The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > When freedom of religion becomes bullying > Comments

When freedom of religion becomes bullying : Comments

By Dan Haesler, published 3/5/2012

The federal government could be complicit in the institutionalised bullying of GLBT children and adults across Australia.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Gay people are now viewed as heroes in pop culture, by academics, and by mainstream media, e.g. the lesbian contestant in Biggest Loser is presented as the woman all young girls should want to be when they grow up. Lady Gaga is very supoortive of gays, as is the show Glee and almost every popular TV show or movie includes gays that are portrayed as the 'ideal' person. Gays are given discounts on motels and restaurants, and also favoured over straights in recruitment.

But it's outrageous to say that non-Christians should teach Christian kids about the Bible/ ethics/ morals/ values at a Christian school. The US Supreme Court recently ruled 9-0 that the State has absolutely no right to go anywhere near the Church when it comes to the hiring of staff. Does Australia want to join China and North Korea as the only countries that oppress religious freedom in this way?
Posted by progressive pat, Thursday, 3 May 2012 10:00:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The proponents of religion have had a free ride for far too long. They have been given unfettered access to children who they brainwash relentlessly.

It is time children were protected from their parents and religious institutions until they are in their mid-teens when they have sufficient maturity to consider the matter.

Children should also be protected from the more extreme views of gays and lesbians too until they are of an age to properly consider the implications and ramifications of such things.

Children should be treated as children and not as pawns in adult games!

http://www.dangerouscreation.com
Posted by David G, Thursday, 3 May 2012 10:28:57 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
An excellent article. It displays the sort of rational and liberal thinking that those of the religious right are incapable of when making moral judgements based on an often immoral belief system. The author has highlighted their bigotry and hypocrisy.
Posted by Neil of Ipswich, Thursday, 3 May 2012 11:19:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We stand almost alone as the only democracy without a bill of human rights. The problems for so-called "Christian" schools has been the horrendous level of child sex abuse it has almost routinely covered up, with the offenders simply "FORGIVEN" and moved to another school district, often time and again? Where they then re-offend again and again?
If we applied today's "Christian" judgemental attitudes to Jesus, we would almost certainly exclude him as well; given he seemed to associate with; and or, prefer the almost exclusive company of males, which likely would have branded him as gay?
One can study his teachings for a lifetime; and nowhere can one find in either word, deed or example, where he has advocated either celibacy or gay bashing.
In fact, he reportedly said, let he who is without sin cast the first stone!
Irrefutable solid science informs us that different sexual orientation, obvious throughout nature, is created in the womb rather than through any element of choice. There are none so blind---
Gays could confound this patent and other discriminations, by conspiring to join up as seeming hetro couples, all while living essential, if very discreet, separate sexual lives. Perhaps in duplexes, with a connecting door?
And then applying for private school teaching jobs, in-vitro outcomes or adoption etc/etc?
I believe that any church and or religious school simply doesn't have any self appointed right whatsoever; to enquire into their employees sexual orientation; bedroom activities or athletics; or discriminate against difference, least they repeat history and persecute or crucify the gentlest, most caring and kindest amongst us.
Whatever you do to the least among you, you also do to me!
It would make a very nice and extremely overdue change, if the eternally moralising puritanical hypocrites finally started practising what they preach?
And wouldn't that be a very pleasant and extremely long overdue change! Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Thursday, 3 May 2012 11:26:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am so fed up with minorities taking on Christianity, as though it were the source of all oppression and injustice.

Organised religion is by definition prescriptive and discriminating; and the biggest, baddest religion of all is Islam.

The day I see one of these minority groups take on Islam I'll take them seriously. Until then they are just cowards and hypocrites.
Posted by cohenite, Thursday, 3 May 2012 11:34:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I know that it is futile to argue with people like Progressive Pat, but just for the record I will say this. Homosexuality is something you are born with. You can't be brainwashed into becoming homosexual. If Pat thinks that young heterosexual males and females, with hormones raging, are going to abandon their desire for members of the opposite sex just because they've seen some homosexuals on TV then he/she has got rocks in his/her head.

As for churches being able to employ whoever they want, I will consider that when they no longer receive massive tax breaks and large amounts of public monies to run their schools.
Posted by Neil of Ipswich, Thursday, 3 May 2012 11:54:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
" The problems for so-called "Christian" schools has been the horrendous level of child sex abuse it has almost routinely covered up, with the offenders simply "FORGIVEN" and moved to another school district, often time and again? Where they then re-offend again and again?"

