Christians Sue for Right Not to Tolerate Policies

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
We can debate the constitutionality of religion in the schools, but one thing seems clear to me. If the schools cannot promote religion, neither can they attack it. And that's exactly what they are doing when they teach that alternative lifestyles are morally equivalent.

Huh???? The decision not to promote a specific set of values necessarily implies an attack on those values???

The decision to make students aware that there are other value systems besides the radical Christian one and that these value systems are morally equivalent represents an ATTACK on Christian values?? Why? How? You say to a student

"Radical Christians believe that homosexuality is immoral. There are other belief systems which encourage in their adherents the idea that homosexuality is not immoral. It is up to you to make up your mind which one works for you"

and this represents an attack on Christianity??

AAA... I jusy don't know what to make of you. You know damn well that this isn't true. Could it be that you are a Z-type, posting things like this just to sit and snicker as people like me spend our time trying to debunk what you yourself know to be rubbish?

Or is it the other explanation... that people like you see that you are losing your grip and are circling the wagons?

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from traderNik:

Huh???? The decision not to promote a specific set of values necessarily implies an attack on those values???

The decision to make students aware that there are other value systems besides the radical Christian one and that these value systems are morally equivalent represents an ATTACK on Christian values?? Why? How? You say to a student

"Radical Christians believe that homosexuality is immoral. There are other belief systems which encourage in their adherents the idea that homosexuality is not immoral. It is up to you to make up your mind which one works for you"

and this represents an attack on Christianity??

AAA... I jusy don't know what to make of you. You know damn well that this isn't true. Could it be that you are a Z-type, posting things like this just to sit and snicker as people like me spend our time trying to debunk what you yourself know to be rubbish?

Or is it the other explanation... that people like you see that you are losing your grip and are circling the wagons?

Few would have a problem if all the schools were doing is saying to students, as you claim, "make up your own mind." But that's not what is happening. They are being not only taught but required to acknowledge that alternative lifestyles are morally equivalent and acceptable. That creates an unavoidable conflict with religious values, and forces the student to choose one over the other.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

"We can debate the constitutionality of religion in the schools, but one thing seems clear to me. If the schools cannot promote religion, neither can they attack it. And that's exactly what they are doing when they teach that alternative lifestyles are morally equivalent."

Since schools are not supposed to teach morality, especially religious morality, then all lifestyles should be presented as morally equivalent.

You want kinds indoctrinated with your religion? Send them to private schools....

It is about time we started taxing the shit out of churches who use their position for political purposes....

Teaching that all lifestyles is morally equivalent is not being even-handed, it's taking a position, one that is explicitly condemned by every major religion.

We have an educational crisis, our students can't read or do math at grade level, but the schools waste enormous resources on PC indoctrination. Do you think there is a lot of that in chinese and Indian schools? The ones training the kids our grandkids will be working for?

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

So schools should adopt a policy in education that conforms the Christian right wings view of morality for fear of generating conflict?

Oy vey!

Let the kids have conflict, then, let them decide for themselves.

That is part of the education process, to be presented with different points of view of what is acceptable, then the kids eventually grow up and decide for themselves.

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Few would have a problem if all the schools were doing is saying to students, as you claim, "make up your own mind." But that's not what is happening. They are being not only taught but required to acknowledge that alternative lifestyles are morally equivalent and acceptable. That creates an unavoidable conflict with religious values, and forces the student to choose one over the other.

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

They are being not only taught but required to acknowledge that alternative lifestyles are morally equivalent and acceptable. That creates an unavoidable conflict with religious values, and forces the student to choose one over the other.

No man... it creates a conflict with YOUR religious values. Again, you are leaping to a conclusion that it forces students to choose one over another. It does nothing of the kind. It is educating them about things in the world, things that exist. It is doing so without strapping the filter of religious fanaticism to their faces.

