They didn't realize it would be public display in a museum
how the catholic church turns off young people.
- Thread starter Free Thinker
- Start date
They didn't realize it would be public display in a museum
I gave you so many chances to think. But you refused.
here is more background on how languages change over time.
Now imagine translating.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Canterbury_Tales
Although no manuscript exists in Chaucer's own hand, two were copied around the time of his death by Adam Pinkhurst, a scribe with whom he seems to have worked closely before, giving a high degree of confidence that Chaucer himself wrote the Tales.[7] Chaucer's generation of English-speakers was among the last to pronounce e at the end of words (so for Chaucer the word "care" was pronounced [ˈkaːrə], not /ˈkɛər/ as in modern English). This meant that later copyists tended to be inconsistent in their copying of final -e and this for many years gave scholars the impression that Chaucer himself was inconsistent in using it.[8] It has now been established, however, that -e was an important part of Chaucer's morphology (having a role in distinguishing, for example, singular adjectives from plural and subjunctive verbs from indicative).[9] The pronunciation of Chaucer's writing otherwise differs most prominently from Modern English in that his language had not undergone the Great Vowel Shift: pronouncing Chaucer's vowels as they would be pronounced today in European languages like Italian, Spanish or German generally produces pronunciations more like Chaucer's own than Modern English pronunciation would. In addition, sounds now written in English but not pronounced were still pronounced by Chaucer: the word <knight> for Chaucer was [knixt], not [naɪt]. The pronunciation of Chaucer's poetry can now be reconstructed fairly confidently through detailed philological research; the following gives an IPA reconstruction of the opening lines of The Merchant's Prologue; it is likely, moreover, that when a word ending in a vowel was followed by a word beginning in a vowel, the two vowels were elided into one syllable, as seen here (with care and...):
Schooling is an affair of state. Come on Mnpharts.
Kids have to go to school. Private or public schools cannot do whatever the hell they want. The key word is school, not religious indoctrination camp.
A bunch of bigotry preaching catholic 'mullahs' telling school children, adopted kids were "sociologically unstable", got it handed right back to them rather ironically by what they thought was a captive and catholic audience.
Damn right too.
Bullshit on this one, a private school can teach whatever they want, and a public school can't stop a child from professing they faith.
Christian, Catholic what ever schools are there because Parents enroll their children in them wanting their children to be taught both religion and academics.
Separation of Church and State was instituted for this very reason, not to keep Religion out of Government but to keep Government out of Religion.... The state can't mandate a private/religious schools curriculum, unless they want to try and blackmail them.
The Catholic spokesperson in this instance choose their words very unwisely, however it doesn't negate the fact that children from broken ,single-parent households are at a disadvantage......not even going to touch non traditional same sex partnered families if you want to stretch the definition.
Actually his analogy was fine. The school is most likely a private, catholic school, students who can't attend mandatory meetings because they don't believe what the church is selling - should attend another school. the church is what it is and has been that way for centuries, they and their families know what they are getting into when they enroll there.
If it is in fact a public school then there shouldn't be any mandatory religious meetings.
Bullshit on your one too. Simplistic sweeping statements like that don't score. A private school cannot legally teach whatever they want. To use an extreme, are you trying to suggest a catholic school would be legally free to preach incitement to commit murder? Of course not. Free to preach and teach intolerance and hatred of fellow pupils by their race religion or whether they were adopted is what parents role into a school for? Are you serious? Next you'll be telling me the government, in the form of law, should be kept out of catholic child rape, because the state cannot mandate that kind of 'curriculum' which they were running worldwide.
Perhaps only a catholic could imagine such things were ok.
The analogy was comparing meetings to captive audiences - and hateful preaching by catholics against the sexual orientation and antecedence of other children , some of whose adopted parents had decided for them they were catholic - being disrupted by more catholics, presumably by parents who decided for them that they were catholic too .
Whereas KKK meetings are not taken to task for their hatred when quite obviously they have and are, and KKK members decide themselves to be KKK members not their parents, and are not obliged by any law ,state or school, to attend a mandatory captive assembly listening to intolerant religious bigots spread their version of hate in the name of god, as those catholic school children were required to do.
Actually his analogy is crap on so many levels.