Rhrosty at his emotive, exaggerating best: " horrendous level of child sex abuse", " almost routinely covered up", " offenders simply "FORGIVEN"".

It is acknowledged that there have been instances of this sexual abuse and administrative failure in immediately dealing with the offenders. The offenders concerned duly have been brought to justice. More appropriate policies for dealing promptly with complaints have since been implemented.

Although the offenders accounted for a very small percentage of staff, and the incidence of sexual abuse in Christian schools is no higher than in public schools, media bias results in far more prominence being given to such cases when Christian schools are involved. Sexual abuse cases in public schools receive little media coverage.
Posted by Raycom, Thursday, 3 May 2012 12:55:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As a matter of record, Paedophiles offending in public schools; once outed, were routinely reported, convicted and even served time, whereas, the situation applying to Christian schools, were routine cover ups or offending preachers and teachers relocated, sometimes abroad, where they were then able to re-offend with virtual impunity?
Those defending the indefendable and all too often common outcome, are it seems, routinely dismissive?
Almost as if the thousands of shattered lives, and the suicides, were of little moment or consequence, in comparison to the public outing of offenders, criminal liability and adequate compensation? Even just one shattered life or one suicide is one too many! Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Thursday, 3 May 2012 1:19:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Secular dogma has led to suicide among teenagers, drug usage, sexual immorality, perversion, family breakup, a flood of porn. Now they want to stick their nose into telling those who teach and model some decent values to their kids. They must hate the fact that parents are voting with their feet and money. I would go to jail before allowing the homosexual lobby access to my kids. They should be learning from what is working rather than imposing their failed dogma and lack of morality on Christian churches. Tackle the Islamic faith and stop being gutless cowards.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 3 May 2012 1:49:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cohenite: "The day I see one of these minority groups take on Islam I'll take them seriously. Until then they are just cowards and hypocrites."

I think you can rest assured that if Islam ever acquires, or even looks like acquiring, the control of the Australian political process that has long been enjoyed by Christian religions, those who maintain the good fight against religious domination will include Islam among their targets.

Would it be expecting too much to ask you to withdraw your "cowards and hypocrites" hyperbole?
Posted by GlenC, Thursday, 3 May 2012 1:54:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I support gay equality and would be far happier if the churches did too, not only in recruitment policies but also in allowing openly gay priests and supporting and conducting gay marriages. The questions Dan addresses to the advocates of discrimination are important ones – how can discriminating against gays and excluding them from the community be consistent with the Christian message of love and inclusion?

But .. I think Dan’s article mixes up two questions – are Christian organisations right to discriminate against gays? And, should they have the right to impose conditions on people they employ based on their beliefs? I’d answer a firm "no" to the first question, but the second is more complex.

This second question is about what to do when two sets of rights are in conflict – the right of religious schools to select staff who reflect the values and beliefs the schools are established to promote, against the right of teachers who do not accept or live by those values and beliefs to work in religious schools. The author say people should be free to practice their religion “So long as that in doing so, it does not impinge on anyone else's rights or wellbeing.” Religious schools will doubtless argue that having gay teachers impinges on their rights and their students’ rights to be taught by appropriate role models who reflect the values of the institutions where they teach.

Both parties have rights; the question is whose rights should prevail in the instance of a conflict, and by what criteria should we judge. The article begs these questions by simply assuming the answers.
Posted by Rhian, Thursday, 3 May 2012 3:02:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good article. Churches should be able to discriminate against whoever they like, but schools that receive public money should not. My taxes go to pay the wages of teachers at these schools. However, as an atheist I would not qualify for a job in one, regardless of how good or well qualified a teacher I might be.
Could you imagine a situation where a school refused to hire a teacher on the basis that they were a Christian? There would be a public out cry and rightfully so.
Either everyone should be able to act on their conscience and discriminate against those peoples whose life styles or belief systems they disagree with, or no-one should. This hypocrisy must end.
Posted by Rhys Jones, Thursday, 3 May 2012 3:07:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For a long time I have been saying that the only way to protect religious freedoms is to protect ALL freedoms.

There should be no discrimination - EVERYONE should be able to employ whoever (and only whoever) they like and accept as students into their private school whoever (and only whoever) they want, both for any reason whatsoever (or even for no reason at all).

