So much fuss over a bit of kumbayah and colouring in pictures of a very white looking Jesus. Maybe he stayed inside a lot.

Some old guy who looks like Obi Wan tells a few fables about being nice to people and weird stuff about snakes and magic tricks and it's going to result in a bunch of homophobic paedophiles? Come on man!

Man I did all that, and I'm no believer. Mustn't work very well.

Nothing to fear here people.

Man, people love the hyperbowl!

Speaking of which, a few trend-driven humanists with a fresh book from Dawkins under their arm, gather together a few people pissed off they cant afford the catholic school down the road create a petition to make a little humanist ethics program to run in competition against the Obi Wans and you'd think the Worlds falling in.

Get a grip people.

I'd sum up the whole SRI with 'Mostly Harmless'.

The most effective stance is to forget the whole thing. No ethics, no comparative religion, no SRI, and just ALL children sit there glued to the TV watching Better Homes and Gardens.

We need Comsumers!

Better still, lets realise the fears of both parties as punishment. I want all the atheist parented kids to endure The Passion of the Christ, and all Christian kids to watch Al Jazeera videos of masked terrorists beheading western hostages in Iraq.

Houellebecq: "So much fuss over a bit of kumbayah and colouring in pictures of a very white looking Jesus. Maybe he stayed inside a lot."

H., I'd like you to go through this list and check off what you have *not* used thus far -

http://www.searchlores.org/schopeng.htm

What you have also *not* used is any actual valid, reasoned argument. I now have no doubt in my mind whatsoever. You are a trained, card carrying ACL shill - you and countless others like you spend vast amounts of time doing little more than poisoning and derailing debate on this subject on any forum that gives you the chance to do so.

You do not listen. You do not contribute. You just derail with nonsense.

Let me ask you a question - what would baby jesus think of your behaviour?

And A here comes the judge..lol...[ picture a angry fat woman with army boots on, walking very fast in your direction:) Watch out Mr Dawkins.

"homophobic paedophiles..you'll have to see a Catholic priest about that one Houellebecq. lol. and what are those truuue Australian values again?

If your problems are with questions beyond your understanding....its alright....we understand:)

The most effective stance is to forget the whole thing. No ethics, no comparative religion, no SRI, and just ALL children sit there glued to the TV watching Better Homes and Gardens.

A posed to Adam & EVE and the snake..lol

Sorry! I have to run to the toilet....lol....

LEA

Houel is realistic about what affects children in different ways is all. I’ve not ever viewed any poison in his contributions and opinions to discussions. Houel has certainly derailed me before with his sense of humour and some very clever insights on various topics.

I want religion out of schools and back in churches (mosques wateva) where religious parents can choose to take their young ones. I don’t want tax dollars going to specific religions for any reason in any public sector. I do want children to be taught generally about religions.

I think I just said shuddup about our Houel but yes I agree about the other stuff Franc but I’ll go off and learn more about winning arguments now.

Hey, Franc - I can't think of anyone on this forum less likely to be a card-carrying ACL member than Houellie...he's probably sitting at his desk right now unable to type because of laughter.

He likes to give an alternative take on things is all.

But, yeah, Houellie, if it's that harmless (useless) why spend money on it that could be targeted toward a more relevant purpose?

Poirot,

Reading through all of this and there have been multiple accusations of "troll" aimed at, and only at, the posters that have an issue with these indoctrination programs. One would assume that's only because the accusers have already said "militant" 5 times and want variety.

There is a huge difference between "devil's advocacy" and "derailing", which is more akin to actual "trolling" - the generation of noise through statements that a person doesn't necessarily mean, but make with the knowledge that they will inflame and distract. If what you say about Houellebecq is indeed correct, then the only person in this discussion guilty of "trolling" is him. Playing a devil's advocate enhances and broadens discussion, and does require a modicum of intellect to carry off. Houlle falls flat on all acounts.