Tell Me Again How Public Schools are Cesspools of Atheism

[Quincy]

Public schools is no place for teaching religion of ANY kind.

Do that in your daily life, in your home and in your church.

Great post. What you teach your children is what they take to school with them, it can improve the quality of public schooling.... or not, lol.

Seems to me that public schools that are in bad shape, are that way because too many parents are sending bad kids to them. Teachers should teach, not be parents or religious mentors.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Great post. What you teach your children is what they take to school with them, it can improve the quality of public schooling.... or not, lol.

Seems to me that public schools that are in bad shape, are that way because too many parents are sending bad kids to them. Teachers should teach, not be parents or religious mentors.

Public schools are in bad shape because the adults that run them have determined that God doesn't belong there and they teach the children that they are nothing more than animals, so thats how the kids act, like animals.

 

[Jose Fly]

So basically, you want US public schools to be Christian madrasas?

 

[Lon]

Oh dear! That was brilliant!

.... :think:

Which god? You folks make reference to one a lot on TOL :think:

I think in your head, there is a connect that is meaningful to you, but I'm missing part of it here, but I'll try. I think 'fault' is wrong though. We are born one way, it is Adam's 'fault' curse. We are born, like Dawkins said (not needing to reference or quote Dawkins or even bring him into the conversation, except as correct on an observation you and I can make), without God on this planet. "Natural?" No, we all have a God-shaped void. More, our existence is sustained by Him Colossians 1:17.

Your fault would be to hear the gospel, be convinced He exists, then walk away. There could be fault in you, simply from walking away without being wise to investigate such an eternal matter.

Both of us, before hearing anything, could have blamed Adam for our miserable condition. I don't think, however 'blame' could take it away, just give us someone to complain against.

I hope I've drawn those connections and meaningfully addressed them. I do care.

If you wanted to be a Christian, you'd have to ask Him. I 'think' that answers your question. -Lon

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Public schools is no place for teaching religion of ANY kind.

Do that in your daily life, in your home and in your church.

One can step over the line, like tellin' the kid his/her mom was bad and going to hell, crazy hunh?

However.........


I reckon it could be studied some in history and social studies.

In particular American history?

It wouldn't hurt to teach children that George Washington believed in God and his son Jesus.

http://www.propheticroundtable.org/ForeFathers/GeorgeWashington/A Prayer.htm

Almighty God,

We make our earnest prayer that Thou wilt keep the United States in Thy Holy protection; and Thou wilt incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government; and entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another and for their fellow Citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the Field.

And finally that Thou wilt most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility, and pacific temper of mind which were the Characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without a humble imitation of whose example in these things we can never hope to be a happy nation. Grant our supplication, we beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

--George Washington

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

So basically, you want US public schools to be Christian madrasas?

Nope, just teach that one of the reasons this country was established was so that people could serve God the father of Jesus Christ to the dictates of their own conscience.

All done within the confines of the Constitution.

Which by the way does not allow federal judges to make up laws and then single handedly enforce them.

All the Supreme Court did in the gay marriage deal is say laws against gay marriage are unconstitutional.

So then if a state brought somebody to court for issuing licenses contrary to the sate's law, the lower courts are obliged not to prosecute them.

One of the main problems in this country is judges thinking they can legally hold bench trials.

Article 3 of the Constitution says ALL cases criminal and civil will be decided by trial by jury.

Just tossin' that out there, sorry for straying a little.

I understand your concern about unlearned Christian zealots over stepping their bounds, but they are no worse than you unbelievers wishing to do the same in the other direction.

 

[keypurr]

One can step over the line, like tellin' the kid his/her mom was bad and going to hell, crazy hunh?

However.........


I reckon it could be studied some in history and social studies.

In particular American history?

It wouldn't hurt to teach children that George Washington believed in God and his son Jesus.

http://www.propheticroundtable.org/ForeFathers/GeorgeWashington/A Prayer.htm

Almighty God,

We make our earnest prayer that Thou wilt keep the United States in Thy Holy protection; and Thou wilt incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government; and entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another and for their fellow Citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the Field.

And finally that Thou wilt most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility, and pacific temper of mind which were the Characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without a humble imitation of whose example in these things we can never hope to be a happy nation. Grant our supplication, we beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

--George Washington

Holiness comes from the heart, not the State.
Keep ALL religion out of public schools.
That way no one steps on someone elses toes.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Holiness comes from the heart, not the State.
Keep ALL religion out of public schools.
That way no one steps on someone elses toes.

All well and good.

But I wonder about yer ability to perform on a jury.

Just sayin' my friend.

 

[Jose Fly]

Nope, just teach that one of the reasons this country was established was so that people could serve God the father of Jesus Christ to the dictates of their own conscience.

All done within the confines of the Constitution.

As well as people of other faiths who want to practice their religions, and people of no religion who want to be free to not have to abide by the rules of someone else's religion.

Which by the way does not allow federal judges to make up laws and then single handedly enforce them.

Good thing they don't then.

All the Supreme Court did in the gay marriage deal is say laws against gay marriage are unconstitutional.

So then if a state brought somebody to court for issuing licenses contrary to the sate's law, the lower courts are obliged not to prosecute them.

And if a same sex couple applies for a marriage license, there's no legal basis for the state to deny it to them. If the state does deny it, the state is violating the Constitutional rights of the couple (by denying them equal protection and due process).

I understand your concern about unlearned Christian zealots over stepping their bounds, but they are no worse than you unbelievers wishing to do the same in the other direction.

Such as.....?

 

[patrick jane]

Almighty God,

We make our earnest prayer that Thou wilt keep the United States in Thy Holy protection; and Thou wilt incline the hearts of the Citizens to cultivate a spirit of subordination and obedience to Government; and entertain a brotherly affection and love for one another and for their fellow Citizens of the United States at large, and particularly for their brethren who have served in the Field.

And finally that Thou wilt most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that Charity, humility, and pacific temper of mind which were the Characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed Religion, and without a humble imitation of whose example in these things we can never hope to be a happy nation. Grant our supplication, we beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

--George Washington

Good Georgey quote !

 

[Clete]

Oh look, a public school teacher forcing.....RELIGION....upon students.
Child students, at that.
THIS is why some of us so vehemently defend the Wall of Separation.



Georgia School Pays Up After Teacher Tells First Grader His Mom Is Bad Because She Doesn't Believe in God

So let me get this straight...

You start a thread asking us to tell you how public schools are atheistic with an opening post saying that they aren't atheistic enough.

Do I have that right?


At any rate, the solution isn't to make public schools more atheistic, its to abolish them altogether. What you consider the removal of indoctrination into one religion I consider to be indoctrination into another. In other words, if the state can't force Christianity (or another theistic religion) down your throat, why do you think it can force atheism (the only alternative) down mine?

The only way your "wall of separation" can be maintained is for the government to get out of the schooling business.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Jose Fly]

In other words, if the state can't force Christianity (or another theistic religion) down your throat, why do you think it can force atheism (the only alternative) down mine?

I'm always amused at how some people can only seem to think in black/white extremes, in this case where if a school doesn't indoctrinate students into any religion, that has to mean they're "forcing atheism".

You do understand there's a difference between the school saying "There are no gods" (atheism, which they don't do) and "whatever you believe about gods is up to you" (neutrality, which is what they do), don't you?

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

As well as people of other faiths who want to practice their religions, and people of no religion who want to be free to not have to abide by the rules of someone else's religion.

So we are on the same page then?

Christianity may be taught from a historical point of view?

Good thing they don't then.

So nobody was jailed for contempt of a judge's order when he thought he could?

And if a same sex couple applies for a marriage license, there's no legal basis for the state to deny it to them.

Who is gonna make them issue them?

If the state does deny it, the state is violating the Constitutional rights of the couple (by denying them equal protection and due process).

This is merely an opinion offered by 5 judges.

Such as.....?

Trying to redefine marriage for one.

 

[Jose Fly]

So we are on the same page then?

Christianity may be taught from a historical point of view?

Of course, along with other religions. That's how things are done in many schools today.

So nobody was jailed for contempt of a judge's order when he thought he could?

Contempt of court is not a law.

Who is gonna make them issue them?

There's no legal reason for them not to. If they don't, they are violating the Constitutional rights of the applicants, which carries specific consequences.

This is merely an opinion offered by 5 judges.

Under the US Constitution, the Supreme Court exists specifically to rule on Constitutional issues and their rulings are the final say. So no, their ruling is more than "merely an opinion".

Trying to redefine marriage for one.

You mean like they did in Loving v. Virginia?

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Of course, along with other religions. That's how things are done in many schools today.

What are these other supposed religions that affected the decisions of the men forming this country?

Contempt of court is not a law.

This is relevant to our discussion how?

Answer my question.

There's no legal reason for them not to. If they don't, they are violating the Constitutional rights of the applicants, which carries specific consequences.

If you would answer the question you would be listing these specifics, so what are they?

Under the US Constitution, the Supreme Court exists specifically to rule on Constitutional issues and their rulings are the final say. So no, their ruling is more than "merely an opinion".

If that's true then address my specific questions.

You mean like they did in Loving v. Virginia?

This has already been addressed in another thread, and shot down.

Yer not the sharpest pencil in the drawer are yuh?

 

[Clete]

I'm always amused at how some people can only seem to think in black/white extremes, in this case where if a school doesn't indoctrinate students into any religion, that has to mean they're "forcing atheism".

You do understand there's a difference between the school saying "There are no gods" (atheism, which they don't do) and "whatever you believe about gods is up to you" (neutrality, which is what they do), don't you?

I understand that this the theory but I also understand it is self contradictory. The lack of a theistic education is, by definition, atheistic. That's what the word means.

This is not merely a question of linguistics but is true in practice as well. The neutrality you speak of is not possible to achieve in actual practice. There is no way to learn from a non-theistic perspective without thinking atheisticly. There is no way to compartmentalize your atheistic education away from the whole rest of the way you think about every other issue in your life.

This obvious fact is well known by those in power. It is the principle reason that progressives have always wanted a public school system.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

I understand that this the theory but I also understand it is self contradictory. The lack of a theistic education is, by definition, atheistic. That's what the word means.

This is not merely a question of linguistics but is true in practice as well. The neutrality you speak of is not possible to achieve in actual practice. There is no way to learn from a non-theistic perspective without thinking atheisticly. There is no way to compartmentalize your atheistic education away from the whole rest of the way you think about every other issue in your life.

This obvious fact is well known by those in power. It is the principle reason that progressives have always wanted a public school system.

 

[Jose Fly]

What are these other supposed religions that affected the decisions of the men forming this country?

In world history classes, the major religions of the world are covered.

This is relevant to our discussion how?

You're talking about Kim Davis, right? She was jailed for contempt of court.

If you would answer the question you would be listing these specifics, so what are they?

You're not making sense. You asked (I think, your question wasn't clear) who makes officials issue marriage licenses. That would be whoever enforces state law. And if in issuing or not issuing licences the person violates someone's Constitutional rights, then the federal government gets involved.

If that's true then address my specific questions.

What do you mean, "If that's true"? You don't know what the Constitution says? And what question are you talking about?

This has already been addressed in another thread, and shot down.

Where?

 

[Jose Fly]

. The lack of a theistic education is, by definition, atheistic. That's what the word means.

Not atheistic in the sense that they are teaching students that gods don't exist, or any other positions regarding the existence or non-existence of gods. All they're saying is the school takes no position one way or the other on questions of religion. That seems fair.

The neutrality you speak of is not possible to achieve in actual practice.

Sure it is.

There is no way to learn from a non-theistic perspective without thinking atheisticly.

Yes there is. A student can think of 2+2=4 as theistically as they want.

There is no way to compartmentalize your atheistic education away from the whole rest of the way you think about every other issue in your life.

Not everyone is limited to such black/white thinking.

This obvious fact is well known by those in power. It is the principle reason that progressives have always wanted a public school system.

Ah yes... Public schools are a liberal plot. :chuckle:

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

In world history classes, the major religions of the world are covered.

Not American history. The question was about this country. Do you really not have the capacity to carry on a conversation?

You're talking about Kim Davis, right? She was jailed for contempt of court.

Yep, by a judge who thought he had the authority to single handedly declare and enforce as law a supreme court decision.

You're not making sense. You asked (I think, your question wasn't clear) who makes officials issue marriage licenses. That would be whoever enforces state law. And if in issuing or not issuing licences the person violates someone's Constitutional rights, then the federal government gets involved.

Pay attention.

This is how supreme court decisions work.

The Supreme Court rules on appeals.

When they make a decision it governs how the lower courts can try cases.

In this case the 2 lesbians who sued her will have to take her back to court.

Unless they can get a jury to award them anything it is an exercise in futility.

The Supreme Court has no authority to try her, let alone have her locked up.

Nor especially a lower federal court judge.

The Judge had to let her go, or the Supreme court would end up having to rule on his authority to make and enforce laws.

In which case he would lose hands down.

Thereby opening himself up to a lawsuit.

Actually, depending upon her wanting to pursue it, and finding an honest judge that would let her in his court, he already has.

I'd surely welcome a chance to be on that jury.

What do you mean, "If that's true"? You don't know what the Constitution says? And what question are you talking about?

If I'm wrong, perhaps you can tell me where in the Constitution it says the Supreme Court can make and enforce laws.

:wazzup: