Let's see if we can discuss an issue...

[Okla-homey]

without it degrading into a political slugfest and moral p1ssing contest. K?

Here's the question presented:

Would there be a problem if basic Christianity, I'll call it "Christianity 101" (the basics of the faith stripped of all extra-biblical doctrine and/or dogma) were taught in public schools as a means of explaining and contextualizing American history, legal traditions, political science and sociology?

As a historian by avocation, and a reasonably rational and educated person, I am convinced the "American experience" cannot be fully explained, appreciated or understood without a working knowledge of the Christian religion.

discuss:

:pop:

[jk the sooner fan]

when you say christianity 101, are you referring to something so basic, that the actual faith part of it is removed? otherwise, i dont think you can do it 101 style.....its either all or nothing

know what i mean?

[SoonerProphet]

What about the role of Enlightenment and the secular philosphes?

Perhaps Judeo/Christian/Roman tradition in law and politics.

[jk the sooner fan]

i agree that it has had a huge impact on world history, and should be included.....to what extent and how deep, i'm not sure

[Sooner in Tampa]

I don't have a problem with it.

[sooneron]

I'm in the Prophet camp. Aren't some of these things already in place? The magna carta and later the Papal Bull by H8...

[Okla-homey]

when you say christianity 101, are you referring to something so basic, that the actual faith part of it is removed? otherwise, i dont think you can do it 101 style.....its either all or nothing

know what i mean?

I mean, the basic tenets of the Gospel and the way they have been interpreted and manifested in American domestic and international policy. Things like evangelization which propelled so much of our early continental and international expansion, and fundamental notions of everyone being equal in the eyes of the Lord, etc. The notion that everyone deserves a second chance. Fundamental fairness. "Doing unto others as you would have them do unto you," and that sort of stuff. Also, the earnest belief held by the great majority, as directly lifted from the Bible, that there is just one God and He wants you to be happy.

[jk the sooner fan]

i guess the answer for me would depend on who's creating the curriculum.....

[sooneron]

I mean, the basic tenets of the Gospel and the way they have been interpreted and manifested in American domestic and international policy. Things like evangelization which propelled so much of our early continental and international expansion, and fundamental notions of everyone being equal in the eyes of the Lord, etc. The notion that everyone deserves a second chance. Fundamental fairness. "Doing unto others as you would have them do unto you," and that sort of stuff. Also, the earnest belief held by the great majority, as directly lifted from the Bible, that there is just one God and He wants you to be happy.
I'm not trying to start a ****storm here, but doing unto others isn't exactly something that has always entered into foreign policy.

[sooneron]

i guess the answer for me would depend on who's creating the curriculum.....
And THAT would be a huge part of the problem.

[sooneron]

Oh, and I say this thread heads for the crapper by page 3.

[Okla-homey]

i guess the answer for me would depend on who's creating the curriculum.....

ahh, there is the rub. That said, I think it could be done, but it would require a completely objective look at Christian influence in American affairs. That said, I contend that people who don't know anything about Christianity find it exceedly difficult to fully comprehend how America got where it is today.

[Okla-homey]

I'm not trying to start a ****storm here, but doing unto others isn't exactly something that has always entered into foreign policy.

No, it isn't. I'm not implying that it has been the mantra of foreign policy...but it has been a significant influence.

[jk the sooner fan]

as much as it pains me to say it, you'd have a hard time finding a group of christians to set a curriculum that they could all agree on within your description ......especially not if the group was spread among the major denominations

you'd have better luck finding weapons of mass destruction in iraq right now

[Okla-homey]

as much as it pains me to say it, you'd have a hard time finding a group of christians to set a curriculum that they could all agree on within your description ......especially not if the group was spread among the major denominations

you'd have better luck finding weapons of mass destruction in iraq right now

That may be, but just because it would be hard to do, doesn't mean its not a worthwhile endeavor. Just think about our system of higher education in this country. Without exception, every college begun in North America before 1750 was created to produce Christian ministers.

One of them, Harvard, became the first domestic corporation in America. That sort of thing is important to understand IMHO.

Think about America's treatment of Indians. Sure, it was pretty negative on the whole, but much of it was also motivated by people of good will who thought they were doing good by converting them to Christianity -- because they believed that was their Biblical duty.

[jk the sooner fan]

i agree that it would be a worthwhile endeavor, but knowing the little bit about our schools, and all that goes with it.......i just dont ever see it happening

have you read the book Persecution by David Limbaugh? I highly recommend it to any/all christians

[usmc-sooner]

I think it would be a good idea. Christianity has had a huge influence in the development of our country, it's morals, direction, laws, and social influence. Why we now try to purposely exclude it to appease a few minorities who can't hear about it without freaking out is beyond me.

[Xstnlsooner]

I don't think it would be difficult at all to find someone objective
in the Christian camp. Take Alvin Plantiga or someone like him.
He's written a great rebuttal to Dawkins' book, The God Delusion,
which I challenge any agnostic/atheist to read. There are some
great Christian intellectuals, not given to emotional tirades or
being overly defensive, that could certainly provide the curriculum.

[OklahomaTuba]

Excellent idear.

Hell, our public schools teach Engrish, and it isn't the offical language. They should be able to teach about Christianity as well. It would help people understand why this is a Christian nation, and probably help educate so many people who are hostile to those people of faith.

I think the state of Oklahoma should do this. We as Christians should start a drive to see this happen.

[C&CDean]

I don't think it would be difficult at all to find someone objective
in the Christian camp. Take Alvin Plantiga or someone like him.
He's written a great rebuttal to Dawkins' book, The God Delusion,
which I challenge any agnostic/atheist to read. There are some
great Christian intellectuals, not given to emotional tirades or
being overly defensive, that could certainly provide the curriculum.

Yeah except that there'd be a thousand Jim Bakkers and Jimmy Swaggerts wanting to get their piece of the pie who will rebuke whatever Plantiga would say.

If they're going to teach evolution in science, I think it'd be OK to teach religion in history. Without it, American government wouldn't exist.

[TexasLidig8r]

Homey,

factor in the constitutional issues into the equation... how do you not offend the traditional notion of separation of chuch and state? How can you not include comparable sections on Judaism?

Do you make it an elective course for 7th and 8th grade kids and older?

That pesky Constitution keeps getting in the way.

[Ike]

as one of this boards godless heathens, I have no problem with it.

Just as I have no problem with teaching literary analysis of the bible. Personally, I think many different philosophies and "101s" of many other religions that had an effect on our history should be taught as well for contextual purposes.


Where I start having a problem is if/when it devolves into a "you should believe this too" kind of thing.

[crawfish]

Homey,

factor in the constitutional issues into the equation... how do you not offend the traditional notion of separation of chuch and state? How can you not include comparable sections on Judaism?

Do you make it an elective course for 7th and 8th grade kids and older?

That pesky Constitution keeps getting in the way.

Again, there IS not constitutional separation of church and state. There is the constitutional guarantee of no state religion, and that the state will not prohibit the practice of religion. This whole "separation" thing is getting in the way of reason.