I agree with both Progressive Pat and Neil of Ipswich: NOBODY should receive government funds for schooling - it would be most hypocritical for religious schools to depend on the devil for their operations.

I commend Rhys Jones's last reply: "Either everyone should be able to act on their conscience and discriminate against those peoples whose life styles or belief systems they disagree with, or no-one should. This hypocrisy must end.", but answer unequivocally that EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ACT ON THEIR CONSCIENCE.

As people like David G. are seeking to "protect children from their parents", it is important that families are able to protect themselves and their children from the bad influences of secular society, but that is doomed if the government's divide-and-conquer tactics succeed, if people are split for example along petty denominational lines, such as Christianity against Islam and Islam against Christianity as we can see on this very thread; or over personal issues such as sexual orientation. Everyone should be united against the vicious onslaught of the state's humanism.

Finally, the author exposed his bias and intellectual dishonesty by inciting against innocent people, accusing them of "bullying" without proving or bringing a single example to fit that description.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Thursday, 3 May 2012 3:24:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
GlenC says:

"you can rest assured that if Islam ever acquires, or even looks like acquiring, the control of the Australian political process that has long been enjoyed by Christian religions, those who maintain the good fight against religious domination will include Islam among their targets"

That is a lie; one only has to look at the infiltration of Islam into European nations to see that the left and those who take pot-shots at Christianity and indeed democracy, not only do not oppose Islam but actually side with it on the reprehensible and self-destructive basis that the enemy of enemy is my friend.

Further to that in none of the Islamist nations of the world where women are nothing more than chattels and portable wombs do Western feminists, who enjoy all the liberation a modern Western capitalist democracy can offer, raise a peep in protest for the plight of their 'sisters'; in fact when courageous souls like Ayaan Hirsi Ali come to Australia they are scorned by the feministas and the left; see:

http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/qed/2010/07/ayaan-hirsi-ali-and-left-loathing

So not only will I not withdraw my comment that people like the author of this piece and the left in general are "cowards and hypocrites", I will also call them gutless.
Posted by cohenite, Thursday, 3 May 2012 5:25:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@cohenite: "That is a lie; one only has to look at the infiltration of Islam into European nations to see that the left and those who take pot-shots at Christianity and indeed democracy, not only do not oppose Islam but actually side with it on the reprehensible and self-destructive basis that the enemy of enemy is my friend."

Er... how many atheist blogs have you actually read? Because I can't think of one that takes 'pot-shots' at Christianity and does not oppose Islam. If you can, name it.

Citation needed, please.
Posted by Jon J, Thursday, 3 May 2012 8:59:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@Progressive Pat: "Gay people are now viewed as heroes in pop culture, by academics, and by mainstream media, e.g. the lesbian contestant in Biggest Loser is presented as the woman all young girls should want to be when they grow up. Lady Gaga is very supoortive of gays, as is the show Glee and almost every popular TV show or movie includes gays that are portrayed as the 'ideal' person."

Makes a nice change from footballers and cricketers, then, doesn't it?

But the principle you are trying to dodge here is that the people who foot the bills should have a say in how the money is spent: and as long as faith schools accept government money -- and boy, do they ever! -- they should be obliged to follow the same government rules as everybody else.

All we really want is consistency. No special favours for anyone's Imaginary Friend, even if they close their eyes and imagine REALLY hard.
Posted by Jon J, Thursday, 3 May 2012 9:03:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JonJ:

"Citation needed, please."

I gave an example; YOU provide a citation of what you claim.

And note I said the left not atheist.
Posted by cohenite, Thursday, 3 May 2012 9:07:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is a classic anti-christian argument - attributing intolerance to Christian schools without a single mention about the viciously vindictive intolerance displayed by gay rights activists. Who, incidentally are the greatest bullies in the modern public space. Why would you think less than 1.6% of the Australian population should dictate to the Christian population of Australia what they can or cannot believe. We are continually told that homosexuality is a state of birth when none of the recent twin or other studies have managed to prove the truth of that. If interviewing thousands of identical twins cannot prove this why on earth should we believe it. We are continually told that the gay lobbying is about equality when the reality that it is realistically about restricting the freedom of others to the extent that no-one is allowed to disapprove of their sexual habits without living in fear of the law. If you disagree with this then you need to look at the plight of people in USA where the lifestyle is forced on the population whether they like it or no. Primary school children are given sex education by transgendered, and gay people and parents are not allowed to have them opt out. Anyone who disagrees in any way lives under the hammer of the law. The right to have an opinion is removed - the right to disagree is removed - the right to educate your child in the way you choose is removed - the right to speak about your beliefs is removed. This is not hypothetical this is the way of life for majorities who find themselves dominated by minorities in these states.
Posted by Rebekah, Thursday, 3 May 2012 9:17:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
well written Rebekkah
Posted by runner, Thursday, 3 May 2012 10:05:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
>>Why would you think less than 1.6% of the Australian population should dictate to the Christian population of Australia what they can or cannot believe.<<

