Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest KJP

Separation of Church & State

Recommended Posts

When Barry Goldwater becomes the voice of reason, that's when we know America has left the rails of reason and discarded the wisdom of separating church and state....

 

10418846_10152888723994255_8160246195681171758_n.jpg?oh=6a2a148fc7784a4609d71b4286332dc4&oe=54D17D26&__gda__=1427087664_35b6ede78212b5f0faff1524fcb5b713


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still fresh but not yet posted.....

 

FRIDAY, SEP 19, 2014 02:30 PM EDT

Creationism is just the start: How right-wing Christians are warping America’s schools

Miseducation isn't only a red-state problem. Right-wing Christians are effectively writing our country's textbooks

AMANDA MARCOTTE, ALTERNET

 

This article originally appeared on AlterNet.

AlterNet

 

One of the biggest obstacles for the conservative movement when it comes to recruiting new members is, to be frank, reality itself. History, science, economics are all fields constantly churning out information that makes right-wing ideology look silly, nonsensical and even delusional. In response, the conservative movement has launched a massive media campaign against reality that spreads out on Fox News, talk radio and the web, but despite all this, conservatives are not satisfied. The kids are who conservatives really want. That’s why the right is relentless about its attempts to get into public schools, throw out actual information and replace it with false and misleading ideology. Whether or not they’ll actually be successful in tricking kids into becoming conservatives is up for debate, but in the meantime, they are doing a lot of damage to childrens’ ability to get a decent education.

 

The latest battle in the ongoing war to turn public schools into propaganda machines for the right is being fought in the state of Texas. The state is often at the center of conservative-fomented education controversies, as right-wingers there keep trying to sneak creationism into the science classroom. Texas also continues to maintain its abysmally high teen pregnancy rate by pushing sex “education” that usually doesn’t bother to mention contraception. While the right has been losing some ground on those two issues, a new report from the Texas Freedom Network suggests that conservatives have been able to inject a shocking number of lies and disinformation into public school history classrooms.

 

MORE:

http://www.salon.com/2014/09/19/creationism_is_just_the_start_how_right_wing_christians_are_warping_americas_schools_partner/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't conflate "conservatives" with "creationists."  I support a healthy dose of curriculum revision to purge a few left-wing delusions from our public school system, but I'm hardly in favor of replacing them with the Bible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I asked was what "delusions" you claimed you wanted to see removed. There's a huge difference between "left-leaning" and "delusions."

 

Culture is leaning left because the right is riddled with those who are incapable of separating church from state. Level-headed people don't follow that mentality and therefore lean more towards an ideology that is more open to letting people do as they please as long as it doesn't hurt others.

 

Neither side is perfect. But you clearly stated there are a few "delusions" being taught in our school systems you'd like to see removed, and I'd love to know what those are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ It's concerning that textbooks in the year 2014 can still be politicized to the extent that is alleged.

 

Question: why in this age of the internet and tree-preservation are textbooks even still a thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a Republican all through 18 years of school. It took about 1 year in the work world to turn me into a Liberal.

 

I was a Democrat through all 22 years of school, or even 25.  It took about 2 years in the work world to turn me into a libertarian-conservative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was more or less a liberal until I was 15 or 16.  I started to see things weren’t adding up, and I read Goldwater, followed by Bill Simon and Ronald Reagan.  Perhaps that’s part of why I remained secular minded.

 

Keep in mind that as far as public schools went, prayer was banned for my entire school career.  Discipline got lax, and indeed the mid 70s to mid 80s were probably the least structured era in education.  Nevertheless, my generation managed to learn in the public schools.  There was a lot more focus on how to think and how to learn.  Not so much on how to think. 

 

The “leftism” that has changed this is primarily “political correctness” and a de-emphasis on productivity and competition.  That last part was beginning to creep in during the 70s, it’s gotten much worse.  Environmentalism has also been promoted to fact in many schools, and religious neutrality replaced by antipathy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ It's concerning that textbooks in the year 2014 can still be politicized to the extent that is alleged.

 

Question: why in this age of the internet and tree-preservation are textbooks even still a thing?

 

For the same reason that math skills are taught in an age of computers, perhaps.

 

In any case, paper is made from trees which are grown as a crop.  We have more trees because of this industry, not less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ It's concerning that textbooks in the year 2014 can still be politicized to the extent that is alleged.

 

Question: why in this age of the internet and tree-preservation are textbooks even still a thing?

 

For the same reason that math skills are taught in an age of computers, perhaps.

 

In any case, paper is made from trees which are grown as a crop.  We have more trees because of this industry, not less.

 

Weak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ It's concerning that textbooks in the year 2014 can still be politicized to the extent that is alleged.

 

Question: why in this age of the internet and tree-preservation are textbooks even still a thing?

 

For the same reason that math skills are taught in an age of computers, perhaps.

 

In any case, paper is made from trees which are grown as a crop.  We have more trees because of this industry, not less.

 

Weak.

 

Absolutely true. 

 

Saying don't use paper to save trees is like saying don't eat corn to save corn plants, or don't wear wool to save sheep.

 

As anyone who has ever had to remove a stump knows, harvesting does not kill trees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep coming back looking for those left-wing delusions that are taught in our public schools, but all I'm getting is anecdotes about how people's political leanings have changed over time and schools have become worse because of environmentalism(?) and something about how commercial logging creates more trees.  What's the topic again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ It's concerning that textbooks in the year 2014 can still be politicized to the extent that is alleged.

 

Question: why in this age of the internet and tree-preservation are textbooks even still a thing?

 

For the same reason that math skills are taught in an age of computers, perhaps.

 

In any case, paper is made from trees which are grown as a crop.  We have more trees because of this industry, not less.

 

Weak.

 

Absolutely true. 

 

Saying don't use paper to save trees is like saying don't eat corn to save corn plants, or don't wear wool to save sheep.

 

As anyone who has ever had to remove a stump knows, harvesting does not kill trees.

 

I'm not disagreeing that paper comes from trees. I actually knew that.

 

My point is that textbooks cost a ridiculous sum of money. An absolutely unnecessary expenditure in this age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worse.  Integration of church and state in America would waste a lot more potential than gets wasted when a place like Afghanistan or Gaza goes full-on theocratic, and wasted potential would be the least of the problems in a Handmaid's Tale-era America.

 

Note, however, that while you can cite individual stories about wannabe-theocrats influencing state boards of education, American society as a whole has basically never been more secular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh.  Ostensibly, the topic was separation of church and state.  It seems like it might have degenerated quickly.

 

The article mentions that, because of the desire to market toward large states like Texas, the textbook industry was steering all of U.S. education toward religious indoctrination.

 

Why should any other jurisdiction buy what they consider to be an inferior, religious leaning textbook?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you have two choices. You have the California book, and the Texas book. Anything else means you're spending more money. Good luck explaining why you're a public school volunteering to spend more money on something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One really good way to get religion involved in government is to get people thinking that government is getting involved in religion. 

 

Liberty works both ways.  If you don’t want the force of government used to keep the minority faith from practicing their beliefs, don’t try to use it against the majority’s beliefs.

 

We’re not a Christian nation, but we are a nation that is mostly Christian.  If those of us who are not want our beliefs respected, it’s pretty stupid to disrespect theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Could you please provide a single situation where Christians' beliefs are being disrespected?

 

The law not following your personal morals or beliefs isn't a valid response. Only laws that actually restrict your ability to practice Christianity are legitimate answers.

 

Bringing up the fact that we're "mostly a Christian nation" is completely irrelevant in this country. That statement's importance is precisely zero. It doesn't matter if a majority follow a specific religion because of separation of church and state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which version of the Bible became the official state book?  The story is unclear.  My understanding is there are something like 50 versions of the English translation alone....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which version of the Bible became the official state book?  The story is unclear.  My understanding is there are something like 50 versions of the English translation alone....

 

Bet it was specified and starts with a K.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marriage is a legal contract. Making it a religious one is the choice of the couple, not government....

 

Oklahoma House passes bill restricting marriage to people of faith

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2015/03/oklahoma-house-passes-bill-restricting-marriage-to-people-of-faith/


"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities."-Voltaire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marriage is a legal contract. Making it a religious one is the choice of the couple, not government....