Such as, erasing religion from history as if it's not a major component. History with no sense of the religion behind it is false history.

[C&CDean]

Again, there IS not constitutional separation of church and state. There is the constitutional guarantee of no state religion, and that the state will not prohibit the practice of religion. This whole "separation" thing is getting in the way of reason.

Such as, erasing religion from history as if it's not a major component. History with no sense of the religion behind it is false history.

Yeah, what he said.

[TexasLidig8r]

Again, there IS not constitutional separation of church and state. There is the constitutional guarantee of no state religion, and that the state will not prohibit the practice of religion. This whole "separation" thing is getting in the way of reason.

Such as, erasing religion from history as if it's not a major component. History with no sense of the religion behind it is false history.

You have to take into account the fact that federal courts, all the way up to the Supremes, have interpreted the guarantee of no state religion as being tantamount to separation.

And again, whose religion shall we teach?

[King Crimson]

And again, whose religion shall we teach?

don't you get it lid? religion and christianity are the same thing. all the other stuff is hokey pokey.

the near but systematic genocide of native americans is also a big part of the american experience....but you'd be amazed how little people (especially those not from Oklahoma) know about the subject.

[crawfish]

You have to take into account the fact that federal courts, all the way up to the Supremes, have interpreted the guarantee of no state religion as being tantamount to separation.

And again, whose religion shall we teach?

Teach the specifics as they relate to history, but don't teach the faith.

How can you truly evaluate the move of many people to the new world without understanding the protestant/puritan beliefs? How can you understand European history without understanding the evolution of Catholicism and the rise of Protestantism? How can you truly understand how our government was inspired while blocking out the religious influences?

As far as what "brand" of religion we teach - teach based on what the history requires. That will be 90% Christian, to be true, in this country. Promoting ignorance on the basis of some flawed view of the constitution seems to be a bad thing in my eyes.

[Hamhock]

i agree.

to the extent hinduism, et al, has had an affect on American culture, history, law, architecture, etc., point it out.

[crawfish]

don't you get it lid? religion and christianity are the same thing. all the other stuff is hokey pokey.

the near but systematic genocide of native americans is also a big part of the american experience....but you'd be amazed how little people (especially those not from Oklahoma) know about the subject.

As I mentioned above, Christianity is 90% of of American and European history, which is most of what our history SHOULD concern itself with since that is what makes up the bulk of our culture. Other religions should be addressed in terms of world history, and their place in it.

I should emphasize that I'm all for the teaching of religion, and not faith, in our schools.

[King Crimson]

our government was inspired by the 18th century secular Enlightenment in France (Rousseau, Diderot, etc.) and the Scottish philosophical tradition with Adam Smith and to a lesser degree the Athenian constitution written by Solon....that's the origin of the idea of democracy.

you can make a good argument that the Protestant Reformation is part of this as well....but only "part".

we'd be better served teaching the history of capitalism (very few people know what it really is) which is the economic realization of enlightenment ideals.....rationality, equality, competition, social relations.

[Paperclip]

We had a whole section on world religions in my high school world history class. There was no endorsement of a particular faith, but we learned the basic tenets of each religion.

[JohnnyMack]

This is about as good an idea as giving Kevin Federline a record contract.

What you're talking about is nothing more than an agenda driven effort to insert propaganda into schools.

SoonerProphet's idea isn't a bad one.

[jk the sooner fan]

alot of high schools offer elective courses on various topics, i think you could come up with a curriculum that wasnt preachy but discussed the role of religion thru out history, etc etc

that way its an elective and not a class that everybody has to take

[skycat]

We had a course at my high school called Humanities, that dealt primarily with religion, philosophy, literature, architecture, and art. It was primarily interested in the influences that created modern western culture.

As such we studied Chritianity. How could we not? What that course included, and what I don't have a problem with in public schools is a curiculum that says something like, "Many people believe in one true God, and here is how those beliefs have shaped the world we live in."

I can't see how anyone could havs a problem with that being taught as part of the curiculum. Even a year long course dedicated to that could be worthwhile, as long as it were an elective.

What I think I would have a problem with is a course that said, "There is one all powerful God, and this is how people who believe in Him have affected our culture."

[TUSooner]

ahh, there is the rub. That said, I think it could be done, but it would require a completely objective look at Christian influence in American affairs. That said, I contend that people who don't know anything about Christianity find it exceedly difficult to fully comprehend how America got where it is today.
Some (many?) Christians will go bananas if their true version of the faith is not presented. "Objective" to them means "false, disrespectful, denuded of essentail meaning, watered down, falsified, emasculated, blasphemous, etc. etc." These believers won't be satisfied with anything except their particular theology and ethic.

But really, I'd be shocked to learn that something like that hasn't already been done under the rubric of 'relgious traditions and influence of American society' or some academicky sounding thing like that. At least in some colleges.

[sooneron]

We had a course at my high school called Humanities, that dealt primarily with religion, philosophy, literature, architecture, and art. It was primarily interested in the influences that created modern western culture.

As such we studied Chritianity. How could we not? What that course included, and what I don't have a problem with in public schools is a curiculum that says something like, "Many people believe in one true God, and here is how those beliefs have shaped the world we live in."

I can't see how anyone could havs a problem with that being taught as part of the curiculum. Even a year long course dedicated to that could be worthwhile, as long as it were an elective.

What I think I would have a problem with is a course that said, "There is one all powerful God, and this is how people who believe in Him have affected our culture."
I think a big issue is who's teaching it, you could have one teacher that is an active southern baptist that preaches the gospel or you could have an agnostic that is constantly rolling their eyes whilst giving the lesson. It would have to be very cause and effect/ action and reaction motivated. Like X believed this and that is why they severed ties from Y.

Crimson is right, more needs to be taught about Capitalism.

[Okla-homey]

Homey,

factor in the constitutional issues into the equation... how do you not offend the traditional notion of separation of chuch and state? How can you not include comparable sections on Judaism?

Do you make it an elective course for 7th and 8th grade kids and older?

That pesky Constitution keeps getting in the way.

As I understand it counselor, what is proscribed is endorsement of one religion over another. This would be a merely a frank discussion and candid treatment on the fundamantal tenets of a given religion and how it has impacted the development of the the Unites States. If carefully confined to these limits, I honestly cannot see how that runs afoul of any of the case law.

Further, I would have no problem with treating the impact of Judiasm and its tenets on American society in the same manner.

[yermom]

ok, i don't know about you guys but my history classes had plenty of discussions about religion, Quakers, Puritans, missionaries, etc...

why are Christians so worried about kids learning more religious stuff in school? do you not talk about it at home? church?

i know i got more than i wanted...

[TexasLidig8r]

Crawdaddy... another fundamental problem that would need to be first rectified is the fact that the public school system in large, urban areas, and quite frankly, throughout the state, are not run by educators, but by politicians. Schools cater to and teach to the median, the average... if your child cannot excel to the point where he or she can get into an AP class, they are left to linger with the dullards, taught by persons whose curriculum is largely out of their hands, and is designed to appeal to the very average child. In addition, for much of a semester, the coursework taught is designed NOT to educate, but to prepare the students for the state wide TAKS test...and if a school district's pass rate on the TAKS test falls below a certain standard, federal funds can be withheld.