They don't. And they never will because they can't: you can dictate how somebody acts but you can't dictate how they think. There is no way of reading peoples minds so there is no way to police belief.

>>We are continually told that the gay lobbying is about equality when the reality that it is realistically about restricting the freedom of others to the extent that no-one is allowed to disapprove of their sexual habits without living in fear of the law.<<

Fail. You can disapprove as much as you like. The law is absolutely silent on the subject of personal disapproval. Public disapproval is subject to the limitations which apply to all speech in Australia but those limitations are really very liberal.

What you're not allowed to do is discriminate. We have laws in place which apply to most workplaces that prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion, sexual orientation, race, gender and so on. It means that everybody has to be given equal consideration on the basis of their abilities. A business can't refuse to hire blacks because the owner is racist. Or refuse to hire women because the owner is a misogynist. Or refuse to hire Christians because the owner is a militant atheist. That all seems fair enough.

Isn't it fair enough that these schools abide by the same rules as everybody else? Why should they be above the law?

Cheers,

Tony
Posted by Tony Lavis, Friday, 4 May 2012 1:01:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Tony,

<<you can dictate how somebody acts but you can't dictate how they think. There is no way of reading peoples minds so there is no way to police belief.>>

That's now just a matter of time - technology is advancing fast.

<<What you're not allowed to do is discriminate.>>

So a bunch of bullies tell you that you must enter into a contract with someone else whom you don't want to have a contract with, or else they throw you in a little cell (or shoot you if you resist). How charming...

<<Isn't it fair enough that these schools abide by the same rules as everybody else?>>

No, it isn't - for those who are in the camp of those who legislated those rules it is easy and natural to follow, while for those in the camp opposite it is excruciatingly painful and counter to their moral values: how can you then state that it is fair?

<<Why should they be above the law?>>

Wrong question - why should they, or anybody else, be below the law in the first place?
Posted by Yuyutsu, Friday, 4 May 2012 5:59:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@cohenite "I gave an example; YOU provide a citation of what you claim.

And note I said the left not atheist."

Your 'example' is actually a comment from a right-wing publication. Did you read the original article?

Here's my first citation: http://www.atheistblogs.co.uk/ There's about thirty blogs there -- take your time.

And you said -- I quote -- "..the left AND those who take pot-shots at Christianity.."

Emphasis mine.

Back-pedal much?
Posted by Jon J, Friday, 4 May 2012 7:22:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JonJ; so Quadrant is a "right-wing" publication; that's it; nothing to say about the left's treatment of Ayaan or what Ayaan says about Islam?

Disgraceful!

As for atheists not criticising Christianity; you must be joking! Richard Dawkins, who I might add I used to respect until he came out in favour of AGW, is an atheist and he is scathing about Christianity; at least he is also even handed in respect of Islam which he calls "one of the great evils of the world".

I find Dawkin's belief in AGW immensely ironic; it just goes to show that the 'god-spot' is not dormant in even the most 'rational' individual.
Posted by cohenite, Friday, 4 May 2012 9:05:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cohenite,

Your slip is showing.

On the one hand you cite Dawkins to buttress your argument against Islam - as if he is someone whose views are pertinent and sagacious.....then you dismiss those which don't suit your agenda.

Dawkins is a man of science. Wonder of wonders that he recognises and supports real evidence regarding AGW
Posted by Poirot, Friday, 4 May 2012 9:15:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My slip is not showing; you and bonmot are the crossdressers around here.

I will concede my point about Dawkins was subtle so that is obviously why you missed it; to wit Dawkins is a rational man and self-declared atheist, yet he accepts the concept of AGW which is nothing more than a pseudo religious belief in which the Eden myth is repackaged and salted up with some modelling chicanery.

Incidentally, you said bonmot was up to speed on the AGW quackery; that is not true; the only thing he has presented is a bad impersonation of a teenager.

One paper, between you; that's 1/2 each.
Posted by cohenite, Friday, 4 May 2012 12:45:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cohenite,

Do you ever stop to think that Dawkins accepts the concept of AGW because it's not "....nothing more than a pseudo religious belief in which the Eden myth is repackaged and salted up with some modelling chicanery."

(Have you been receiving private tutorials from runner? - coz you're beginning to sound like one of his disciples)
Posted by Poirot, Friday, 4 May 2012 2:51:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Poirot stoops to demonisation when she loses the arguement. You certainly have become a disciple of the warmist religion as shown by your lack of reason.
Posted by runner, Friday, 4 May 2012 3:55:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner,

Poirot doesn't stoop to demonise (That is your department - remember?)....she stoops to conquer (n'all that).

I'm afraid you'll have to take cohenite in hand. He hasn't quite got the hang of runnerspeak - he didn't once utter the words: "dogma", high-priest","Christophobic", "hater", "self-righteous", "Godless", "perversion", "immoral", ...etc, etc, etc.

Not good enough, really.
Posted by Poirot, Friday, 4 May 2012 5:02:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<<Poirot doesn't stoop to demonise>>

Come come Runner, you misjudge her.
She never needed to "stoop", she always lurks there
Posted by SPQR, Saturday, 5 May 2012 7:06:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Enough of the name-calling already, it's tiresome and unproductive. Courtesy ladies and gentlemen.

Church schools receive funding from the State because they are doing the State's job - educating - and they generally do it better than the State schools (as evidenced in their success rates re achievement and university entries, and their increasing popularity with those who don't mind paying a little extra for excellence).

Anti-discrimination has a place, but it should not interfere mindlessly and at the expense of the pursuit of excellence and worthy outcomes. The spirit and the objective of laws and mores (and contracts) need to be observed, and not be overtaken by simplistic compliance with the 'letter' - or to satisfy possibly miscreant interests.

The best qualified applicant in any situation is a combination of qualities and aptitudes, determining 'fit' and suitability - as much determined by organisational charter, culture, composition, structure and objectives as by individual qualifications. No-one wants bulls in the china shop, or square pegs in round holes. All organisations should have reasonable leeway in determining that 'fit'.

As for bullying, this appears to be far more prevalent in State schools, and dare I say in society at large. The best schools provide good example, and should be enabled to continue so doing by means of a 'proven' formula - even if it means going against a political correctness run rampant.
Posted by Saltpetre, Saturday, 5 May 2012 5:49:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think that Dan is 100% correct, but for one detail. He seems to represent a growing liberal left sentiment that views their own values as valid and others as oppressive. I happen to be part of the progressive left, but as a democrat, know I must keep space for dissent, including values I reject. I strongly support equality for the gay community, and I reject bullying in every form. However, I cannot accept that a liberal take on this subject makes my superior to more conservative views I personally find offensive. I will fight, using my vote, to allow my view to become a majority view, but to call it bullying is liberal values becoming judgemental and arrogant. Why is this leftist sentiment gowing in intolerance?
Posted by Brian Kollin, Sunday, 6 May 2012 4:48:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think one needs to discern between what some Christians think (particularly the vocal hate mongers) and what Christ taught.

Gandhi had it right...

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ" - Gandhi
Posted by Valley Guy, Saturday, 12 May 2012 11:19:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm trying to follow the logic in Dan H's argument.

There are Christians who have schools in which they wish to educate their kids according to certain values. Dan H doesn't agree with those values and insists that they change their values to suit his wishes.

The government must force schools to adopt these values of Dan H. It seems the government must impose these values onto us to show how not to be bullies.
Posted by Dan S de Merengue, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 12:02:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dan Haesler, you say you prefer to keep out of theology. You also claim people have a right to freedom of worship. And I’d also agree with your sentiment that we have the right to pick and choose our beliefs, which I think is something to do with freedom of conscience.

I would encourage you along all of these paths. But the end result would be for you, as an unbeliever, to stop advising Christians on what they’re supposed to believe. Neither is it the role of the government to tell us what to believe. The government is not called upon to play this kind of role of social engineer.
Posted by Dan S de Merengue, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 9:18:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy