How Are Atheists or Secularists Harming You, Your Kids or Your Country?

[icehorse]

I'm not clear what any of this has to do with a secular government. Fundamentalist beliefs have to be held with the same respect as other beliefs.

I'm not at all sure I need to respect beliefs that have no evidence to support them. Why should I?

If you believe (as some people do), that irrational numbers (like Pi), are the work of the devil, why on earth should I respect that belief? If you believe that you know of a magic book that's correct and that other people's magic books are incorrect - and hold all of these beliefs without any evidence, why should I respect any of these beliefs?

BTW, just because I don't respect a belief, it does NOT mean that I don't respect the person who holds the belief.

 

[Willamena]

No more Christmas trees at the mall or nativity scenes on public city parks or town centers.

Why?

 

[Willamena]

I'm not at all sure I need to respect beliefs that have no evidence to support them. Why should I?

If you believe (as some people do), that irrational numbers (like Pi), are the work of the devil, why on earth should I respect that belief? If you believe that you know of a magic book that's correct and that other people's magic books are incorrect - and hold all of these beliefs without any evidence, why should I respect any of these beliefs?

BTW, just because I don't respect a belief, it does NOT mean that I don't respect the person who holds the belief.

You don't have to be secular, there's no stipulation about that.

 

[Willamena]

In the specific case of education, it has plenty to do with secular government, as they are involved in the setting of curriculum.
Your comment about fundamentalist beliefs being held with the same respect as other beliefs is interesting to me. Respecting beliefs is a simple enough thing to do, right up until the point that different belief systems come into conflict with one another. If we work to key tenets that apply to all in equal fashion, then I would think you're actually talking about secularism.

Secularism is without regard to particular beliefs. To me, that means allowing respect for any beliefs. It's what I like most about Western cultures.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Depends on what you mean by secularism, and how you see that as manifesting. I don't want to see a rise in secularism, I want to see a rise of pluralism.

IMO, the best way to encourage pluralism is to encourage secularism. History has shown that when religions are given influence with governments, competing religions tend to suffer.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Secularism is without regard to particular beliefs. To me, that means allowing respect for any beliefs. It's what I like most about Western cultures.

I think it's nice in theory, but I'm not sure what you are seeing as the practical implication of this theory.
For example, if you're responsible for science curriculum in schools, what role does creationism play?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No more Christmas trees at the mall or nativity scenes on public city parks or town centers.

I'm fine with Christmas trees at the mall - I just strip them of any religious connotations.

 

[Willamena]

I think it's nice in theory, but I'm not sure what you are seeing as the practical implication of this theory.
For example, if you're responsible for science curriculum in schools, what role does creationism play?

I'm not looking at a practical application at all, but if I were, it would be harmony and negotiation.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm not looking at a practical application at all, but if I were, it would be harmony and negotiation.

Personally, I see it as an unqualified negative if the science is negotiated out of school science curriculum.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I'm not looking at a practical application at all, but if I were, it would be harmony and negotiation.

No offence, but that's NOT practical. That's idealistic.
At some point, unfortunately, ideals are sullied. There are quite literally people who sit around making decisions about curriculum. One of those decisions (in America) seems to be whether creationism is included as part of the curriculum.

Offering harmony and negotiation as a solution does not assist in planning classroom curriculum for 2015.
*shrugs*

Would you include it or not?

 

[icehorse]

Secularism is without regard to particular beliefs. To me, that means allowing respect for any beliefs. It's what I like most about Western cultures.

I'm happy to live in a fairly secular country (the US). I wish it was more secular, but I understand I'm lucky to live here. I defend your right to believe whatever you want, as long as it doesn't impinge on my rights. But I'm under no obligation whatsoever to respect what you believe.

I do not respect religious beliefs - period. If you are a religious person living in a secular country, then you must defend my right to think that your religious beliefs are silly.

I have horses. You might not respect my choice to have horses - you might think it's silly. And I defend your right to not respect what I believe about horses.

That's one of the things I like most about secular cultures.

 

[icehorse]

No offence, but that's NOT practical. That's idealistic.
At some point, unfortunately, ideals are sullied. There are quite literally people who sit around making decisions about curriculum. One of those decisions (in America) seems to be whether creationism is included as part of the curriculum.

Offering harmony and negotiation as a solution does not assist in planning classroom curriculum for 2015.
*shrugs*

Would you include it or not?

