cheating of physics and chemistry.

Could I be more semantic? I don't think so.
Avatar artist: Dain Fagerholm
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591
Perhaps only a little clearer.

Jesus was a man. Evidence to support that.

Jesus as a God. A spiritual belief of Christians. Do you want proof that people believe that or that it should be believed? Either way, I don't think any of you respond to the "proof" because it's an apples oranges thing - scientific versus spiritual.

Bible as an historical text. Yes it is. Evidence otherwise?

Why bother teaching Hinduism, Judaism and Islam in religious education in a Christian country unless only for the sake of making sure the approach is balanced? I don't know, I wouldn't care for balance. What's the point. If we care about balance in religion, why don't we care about balance in PDHPE? Let's have classes on sex education, but to balance it we'll have homo sex-education classes, transgender sex education classes, etc. You see where this is going? Education is not about balance.

That's my stance. Why say it in ten paragraphs when you can say it in six.
jdoodle +

in on the killtaker

jdoodle's Avatar
Joined
Nov '01
Times thanked
< 2,202
Posts
16,874
we are not a christian country though, keep repeating lies doesnt make them true
and continue with your stupid strawman examples, your position looks weaker by the post
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." John Stuart Mill
Geezah +

Raaaaaaaaaaaaarrghh

Geezah's Avatar
Joined
Sep '03
Times thanked
< 1,658
Posts
12,196

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

1. Perhaps only a little clearer.

2. Jesus was a man. Evidence to support that.

3. Jesus as a God. A spiritual belief of Christians. Do you want proof that people believe that or that it should be believed? Either way, I don't think any of you respond to the "proof" because it's an apples oranges thing - scientific versus spiritual.

4. Bible as an historical text. Yes it is. Evidence otherwise?

5. Why bother teaching Hinduism, Judaism and Islam in religious education in a Christian country unless only for the sake of making sure the approach is balanced? I don't know, I wouldn't care for balance. What's the point. If we care about balance in religion, why don't we care about balance in PDHPE? Let's have classes on sex education, but to balance it we'll have homo sex-education classes, transgender sex education classes, etc. You see where this is going? Education is not about balance.

That's my stance. Why say it in ten paragraphs when you can say it in six.

1. What?

2. Jesus may very well have existed, but there is no actual physical evidence of that existence, other than he was written about in the Bible.

3. The Bible is an historical text. It isn't necessarily a text of recorded actual history. Some events are likely to have occurred, some events may be pure fabrications of the authors i.e. some events, people have corroborating evidence from other historical authors that have survived.

4. We aren't, and never have been, a Christian nation officially (nor in reality). As I have said previously, Christianity is now in competition with other religions as a source of faith; and religion is now in competition with science for matters relating to materialism, and other philosophies such as humanism, secularism etc, for matters relating to morals and ethics. It is no longer necessary, if it ever was, to read the Bible, Torah, or Qu'ran to become an ethical and moral person.

I would teach all faiths and religions because it is part of a broader education which instills knowledge in children so they can understand how we got to where we are, as well as being able to interpret the world they are in. It isn't necessary for children to be taught to have belief in any of these religions for these religions to impart some sense of knowledge onto them.

And what kind of ridiculous and specious analogy you create with sex education, and whether it should somehow explain the physical nature of homosexual or transgender intercourse. Sex education is about teaching kids the positives from practicing safe sex. Although it could, in years 11 and 12 begin to discuss in a mature fashion that there are different kinds of sexual attraction and that these differences as long as entered into consentually should be respected. It doesn't have to turn into some tawdry, sleazey and childish discussion like you seem to imply that it would.
Avatar artist: Dain Fagerholm
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdoodle View Post

we are not a christian country though, keep repeating lies doesnt make them true
and continue with your stupid strawman examples, your position looks weaker by the post

If you'd be more specific I'd know what you're talking about.
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geezah View Post

And what kind of ridiculous and specious analogy you create with sex education, and whether it should somehow explain the physical nature of homosexual or transgender intercourse. Sex education is about teaching kids the positives from practicing safe sex. Although it could, in years 11 and 12 begin to discuss in a mature fashion that there are different kinds of sexual attraction and that these differences as long as entered into consentually should be respected. It doesn't have to turn into some tawdry, sleazey and childish discussion like you seem to imply that it would.

Stop trolling! Are you serious?

I was not even suggesting that we should do that. I'm showing you how absurd your ideas are yet you still think that it'd be a good and viable idea to do it! I didn't imply anything but the absurdity of your "balance in education" theory. The inference is your own.

And do you have any understanding of history? Of course there's things that have been passed on, re-written, all of it. Welcome to the last 7000 years of history you incompetent fool
big eddie +

Got soju?

big eddie's Avatar
Joined
Jan '03
Times thanked
< 15,474
Posts
49,998
I think you'll find that current sex ed classes do discuss issues of homosexuality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gotamangina View Post

I hate it when you're right and I'm not.

horst +

Registered User

horst's Avatar
Joined
Sep '02
Times thanked
< 414
Posts
5,444
Fewison are you signalling me to give you an infraction and close this thread?
If not then stop baiting people with insults.
esoteric31 +

errs on the side of awesome.

esoteric31's Avatar
Joined
Sep '02
Times thanked
< 49
Posts
10,518
The Bible is an historic text which is profoundly ahistoric. Teleology, in the "Fullness of Time" etc

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balls Deep View Post

Not this tart again

Geezah +

Raaaaaaaaaaaaarrghh

Geezah's Avatar
Joined
Sep '03
Times thanked
< 1,658
Posts
12,196

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fewsion View Post

Stop trolling! Are you serious?

I was not even suggesting that we should do that. I'm showing you how absurd your ideas are yet you still think that it'd be a good and viable idea to do it! I didn't imply anything but the absurdity of your "balance in education" theory. The inference is your own.

And do you have any understanding of history? Of course there's things that have been passed on, re-written, all of it. Welcome to the last 7000 years of history you incompetent fool

Whatever dude. You know what I find really fucking annoying about this whole argument? Me. I can't understand why I have wasted so much time debating this with you. It's not your fault, it's entirely my own.

But at least I am now aware of this stupidity. Balance in education? Pfffft, what was I thinking? Teaching kids to learn to think for themselves and to constantly be thinking about their convictions, what a sinister and evil ideal to be encouraging .
Avatar artist: Dain Fagerholm
Fewsion +

Registered troll

Fewsion's Avatar
Joined
Oct '03
Times thanked
< 96
Posts
3,591

Quote:

Originally Posted by horst View Post

Fewison are you signalling me to give you an infraction and close this thread?
If not then stop baiting people with insults.

Signal this.
Reply

« Previous Thread Next Thread »

Posting Rules

+
    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts