Xero, the system won't let me approve the previous post for reputation again, but thank you for writing it. It is exactly, <I>exactly</I> what I think and would have written. 
Is "under God" in the American Pledge of Allegiance appropriate?...
- Thread starter mom2many
- Start date
Yup. I hate political correctness. If you genuinely respect someone, there should be no need to use pretty suger-coated words to say what you mean. To me, if someone is ovely PC I always doubt whether he/she really means a thing he/she said. But that's just me, I may be horribly misjudging many people here.mom2many said:
On your criteria, I don't have a lot to feel patriotic about, and yet I wouldn't want to live anywhere elseparentastic said:
but hey, part of what I'm proud of is that we're working on all of that, and that we've come a long way against many odds (and we can host a kick-ass world-cup, lol! ) However, my feelings of patriotism has nothing to do with anything I was taught as a kid. Actually, most of that was complete nonsense, that I tried to forget as soon as possible. I feel no pride when I think back at our previous government. Does that dishoner those who died? No. My older half-brother died fighting for them - and I will always honour his memmory, even though I now believe what he faught for was mostly lies. That wasn't his fault.Um.... what? lol
If I am...reading correctly, hopefully. My explanation is above. My kids are too young to understand religion or my beliefs against religion. We don't talk about it. It isn't a necessary topic, and I don't feel any need to raise my kids to think like I do. When he's old enough, I will explain to him as much as I know about the different religions out there, and I will tell him why his father and I are athiests in a non-biased way as well as I can, and they will have the freedom to choose any path they like and I wont judge them or try to change their minds. As for now, that's not really something they need to think about.[/QUOTE]
(I knew that paragraph I wrote would not come out right, but I'm sometimes I'm writing in between work, or meetings and have to just rush through it. I know most of you get the basic idea of what I've posted.)
Anyhow, that's fine for your family Xero, as long as parents are consistant with their teachings which ever way they believe, their children will have no problems beliving what you tell them. I know from experience though, that only lasts while the children are still young enough to be at home, the problem ( or confusing) might arise when they enter school and are surrounded by a ga-zillian other children who talk about Christmas all the time even if you don't. Some of the kids are experiencing religious instruction and are learning about Jesus and God and talk about it to each other.
Our children become exposed to the religious aspect/beliefs of ALL religions and their holiday traditions. This will NOT come from the teachers but from other children.
I also wanted Max to be knowledgeable enough about his christian faith to hold an intelligent conversation with whom ever was discussing it. And having experience it first hand I felt would give him the best advantage. And These conversations and debates DO come up often as children get older.
It doesn't mean he has to believe but I felt it would help him to fit in better ( for a lack of words, I'm rushing again)
The other thing you mentioned is that your children are too young to understand religion. Most people who choose to incorporate religion in their children's life, start at birth. For instance babes are baptized usually during infancy, and go to church with their families from infancy on.
Religious instruction ( for Catholice anyway) begin in first grade. By the time they get there, they already know about Jesus since their parents have taught them since birth.
Actually, I'm not a religious person, and truthfully still question many bible teachings that I've been taught. But I thought it only fair to give my son a religious foundation to base his decision on. (should he choose to believe in God or not)
For instance, I provided religious instruction for him, taught him the religion I was raised understanding, just for him to have some basic knowledge, I also was trying to impress upon him that religion (any) is a <I>positive,</I> and personal experience. Even if he choose to eliminate if from his life today ( which he has) NO ONE knows how he will feel down the road, and at least he has a basics.
I would never suggest or force him go to church now, or practice his religion because it's too personal a choice. However I did feel obligated as a parent when he was little, to provide the information that he couldn't get for himself.
I knew he would certainly be getting in from his school mates.
As an adult he can do as he please.
I really don't want to debate religion, I just wanted to respond to some of the statements you made. I belive in religious freedom and respect your belife what ever it may be, But I also expect the same respect from from others. Somehow(not from you necessarily) this conversation/ or thread turned into a christian mini bash, so it's best that I keep out of it.
Have a great day.
If I am...reading correctly, hopefully. My explanation is above. My kids are too young to understand religion or my beliefs against religion. We don't talk about it. It isn't a necessary topic, and I don't feel any need to raise my kids to think like I do. When he's old enough, I will explain to him as much as I know about the different religions out there, and I will tell him why his father and I are athiests in a non-biased way as well as I can, and they will have the freedom to choose any path they like and I wont judge them or try to change their minds. As for now, that's not really something they need to think about.[/QUOTE]
(I knew that paragraph I wrote would not come out right, but I'm sometimes I'm writing in between work, or meetings and have to just rush through it. I know most of you get the basic idea of what I've posted.)
Anyhow, that's fine for your family Xero, as long as parents are consistant with their teachings which ever way they believe, their children will have no problems beliving what you tell them. I know from experience though, that only lasts while the children are still young enough to be at home, the problem ( or confusing) might arise when they enter school and are surrounded by a ga-zillian other children who talk about Christmas all the time even if you don't. Some of the kids are experiencing religious instruction and are learning about Jesus and God and talk about it to each other.
Our children become exposed to the religious aspect/beliefs of ALL religions and their holiday traditions. This will NOT come from the teachers but from other children.
I also wanted Max to be knowledgeable enough about his christian faith to hold an intelligent conversation with whom ever was discussing it. And having experience it first hand I felt would give him the best advantage. And These conversations and debates DO come up often as children get older.
It doesn't mean he has to believe but I felt it would help him to fit in better ( for a lack of words, I'm rushing again)
The other thing you mentioned is that your children are too young to understand religion. Most people who choose to incorporate religion in their children's life, start at birth. For instance babes are baptized usually during infancy, and go to church with their families from infancy on.
Religious instruction ( for Catholice anyway) begin in first grade. By the time they get there, they already know about Jesus since their parents have taught them since birth.
Actually, I'm not a religious person, and truthfully still question many bible teachings that I've been taught. But I thought it only fair to give my son a religious foundation to base his decision on. (should he choose to believe in God or not)
For instance, I provided religious instruction for him, taught him the religion I was raised understanding, just for him to have some basic knowledge, I also was trying to impress upon him that religion (any) is a <I>positive,</I> and personal experience. Even if he choose to eliminate if from his life today ( which he has) NO ONE knows how he will feel down the road, and at least he has a basics.
I would never suggest or force him go to church now, or practice his religion because it's too personal a choice. However I did feel obligated as a parent when he was little, to provide the information that he couldn't get for himself.
I knew he would certainly be getting in from his school mates.
As an adult he can do as he please.
I really don't want to debate religion, I just wanted to respond to some of the statements you made. I belive in religious freedom and respect your belife what ever it may be, But I also expect the same respect from from others. Somehow(not from you necessarily) this conversation/ or thread turned into a christian mini bash, so it's best that I keep out of it.
Have a great day.
I can not add REP to anyone...not even those I disagree with. It drives me crazy!
As a side note I go my first vote down from Fooser. Guess my advice was just horrible LMAO!
As a side note I go my first vote down
from Fooser. Guess my advice was just horrible LMAO!
OH MY GOSH did he seriously give you bad rep?!!?!?!?!?? WOW. He was the one being rude, you said nothing wrong??? :/
Parentastic - Thanks, I am always trying to rep you too LOL and I'm not allowed anymore.
He was the one being rude, you said nothing wrong??? :/Parentastic - Thanks, I am always trying to rep you too LOL and I'm not allowed anymore.
Simple. I will answer any questions he has about the things his friends say as they arise. No stress there.NancyM said:
Yes, I am very well aware of all of this. I was one of those kids. My point was that I think that's too young. Yes, young children know about the religion they are being raised in, but do they truly understand it? Do those kids really get the concept of death and sin and all of that other stuff? Does any baby have any idea what is going on when they are baptised? I know kids that age learn about it, I just personally find it inappropriate. To each their own, of course.NancyM said:
Xero said:OH MY GOSH did he seriously give you bad rep?!!?!?!?!?? WOW.
I know! I never done rep unless if is something that is so far off that it is scary. I don't think I have ever down rep'd anyone!
Xero said:
Thank-you mam!!
That's a good question that I don't have a solid answer for. I think the reason you can only give so much to one person is so that the wealth is spread around...unless your me and just can't seem to give anyone anything LOLparentastic said:
I think we should be able to rep who we want, when we want, but as of know that isn't possible.
Here is an interesting graphic that, IMO, can explain a lot of why I think religion should never be mixed with schooling... amongst other reasons.
It speaks about patriotism also, in a way, but that's another story....
It speaks about patriotism also, in a way, but that's another story....
The reason that you have to "spread the love" is so that you can't have cliques of people who just rep eachother all of the time, thus you have a small group with a ton of rep. Rep is for those who deserve it with insightful and useful advice. I don't rep a ton because my rep power is very high...so i hold it for those whose advice I deem to be worthy of it.mom2many said:
I'm the same way Dadu, I don't rep often because of how high my rep power is. And yes you can only give a person rep every once in a while, and it is not a matter of time before you can rep them again, it is a matter of people. As soon as you rep (good or bad) a certain amount of people after you have repped that particular person, then you can go back and rep them again sometime. So you could rep like ten random people right now and then be able to rep me (or whoever).
well, there's a couple of things...first, I think the US position is reversed on the graph per : http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/four-americans-believe-strict-creationism.aspx[/URL]parentastic said:
and I think it's absolutely an exagerated conclusion.
You said "religion should never be taught in school." and then to support that you drag out statistics on beliefs in strict creationism. One does not equal the other. There are a hell of a lot of schools that teach good science and religion side by side. I'm about fed up with this generalization and smug bashing, not only here but all over the internet, by so-called educated people.
I have tried time and time again to illustrate how religious people can be just as normal and intelligent as the next guy. That the picture of the religious loon does not represent the whole of those who believe. Yet some people seem to feel the need to look down their nose and laugh at people who believe that a supreme being exists? Why? Whay can they not simply accept the different people have different beliefs? Why mus they insist on being right? Is it an insecurity? I'm perfectly happy acknowledging that some people don't believe in a god, and they can be every bit as bright, loving and respoinsible as me.
Shouldn't I be afforded the same courtesy?
There's more to relegion, that this silly struggle over evolution and creation and it's sad that it gets lost in the mix.
IMO your conclusion is wrong and you've opresented very little to support the notion that schooling and religion should NEVER be mixed.
So I am gathering, IADad, that you are quite angry about religion and science. What I am getting from your post, is that you seem to feel that non-religious people, and mostly educated people, are "looking down" on religious people as if they were not intelligent?IADad said:
I can't speak for others, nor can I speak for the whole of the internet. But as far as I am concerned, this is not related to "intelligence". For me that word is between quotes because, who knows what "intelligence" is? Goleman sees many types of intelligence and the very definition of it depends on your own set of values and reference frame, so I would never want to judge anyone over that kind of a criteria, if any.
But that's just me.
Both the graph and your data are correct. It shows 40% of us population still believe that humans were created by a supreme entity less than 10k years ago. The graph also show that US is an exception to the trend, which is actually a compliment to US people. The point of the graph, though, is not about USA. It's about how there is a direct correlation between extreme religious beliefs and education, and in turn, how this is directly correlated to National Wealth. As a generalized rule applied over 30 countries, the more extreme your population's religious views, the less power and wealth your nation generates. Which makes sense since it is directly related to education.IADad said:
IADad, I am not saying that the people who believe in creationism represent the whole of those who believe, not at all.IADad said:
However, the fact remains:
40% of Americans believe that a supreme being created human beings 10,000 years ago. FORTY PERCENT!
That's over <U>125 million people</U>! That's over THREE TIME the whole population of Canada!
125 million people, just in USA, have no idea about <I>carbon 14 dating</I> or do not care, do not believe in evolution, refute the idea of fossils and basically reject - by ignorance, lack of culture, or sheer faith - about a dozen affiliated scientific disciplines, including anthropology, biology, genetics, physics, chemistry...
In Texas, millions of elementary school books are being printed and ordered by religious-right wing politicians into school boards to "teach" children "intelligent design", as a "scientific" discipline alongside other discipline, perpetuating the cycle, confusing children as they are taught religious beliefs as "facts", hindering their capacity for critical thinking and countering the very idea of the scientific method.
So, let me ask you this in the most genuine, open-minded way I can be, in all truth and honesty: could you explain <I>how</I> they can do this?IADad said:
How do you teach that a man walked on water, yet teach Archimedes and density? How do you teach evolution, and genetics, and tectonic plaques, and continent separation, and anthropology - while you also "teach" that the entire earth, globe and all, was "created" in 7 days 10,000 years ago? How do you teach the scientific method, empirical testing, research result reproducibility - while you also "teach" things that cannot be verified, tested or validated by any experiment? How do you teach medical knowledge, while you also teach that prayer heals wounds? How do you teach biology, while "teaching" immaculate conception? How do you teach compassion and open-mindedness, while also teaching that one god is the only "right" one?
Of course! And, IMO, it's not about being right or wrong. If a parent wants to teach their children that the one true supreme being is the spaghetti space monster, hey, that's their rights - and for all we know, they may well be right. But this is a belief. Not facts.IADad said:
Facts should be taught in school, as well as how to recognize them and critique them. Beliefs should be taught at home, if any, and not at the cost of hindering a child's ability to think critically or while opposing scientific facts.
There is <I>definitely</I> more to religion than this struggle over creation.IADad said:
But it's far from <I>silly, </I>when it causes 125 million people, more than a third of a country, to reject science.
Religion can be powerful. It is in part about spirituality, it has been a powerful motor that has moved civilization ahead in the past; it's part of the realm of philosophy and reflection; I have complete confidence that the existence of various religions, their core principles, their influence on humanity's history, the influence on systems of values and on culture, has a place in school as part of history, philosophy, anthropology and ethics classes, if they are not picking sides or presenting any religion in an advantageous or disadvantageous light (and yes, that includes islamic and judaic religions, too).
But religion's <I><U>beliefs</U> </I>have no place in a school.
Have I clarified my position?IADad said:
Last edited:
You seem to think that religion and science HAVE to be separated. When in fact, they can be held hand in hand and both have something positive to offer. It doesn't have to be one way or the other...parentastic said: