How to kill religion ???

[SirYeen]

But can't you teach it at schools ? I mean if they choose not to after , sure. But if people benefit from being skeptical, shouldn't they at-least have the chance to learn it at school ?

 

[Prolescum]

1. Isn't the default position that something should not be taught ?

Is it?

2. I don't think you've proven my view is irrational either.

I didn't say your view was irrational, I said mine wasn't, which you intimated, hence why I asked you to show me where I was being irrational.

3. Can you give me proof of 1 religion that is pure good and should be taught ? I can give you proof of several that if taught will only poison the mind.

What are you talking about? Henry the eighth was a complete and utter bastard, yet I learned about him in school. He started his own church, you know... I use Henry in this example because communism isn't funny any more.

I don't want to get into the whole interpretation thing but the thing is that the more acceptable a interpretation gets the less extremist it gets and the closer it seems to get to humanism and common sense (none of which need god).

So? That's an entirely different matter.

4. You say that inspired them, can you prove it ? Can you prove they wouldn't have done the exact same thing without religion ?

Can I give evidence that both of those people were devout believers and inspired to make their mark by their focus on their faith? Yes. Can I prove it categorically? No, but it is common knowledge that both men were to apply their faith to the real world and have an historical effect.

5. I mean at younger age. The first bit of criticism I felt was a few years ago and I'm 17 right now. God is not Santa Claus. The idea can be much more dangerous then that and therefor it should be properly understood and be subject to scrutiny as part of our education.

Although I admit that you've stated in your school this was not the case, in my school, and comprehensives across the country do teach it objectively.

Make no mistake, I'm against so-called faith schools, especially the tax-funded variety, but not the teaching of religion as a subject.

 

[Nautyskin]

Does this happens at a morning assembly or in an RE class? Is the school a secular or faith-based? Does it happen in all schools or just some?

They're all secular schools, and these are weekly scheduled RE classes, where a non-regular teacher comes in (I'm not sure if they're even qualified at anything, let alone teaching) and tells the kids 'this is how the world was created, and these are some of the things that happened'.

As far as I know, it's at all of them, although I cannot say I've witnessed this at every single school, but it's definitely at the majority of those I come into contact with through work.

That's not the only example I can provide, but it was the most shocking.

You're expecting me to take your word for it, and your wording is pretty vague.

Fair enough.

For further interest(although I have no idea if this is who services the schools I'm in contact with, but they do service state schools):

http://www.accessministries.org.au/about

http://www.accessministries.org.au/creteachers/curriculum

http://www.epworthbooks.org.nz/CRE/CRE_images/Launch_Blue_Part_1_summary.pdf


This isn't education about religion. It's religious instruction, and that's exactly what I've seen taking place. Obviously this is quite different to high-school level education as you stated, and you could hardly be blamed for not knowing what goes on in every corner of the globe at all times

I'm just saying - it is taking place.

Indoctrination takes place in Primary Schools in this country. There's teaching religion, and teaching about religion. I support the latter. The former makes me sick.

Indeed, that is what is already on the curriculum (here at least), which would be banned under the OP's proposed laws (or law).

Aye, and I agree with you 100% that education on religion should be included in a school's curriculum.

edit: Quote formatting

 

[Nautyskin]

Let me just quote something (this is from a MODERATE CHRISTIAN CLASS)

"The second law of thermodynamics contradicts the evolution theory (order to chaos vs chaos to order) and we can only reconcile them if we create a new world view of creativity and inspiration. "

Yeah. I've had to work in the same room when these classes are occurring, and it burns me up a bit. They're not my kids, so it's not really my concern, but when you're sitting there listening to some creationist telling these kids how god is real and that some guy lived for a few days inside this huge fish and the Earth was made in six days and you see their trusting innocent faces looking up at this fucking imbecile telling them just pure bullshit as if it were fact ... AND the guy is getting paid for it ... it's just freakin wrong.

The kids don't know what's going on. How could they? And it's not my place to say anything ... the parents might think that's exactly what the kids should be learning, and I wouldn't actually achieve anything by causing a scene, except perhaps losing my job.

So, I understand where you're coming from, but this:

1. Religion is not to be taught in classes until a kid reaches the age of 16.

is no good


Religious instruction has no place in a public school, but religious education is a must.

 

[Prolescum]

Does this happens at a morning assembly or in an RE class? Is the school a secular or faith-based? Does it happen in all schools or just some?

They're all secular schools, and these are weekly scheduled RE classes, where a non-regular teacher comes in (I'm not sure if they're even qualified at anything, let alone teaching) and tells the kids 'this is how the world was created, and these are some of the things that happened'.

As far as I know, it's at all of them, although I cannot say I've witnessed this at every single school, but it's definitely at the majority of those I come into contact with through work.

