Religion in Schools

Originally posted by pawnhandler
Lots of utter rubbish to wade through. I taught in parochial schools for 8 years -- talk about prayer and religion in school! We still had our share of sociopaths, horrid parents, cruel children, etc. These were families that showed up in church every week, donated, etc. Religion and morals education is irrelevant. What matters is the actual parenting.

You taught for 8 years? When? In the last 20?

You are correct about the parenting. Recently, right in my neck of the woods, a 2 year old child was found 2 blocks from home by herself. When the police found the house where she lived they knocked on the door, but no one answered. They went in and found the parents sleeping at ten thirty in the morning. The dad was drunk. There was dog feces all over the house and in the child's bed.

Morals education is not irrelevant. I don't believe schools are responsible for teaching religion, but they are responsible for producing responsible adults. After all they have the kids all day everyday 9 months of the year.

But don't hold your breath hoping the public school system will improve. It's run by the government. Very inefficient.

Originally posted by josephw
Me either. But it is plain to see the effects of 40 years of liberal democratic rule. And the republicans are just as much to blame.
Don't forget to throw Hollywood into it.

Show me the actual evidence of causation (correlation is NOT causation).

You say you aren't for a theocracy, yet you regret prayer being taken out of public schools (as it should have been)?

Originally posted by josephw
In the 1950's the worst thing a kid in school could do was to chew gum in class and a few other minor things.
Then in 1961 and 62 the supreme court outlawed prayer and the pledge of allegiance. Now days our children are murdering each other.

No, let's not go back to teaching religion and morals and pride in our country. After all, this is the worst natio ...[text shortened]... time to dispense psychosomatic drugs for this epidemic schizophrenia that plagues this land.

You say we are the worst nation on earth and then you say we are the greatest.

What exactly do you hope having prayer in school will do?

Originally posted by josephw
You taught for 8 years? When? In the last 20?

You are correct about the parenting. Recently, right in my neck of the woods, a 2 year old child was found 2 blocks from home by herself. When the police found the house where she lived they knocked on the door, but no one answered. They went in and found the parents sleeping at ten thirty in the morning. The hoping the public school system will improve. It's run by the government. Very inefficient.

I taught in parochial schools from September 1999 to June 2007. This is my first year in public schools (as a teacher). In both schools we've tried to teach morals, but kids hold onto the values of their parents and dismiss what the school says. The parents had these kids for years before they started school. Look at your own family. If you have children, would you prefer that if they had to choose, they pick the school's values over yours? If not, then it doesn't make sense to assume the other 2 billion families are different.


Edit: What exactly is it that you think the school is inefficient at?

Originally posted by josephw
You're wrong. It was never like it is today. I know my American history, and we are no more violent than any other nation. As a matter of fact it's quite peaceful here. The acts of violence you would obviously list are isolated and perpetuated by a relatively few, and is not representative of the vast majority of Americans.

Don't knock my country. It's th ...[text shortened]... I'm right. I have first hand experience. I've observed it's decline these past 40 years.

Hahahahahahahahha! Wow, I laughed until I cried!

There have been shootings in schools many, many years before prayer was abolished. Prayer prevents nothing.

As for the levels of violence in America, well,your murder rates are two orders of magnitude higher than Western Europe, and three orders of magnitude higher than here in Japan, even with population sizes taken into consideration. Even if America isn't more violent than other cultures, more people certainly wind up dead as a result.

Don't knock my country. It's the greatest nation that ever existed. Any attempt to say otherwise would be a display of ignorance.

Last time I heard this type of argument it was perpetuated by two 5 year olds. Yeah, sure your Daddy is bigger than my Daddy.

I wish they would just teach something in American schools. I know there are some good schools and some people get a good education, but I find it amazing how many Americans I know who went through school but are remarkably uneducated.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Then you are as well informed about science as most rocks.

Evolution is backed by lots and lots and lots of empirical evidence.

Also, you don't understand the word Theory.

yes, the basic idea of evolution that organisms can mutate to surivive is bluntly clear. Bird's grow longer beaks to reach foods and many others. Clearly evolution is true in this case, and closely related species may have evoloved one way or another, I'm not arguing that. I'm making the point that we cannot truly acredit or discredit evolution or creation theories because of the initial "creation." This is where the real issues comes into play: when you begin to track back in time. To the creation of the first matter.
Because either the matter that we see here today either mutated (evolved) from a matter that:
a) Is eternal
b) Is not eternal

a1) If it is eternal, than you truly believe that the world we see has always existed and is never aging, for in order for it to be eternal, it has to be without time. This isn't true because stars die, particles decay, and even fundamental elements shift into different elements.
a2) If this matter always has existed and was not created by anything, doesn't that sound disturbingly like God?

b1) if it is eternal, then when was it created? If it was created, it would have definitive starting place.
b2) if it is eternal, then how was it created? If it was created, something had to start it.
b3) If we had nothing, then something was created, and nothing cannot create anything, then how was it created? It could not have created itself.
b4) That leaves a creator, but then that dives into religion, and what made god?

The "A" line of thinking leads you to see matter as a self-sustaining, eternal object, a god if you will. Line "B" simply begs the question of what came first.

Because the idea of creation by evolution or "god" must eventually deal with "Time=0 through Time=1," we can never truly prove or disprove a creation vs evolutionary theory debate. and yes, theory is the correct word, after being criticized, i double check my previous post and was re-affirmed that my usage of "theory" from was correct.

This is quoted from Dictionary.com:

1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.

Using this definition of theory, it requires a certain amount of "faith" to believe in ANY beliefe in creation, because it cannot be proved: both religious and athiestic.

So again, I am NOT simply stating that to teach "Evolution over Creation" or "Creation over evolution" is wrong. I'm saying that when taught, they need to be taught at an equal level, for both are valid theories, both of which require a certain degree of FAITH to believe in. Oh, and so that you don't get anal on me, here is a definition for "faith"
"Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. "
"belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc"

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
You say you aren't for a theocracy, yet you regret prayer being taken out of public schools (as it should have been)?[/b]

Prayer in schools is controversial. On one hand, I see it as improper for a teacher to lead his students into prayer at a public school. However, if a student wishes to pray before a meal, test, recess, or whatever, it should be up to him

Originally posted by c guy1
yes, the basic idea of evolution that organisms can mutate to surivive is bluntly clear. Bird's grow longer beaks to reach foods and many others. Clearly evolution is true in this case, and closely related species may have evoloved one way or another, I'm not arguing that. I'm making the point that we cannot truly acredit or discredit evolution or creation elief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc"

Again, you show a complete ignorance of even the most fundamental of scientific facts.

Evolution only deals with the diversity of life, NOT how it began. That is the study of abiogenesis which is interesting in it's own right.

The origin of matter has nothing to do with evolution. It's more to do with the Big Bang hypothesis, and nucleosynthesis in stars. All pretty well researched.

Unlike creationism, evolution is readily testable, since it makes predictions which can be experimentally investigated and, if they turn out to be false, the theory modified or even abandoned completely.

For example, humans have 2 less chromosomes inside their cells than other members of the great apes. Since we cannot just "lose" a pair of chromosomes, since that would result in death, the only explanation which would be allowed if evolution is true, would be that two of the chromosomes had fused together. Sure enough, when the tests were done, we find out that primate chromosomes 2 and 13 are fused together in humans, replete with doubles of the genetic markers used by the cell during reproduction (normal chromosomes have one set of telomeres, yet these chromosomes had 2 pairs, just as they would if 2 chromosomes had been fused).

Other predictions, such as the lack of fossil bunny rabbits in the Pre-Cambrian strata, again something which would render evolution obsolete, have NEVER been found. One day we might, and evolution would be abandoned, but we haven't in 150 years of looking.

As for the term Theory, it is a technical word, which does not have the meaning that you seem to suppose it does, when you apply it to creationism.

When a layperson says the word "theory", they basically normally mean "wild speculation". When a scientist uses the technical term theory, they are talking about an idea which is supported by a large body of work, has been tested many many times, and never been found to be substantially wrong. Gravity, for example, is a theory. Do you have any doubt that gravity exists? Neither do the scientists - a theory is an explanation backed by evidence.

Creationism, on the other hand has no backing in evidence. Creationism can never be considered as science, because their main tenants of their argument are untestable.

I have no problem with creationism being taught in a comparative religion class, but to teach it as science is not just criminally irresponsible, it is intellectually dishonest, and morally repugnent. If someone tried to teach creationism to my kids at school (if I had any), I would be sueing the individuals and school boards responsible, and endeavouring to have their teaching licences revoked.


[edit; by the way, your "where did everything come from" part of the post is logically flawed, since it requires time to be external to the universe, and not a property of the universe, which we know it to be (thanks to Professor Einstein).]

My sons school is organizing a camping trip for the class. The booklet from the camp organizers says that there will be Christians prayers. The Muslim and Jewish children will be automatically excused but anyone else wanting to be excused must have a letter specifically requesting it. I am wondering whether I should write a rude letter about discrimination against atheists or whether I should just tell my son to pretend he is Muslim.

Religion in schools is a much tougher issue here in Capetown as a typical class has Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and Atheists.

Originally posted by twhitehead
My sons school is organizing a camping trip for the class. The booklet from the camp organizers says that there will be Christians prayers. The Muslim and Jewish children will be automatically excused but anyone else wanting to be excused must have a letter specifically requesting it. I am wondering whether I should write a rude letter about discriminatio ...[text shortened]... er issue here in Capetown as a typical class has Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and Atheists.

maybe it would be better if he didn't attend. a camp for children that does activities only for a certain category of children might not be a very positive influence

Originally posted by c guy1
Prayer in schools is controversial. On one hand, I see it as improper for a teacher to lead his students into prayer at a public school. However, if a student wishes to pray before a meal, test, recess, or whatever, it should be up to him

Someone praying before their meal or whatever at school is different than "prayer in schools".

The whole point is that public schools should not be neutral about prayer - i.e. don't have a "prayer time" before class.

If you want to pray before class, then fine - do it on your own time.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
maybe it would be better if he didn't attend. a camp for children that does activities only for a certain category of children might not be a very positive influence

But then keeping him away from having fun with his friends in the hope of sheltering him from the worlds problems might not be a good idea either. He lives in a society full of religion as well as a significant amount of religious segregation, and also racial segregation (apartheid is gone but racism is far from dead).

Originally posted by twhitehead
I wish they would just teach something in American schools. I know there are some good schools and some people get a good education, but I find it amazing how many Americans I know who went through school but are remarkably uneducated.

Part of the problem with American schools is the lack of global standards. There is a widespread view in the US that education standards are a local decision so there isn't any real national standard of what is taught other than some pretty general things from what I understand.

There are some benefits to this, but the problem is you get a wide difference in how good an education people will get depending on where they went to school and whether their school district had good or bad standards.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But then keeping him away from having fun with his friends in the hope of sheltering him from the worlds problems might not be a good idea either. He lives in a society full of religion as well as a significant amount of religious segregation, and also racial segregation (apartheid is gone but racism is far from dead).

I think you should write a letter to them. If anything, it'll let them know that there is that other viewpoint.

They're not going to change if noone ever says anything.