Allowing religious beliefs to influence science or math classes is a dangerously bad idea. To me it verges on a treasonous idea. I'd prefer to keep my country strong and a lot of that strength comes from our technological superiority. I'd also like to allow medical research to proceed unhampered by the religious beliefs of people in a few religious sects.

 

[Willamena]

No offence, but that's NOT practical. That's idealistic.

Idealistic is what I am before I look at harmony and negotiation and exercise their implementation. It's the belief that we can all get along. The implementation that makes it happen is quite practical.

At some point, unfortunately, ideals are sullied. There are quite literally people who sit around making decisions about curriculum. One of those decisions (in America) seems to be whether creationism is included as part of the curriculum.

Offering harmony and negotiation as a solution does not assist in planning classroom curriculum for 2015.
*shrugs*

Are you suggesting that offering harmony and negotiation doesn't achieve your particular goal? If so, you're probably right. It's end is to satisfy in part both parties.

Would you include it or not?

I believe I've already said I would.

 

[Willamena]

Allowing religious beliefs to influence science or math classes is a dangerously bad idea. To me it verges on a treasonous idea. I'd prefer to keep my country strong and a lot of that strength comes from our technological superiority. I'd also like to allow medical research to proceed unhampered by the religious beliefs of people in a few religious sects.

I'd agree that maths should remain strictly maths, but that's idealism.

 

[psychoslice]

No more Christmas trees at the mall or nativity scenes on public city parks or town centers.

Yes keep the tree and the nativity scenes, but lets bring something new into the picture, Christmas really is nothing to do with religion, well in most peoples mind, its just simply a fun time, nothing wrong with fun time, Oh yea.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Idealistic is what I am before I look at harmony and negotiation and exercise their implementation. It's the belief that we can all get along. The implementation that makes it happen is quite practical.

Nope. The implementation that makes it happen is quite impossible.
I'm an idealist, and I think ideals are important, and drive us. However, not all ideals are compatible, and harmony and negotiation cannot make them so.

Are you suggesting that offering harmony and negotiation doesn't achieve your particular goal? If so, you're probably right. It's end is to satisfy in part both parties.

That's compromise, and I'm not talking about my goals in particular. Group A wants Christian literal Creationism taught in science classrooms, and Group B doesn't. There is nothing to suggest that these two groups can be brought to a point of compromise.

I believe I've already said I would.

Then I missed that. But how do you justify teaching creationism in a science classroom when it is not a scientific theory? And what happens when if a Native American group wants their creation stories taught alongside?

 

[Willamena]

Nope. The implementation that makes it happen is quite impossible.

We disagree.

That's compromise, and I'm not talking about my goals in particular. Group A wants Christian literal Creationism taught in science classrooms, and Group B doesn't. There is nothing to suggest that these two groups can be brought to a point of compromise.

Sure there is. Create a third class. The present breakdown of educational classifications needn't hold.

Oh, wait. There's that idealism again.

 

[icehorse]

We disagree.

Sure there is. Create a third class. The present breakdown of educational classifications needn't hold.

Oh, wait. There's that idealism again.

Perfect! Let's compromise and turn science into not-science. I'm sorry, let's NOT compromise on things that should not be compromised on.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

We disagree.

Sure, but if we keep working at it we'll reach a point of harmony...

Sure there is. Create a third class. The present breakdown of educational classifications needn't hold.

Oh, wait. There's that idealism again.

Yup, that's right, it's idealism again.
At some point, idealism needs to actually become pragmatic action. The reason I harp on about the 2015 science curriculum is it is a simple example of something with a hard deadline and a practical impact. 'Harmony', 'negotiation' and this concept of a 'third class' are all well and good, but in no way do they illustrate how your idealism would impact on reality, or actual decision impacting on the classroom.

I am completely in favour of harmony and negotiation. I'm also quite idealistic, and generally optimistic. However, I'll readily admit that you'll never reach consensus positions on everything. I am completely at a loss as to how you could think differently, to be honest.

To take an overly idealistic position whilst not being able to apply this to a practical situation means that your ideals will remain divorced from decisions being made. In effect, your decision becomes non-action. To effect action, you need to determine the best way of applying your idealistic viewpoint, which is (I would readily admit) very difficult and frustrating to do. In this particular case, if you believe inclusion of creationism to science curriculum can be catered for, whilst building harmony between all sides, I'd suggest you're mistaken.

If I'm misunderstanding you, on the other hand, more than happy to be clarified.

 

[Thruve]

I'm fine with Christmas trees at the mall - I just strip them of any religious connotations.

Jesus. Your one of those guys.
Disgusting. No respect, but I bet you like it that way love ya