You're expecting me to take your word for it, and your wording is pretty vague.

Fair enough.

For further interest(although I have no idea if this is who services the schools I'm in contact with, but they do service state schools):

http://www.accessministries.org.au/about

http://www.accessministries.org.au/creteachers/curriculum

http://www.epworthbooks.org.nz/CRE/CRE_images/Launch_Blue_Part_1_summary.pdf


This isn't education about religion. It's religious instruction, and that's exactly what I've seen taking place. Obviously this is quite different to high-school level education as you stated, and you could hardly be blamed for not knowing what goes on in every corner of the globe at all times

I'm just saying - it is taking place.

Indeed, that is what is already on the curriculum (here at least), which would be banned under the OP's proposed laws (or law).

Aye, and I agree with you 100% that education on religion should be included in a school's curriculum.

Blimey, it makes you wonder what the 1999 and 2006 revisions were to the education act (1958) over there . Alas, I'm off out and cannot find out 'til some time later.

I now vaguely recall some discussion on this forum about this particular Australian issue and there was some kind of alternative being trialled to replace this period with a secular philosophy-type class for those without religious parents. Not really sure of any details at the mo, but it's not that old.

 

[Fictionarious]

Okay so there there are some on this thread who would like to have "Religious Education" to refer to things like Jesus Camp and the things they probably teach you at a school with a name like "St. John's" or "New Life Christian School" (from the top of my head), where there is one primary religion being taught about and what it's tenets are. This is NOT education, and I would not fight and die for someone's right to teach it as though the issue under question was somehow free speech. That is NOT the issue.

Then there are others on the thread who imagine/propose religious education refer to something like this:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/dan_dennett_s_response_to_rick_warren.html
These are the people I agree with. Teaching religion honestly would entail mentioning many of the things I listed in category one of my first post here, and religions as enduring social institutions would not be better of for it.

Which, imho, IS better off for the world at large.

 

[Nautyskin]

Blimey, it makes you wonder what the 1999 and 2006 revisions were to the education act (1958) over there . Alas, I'm off out and cannot find out 'til some time later.

Those convicts still ain't right. Feed 'em more Jeebuz!

I now vaguely recall some discussion on this forum about this particular Australian issue and there was some kind of alternative being trialled to replace this period with a secular philosophy-type class for those without religious parents. Not really sure of any details at the mo, but it's not that old.

Here. Have a look at this shitty website:

http://www.ethicaleducation.net/

Also an article on the introduction of a 30-minute "humanist applied ethics" class for primary students:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/religion-in-schools-to-go-godfree-20081213-6xxs.html

Fundamentalist Christian group the Salt Shakers panned the idea of humanists being given religious education class time.

Research director Jenny Stokes said: "If you go there, where do you stop? What about witchcraft or Satanism?

"If you accredit humanism, then those things would have an equal claim to be taught in schools."

Oh my goodness.


Sorry for the hijack, Iprodigy ...

 

[SirYeen]

Let me just quote something (this is from a MODERATE CHRISTIAN CLASS)

"The second law of thermodynamics contradicts the evolution theory (order to chaos vs chaos to order) and we can only reconcile them if we create a new world view of creativity and inspiration. "

Yeah. I've had to work in the same room when these classes are occurring, and it burns me up a bit. They're not my kids, so it's not really my concern, but when you're sitting there listening to some creationist telling these kids how god is real and that some guy lived for a few days inside this huge fish and the Earth was made in six days and you see their trusting innocent faces looking up at this fucking imbecile telling them just pure bullshit as if it were fact ... AND the guy is getting paid for it ... it's just freakin wrong.

The kids don't know what's going on. How could they? And it's not my place to say anything ... the parents might think that's exactly what the kids should be learning, and I wouldn't actually achieve anything by causing a scene, except perhaps losing my job.

So, I understand where you're coming from, but this:

1. Religion is not to be taught in classes until a kid reaches the age of 16.

is no good


Religious instruction has no place in a public school, but religious education is a must.

I'll rephrase because that was to strict. Read : you're right.

 

[SirYeen]

*For the last time I don't think we shouldn't see ANY religion. I just believe we should see it in a different perspective. Yes we should see religion as part of our culture and how it affected us but we should *not* learn how the world was created or any other creationist/religious crap.

*I know about the religious scientist thing but really, they just were good at what they were doing. There is no proof whatsoever that they couldn't have done it without religion.

* Well we don't have time for everything so I assume the default position is not to teach something unless it is useful.

 

[Yfelsung]

Religion seems like an awfully useful control tool just to throw away haphazardly.

Why not attempt to infiltrate, control and warp a religion to a more progressive/humanist perspective?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Religion seems like an awfully useful control tool just to throw away haphazardly.

Why not attempt to infiltrate, control and warp a religion to a more progressive/humanist perspective?

For the same reason that your plan to test people before letting them vote fails: because someone will always twist things back away from whatever goal you want. Evil people are better at that sort of thing.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Religion seems like an awfully useful control tool just to throw away haphazardly.

Why not attempt to infiltrate, control and warp a religion to a more progressive/humanist perspective?

Every religion starts like that. The problem is that the inherent dogmatism inevitably renders even well-intentioned instruction an impediment to progress.

Take drinking blood for instance. I'm sure when the Jehovah's Witness forbade the practice it seemed entirely reasonable... who would have thought that it would one day render them selfish assholes, doomed to die from even moderate blood loss.

That, and its an insult to human dignity, but I somehow doubt that you care.

 

[australopithecus]

The problem, as I see it, is not religion. It's the bullshit claims that a lot of religions make. Religion (any religion for it encompasses a lot of ideologies) by itself is at it's most basic just an opinion people hold about the supernatural, however when those opinions start infringing on other lives that's when you get a problem.

The claim 'God exists' isn't harmful anymore than the claim 'toothfairies exist'. You're never going to be able to 100% disprove gods so let people believe if they want, but when they start making demands on education and the public and private lives of others then you get pissed off. Religion doesn't need to be killed, it needs to brought into the 21st century. The dogma needs to be brutally beaten in the light of day and the likes of creationism, sexism, homophobia, racism, exclusionism...etc that come it need to be killed, but if people want to believe there's something watching over them and helping them and they want to call that thing God, then fair enough.

Stopping people from getting an education in religion takes away a persons right to choose what they want to learn, it also makes people ignorant bigots. It can only ever be a bad thing.

 

[Andiferous]

Don't think about GREEN!

 

[australopithecus]

Damn. That's worse than THE GAME.

 

[Prolescum]

*For the last time I don't think we shouldn't see ANY religion. I just believe we should see it in a different perspective. Yes we should see religion as part of our culture and how it affected us but we should *not* learn how the world was created or any other creationist/religious crap.

No one suggests that creationism should be taught.

*I know about the religious scientist thing but really, they just were good at what they were doing. There is no proof whatsoever that they couldn't have done it without religion.

Mate, I said he was influenced by his faith and could provide evidence for that. Isaac Newton was also a theologian.
There is no proof that he couldn't have done it without eating bread.

Please make the effort to read my posts properly, the same courtesy I give to you.

* Well we don't have time for everything so I assume the default position is not to teach something unless it is useful.

What a depressing thought. Where do we draw the line? We're not communists. Although I probably agree that media studies should be taken off the curriculum... :lol:

There are enough people in the world to study everything. In fact, I'll go one further and suggest everything should be studied.

 

[Yfelsung]

Religion seems like an awfully useful control tool just to throw away haphazardly.

Why not attempt to infiltrate, control and warp a religion to a more progressive/humanist perspective?

For the same reason that your plan to test people before letting them vote fails: because someone will always twist things back away from whatever goal you want. Evil people are better at that sort of thing.

Every system or organization is corruptible. Our current system and religions are balls deep in corruption.

"Someone might twist it for evil" isn't a valid argument given the preceding fact.

You fear some would twist the opinions of the intelligent through rigging the test in my system I proposed.

Currently some are twisting the opinions of the unintelligent through appeals to their base instincts.

There's nothing about my idea that would lead to a world any worse than what we have now.

 

[retardedsociety]

Not everyone is born a skeptic, my mother has been shown lots of evidence and everything that is contradicting in her religion and shes always making excuses out of it, always putting god behind every gap.

This is why is very important for children to be raised openly of how everything works and the variety of religions there are, cause some of them who are indoctrinated will never leave their religion no matter what.

Not that its harmful for a person to be of a religion, but you already know how some of them get all crazy and do stuff that can't be fixed.

 

[Yfelsung]

Not everyone is born a skeptic, my mother has been shown lots of evidence and everything that is contradicting in her religion and shes always making excuses out of it, always putting god behind every gap.

This is why is very important for children to be raised openly of how everything works and the variety of religions there are, cause some of them who are indoctrinated will never leave their religion no matter what.

Not that its harmful for a person to be of a religion, but you already know how some of them get all crazy and do stuff that can't be fixed.

Well, I can guarantee your mother was born without belief, she was just indoctrinated early.

No one is born with a religion.

 

[DeathofSpeech]

Don't buy into the bullshit. Religion will fall only if we take active steps to make it.

I don't think anyone here advocates being passive (doing nothing) but there are effective means and counterproductive means.

All we need to do is increase the statistical likelihood that a few members of the congregation find the library door unlocked.
The rest is inevitable.