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 > God and the Democrats > Comments

God and the Democrats : Comments

By Ted Witham, published 5/9/2006

In most government schools today, the critical teaching of 'world religions' is taught poorly, if at all.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
it is unhelpful to start with the assumption that it is necessary to have spiritual teaching in schools. This is not so. We need studies in ethics, philosophy and comparative religion, but the last thing we need is one religion [posing as spirituality whatever that is]indoctrinating children with their brand of supernaturalism.
The worst aspect of this it that parents have to write a letter to opt out of the classes. This is seldom made clear and opting out is often punished by forcing those students to do unattractive activities. Thus many students are forced into classes to learn that although we live in a natural world, there is an invisible, supernatural world that no one had ever seen, for which there is no evidence, which is ruled by a superman who not only made the universe and all that’s in it, but also knows every breath and thought and deed of every human on the planet, weighs them up and judges them according to an unknowable system of ‘justice’….
Such palpable nonsense has no place in an institute of learning, and to call it spiritual is simple minded.
Posted by ybgirp, Tuesday, 5 September 2006 11:53:48 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
I can't remember what prompted me, but I did actually start to complete the survey referred to in the article. I found it difficult to work with, because the answer options available were not those that I would describe as either natural or intuitive.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of religious education, issuing such questionnaires, and presumably (if the answers suit their book) publishing the results at some point in the future, does not advance their cause one iota.

The use of data based on answers to blatantly skewed questions can only diminish their reputation for honesty.

But of course, they are a political party.

Ignore this post.
Posted by Pericles, Tuesday, 5 September 2006 12:17:50 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
If the Democrats get their way they will only help the private schools continue to burst at the seams.We see the evidence of godless based education in schools today. It is no wonder when children are not taught about their Creator that they often lack purpose, morals and a reason to live. Secular religion has shown that it can not replace the God vacumm in every one of us. It leads to more drug use, more self indulgence, more immorality, more suicide, more abortions etc,etc,etc. To compare all religions as the same is total ignorance. I wonder how many of the kids of the dimishing Democrats attend Christian based schools. The sooner the democrats disappear the better.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 5 September 2006 1:24:13 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
That the teaching of various religions, would be a good thing.

All I would emphasize is that the FOUNDER of each faith be placed under microscopic scrutiny and that this be linked to his/her claims about his/her position in regard to that faith.

I SHUDDER to think that just the 'main teachings' of a faith made it to the blackboard without FULL information about the founders.

UNLIMITED SEX
After listing all the various categories of woman Mohamed could have sex with (including cousins) Surah 33:50 makes this statement:

"and a believing woman if she offers herself to the Prophet, and the Prophet wishes to marry her; a privilege for you only, not for the (rest of) the believers"

DOES ANYONE SEE THIS ? "for u only...but NOT for the believers"

Sounds like 'man' in all his carnality speaking to me.

"REVELATIONS of CONVENIENCE"
This man used his revelations to give him an 'open slather'sexual policy and is it any wonder that various biographies say he had between 13 and 21 wives and who knows how many captive slave girls.

The moral permissiveness and promiscuity is not hidden by the word 'marraige' or.. 'Allah makes lawful' but are EXPOSED by the 'for you alone, not for the believers'

His marraige of his adopted sons wife, who had to divorce her so mohamed could 'have' her, is described like this:

37 [We gave her to you in marriage, so that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the believers in respect of (the marriage of) the wives of their adopted sons]

So, presumably, extending this logic to ALL that mohamed did, we can safely assume that he married a 6 yr old girl to show us how this is OK with Allah.

It should not surprise anyone that the violence and hatred which emerges from many Muslims who don't like the 'prophet' to be insulted.
(I'm sure Ivan Milat also does not like the term 'Serial Killer')

Why ? because they are brought face to face with the ugliness and decadence of their own position in following such a man.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Tuesday, 5 September 2006 1:36:55 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 agree with the first post. If religion is taught in schools, then surely it can only really be taught in the context of history or social science as something which some people do sometimes.

Ethics and philosophy can stand on their own as areas for study without needing an explicitly religious framework, particularly not one which takes as its starting point an irrational belief in a omniscient omnipresent omnipotent ghost.

I think students should be taught to respect the religions of other people; but this in itself is about learning a wider respect for the practices of other peoples.

The author's concern about RE seems to be that if it is withdrawn, there will not be a skilled base for religious instruction left behind. I think he is right. I just don't see it as a problem.

In the alternative, of course, you could make an even more wild jump and have all religions offered - with secularism as an explicit alternative - to schools on the same basis, instead of giving Christianity a free kick. Let little Billy do a course in Christianity this semester, Buddhism next semester, Islam the following semester, and secularism last of all.
Posted by Anth, Tuesday, 5 September 2006 1:41:38 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
If by their actions shall ye know them, then many so-called Godless public schools are doing a sight more christian job of educating the neediest, the most difficult and the most disadvantaged kids in Australia than many of their private, religious counterparts. I have no problem with religious education in secular schools, as long as it is freely chosen. I also cannot see why humanists or athiests should not also be able to preach their gospel along with the others. However, I do think it should be an opt in rather than an opt out system. I allowed my daughters to attend Uniting Church scripture at their public school, because it is the only church not to make a fuss about women priests. When that RE teacher retired, I stopped them attending scripture - and they had to sit and watch videos instead! This is ridiculous, they should have learnt ethics or philosophy or comparative religions, or something.
I had made a decision of conscience about what I want my girls to be taught, no way would I allow them to sit in any class which believed they were somehow of lesser value than the boys they sat next to, yet my decision led to them wasting time. Imagine, for a moment, there was a church ( and there used to be in slave owning America) that thought black people were all very well but should never take leadership over white people. What would we think of black parents who sent their kids to such a scripture class? Well, I see it as being just the same regarding my daughters and all churches, except the Uniting Church. This is a rational position and deeply felt, yet my girls were inflicted with boredom because of it.
Posted by ena, Tuesday, 5 September 2006 1:45:26 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
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

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