 

Oklahoma House passes bill restricting marriage to people of faith

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2015/03/oklahoma-house-passes-bill-restricting-marriage-to-people-of-faith/

 

Is that for real or just an Onion-esque story?

 

If its real, I'd wonder if "The Church of Satan" or "The Church of Scientology" meets the Oklahoma standard for a clergy-approved marriage.  Or is Oklahoma going to "restrict religious freedom"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd support a situation where the state legally recognized any and all voluntary unions between two people (regardless of sex), but allowed each religious group to decide whom to "marry." Unfortunately this seems like an overstep by Oklahoma and in the wrong direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd support a situation where the state legally recognized any and all voluntary unions between two people (regardless of sex), but allowed each religious group to decide whom to "marry." Unfortunately this seems like an overstep by Oklahoma and in the wrong direction.

 

Don't individual churches, and religious groups already have the right to deny marriage rites to anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd support a situation where the state legally recognized any and all voluntary unions between two people (regardless of sex), but allowed each religious group to decide whom to "marry." Unfortunately this seems like an overstep by Oklahoma and in the wrong direction.

 

Don't individual churches, and religious groups already have the right to deny marriage rites to anyone?

 

It's sad to have to state the obvious...but YES it already is this way.  No wonder we are fighting for marriage equality.  I thought every American already understood the simple concept that marriage is civil contract, a government recognized Union.  Secondarily, religious groups have their own sacraments.  One of which is their own individual recognition of marriage....of which the government has no stake or interference in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What C17 is suggesting is removing the word marriage from the law. The state would recognize unions.  i like it.  But I want peace on earth too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marriage is a legal contract. Making it a religious one is the choice of the couple, not government....

 

Oklahoma House passes bill restricting marriage to people of faith

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2015/03/oklahoma-house-passes-bill-restricting-marriage-to-people-of-faith/

 

Is that for real or just an Onion-esque story?

 

If its real, I'd wonder if "The Church of Satan" or "The Church of Scientology" meets the Oklahoma standard for a clergy-approved marriage.  Or is Oklahoma going to "restrict religious freedom"?

 

It doesn't really matter.  They are placing civil authority in the hands of religious groups, and that doesn't pass Constitutional muster.

 

Assuming this is not a hoax, that is, but this doesn't look like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd support a situation where the state legally recognized any and all voluntary unions between two people (regardless of sex), but allowed each religious group to decide whom to "marry." Unfortunately this seems like an overstep by Oklahoma and in the wrong direction.

 

Don't individual churches, and religious groups already have the right to deny marriage rites to anyone?

 

 

It's sad to have to state the obvious...but YES it already is this way.  No wonder we are fighting for marriage equality.  I thought every American already understood the simple concept that marriage is civil contract, a government recognized Union.  Secondarily, religious groups have their own sacraments.  One of which is their own individual recognition of marriage....of which the government has no stake or interference in. 

 

That's what I thought. Every straight couple I know who got married at a church had to demonstrate, either by their attendance and adherence to the faith's traditions, or by going through some sessions with the pastor/priest etc, that they understood the religious meaning of the wedding. That's why all the blaring on about churches "forced" to perform gay weddings never held any water.

 

Any church could, and still can, refuse to hold a wedding ceremony for a same-sex couple on the grounds that it's against their faith tradition, right? As I gay-married man, I have zero problem with this. But would this also, technically, carry over to interracial, or inter-denominational ceremonies for example?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marriage is a legal contract. Making it a religious one is the choice of the couple, not government....

 

Oklahoma House passes bill restricting marriage to people of faith

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2015/03/oklahoma-house-passes-bill-restricting-marriage-to-people-of-faith/

 

Is that for real or just an Onion-esque story?

 

If its real, I'd wonder if "The Church of Satan" or "The Church of Scientology" meets the Oklahoma standard for a clergy-approved marriage.  Or is Oklahoma going to "restrict religious freedom"?

 

It doesn't really matter.  They are placing civil authority in the hands of religious groups, and that doesn't pass Constitutional muster.

 

Assuming this is not a hoax, that is, but this doesn't look like it.

 

Don't religious groups already have civil authority when it comes to confirming the legality of marriages? Or is that different...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...