What was your religious education in public schools by State?

[TagliatelliMonster]

"Public school in a secular society has no business teaching any religion."

And that is biased against religion. Right, please?

Regards

No, it's not.
It's instead staying true to its secular nature.

Note that it's not the case that children in public school are prohibited from taking religious classes. They can take whatever classes they want to on their own time.

Personally, I'ld even go a step further and say that religious classes shouldn't be given in ANY school.
School is for education. Literature, grammar, math, physics, chemistry, accounting, computers, biology,...

You can teach history of or comparative religion in some kind of sociological / culture class. But that is quite different from instructing a specific religion / indoctrinating into a religion.

For me, religion has no place in school. I view it as some kind of personal thing. Like a hobby or something.
You don't learn how to collect stamps in school either. You are free to join a stamp collecting club on your own time though.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Knowingly or unknowingly they are, it seems, biased in favor of Atheism to keep the children ignorant about religions. Right, please?

1. secularism and atheism are not at all the same thing

2. if parents want their kids to be indoctrinated into a religion, they can always send them to sunday school or bible lessons of whatever floats their boat, or teach them themselves. Nobody is stopping them. Nobody is telling them they can't do that.

Public school simply is not the place for that. There are other kids there as well, who might be following very different religions then your kids, or even no religion at all.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And that suits the Atheism/Agnosticism.

Regards

That suits secularism.
You know... that rather important thing that is written about in the constitution of pretty much every western democracy.

 

[paarsurrey]

What was your religious education in public schools by State?

I have written many posts in this thread. I enumerate my point here to sum up*:

Religious education and also of the Atheism/no- Religions should be
imparted to the students on equitable basis:

• at all levels of schools and colleges
• so that the students are properly equipped within their student life
• to adopt whatever they think is right and gives them satisfaction
• before they enter their practical life.
• Science is a common tool for the believers and non-believers, this is not to Demean science but that is different from the off-the-cuff thoughts of the pseudo-scientists.
• Science covers material and physical aspects of the human life, and Religion covers the whole aspect of the life with special emphasis on ethical, moral and spiritual aspects.
• As far as the Atheists, I am not against them in their persons and I am in favor of equitable treatment to them by every Religion.
• The better idea as I visualize is that there should be periodically seminars in the schools/colleges in their halls on the subjects about religion/no-religions.
• I don't say that there should be teachers to teach every religion in the schools. I say that there should be seminars in the schools/colleges where representatives of religions/no-religions should give lectures on the selected topics and then there should be provision of a question answer session for the students. These seminars should be conducted by moderators of the City officials.
• As somebody has to manage such events to provide equitable opportunity to every religion/no-religion that is interested in the event. The issue of moderators could be sorted between the school/colleges and the cities locally.
• My point is that the students get equal access/information to the religions of believers as also to the non-believers be they Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism or any shades of them. Under the name of Secular-ism, which means equitable treatment to everybody they should not remain ignorant of Religions/No-Religions.

Right, please?

Regards
____________
* Posts #2,,#17, #42,#68,#82,#86 , #116,#117, #118,,#120

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I've come on an alarming realization, possibly condemnable upon my person. Everyone could help me out with a simple questionnaire. Please indicate which of the listed items, and fill in as miscellaneous where applicable, that you remember highlighted terms in your public education, and list the state in which that Grade School , Elementary-High School religious education took place. I'll provide my example at the bottom.
Thanks for participating.

1. 95 theses
2. Oliver Cromwell
3. Calvinism
4. King Henry VIII
5. Anne Boleyne
6. (loosely the Pope/Catholocism)
7. Byzantine Empire
8. Stonewall Jackson
9. Martin Luther
10. Queen Catherine (of Aragorn)
11. Queen Isabella
12. Lutheranism (More Specifically)
13. Quakers
14. Puritans/Colony of New England/Thanksgiving


.

1,2,4,5,6,7,9,10,11,12,14
Also
Jonathan Edwards
Cotton Mather
Salem Witch Trials
Guy Fawkes
The Great Awakening
John Wesley
Muhammad
Saladin
Anne Frank
Holocaust

My education was for gifted kids, so we discussed religion a lot in the context of literature and history. Indeed I don't believe you can really have a suitable understanding of the humanities without incorporating the sphere of religion.

 

[MikeDwight]

Oh ya? Well now that you mention it, I'd assume that Great Awakening at least, Anne Frank, probably just slipped my mind. Do you care to put any regional identification at all to your education? Perhaps a state?

To put Religion on Holocaust in any direction goes down some pretty dark roads. How do you see that?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Oh ya? Well now that you mention it, I'd assume that Great Awakening at least, Anne Frank, probably just slipped my mind. Do you care to put any regional identification at all to your education? Perhaps a state?

To put Religion on Holocaust in any direction goes down some pretty dark roads. How do you see that?

State of California. But like I said, it was in the gifted programs of the 70's. I can't vouch for what went on in the more typical classrooms.

You can't talk about the Holocaust without talking about Judaism. Sure there were secular Jews. But really, what did it mean to live life as a Jew?

 

[MikeDwight]

OK at least it was that angle, which is still pretty strange, like religion brought you to something. It was all genetics though. They thought slav and jew were races and they liked german race.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

OK at least it was that angle, which is still pretty strange, like religion brought you to something. It was all genetics though. They thought slav and jew were races and they liked german race.

Scientifically there is no such thing as race, because there are no clear boundaries.

We do have things like tribes, which are loosely based on kinship, although they also include people who marry in or are adopted in. The Jews are a tribe.

You also have common cultures, which are people who share an upbringing, meaning they have been raised with certain assumptions, values, and skills. You can have two Chinese individuals but if one is raised in mainland China and another in the US, they have different cultures.

You also have nationalities. Usually there is a crossover between nationality and culture. German is a nationality and culture.

 

[MikeDwight]

Yes, Scientifically, IN Christianity, I'd think the opposite is inalienable. The Pope mainly called on the long heritage since Charlemagne of the French race across the mountains, to begin the Crusades. The Scots Presbyterians were always described as an unconquered race and civilization. We definitely should watch how science led to Nazi race definitions. I liked the Crusaders defended the Jewish Community in France on "Knightfall". Fun scene if you want to look it up.

Of course that makes religion in the typical definition pan-race and also pan-nationality, since religions that do not grow beyond singular nationality or race tend to be labeled tribal/pagan/undeveloped religions. Excluding Jewish. Jewish religion has a worldwide heritage.

Anyway, California gifted. Awesome. So no opinion on Stonewall Jackson? See we have a problem in the US about they like to say he taught at Colored Sunday School, there was a revival of 2 million Colored Presbytery around 1910. That's a totally different usage of the schism that happened for African Baptist or African Methodist. What was the creation of Korean Presbyterian? Acknowledgment, well technicaly of "nativism", that's not necessarily race, even if the first 3 chapters were gawking about a Japanese/Korean/Chinese and races, nobody said we need a race church, they needed a church native to Koreans. Orthodoxy tends to follow this.

 

[England my lionheart]

I've come on an alarming realization, possibly condemnable upon my person. Everyone could help me out with a simple questionnaire. Please indicate which of the listed items, and fill in as miscellaneous where applicable, that you remember highlighted terms in your public education, and list the state in which that Grade School , Elementary-High School religious education took place. I'll provide my example at the bottom.
Thanks for participating.

1. 95 theses
2. Oliver Cromwell
3. Calvinism
4. King Henry VIII
5. Anne Boleyne
6. (loosely the Pope/Catholocism)
7. Byzantine Empire
8. Stonewall Jackson
9. Martin Luther
10. Queen Catherine (of Aragorn)
11. Queen Isabella
12. Lutheranism (More Specifically)
13. Quakers
14. Puritans/Colony of New England/Thanksgiving


I respond,
1,4,5,8,9,14
I may write in, education with Martin Luther King Jr.. you can count that as 15.
10, 13 may have been there
Northern Alabama




-----
I Highly Suspect state textbooks are dividing the country. I'm entirely for my state, BUT, not at the expense of assuming unAmerican education! Thanks for responses. Or, if you want to comment, that's fine.

I'm English so I got 1 to 14 but more for history than religious education which was mainly about the different religious beliefs.

Obviously and because the UK could fit into Texas 5 times the curriculum is basically the same across the country unless it's a religion based school which maybe different.

 

[MikeDwight]

I'm English so I got 1 to 14 but more for history than religious education which was mainly about the different religious beliefs.

Obviously and because the UK could fit into Texas 5 times the curriculum is basically the same across the country unless it's a religion based school which maybe different.

Hi again Lionheart. I wonder if you have opinions on the Catholic community in England. Some places say 10% some said 40%, or how prevalent is the ideology, the ideology is obvious when you see it I think.

 

[England my lionheart]

Hi again Lionheart. I wonder if you have opinions on the Catholic community in England. Some places say 10% some said 40%, or how prevalent is the ideology, the ideology is obvious when you see it I think.

4 million ish out of 60 odd million I think,there are lots of churches closing in the UK and you can actually buy one,I'm drinking in an x church atm so the ideology isn't that noticeable here.

 

[MikeDwight]

I got 5 million of 53 million from Wikipedia statistics just now if it matters. So you're saying you got Calvinism, Oliver Cromwell, and smashing the Irish then? That's interesting. Monty Python's 'every sperm is sacred', I don't really care, they come out of the woodwork to confirm themselves in the faith, who cares?

Jefferson Davis thinks that Oliver Cromwell's responsible for 200 years.
“a traditionless and homeless race … gathered by Cromwell from the bogs and fens of the north of Ireland and of England” to be “disturbers of peace in the world.”

 

[Audie]

No, it's not.
It's instead staying true to its secular nature.

Note that it's not the case that children in public school are prohibited from taking religious classes. They can take whatever classes they want to on their own time.

Personally, I'ld even go a step further and say that religious classes shouldn't be given in ANY school.
School is for education. Literature, grammar, math, physics, chemistry, accounting, computers, biology,...

You can teach history of or comparative religion in some kind of sociological / culture class. But that is quite different from instructing a specific religion / indoctrinating into a religion.

For me, religion has no place in school. I view it as some kind of personal thing. Like a hobby or something.
You don't learn how to collect stamps in school either. You are free to join a stamp collecting club on your own time though.

Teaching any superstition is wholly inappropriate

 

[paarsurrey]

Teaching any superstition is wholly inappropriate

Like Atheism/Skepticism/Agnosticism, please?!
The truthful Religion is based on Word of G-d as is Science based on Work of G-d, both don't support superstition, and as I understand, both don't support Atheism/Skepticism/Agnosticism, please. Right, please?

Regards

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Like Atheism/Skepticism/Agnosticism, please?!

1. atheism isn't something that is "taught". There's nothing there to teach about. Just like one doesn't "train" to "not play football".

2. skepticism/agnosticism, is the opposite of superstition.

The truthful Religion is based on Word of G-d as is Science based on Work of G-d, both don't support superstition,

You should look up what "superstition" means....
If you think religious beliefs don't fall in that category but skepticism does, then I can only inform you that you have it exactly backwards.

 

[Audie]

1. atheism isn't something that is "taught". There's nothing there to teach about. Just like one doesn't "train" to "not play football".

2. skepticism/agnosticism, is the opposite of superstition.



You should look up what "superstition" means....
If you think religious beliefs don't fall in that category but skepticism does, then I can only inform you that you have it exactly backwards.

Psychological projection, like the force for Jedi, is
strong with the creos.

 

[paarsurrey]

1. atheism isn't something that is "taught". There's nothing there to teach about. Just like one doesn't "train" to "not play football".

2. skepticism/agnosticism, is the opposite of superstition.

You should look up what "superstition" means....
If you think religious beliefs don't fall in that category but skepticism does, then I can only inform you that you have it exactly backwards.

"atheism isn't something that is "taught""

If they don't have something to teach, they just don't do it, but they needn't prohibit others as an excuse. Why should the students be deprived of introduction to religions? Keeping the students ignorant is not appropriate.
My emphasis was on the following points:

• "As far as the Atheists, I am not against them in their persons and I am in favor of equitable treatment to them by every Religion.
• The better idea as I visualize is that there should be periodically seminars in the schools/colleges in their halls on the subjects about religion/no-religions.
• I don't say that there should be teachers to teach every religion in the schools. I say that there should be seminars in the schools/colleges where representatives of religions/no-religions should give lectures on the selected topics and then there should be provision of a question answer session for the students. These seminars should be conducted by moderators of the City officials.
• As somebody has to manage such events to provide equitable opportunity to every religion/no-religion that is interested in the event. The issue of moderators could be sorted between the school/colleges and the cities locally.
• My point is that the students get equal access/information to the religions of believers as also to the non-believers be they Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism or any shades of them. Under the name of Secular-ism, which means equitable treatment to everybody they should not remain ignorant of Religions/No-Religions."

Right, please?

Regards
________________
Posts #2,,#17, #42,#68,#82,#86 , #116,#117, #118,#120

 

[paarsurrey]

1. atheism isn't something that is "taught". There's nothing there to teach about. Just like one doesn't "train" to "not play football".

2. skepticism/agnosticism, is the opposite of superstition.

You should look up what "superstition" means....
If you think religious beliefs don't fall in that category but skepticism does, then I can only inform you that you have it exactly backwards.

"superstition"

I used it in my post as an "unreasonable notion" irrespective of whether in religions or in No-Religions Right, please?

Regards