• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Religion in Public Schools.

Rhizomatic

Vaguely (Post)Postmodern
Why do you think the fundies are so hell bent on getting their bible and their god back into public school curriculum?

Religion relies a lot on indoctrinating youth.
Over-generalizations aside, that doesn't actually address my argument. People like Chuck Norris want religious instruction, not instruction about religion.
 

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
I disagree.

Exodus is nothing but religious dogma, the best scientific theories of the rise of civilization are directly opposed to the tale of the Exodus.

Not to mention Christians and Jews have been searching the deserts for many thousands of years to find evidence of said Exodus only to fail time and time again.

The Exodus is not how humanity came out of Africa, yet my sons history book heavily implies that it is and gives no other alternatives.

:facepalm:

Yes, I am aware that there isn't any evidence for the Exodus.

However, it is not mere religious doctrine, such as "Christ will save you".
 

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
I think the religious would have a lot more success in maintaining their rights to bring Bibles to school if they would hit the point home with this simple fact:

the last 2,000 years, almost every area of studies/life (arts, language, literature, even mathematics) has become what it is today because of the Biblical influence involved ... take into account that Shakespeare has hundreds of references in his works that are taken from the Bible <<-- that is only ONE example among far too many to state here.

Though my own personal interest in the Bible is spiritual ... it is my very life in fact ... still I do not teach it to my children w/ religion and/or the spiritual in mind, and rather I find it absolutely necessary for them to know it very well so that they have a better understanding of the world around them, and how we have come to the place we are at now as mankind ... ** without ** that understanding, then they would have no say so in where it is we are going. It is 100% essential for the sake of education (whether at home objectively or in the schools) for the Bible to be taught, known, and understood properly by our children.

Those who are opposed to it are no less religious in their efforts toward keeping it out of public education (though, here in Tx, this is less the problem ... even in the Austin area as even many non-religious see the logic in educating our children of its content) ... those that oppose simply are exercing what they claim to be against .. that is, supression of the minds of our children (in an even worse way IMHO), and it shows a lack of trust for them AS our children in regard to the future. I trust mine personally, and therefore do not suppress them from learning as they choose, and/or should for their own sake (and the sake of those around them) ...

That is a common ploy of those who are against the Seperation issue, claiming that the bible had a "huge impact on western culture".

This is, I'm afraid, merely empty lip service.

Our set of Common Laws, for example, find their origin in pre-Christian Saxon law.

Sorry, but there simple isn;t any logical ratioal to force the chidlren of every American citizen to learn your scriptures. Such a thing would be pure indoctrination, nothing more, nothing less.
 

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
Over-generalizations aside, that doesn't actually address my argument. People like Chuck Norris want religious instruction, not instruction about religion.

People like Norris want the bible back in public school cirriculum...

[youtube]sEI6vUZr4dg[/youtube]
YouTube - Chuck Norris Sucks

Not to mention completely ignorant on our Nation's Founding.

There are no "biblical principles" in our Founding.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Exactly, it's not in the constitution.
There are many misconceptions about what's written into the Constitution & what's in the letters between its writers showing intent.
Did you know that most people don't even have a copy of the Constitution at hand when they post? Yeah, really! (I have the big print
version with the racy photos.) The 1st Amendment didn't even apply to the states until the incorporation doctrine was adopted.
 
Last edited:

Magic Man

Reaper of Conversation
Exactly, it's not in the constitution but these rights where stated to be endowed to us by our creator is in the pre-emble.

Nope, those exact words were not in there. However, it's about interpretation. We constantly have to interpret the words in the Constitution. That's what the Supreme Court is for. The fact is "separation of church and state" was the intent of the first amendment. And you're thinking of the Declaration of Independence with the "endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights" part. God is not mentioned in the constitution, other than when they say "In the year of our lord..." at the end.
 

MW0082

Jesus 4 Profit.... =)~
What document contains the words "separation of church and state"?

You did mean separate right?
Nothing specifically contains it, but it is more than implied. However that is missing the point. USA was founded by Athiest, look it up. It will surprise you.....:D
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Usiing Wikipedia is never acceptable or credible btw.......
Certainly not for scholarly work, which is true of any encyclopedia.
But as a quick reference, I find it useful.
Do you disagree with what I posted from it?
 
Last edited:

MW0082

Jesus 4 Profit.... =)~
Certainly not for scholarly work, which is true of any encyclopedia. But as a
quick reference, I find it useful. Do you disagree with what I posted from it?
I agree that it is not in the constitution verbatim, but I do believe it is more than implied through out the constitution. There should eb a complete seperation of church and state. If any church were to get into the government, can you even think of the implications...... Our founding fathers (mainly Atheists) saw and knew htis. They wanted religious freedom for a reason...
 

Smoke

Done here.
Usiing Wikipedia is never acceptable or credible btw.......

You're always welcome to refute anything posted if you have information from a better source. Wikipedia is certainly not authoritative, but it's generally pretty reliable.
 

Smoke

Done here.

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
In other words, all those constitutional originalists should be adamantly insisting on separation of church and state, since the original intent is not in doubt.
Certainly, this constitutional originalist reads separation of church & state into the Constitution based upon context & the words of its authors.
This doesn't mean that references to religion are to be eliminated, but religion doesn't get to touch the steering wheel.

I agree that it is not in the constitution verbatim, but I do believe it is more than implied through out the constitution. There should eb a complete seperation of church and state. If any church were to get into the government, can you even think of the implications...... Our founding fathers (mainly Atheists) saw and knew htis. They wanted religious freedom for a reason...
Are you sure the founders were mainly atheists? Source?
 
Last edited:

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
Exactly, it's not in the constitution but these rights where stated to be endowed to us by our creator is in the pre-emble.

Refusing the strong urge to be insulting...

You are quoting the Declaration of Independance, a colonial document and NOT a US legal document.

Also, the phrase Mr. Jefferson coined is a summation of the Establishment Clause.

From Biover's Law Dictionary, this Nation's earliest legal definitional source for American legal terms...

4. To found, recognize, confirm or admit; as, congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.

Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856 Edition - Letter E
 

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
There are many misconceptions about what's written into the Constitution & what's in the letters between its writers showing intent.
Did you know that most people don't even have a copy of the Constitution at hand when they post? Yeah, really! (I have the big print
version with the racy photos.) The 1st Amendment didn't even apply to the states until the incorporation doctrine was adopted.

The 9th and 10th acted as Supremecy Clauses, especially when combined with the original make-up of Congress, ie each State legislator choosing a Senator instead of We the People. Said Senator directly represented the State Legislature in Congress.

I believe the Supremecy Clause in the 14th was added due to some confusion in certain court cases as to the supremecy of the US Constitution.

This is also moot for this debate, however, as each State Constitution also has it's own version of the Estabishment Clause.
 

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
Our founding fathers (mainly Atheists) saw and knew htis. They wanted religious freedom for a reason...

Would you happen to ahve a link to this idea that the Founders were Atheists?

Unless you are being creative and stating that msot of the Founders didn't believe in other gods, which makes them "atheist" towards other religions, I am unaware of ANY Atheists among our Founders.

Religion of the Founding Fathers of America
 
Top