punished for beliefs in public school?

[Curious George]

There are two sides to every story. Not one. Balance. Not 50%. Not bias and hearing one side and complaint. "If" it were discovered this child was disciplined because of bullying other students, making fun of, making others kids cry... And the parents were extorting off of the vulnerable "religious" route, by stating the "religious" route were his grounds for disciple whereas he was bullying, and that were his grounds for discipline, then what? Would a 2nd grader start crying off of hearing a simple "I don't believe in God?" There "could" be more to it. You have no reason to believe otherwise because of the biased conclusions already come to off of 50% and one side. The other 50% are hypotheticals.

At this point in time, it would irrational to jump to conclusions. The only conclusion one can currently come to is that "if" the allegations are true and happened as such, then there is no place for that in schools. If they aren't true, there still is no place for that in schools.

If the court of law and public opinion makes their choices off of one side and 50%, is already set in stone... that is emotional thinking and not rational thinking.

Deriving hypotheticals from actual information is one thing. However the derivation that they could be just trying to get a pay day, only has merit if asking for relief is reasonable grounds to assert this proposition. It is not.

 

[outhouse]

Because the kid does "not believe in God".

Just because you cannot process the cognitive function of others thoughts, does not mean YOU get to dictate how they think.

The kid may very well have no belief about it, one way or the other.


I don't have a belief about god being mythology, I know the concept is.

Sorry, this is simple logic.

Ya but it is your personal logic, that does not apply to anyone else but you.

To us, your illogical in this sentiment.

 

[outhouse]

Deriving hypotheticals

Sorry but the legal reality here is in fact not hypothetical

 

[outhouse]

However the derivation that they could be just trying to get a pay day

Non sequitur.

The teacher was legally out of line. She will loose this one provided we don't have a YEC judge.

 

[Curious George]

Just because you cannot process the cognitive function of others thoughts, does not mean YOU get to dictate how they think.

The kid may very well have no belief about it, one way or the other.


I don't have a belief about god being mythology, I know the concept is.



Ya but it is your personal logic, that does not apply to anyone else but you.

To us, your illogical in this sentiment.

This is simple logic. This is following the rules of classical logic, if you cannot play by these rules don't play.

 

[Curious George]

Sorry but the legal reality here is in fact not hypothetical

He was speaking about what the rest of the story could be. Are you having trouble following?

 

[Curious George]

Non sequitur.

The teacher was legally out of line. She will loose this one provided we don't have a YEC judge.

I really think you need to look up the definition of non-sequitur.

I doubt it will go to a judge. I agree that the case does not look good for the defendants. I imagine that the school district will say she was acting outside the boundaries of her job and in contradiction to policy. Therefore, they will assert they should not be liable because they did everything reasonable to prevent this. I don't think that will win though

 

[outhouse]

This is following the rules of classical logic

Your opinion.

No one else's, and you seem to be the minority on this personal opinion of yours.

He was speaking about what the rest of the story could be

Does not change anything I posted. Your moving goal post

 

[Curious George]

Just because you cannot process the cognitive function of others thoughts, does not mean YOU get to dictate how they think.

The kid may very well have no belief about it, one way or the other.


I don't have a belief about god being mythology, I know the concept is.



Ya but it is your personal logic, that does not apply to anyone else but you.

To us, your illogical in this sentiment.

Are you suggesting that false does not equal not true?

Expressing what you know is merely expressing a conviction. It is still a belief.

 

[Curious George]

Your opinion.

My opinion, which happens to be true. Go ahead and dissect it.

No one else's, and you seem to be the minority on this personal opinion of yours.

This is a logical fallacy.

Does not change anything I posted. Your moving goal post

I am not moving the goal posts. They were always where they have been. You simply can't follow

 

[outhouse]

Expressing what you know is merely expressing a conviction. It is still a belief.

This is where personal logic fails.

the answer of 2, knowing the equation of 1 + 1 = 2, is not a belief.


Knowledge is not belief. and Lack of belief is not belief.


According to your logic, there is no such thing as lack of belief

 

[outhouse]

My opinion, which happens to be true.

Self proclaimed

. They were always where they have been. You simply can't follow

Follow your personal thought and logic pattern, no your right there. I cannot follow your methodology here.

 

[leibowde84]

Not true =false
Sorry, this is simple logic.

Yeah ... the logical fallacy of circular reasoning. My argument is that they aren't saying that God cannot exist ("not true"), they merely don't believe in God, but they don't hold the negation. They are without either belief.

 

[Curious George]

Yeah ... the logical fallacy of circular reasoning. My argument is that they aren't saying that God cannot exist ("not true"), they merely don't believe in God, but they don't hold the negation. They are without either belief.

God exists is the proposition we are looking at here. Is it true or false?

 

[Curious George]

Self proclaimed

Opposed to your proclamation of it being false? Forgive me if I don't take your word.

Follow your personal thought and logic pattern, no your right there. I cannot follow your methodology here.

 

[Curious George]

This is where personal logic fails.

the answer of 2, knowing the equation of 1 + 1 = 2, is not a belief.


Knowledge is not belief. and Lack of belief is not belief.


According to your logic, there is no such thing as lack of belief

1+1=2 is something I know. But this is also a belief. Perhaps you don't know the definition of belief either?

 

[Curious George]

Yeah ... the logical fallacy of circular reasoning. My argument is that they aren't saying that God cannot exist ("not true"), they merely don't believe in God, but they don't hold the negation. They are without either belief.

The statement God exists in classical logic must be true or false. The idea that one can "not believe in God" and not say that this position is either true or false comes from the unique situation where one does not have the ability to evaluate this proposition I.e. babies, rocks, strange man on island. Once given the capability of evaluating this proposition a person can either accept (true) or not accept (false) the proposition. The idea where someone doesn't accept the proposition, still has a weak affirmative belief. You cannot evaluate a proposition and not have belief.

 

[Curious George]

.


According to your logic, there is no such thing as lack of belief

One cannot lack all belief without being incapable of belief. One can lack a very specific belief, but this lack of belief signifies a different belief.

 

[leibowde84]

God exists is the proposition we are looking at here. Is it true or false?

Or, doesn't have a belief either way. 50/50 split ... if you will, although I don't think it even takes that much.

 

[Curious George]

Or, doesn't have a belief either way. 50/50 split ... if you will, although I don't think it even takes that much.

No, now you are discussing multiple propositions. But I was careful here. If someone wanted to take the position of the 50/50 split and say they did not believe in God, they would still have to evaluate the proposition as not true. They would just have to evaluate the separate proposition of God does not exist as not true as well. This is a very nuanced position, and likely not the position of a second grader. But even were this second grader more precocious than I imagine, then he still must say that he believes that God exists is false, according to logic.