With a system that is so broken and bereft of quality and character, can we realistically expect responsible teaching of this revolutionary idea?

[Okla-homey]

ok, i don't know about you guys but my history classes had plenty of discussions about religion, Quakers, Puritans, missionaries, etc...

why are Christians so worried about kids learning more religious stuff in school? do you not talk about it at home? church?

i know i got more than i wanted...

Again, I favor an objective treatment of the impact of the principle faith which has colored so much of what America has done in the world and where it is today.

Please understand, this is not about teaching religion. It is meant to fill the gaps for kids who have not been exposed to any of this at home or in church -- which I suggest, is becoming a majority of students. I submit that without a working knowledge of religion, particulalrly Christianity, you simply cannot fully comprehend our laws, our history, our politics or our domestic and international polices.

I submit that when a nation loses touch of where it got its ideals, it can cease to be a nation.

[sitzpinkler]

ok, i don't know about you guys but my history classes had plenty of discussions about religion, Quakers, Puritans, missionaries, etc...

why are Christians so worried about kids learning more religious stuff in school? do you not talk about it at home? church?

i know i got more than i wanted...

I agree with this. Like Skycat said, religions are already discussed in classes such as humanities. To me that's plenty.

I would have a huge problem with a Christianity course being a requirement. That's taking it way too far. As an elective, maybe, as long as classes on other religions are offered as electives as well.

[sooneron]

Again, I favor an objective treatment of the impact of the principle faith which has colored so much of what America has done in the world and where it is today.

Please understand, this is not about teaching religion. It is meant to fill the gaps for kids who have not been exposed to any of this at home or in church -- which I suggest, is becoming a majority of students.

This is where you lost me a little. As mentioned by the whorn, school's are screwed enough these days without trying to fill holes about religion in American society when the kids don't get it away from school.

[sitzpinkler]

It is meant to fill the gaps for kids who have not been exposed to any of this at home or in church -- which I suggest, is becoming a majority of students. I submit that without a working knowledge of religion, particulalrly Christianity, you simply cannot fully comprehend our laws, our history, our politics or our domestic and international polices.


I disagree with everything you said here. Stating why is going to turn this thread in to a heated political and religious debate so I'll refrain.

I do want to address the section I highlighted above: you do live in Oklahoma right?

[TUSooner]

Some (many?) Christians will go bananas if their true version of the faith is not presented. "Objective" to them means "false, disrespectful, denuded of essentail meaning, watered down, falsified, emasculated, blasphemous, etc. etc." These believers won't be satisfied with anything except their particular theology and ethic....

Case in point:

*** It would help people understand why this is a Christian nation, and probably help educate so many people who are hostile to those people of faith. I think the state of Oklahoma should do this. We as Christians should start a drive to see this happen.

When you start with the broad, but oversimplistic premise that the USA is "a Christian nation" without acknowledging the complexity of Christianity's influence and the influence of Deism, Catholicism, Puritanism, and all that religious toleration and religious conflict stuff, you've skipped education and gone straight into indoctrination. Which would make only some fundamental Babdis types happy. ;)

The proper question would seem to be: "To what extent is the USA a Christian nation?" In many ways it is very much one, in other ways it is not and was not intenhded to be one.

[JohnnyMack]

It is meant to fill the gaps for kids who have not been exposed to any of this at home or in church -- which I suggest, is becoming a majority of students. I submit that without a working knowledge of religion, particulalrly Christianity, you simply cannot fully comprehend our laws, our history, our politics or our domestic and international polices.

I submit that when a nation loses touch of where it got its ideals, it can cease to be a nation.

I think your effort is nothing more than a wolf in sheeps clothing.

[King Crimson]

Again, I favor an objective treatment of the impact of the principle faith which has colored so much of what America has done in the world and where it is today.

Please understand, this is not about teaching religion. It is meant to fill the gaps for kids who have not been exposed to any of this at home or in church -- which I suggest, is becoming a majority of students. I submit that without a working knowledge of religion, particulalrly Christianity, you simply cannot fully comprehend our laws, our history, our politics or our domestic and international polices.

I submit that when a nation loses touch of where it got its ideals, it can cease to be a nation.

i thought you wanted this to be an objective thread. that's balls up rhapsodic cheerleading right there.

did you miss that genocide part? America's "ideals" come from the secular enlightenment.....and you talk about losing touch. 90% of our laws are based in the defense of private property as a response to protect citizens from the state. they have little to do with Christianity.

[PrideTrombone]

I wouldn't be in favor of it because more electives means less kids in my band class. :)

[skycat]

I wouldn't be in favor of it because more electives means less kids in my band class. :)

This is the most clearly reasoned, rational post in this thread.

[PrideTrombone]

This is the most clearly reasoned, rational post in this thread.

Woo self-interest!!! :D

[royalfan5]

My small high school in Nebraska did integrate the study of the influence of Religion into our social science classes. We were small enough and homogeneous enough that nobody pitched a fit. Going to a small remote school does have some advantages.

[Ike]

Again, I favor an objective treatment of the impact of the principle faith which has colored so much of what America has done in the world and where it is today.

Please understand, this is not about teaching religion. It is meant to fill the gaps for kids who have not been exposed to any of this at home or in church -- which I suggest, is becoming a majority of students. I submit that without a working knowledge of religion, particulalrly Christianity, you simply cannot fully comprehend our laws, our history, our politics or our domestic and international polices.

I submit that when a nation loses touch of where it got its ideals, it can cease to be a nation.

I respect your point of view here, and I do see where you are coming from, but in a count-pointercount kind of thing, I submit that laws that cannot be understood absent a religious context have no place in a pluralistic society such as ours.

[TUSooner]

I wouldn't be in favor of it because more electives means less kids in my band class.

This is the most clearly reasoned, rational post in this thread.

Exactly! :D

[crawfish]

Crawdaddy... another fundamental problem that would need to be first rectified is the fact that the public school system in large, urban areas, and quite frankly, throughout the state, are not run by educators, but by politicians. Schools cater to and teach to the median, the average... if your child cannot excel to the point where he or she can get into an AP class, they are left to linger with the dullards, taught by persons whose curriculum is largely out of their hands, and is designed to appeal to the very average child. In addition, for much of a semester, the coursework taught is designed NOT to educate, but to prepare the students for the state wide TAKS test...and if a school district's pass rate on the TAKS test falls below a certain standard, federal funds can be withheld.

With a system that is so broken and bereft of quality and character, can we realistically expect responsible teaching of this revolutionary idea?

In other words: our kids are going to be stupid anyway, so why bother teaching them reality?

I'm sorry, but the whole "separation of church and state" thing is becoming a movement to excise religion (esp. Christianity) from all public display. That is disturbing and wrong.

[crawfish]

I think your effort is nothing more than a wolf in sheeps clothing.

Just as I think the movement to excise all mention of religion in schools is.

[skycat]

Just as I think the movement to excise all mention of religion in schools is.

Frankly, I don't believe that even if such a movement currently exists, it has any chance at success.

As has been mentioned, religion gets its due in various history and English classes as part of the standard curiculum, and in electives such as Humanities. And I see no indication that it won't continue to be.

[TexasLidig8r]

In other words: our kids are going to be stupid anyway, so why bother teaching them reality?

I'm sorry, but the whole "separation of church and state" thing is becoming a movement to excise religion (esp. Christianity) from all public display. That is disturbing and wrong.

No No No... in other words, the public education systems is so fatally flawed and lags behind so many other educational systems in other industrialized nations, that the system itself needs a complete overhaul to be able to regain an elite status.

If you want a bold frontier by reincorporating some religious teaching into our schools, you must first fix the foundation of the system.

The separation of church and state notion for the purpose of eradicating religion (yes, especially Christianity) from all public display, from its inception, was spearheaded by non-believers, atheistic and agnostic groups.

[NormanPride]

Yeah, this is already being done, man. I was taught all that stuff in all my history classes, and I don't think the curriculum has changed too much. At least my mom says it hasn't...

Anything more, and you're pressing the issue too much. I think I actually agree with JM on this one. The execution of any big change like this would be a disaster, and you'd just end up making everyone mad.

[C&CDean]

I don't know. The public education system got you morons to point where you're able to debate this crapola fairly logically. Just sayin'....

[NormanPride]

I don't know. The public education system got you morons to point where you're able to debate this crapola fairly logically. Just sayin'....

This is the best and brightest, Dean. Look at the football board if you want to see a true cross-section of Oklahoma.

[yermom]

In other words: our kids are going to be stupid anyway, so why bother teaching them reality?

I'm sorry, but the whole "separation of church and state" thing is becoming a movement to excise religion (esp. Christianity) from all public display. That is disturbing and wrong.

define "public"

the way i see it is that Christians, despite being a huge majority, feel like they are being discriminated against somehow. if anything i feel like they are still catered too way too much with things like national holidays and swearing on a bible, "under God", "In God We Trust", etc...

what i'm getting from all this is that you think kids will grow up being psychos if they don't grow up Christian. you are placing a value judgement on religion

why is it anyone's business what religion you practice? why does a cross need to be displayed on a public building? why does a town's public funds need to be spent on Christmas decorations?

i think the Christians need to stay out of schools so the kids can learn about sex and science the way they should. not about some mythology and abstinence

while religion is something i think they can learn at home, there isn't really a time limit, is there? sex ed is a little different, kids are going to screw around, and if they know where babies come from and how to help prevent getting/spreading diseases they are and society is better off. now if you want to add morality to that at home, go for it. but i'm pretty sure sex ed doesn't have much in the way of "have sex all over town, just wear protection"

[Sooner in Tampa]

Just as I think the movement to excise all mention of religion in schools is.
I agree with Crawdaddy! It may take some time, but I really believe that this is an agenda of NEA.

[Vaevictis]

Back when I was in high school -- mid 1990s -- they did a survey of the major religions in a required course known as "World History."

IMO, you can't intelligently discuss any history of any region without discussing the culture of that region... and you can't intelligently discuss the culture without discussing the religion(s).

The key is to avoid advocacy of any one religion, and IMO, a good way to pass the test is to do exactly what my World History class did -- survey ALL of the major religions. It's hard to say that the curriculum is advocating any religion when you give reasonably equal treatment to all of the major ones.

Simultaneously, as we are teaching that Christianity has historically been the majority religion in the USA, I think it would be nice if some special attention would be paid to Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, and the fact that some of the document writers may have been Deists and as such not all references to "God" necessarily mean the Christian one. But that's just on my wishlist ;)

[Sooner in Tampa]

what i'm getting from all this is that you think kids will grow up being psychos if they don't grow up Christian. you are placing a value judgement on religion

why is it anyone's business what religion you practice? why does a cross need to be displayed on a public building? why does a town's public funds need to be spent on Christmas decorations?

i think the Christians need to stay out of schools so the kids can learn about sex and science the way they should. not about some mythology and abstinence
Statistics have shown that kids who are raised in a religious environment are less likely to get into serious trouble. Is it the religion? Is it just the fact that they have structure? There is not a clearly defined reason.

I don't think anyone cares about what religion you practice...that is not the point of this thread. This is merely a question about teaching "Christianity 101" in public schools.

As far as kids learing about sex in schools...well, when you have kids (daughters) that LAST place you want them learning about sex is the public school system. Mom and Dad had better be leading the charge on the subject (preferablly Mom :P )

[TexasLidig8r]

while religion is something i think they can learn at home, there isn't really a time limit, is there? sex ed is a little different, kids are going to screw around, and if they know where babies come from and how to help prevent getting/spreading diseases they are and society is better off. now if you want to add morality to that at home, go for it. but i'm pretty sure sex ed doesn't have much in the way of "have sex all over town, just wear protection"

Uh.. not so much. Sex education should be taught at home. I don't want a person who might not know a clit from an elbow to be in charge of educating the youth of America on sexual standards. Of course, I understand that in many, many homes sex ed is not taught. But at what point did the mission of our schools take the place of that which is, or should be, taught at home?

[Sooner in Tampa]

And for what it is worth...my 15y/o daughter is studying World History as a sophomore in HS...The book contains a great deal of information about Muslims and the information about the Pillars of this religion.

I do NOT have a problem with her learning these things...and I ain't Muslim.

[royalfan5]

Uh.. not so much. Sex education should be taught at home. I don't want a person who might not know a clit from an elbow to be in charge of educating the youth of America on sexual standards. Of course, I understand that in many, many homes sex ed is not taught. But at what point did the mission of our schools take the place of that which is, or should be, taught at home?
When the homes started dropping the ball on a wide scale.

[JohnnyMack]

Just as I think the movement to excise all mention of religion in schools is.

I'm dumb. What do you mean? You're saying that the whole effort to remove "religion" from schools is actually a push to remove "Christianity"?

[Soonrboy]

As a parent, it is my job to take my children to church, to guide them in their journey to know God also. I don't want anyone else doing that for me except for the church we go to. As a principal, there are some very good teachers in my building that I would not want teaching my children about God, some very fundamentalist that I just happen to disagree with.

If prayer is so important in your life, do it at home with your family. Don't leave it up to the schools.

[Sooner in Tampa]

As a parent, it is my job to take my children to church, to guide them in their journey to know God also. I don't want anyone else doing that for me except for the church we go to. As a principal, there are some very good teachers in my building that I would not want teaching my children about God, some very fundamentalist that I just happen to disagree with.

If prayer is so important in your life, do it at home with your family. Don't leave it up to the schools.Props dude!!!

[sooneron]

And for what it is worth...my 15y/o daughter is studying World History as a sophomore in HS...The book contains a great deal of information about Muslims and the information about the Pillars of this religion.

I do NOT have a problem with her learning these things...and I ain't Muslim.
Is it a great deal about muslims or a great deal about islam? You could say that English history about Eliz. 1 and the Spanish armada was teaching a great deal about christians.

[SoonerProphet]

As a parent, it is my job to take my children to church, to guide them in their journey to know God also. I don't want anyone else doing that for me except for the church we go to. As a principal, there are some very good teachers in my building that I would not want teaching my children about God, some very fundamentalist that I just happen to disagree with.

If prayer is so important in your life, do it at home with your family. Don't leave it up to the schools.

or any state bureaucracy.

[Fraggle145]

define "public"

the way i see it is that Christians, despite being a huge majority, feel like they are being discriminated against somehow. if anything i feel like they are still catered too way too much with things like national holidays and swearing on a bible, "under God", "In God We Trust", etc...

what i'm getting from all this is that you think kids will grow up being psychos if they don't grow up Christian. you are placing a value judgement on religion

why is it anyone's business what religion you practice? why does a cross need to be displayed on a public building? why does a town's public funds need to be spent on Christmas decorations?

i think the Christians need to stay out of schools so the kids can learn about sex and science the way they should. not about some mythology and abstinence

while religion is something i think they can learn at home, there isn't really a time limit, is there? sex ed is a little different, kids are going to screw around, and if they know where babies come from and how to help prevent getting/spreading diseases they are and society is better off. now if you want to add morality to that at home, go for it. but i'm pretty sure sex ed doesn't have much in the way of "have sex all over town, just wear protection"

I agree with you here, well except for the sex stuff, I think that parents should teach their children that. However, I think the public school system has a responsibility as well, due to the fact that many children dont learn this from their parents.

I dont understand the christrian "we are so persecuted" thing either, and I also agree that christianity is catered to way too much. I think part of it is that it is hard to accept people that have different beliefs no matter what it is, and in this part of the country people aren't used to being different on this issue.


ok, i don't know about you guys but my history classes had plenty of discussions about religion, Quakers, Puritans, missionaries, etc...

why are Christians so worried about kids learning more religious stuff in school? do you not talk about it at home? church?

i know i got more than i wanted...

I know exactly what you mean here. I got plenty of both down your throat and objective christian schooling in public school in my history classes. If this was to get off the ground it would need to be an elective and there probably would be a better name for it that christianity 101. Like "The role of Christianity in Shaping United States History."

[Hamhock]

i wish i had a milkshake from Braum's right now.

[crawfish]

define "public"

the way i see it is that Christians, despite being a huge majority, feel like they are being discriminated against somehow. if anything i feel like they are still catered too way too much with things like national holidays and swearing on a bible, "under God", "In God We Trust", etc...

what i'm getting from all this is that you think kids will grow up being psychos if they don't grow up Christian. you are placing a value judgement on religion

why is it anyone's business what religion you practice? why does a cross need to be displayed on a public building? why does a town's public funds need to be spent on Christmas decorations?

i think the Christians need to stay out of schools so the kids can learn about sex and science the way they should. not about some mythology and abstinence

while religion is something i think they can learn at home, there isn't really a time limit, is there? sex ed is a little different, kids are going to screw around, and if they know where babies come from and how to help prevent getting/spreading diseases they are and society is better off. now if you want to add morality to that at home, go for it. but i'm pretty sure sex ed doesn't have much in the way of "have sex all over town, just wear protection"

Heh. My high school sex-ed teacher - the assistant football coach - told us guys "using a condom is like taking a shower in a raincoat". For the record, kids did not always "screw around" at the rate they do today. What good does it do if we teach kids how to decrease the chances of pregnancy/STD's to 1% if they're having 100% more sex than before? Abstinence is something that should be encouraged, and our schools should be encouraged to encourage it - ALONG with teaching about STD's and prevention.

I am not for TEACHING Christianity in public schools. I'm for teaching ABOUT Christianity, as well as other religions when appropriate. I'm for not avoiding talking about religion in schools when it's a necessary context to understanding. I'm for not denying religious groups equal access to public resources in the interest of "separation". I'm for not denying the expression of personal faith by public employees, as long as it's not used in a manipulative way (which could be addressed and punished separately). I'm for not denying a public building's decoration, or the celebration of a long-standing traditional American holiday. I'm for not suppressing our traditional American/European-based holidays simply because they're based in religion.

I DO NOT want religion to affect the study of science - Creationism is a theology, not a science, and ID is statistical evaluation. I don't care much about the pledge, or the words on our money, although I'm a little peeved at the reasons people want to change them.

I don't think Christians are being "over discriminated against" right now, but I don't like the trends.

[crawfish]

I'm dumb. What do you mean? You're saying that the whole effort to remove "religion" from schools is actually a push to remove "Christianity"?

I think it's something designed more to hurt religion than to help schools.


As a parent, it is my job to take my children to church, to guide them in their journey to know God also. I don't want anyone else doing that for me except for the church we go to. As a principal, there are some very good teachers in my building that I would not want teaching my children about God, some very fundamentalist that I just happen to disagree with.

If prayer is so important in your life, do it at home with your family. Don't leave it up to the schools.

Rest assured, I AM doing this stuff at home, and I do NOT depend on the schools. I don't want to see the schools become a place antagonistic to my family's beliefs, though.

[Ike]

I DO NOT want religion to affect the study of science - Creationism is a theology, not a science, and ID is statistical evaluation.


if by "statistical evaluation" you mean "completely arbitrary analysis of things not really connected to physical reality" then you'd be right...


:)

[royalfan5]

Heh. My high school sex-ed teacher - the assistant football coach - told us guys "using a condom is like taking a shower in a raincoat". For the record, kids did not always "screw around" at the rate they do today. What good does it do if we teach kids how to decrease the chances of pregnancy/STD's to 1% if they're having 100% more sex than before? Abstinence is something that should be encouraged, and our schools should be encouraged to encourage it - ALONG with teaching about STD's and prevention.

I am not for TEACHING Christianity in public schools. I'm for teaching ABOUT Christianity, as well as other religions when appropriate. I'm for not avoiding talking about religion in schools when it's a necessary context to understanding. I'm for not denying religious groups equal access to public resources in the interest of "separation". I'm for not denying the expression of personal faith by public employees, as long as it's not used in a manipulative way (which could be addressed and punished separately). I'm for not denying a public building's decoration, or the celebration of a long-standing traditional American holiday. I'm for not suppressing our traditional American/European-based holidays simply because they're based in religion.

I DO NOT want religion to affect the study of science - Creationism is a theology, not a science, and ID is statistical evaluation. I don't care much about the pledge, or the words on our money, although I'm a little peeved at the reasons people want to change them.

I don't think Christians are being "over discriminated against" right now, but I don't like the trends.
The Swedes have an extensive sex education program, and have less teen sex than the United States. Now with all that education and hot Swede tail floating around, shouldn't they be like rabbits with your theory?

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070318/26sex.htm

[JohnnyMack]

I'm for teaching ABOUT Christianity, as well as other religions when appropriate. I'm for not avoiding talking about religion in schools when it's a necessary context to understanding.

I can just imagine how well "Satanism Day" or "Wiccan Week" would go over around here.

:D

[Octavian]

History as an academic subject is an incredibly sticky subject in America. The United States, unlike most nations, does not have a nationalized curriculum that it provides to the youth. American history books vary from state to state...region to region. Americans can't seem to agree on a shared history....and there is no political will to push a nationalized curriculum. Probably never will be. So the kids in South Carolina would most likely learn a drastically different "history of Christianity" than kids in Oregon.


It would be nice to teach kids the influence of Christianity on the American experience...but agreeing on an "objective" approach would be next to impossible.


The influence of Christianity on American society, culture, politics, foreign policy, economics, etc....is not exactly all roses and cream. There's some pretty ugly stuff in American history which either happened directly or indirectly because of Christian influence on politics, economics, society, foreign policy, etc. I doubt the Christian movement (and even moderates or liberal Christians - hell, even non-Christians) would be comfortable with that being drug up and taught to kids objectively. It probably wouldn't be tolerated.


I think KC made a good point about American religion really being Capitalism. The tie that has bound American society together to the greatest extent hasn't been religion or even republicanism...it's been commerce. Kids may better comprehend American history if they had a firm grasp on the evolution of Capitalism from European mercantalism to post-industrial global commercialism. But then again, that might be uglier than the teaching of Christianity :eek:


But with regards to the teaching of the history of Christianity in America, I think JM made the "wolf in sheep's clothing" remark and that's probably spot-on....either from a radically secularized or a radically religious viewpoint.


Maybe that's why we don't have a national curriculum.

[Scott D]

I think the answer here is just to abolish schools.

[OklahomaTuba]

The proper question would seem to be: "To what extent is the USA a Christian nation?" In many ways it is very much one, in other ways it is not and was not intenhded to be one.

That is an entirely different subject. This country is as much Christian as it is an English speaking nation. Schools should teach both.

[Hamhock]

I think the answer here is just to abolish schools.


i agree

[JohnnyMack]

I think the answer here is just to abolish schools.

Well we got no choice
All the girls and boys
Makin all that noise
'Cause they found new toys
Well we can't salute ya
Can't find a flag
If that don't suit ya
That's a drag

School's out for summer
School's out forever
School's been blown to pieces

No more pencils
No more books
No more teacher's dirty looks

Well we got no class
And we got no principles
And we got no innocence
We can't even think of a word that rhymes

School's out for summer
School's out forever
School's been blown to pieces

No more pencils
No more books
No more teacher's dirty looks

Out for summer
Out till fall
We might not go back at all

School's out forever
School's out for summer
School's out with fever
School's out completely

[OklahomaTuba]

I think the answer here is just to abolish schools.

If schools plan on abandoning God, as many have, then there is no reason for them.

[royalfan5]

If schools plan on abandoning God, as many have, then there is no reason for them.
Maybe Denominations should put more of an emphasis on maintaining their own schools like the Catholics and Many Lutherans do. Why expect the state to do everything for you?

[OklahomaTuba]

Maybe Denominations should put more of an emphasis on maintaining their own schools like the Catholics and Many Lutherans do. Why expect the state to do everything for you?

The state should educate the people, after all, we pay for it.

Education is a one of those gifts given to us by the creator afterall.

[Octavian]

If schools plan on abandoning God, as many have, then there is no reason for them.


That's the view held by many Middle Eastern governments

[crawfish]

The Swedes have an extensive sex education program, and have less teen sex than the United States. Now with all that education and hot Swede tail floating around, shouldn't they be like rabbits with your theory?

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070318/26sex.htm

I'd be interested in knowing if there were other cultural factors at play here. An aberration does not a rule make.

[Vaevictis]

meh.

[crawfish]

I can just imagine how well "Satanism Day" or "Wiccan Week" would go over around here.

:D

If you can show me a long-standing American tradition of celebrating them, or show their significant cultural impact, then by all means, go ahead.

[royalfan5]

The state should educate the people, after all, we pay for it.

Education is a one of those gifts given to us by the creator afterall.
Yeah but who wants their kids being contaminated by baptist's in a public schoolsetting? Not me. The creator gave a lot less red tape to private schools, and I would rather pay more and get to pick my kids education, than try and compromise with others over what gets taught from a religious perspective.

[OklahomaTuba]

That's the view held by many Middle Eastern governments
And the founders of this nation as well.

[OklahomaTuba]

Yeah but who wants their kids being contaminated by baptist's in a public schoolsetting? Not me. The creator gave a lot less red tape to private schools, and I would rather pay more and get to pick my kids education, than try and compromise with others over what gets taught from a religious perspective.

Thats fine. I don't really care if a Baptist or Catholic or Mormon (Lord help us ;) ) or Jew even is teaching something. It should be taught, and the facts only. A good detailed and rational look at the history and contents of the most important text in world history would seem reasonable to me.

[Okla-homey]

This has been going remarkably well so far. I'm proud of you. Wondeful points from all around. I quite agree that doing it objectively would be the hard part.

Now, let me try to refocus.

One of the things I want kids to understand is the fact that our system depends on self-restraint on the part of individual citizens in order for it to function. Put another way, the Constitution is totally insufficient to govern a people who don't generally try to do the "right thing."

Barring that self-restraint, that whole "presumption of innocence" thing becomes completely impractical. We also couldn't hire enough cops or build enough prisons to house miscreants if people didn't have some sort of moral compass which made them do the right thing, even when no one is looking.

Frankly, I don't care if your moral compass comes from the Book of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as long as that book's teachings about right and wrong are reasonably consistent with our laws. The problem is, TBOTFSM (which probably doesn't exist:D ) isn't a source that has been around long enough to have taken root and shaped debate on issues of natioanal importance. The Bible has.

Think about abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage...all very controversial, yet the controversy is based on what various folks think the Bible has to say about these things. I just think it would be useful for kids to know literally what the Book has to say about them so they can either A) conclude that's what was meant, b) decide its not, or c) make an informed decision that what the Bible says is irrelevant. If they don't get Biblical exposure at home, they aren't going to get that at school. That's not intended to be proslytizing, but instead, is intended ONLY educate and to help both sides understand where the other side is coming from. Without that, its just uninformed arguing..which can be fun, but leads nowhere.

What I'm trying to say is, without at least an exposure in a calm, objective, rational way to what the words on the pages of the Bible say, people are less likely to fully comprehend our system of government and our national history and how it comports with ancient notions that have proven over time to have been extremely influential in the formation and promulgation of national policy.

[JohnnyMack]

Tuba telling us to take a "rational look" at something is my vote for "Funny of the Week".

[Octavian]

And the founders of this nation as well.


case in point about the subjectivity of history...and why the teaching of Christianity in public schools would be corrupted

[Hamhock]

The state should educate the people, after all, we pay for it.

Education is a one of those gifts given to us by the creator afterall.


i assume this is one of those times that you're being so sarcastic that a winkie isn't needed?

[JohnnyMack]

This has been going remarkably well so far. I'm proud of you. Wondeful points from all around. I quite agree that doing it objectively would be the hard part.

Now, let me try to refocus.

