Last night I listened to ABC 774 on this very topic.

The concerns were about a moral frame work for children to live by and aspire to. In a nutshell, all the guests were Christian and saw the only way for decent moral values to be taught to children was through Christianity - no other religion, no other set of ideologies such as through philosophy or the teaching of basic ethics. As far as many of the Christians interviewed the only way was through "accepting Jesus into their lives".

As a perfectly decent, moral, compassionate NON-Christian this attitude is deeply offensive. However, people like Philo listening to even the relatively mild program of John Cleary's would have had their prejudices confirmed.

I like John Cleary and wished he had challenged a couple of his guests a little more regarding moral values only being accessible through a single source such as Christianity.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/europe/stories/s3288400.htm

If an intelligent man like Cleary cannot be more inclusive (or respectful) of the beliefs of other people, what hope do we have with those like Philo?

We wind up with such fundamentalists calling non-religious, communists and worse. Hardly an example of high moral standing that they like to proclaim for their religion. Completely at odds with the teachings of Jesus, Buddha or other prophets.

This McCarthyist idea that if you don’t believe in a deity, then you must necessarily be a communist, came about because the West - America in particular - felt the need to separate themselves from communists in one way or another and so they scratched around and eventually found something…

“We’re not like those evil communists because, um, because, um… oh yeah! Because we believe in god. Yes, yes… that sounds good!”

And thus the unconstitutional requirement for money to be printed with the words, “In God we Trust”.

What a warped reality people must have lived in, in the 50’s when believing in something for which there is no evidence and even in the face of evidence to the contrary, was the only way to prevent one’s self from concluding that therefore the working class must seize political power internationally through a social revolution to expropriate the capitalist classes around the world and place the productive capacities of society into collective ownership.

According to some here anyway.

How anyone can not spot the glaring non sequitur there is beyond me.

Ammonite,
Talk about closed minded. I have never called non-christians communists.

The doctrine that the State is a better life teacher of children than parents, violates the rights of the parent. It espouses the teaching of communist doctrine.

Having had experience with secular counsellors of youth in the street in recent years. While several of us from Church were approached by the local Chamber of Commerce we run a programme for youth on the steet after the Council closed a park to the consumption of alcohol. The youth would congreate in the grand stand and shoot drugs and consume alcohol then go on rampage of destruction of local shops.

We run a programme called the Zone which was a drop in centre for kids wandering the streets on the weekend. It was a games centre with free bbq and drinks and local bands. In the summer we held battle of the bands with the local Mayor presenting the winning band with $200 cash prize.

On several nights we had secular counsellors employed by the Government from a nearby Youth counselling service come in the talk to the teenagers at the Zone. One night they dristributed condoms, their advise was be sure you use condoms when having sex. No restraint relationship advise was given on respect for others bodies. The boys used the condoms alright as water bombs. In fact one older one were heard saying he would not use condoms as his 17 year old girlfriend wanted to get pregnant. On another night their counsell was on the responsible drinking of alcohol where they distributed measures glasses identifying limits - none of the youth took them home. These counsellors from the Youth Centre distributed syringes and pregnancy tests at their drop in Centre.

Supposedly good advise paid for by secular idiology.

Spot the contradiction:

>> Talk about closed minded. I have never called non-christians communists.

The doctrine that the State is a better life teacher of children than parents, violates the rights of the parent. It espouses the teaching of communist doctrine. <<

1. Parents are not prevented from teaching their children their religion or values, never have been. In fact parents are free to home-school if they wish.

2. State education is for everyone, not just Christians. If you believe this is some kind of communist plot - where is your evidence? Public schools have been teaching children for over 200 years. Australia remains a version of democracy allied with capitalism - nowhere near communism.

3. Your anecdote, while interesting does not a summer make. In other words, if condoms were handed out to young people without adequate information, then indeed it was a nonsense. However your single experience does not prove that condoms are routinely handed out without corresponding education.

For example:

http://www.fpv.org.au/teaching-resources/

I would posit that it is religious fundamentalist who are less likely to educate the correct use of condoms, the prevention of STD's, pregnancy and so on than the government Youth Counsellors.

I liked the second last paragraph of your last post, Philo. It’s a good example of why the rate of abortions and teen pregnancies tend to increase with the more religious a society is.

http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

AJ Philips,
These children were not in any way religious or from Church families. They were neglected street kids! Your analogy is non existent.