The conflict, which you characterize as unavoidable, exists not in the education process, but in your mind. And in the end, there are lots of conflicting ideas that students will have to deal with. That is the solace of religion - it provides all the answers in a world in which answers are often hard to come by.

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
We have an educational crisis, our students can't read or do math at grade level, but the schools waste enormous resources on PC indoctrination. Do you think there is a lot of that in chinese and Indian schools? The ones training the kids our grandkids will be working for?

And the solution to this future imbalance you describe, where your grandkids are working for Chinese and Indians, is... is... to teach your grandkids that homosexuality is a sin? I agree that the PC component in education is contemptible. But let's keep it real. Taking the word Christmas out of any material that might be seen by a 11th grader is absurd. By all means, stamp this kind of idiocy out. But the last thing, the very last thing that people like you want to do is become insular, to smash the filter down over the faces of those grandkids you worry about and shout loudly enough that ideas which make you uncomfortable won't reach their ears. I am not sure if you have kids, but I can guarantee you this - the 8-14 year old kids I see are bombarded by ideas and images that you have no way of controlling. Is it not better to educate them, in order to allow them to make good decisions?

Has prohibition ever worked? Do you think that the idea that you are God's chosen people and that those who don't think like you are going to burn in hell has anything to do with the lack or performance by your grandkids in school? Do you see anything remotely resembling this in Indian or Chinese families? They don't give a rat's ass about your moral or religious philosophy. Why are you spending so much time worrying about mine?

Because.... you're circling the wagons, because it's getting away from you. Which, paradoxically, is the last thing you want to be doing.

And don't get me wrong - protecting your cultural heritage is fine. Again, take a look at Indian and Chinese kids.

 

[jem]

Stating the obvious, that some kids have two moms or two dads is education. My son in kindergarten just learned this last week on his own with out the aid of a teacher.

Stating that having one mom and one dad is better -- is teaching morals and values.

Stating that having one mom and one is is worse -- is teaching morals and values.

Stating that having one mom and one dad is equal -- is teaching morals and values.

For the brain dead or emotional just substitute "one mom and one dad" with "two moms or two dads" and realize you are brain dead to take the other side of this debate.

For zzz to argue as he has on this thread about teaching alternative lifestyles but then argue on other threads about the need for teaching science in a non value laden way vis a vis evolution is the epitome of trolling and being pyschotic at the same time.

 

[jem]

Finally, I think dopey liberals need to understand that 86% of the country identifies itself as Christian. I suspect there are a majority of people in this country who are Christian and very capable of discerning the difference between promoting Christian values in schools vs. promoting alternative values.

We value public education for numerous reasons and we are not asking the public to promote Christian values in public schools. But we also demand that a radical minority does not use the schools to indoctrinate our children into the belief systems shared by radical minorities.

To be graphic.

Teaching children that kissing or felatio is OK is not something that should to be taught in schools. Whether it be of the heterosexual or homosexual kind. Teaching kids that heterosexual or homosexual relationships are O.K. is similarly improper for Public schools.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

I see you have gone full blown ad hominem jem.

Classic....

I expect that kind of response from Pabst and others, but when you employ such knee jerk responses, I know that you have seriously lost your balance....

Quote from jem:

Stating the obvious, that some kids have two moms or two dads is education. My son in kindergarten just learned this last week on his own with out the aid of a teacher.

Stating that having one mom and one dad is better -- is teaching morals and values.

Stating that having one mom and one is is worse -- is teaching morals and values.

Stating that having one mom and one dad is equal -- is teaching morals and values.

For the brain dead or emotional just substitute "one mom and one dad" with "two moms or two dads" and realize you are brain dead to take the other side of this debate.

For zzz to argue as he has on this thread about teaching alternative lifestyles but then argue on other threads about the need for teaching science in a non value laden way vis a vis evolution is the epitome of trolling and being pyschotic at the same time.

 

[jem]

excellent point by point rebuttal zzz. Just what I expected from you. O.K. I retract the part about trolling and pychosis. Now explain.