One of the things I want kids to understand is the fact that our system depends on self-restraint on the part of individual citizens in order for it to function. Put another way, the Constitution is totally insufficient to govern a people who don't generally try to do the "right thing."

Barring that self-restraint, that whole "presumption of innocence" thing becomes completely impractical. We also couldn't hire enough cops or build enough prisons to house miscreants if people didn't have some sort of moral compass which made them do the right thing, even when no one is looking.

Frankly, I don't care if your moral compass comes from the Book of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as long as that book's teachings about right and wrong are reasonably consistent with our laws. The problem is, TBOTFSM (which probably doesn't exist:D ) isn't a source that has been around long enough to have taken root and shaped debate on issues of natioanal importance. The Bible has.

Think about abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage...all very controversial, yet the controversy is based on what various folks think the Bible has to say about these things. I just think it would be useful for kids to know literally what the Book has to say about them so they can either A) conclude that's what was meant, b) decide its not, or c) make an informed decision that what the Bible says is irrelevant. If they don't get Biblical exposure at home, they aren't going to get that at school. That's not intended to be proslytizing, but instead, is intended ONLY educate and to help both sides understand where the other side is coming from. Without that, its just uninformed arguing..which can be fun, but leads nowhere.

What I'm trying to say is, without at least an exposure in a calm, objective, rational way to what the words on the pages of the Bible say, people are less likely to fully comprehend our system of government and our national history and how it comports with ancient notions that have proven over time to have been extremely influential in the formation and promulgation of national policy.

http://www.americansforprosperity.org/includes/imagemanager/images/blog/may/wolf_sheeps_clothing.jpg

[KC//CRIMSON]

Oh, and I say this thread heads for the crapper by page 3.


Wow! I'm gonna start calling you Nostradamus.:D


ps. can i get tomorrows lottery numbers.......

[Ike]

Tuba telling us to take a "rational look" at something is my vote for "Funny of the Week".
seconded

[OklahomaTuba]

case in point about the subjectivity of history...and why the teaching of Christianity in public schools would be corrupted

Interesting, since it was a Christian movement that led to the abolishment of Slavery in the first place.

Interpretation is a crazy thing. Just teach the facts, and how they came to be. Thats all.

[OklahomaTuba]

i assume this is one of those times that you're being so sarcastic that a winkie isn't needed?

Whys is that?

[royalfan5]

Thats fine. I don't really care if a Baptist or Catholic or Mormon (Lord help us ;) ) or Jew even is teaching something. It should be taught, and the facts only. A good detailed and rational look at the history and contents of the most important text in world history would seem reasonable to me.
Trying to teach Religion by only examining facts isn't teaching Religion at all. That is if you could get people to agree what the facts is.

[OklahomaTuba]

Trying to teach Religion by only examining facts isn't teaching Religion at all. That is if you could get people to agree what the facts is.

I think for the most part people do agree what the facts are. At least in the areas a public high school would have time to cover, and the effect those events in the Bible had on world history and our nation.

[Hamhock]

the right to an education is a gift from the Creator?

[Octavian]

What I'm trying to say is, without at least an exposure in a calm, objective, rational way to what the words on the pages of the Bible say, people are less likely to fully comprehend our system of government and our national history and how it comports with ancient notions that have proven over time to have been extremely influential in the formation and promulgation of national policy.


That's a valid point, but as others have said....the meaning behind those words on the pages can't even be agreed upon by the religion's own practicioners. Would we take an academic or literal approach?


Even if we could somehow agree though....would the the government really wanna teach kids the influence of Christianity in regards to racially based slavery, the KKK, the Holocaust, American imperialism, ect...


It'd be really muddy.

[royalfan5]

I think for the most part people do agree what the facts are. At least in the areas a public high school would have time to cover, and the effect those events in the Bible had on world history and our nation.
I don't know how many people would accept the events of the Bible as facts worthy of teaching in a history class. What does Samson have to do with American history?

[OklahomaTuba]

Tuba telling us to take a "rational look" at something is my vote for "Funny of the Week".

Just ignore that part JM, it was wishfull thinking on my part for you. :D

[KC//CRIMSON]

Religion does not stack up against logic. That is why "faith" was created.


Ba-dum crash!

[Octavian]

Interesting, since it was a Christian movement that led to the abolishment of Slavery in the first place.


you know that it was also it's principle justification as well, right?




Interpretation is a crazy thing. Just teach the facts, and how they came to be. Thats all.


"facts" in history are the "who's and when's".....not the "why's or how's"


History isn't objective....it's entirely subjective and at the mercy of the beholder's own biases....this conversation is a good example of that

[Scott D]

If schools plan on abandoning God, as many have, then there is no reason for them.


The state should educate the people, after all, we pay for it.

Education is a one of those gifts given to us by the creator afterall.

make up your mind. Either your argument is that the Church in all of it's fractured and splintered glory should be addressing education, or the state should.

[Hamhock]

make up your mind. Either your argument is that the Church in all of it's fractured and splintered glory should be addressing education, or the state should.

my vote is to remove the government from education...and health care.

[Scott D]

my vote is to remove the government from education...and health care.

much easier to do once you remove business and special interests from government.

[Vaevictis]

Think about abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage...all very controversial, yet the controversy is based on what various folks think the Bible has to say about these things. I just think it would be useful for kids to know literally what the Book has to say about them so they can either A) conclude that's what was meant, b) decide its not, or c) make an informed decision that what the Bible says is irrelevant. If they don't get Biblical exposure at home, they aren't going to get that at school. That's not intended to be proslytizing, but instead, is intended ONLY educate and to help both sides understand where the other side is coming from. Without that, its just uninformed arguing..which can be fun, but leads nowhere.

Here's where you're losing me. Here you are standing right on the line on proselytizing -- intentionally or not -- and if in theory you're already standing on it, in practice, people are going to cross it over and over again.

For the purpose of teaching history, you don't need to know what the Bible says. In fact, for the purpose of teaching history, what the Bible says is largely irrelevant -- what IS relevant is how the actors in history interpreted and acted upon what's in the Bible.

For example, reading the Bible isn't going to teach you a whole hell of a lot about the whys and hows of the Roman Catholic Church which is clearly the dominant force in Europe pretty much from what, Constantine until the Reformation? And you don't have to know the words of the Bible to understand the Reformation, either, in spite of the fact that the words are what it was about.

Of course, this is strictly from a historical point of view. It might have value from a *political* point of view, but you don't need to teach the Bible at large to address that either -- just those parts that may be relevant to the various political positions.

[sitzpinkler]

If schools plan on abandoning God, as many have, then there is no reason for them.

:rolleyes:

sorry, we dont' live in a theocracy

[crawfish]

I think you're all a bunch of complete idiots for not listening to me.

[Hamhock]

is every american have a right to an education?

[Hamhock]

I think you're all a bunch of complete idiots for not listening to me.

don't waste your breath.

you're talking to people who don't even appreciate a good bull testicle joke.

[sitzpinkler]

And the founders of this nation as well.

not

[Ash]

is every american have a right to an education?

Pure.

Comedy.

Gold.

:D

[JohnnyMack]

I think you're all a bunch of complete idiots for not listening to me.

I agree.

Wait.

What?

[OSUAggie]

The only "responsible" way to teach the Bible/religion/whatever and how it pertains to history (American or otherwise) is to do it in a controlled environment. That is, educators (not sure there will be enough of them with the "expertise" in this field, so I'm sure some will be borrowed from the "youth director" position at a few churches to teach this specialized class) will completely spin the way Christianity is intertwined in history to their beliefs, as has been discussed previously. So, it should be basic knowledge that if you want your child to learn the aforementioned topic in a manner that is comfortable to you, you have a couple of options:

1. Send his/her *** to private school.

2. Teach him/her yourself.

Allowing this in public schools would be a disaster, I think. In some places (Claremore is a solid example with the Baptist population), a particular church tends to be the dominant school of thought amongst its educators and there are already difficulties attempting to keep said educators from pimping their beliefs while teaching PE or home-ec, so I can't imagine how Christianity 101 might go. It's a very good idea, but I feel the execution would be poor, at best.

[Hamhock]

Pure.

Comedy.

Gold.

:D


and i can't even get some spek?

[SoonerProphet]

Any you folks read much Reinhold Niebuhr?

[Vaevictis]

and i can't even get some spek?

Everybody pile on the red!

[yermom]

Uh.. not so much. Sex education should be taught at home. I don't want a person who might not know a clit from an elbow to be in charge of educating the youth of America on sexual standards. Of course, I understand that in many, many homes sex ed is not taught. But at what point did the mission of our schools take the place of that which is, or should be, taught at home?

well, seeing that some of them might not even be there if their parents had gotten some proper sex ed...

i'd agree this, like religion, should be taught at home first. the problem is that if it hasn't happened by a certain point it needs to before they get pregnant or worse. they have plenty of time for being saved

and i don't think the clit vs. elbow really needs to be covered :D

i only mention it as an example of the conflict of the Religious Right and the ugly liberals in the school system

[Scott D]

well, seeing that some of them might not even be there if their parents had gotten some proper sex ed...

i'd agree this, like religion, should be taught at home first. the problem is that if it hasn't happened by a certain point it needs to before they get pregnant or worse. they have plenty of time for being saved

and i don't think the clit vs. elbow really needs to be covered :D

i only mention it as an example of the conflict of the Religious Right and the ugly liberals in the school system

somehow I picture Lid's explanation of a clit to be on par with Will Ferrell's character in Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back.

[Chuck Bao]

Why do US textbooks not mention the Buddhist influence on early western culture and subsequent latter day culture?

If we are like going back to ancient times and influences, one can successfully argue that the new religion/thought/morals coming out of the east had a big influence on the writers of the New Testament. I mean, how else do you explain the big change in the Old and New Testaments?

IMHO, some of the morals that have shaped our country should be traced back to Buddhism.

[Vaevictis]

Why do US textbooks not mention the Buddhist influence on early western culture and subsequent latter day culture? ... I mean, how else do you explain the big change in the Old and New Testaments?

I would guess that if you're a Christian who takes things at all literally, the idea that the New Testament was strongly influenced by Buddhism is basically blasphemy.

Remember, the New Testament comes from the teachings of Jesus. Jesus is God. Does God take advice from some ascetic sitting under a tree? I think not.

[Chuck Bao]

I would guess that if you're a Christian who takes things at all literally, the idea that the New Testament was strongly influenced by Buddhism is basically blasphemy.

Remember, the New Testament comes from the teachings of Jesus. Jesus is God. Does God take advice from some ascetic sitting under a tree? I think not.

Heh! But, that's the point, isn't it? So, the curriculum would have to be writen by Christians and their own narrow view of history?

[Vaevictis]

Heh! But, that's the point, isn't it? So, the curriculum would have to be writen by Christians and their own narrow view of history?

Something like 85% of the country self-identifies as Christian. How do you get a country that's 85% Christian to say, "Yeah, it's cool. Teach as fact something that fundamentally says our religion is bull****."

Get real.

[Skysooner]

But of that 85% who identifies itself as Christian, a large number don't go to church. Perhaps there is a problem with how the religion is taught in churches?

Not to get off-topic with that last comment, but it is possible to teach how religions have affected the history of nations, communities, etc. It would be very difficut to study the history of Utah without studying the influence of the Mormon religion. As long as it was limited to the role that religion played and not to the tenets of any particular religion then I wouldn't have a problem with it. Part of my history classes in school were studies of such an influence.

[Chuck Bao]

Something like 85% of the country self-identifies as Christian. How do you get a country that's 85% Christian to say, "Yeah, it's cool. Teach as fact something that fundamentally says our religion is bull****."

Get real.

Hey, I was just trying to offer a humorous view at best or a contrarian view at worse. I guess I need to work on both.

[Vaevictis]

That probably came off harsher than I intended.

I'm just saying, true or not, no way it realistically happens.

I mean, for goodness sake, they've actually got some school districts talking about "intelligent design" as if it's actually science.

[Rogue]

Think about abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage...all very controversial, yet the controversy is based on what various folks think the Bible has to say about these things. I just think it would be useful for kids to know literally what the Book has to say about them so they can either A) conclude that's what was meant, b) decide its not, or c) make an informed decision that what the Bible says is irrelevant. If they don't get Biblical exposure at home, they aren't going to get that at school. That's not intended to be proslytizing, but instead, is intended ONLY educate and to help both sides understand where the other side is coming from. Without that, its just uninformed arguing..which can be fun, but leads nowhere.

What I'm trying to say is, without at least an exposure in a calm, objective, rational way to what the words on the pages of the Bible say, people are less likely to fully comprehend our system of government and our national history and how it comports with ancient notions that have proven over time to have been extremely influential in the formation and promulgation of national policy.

Which Christian book would you argue has had the biggest historical influence? The Catholic bible? King James version? Mormon texts? Just the "good news" or all of the atrocities committed in the name of religion too? More than anything my studies tell me that freedom of (and yes FROM) religion is way more important to why and how our country became what it is than any across-the-board tenets of so diverse a spectrum as Christianity. And, for the record, I'm against it in public schools.

In my hometown which was 90% Mormon, kids could take an elective "seminary", walk across the parking lot to the meetin' hall, and pray together wearing magic underwear for an hour. They were great to me, let me play in church league basketball, but I never figured out how they all got "A's" in those classes while I was busting my hump in woodshop for my "A". :D

[Octavian]

If we are like going back to ancient times and influences, one can successfully argue that the new religion/thought/morals coming out of the east had a big influence on the writers of the New Testament. I mean, how else do you explain the big change in the Old and New Testaments?


There is a small sect of Christian followers that would give you a very interesting answer. They're easily cast aside as crackpots because of their unconventional explanations....but I actually think they have some valid and intriguing points. I won't swear by it, but their beliefs connect the dots in ways which have previously not been answered. It makes sense...at least to me.


I'm not gonna start a ****storm about it on here, but there's a reason behind the growing number of Christian-Buddhists (for lack of a better term).


Peem me if you're interested.