We are seeing an increase in the number of people who deny that there is a god or that he has any ongoing interest in what happens on planet Earth.

Once you reach that conclusion, then every glitch in the environment becomes a reason to panic. Basically, the "sky is falling" syndrome. There is no confidence that the various cycles of warming, cooling, volcanic activity, etc. will swing back from their highs and lows to arrive at "normal" as has been the case for as long as human history knows.

Since it is now up to humans to control the forces of nature, we fall prey to every snake oil salesman who comes along. We become willing to surrender financial viability for the empty promise of "saving" the world. Worse still, we become willing to surrender liberties.

Even though after all is done, the cllimatic and geological systems will continue to function as they have always done.

Being a Christian, I know the sky is NOT falling.

The Sun is under the control of the Creator and will continue to warm Earth, sometimes more, sometimes less. And there is not ONE thing any of us can do about it.

We can only impoverish ourselves in a futile effort. The world seems to be overpopulated with fools.

We can only impoverish ourselves in a futile effort. The world seems to be overpopulated with fools.

Yes I agree with you and many of them are meeting in Copenhagen in the next two weeks. It is interesting that the Bible, the message from God devotes some chapters to the thinking of fools

Let us contemplate some of them;
A companion of fools suffers harm
The folly of fools is deception
The folly of fools yields folly
The mouth of a fool gushes folly
Folly delights a man who lacks judgement
Folly brings punishment to fools
'

There is no god and the sky is indeed not falling. Feel free to vent your car's exhaust into your house, I'm sure you're "creator" will take care to make all things right.

There is no god and the sky is indeed not falling. Feel free to vent your car's exhaust into your house, I'm sure you're "creator" will take care to make all things right.

My creator will not save me from my own stupidity, and should I take your advice I'm sure he will tell me that personally. You statement is correct in only one aspect, the sky is not falling, however the air we breathe is less pure very day. Now I see little evidence of this myself on a day by day basis, but I have been to China and it is certainly true there as it is in all major cities. I think it is foolish to stay in such places.

My creator will not save me from my own stupidity, Yet people meet to try to save themselves from their owbn stupidity and you call them fools. Your logic seems faulty. Also please understand that there are billions of people in this world who live their daily lives without any religion whatsoever and they are doing just fine. Your way isn't the only way. :)

We become willing to surrender financial viability for the empty promise of "saving" the world. Worse still, we become willing to surrender liberties.Hello gal:

Surrender liberties?? SURRENDER LIBERTIES?? Really?? That's what we're GOING to do??

We have NO liberties LEFT after the dufus TOOK them. Do you want me to list them for you?? No? It's OK, I'll do it for ME.

Bush took away our right to Habeas Corpus. It's the FOUNDATION of our legal system... It's what the FIFTH Amendment to the Constitution is about. Bush took away your right to be FREE from the government reading your private email or listening to your phone calls. That's what the FOURTH Amendment is all about.. Certainly, he took away your right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. That's what the SIXTH Amendment is all about... The dufus also took your tax money and spent in on RELIGIONS groups, and that shattered the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution...

No, I'm NOT done... But that should keep you busy for a while...

excon

Yet people meet to try to save themselves from their owbn stupidity and you call them fools. Your logic seems faulty.

You don't see the irony in these particular people, bringing with them a carbon footprint the size of a small country, meeting to save the world?

You don't think “Please, help save the world” sounds a wee bit like a religious movement?

NVGGgncVq-4


Also please understand that there are billions of people in this world who live their daily lives without any religion whatsoever and they are doing just fine. Your way isn't the only way. :)

Roughly 1.1 billion profess to be "nonreligious." 84 percent of the world adheres to a religion, now that's billions.

Roughly 1.1 billion profess to be "nonreligious." 84 percent of the world adheres to a religion, now that's billions.
It's not about being part of a majority, it's about what's right for you. Plus within that 84% most would tell you that those not part of their religion are doing it wrong.

Hello again:

Those numbers notwithstanding, religion is on its way out, thank god. Europeans are shedding it right and left. I wonder if it has anything to do with having an educated populace?

It does seem that the more one studies, the less one believes in fantasy.

excon

It's not about being part of a majority, it's about what's right for you.

Irrelevant to the point, which was there aren't "billions" of nonreligious people in the world.


Plus within that 84% most would tell you that those not part of their religion are doing it wrong.

And within that 1.1 billion nonreligious people, most would tell everyone else they're doing it wrong. So what's your point?

Those numbers notwithstanding, religion is on its way out, thank god.

Nice pun. What you miss is that they're just replacing it with another religion (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703558004574581673107794380.html?m od=rss_opinion_main) of their own creation.


Europeans are shedding it right and left. I wonder if it has anything to do with having an educated populace?

Educated on what?


It does seem that the more one studies, the less one believes in fantasy.

Study what?

Why is this thread in current events and not the Christianity forum?

Okay, I'll play along.


Once you reach that conclusion, then every glitch in the environment becomes a reason to panic. Basically, the "sky is falling" syndrome. There is no confidence that the various cycles of warming, cooling, volcanic activity, etc. will swing back from their highs and lows to arrive at "normal" as has been the case for as long as human history knows.

You're saying that all non-believers feel this way? Well, you're wrong. I know the sky isn't falling, Foxy Loxy told me so right after he ate Chicken Little.


Being a Christian, I know the sky is NOT falling.

I'm a Deist and I know this as well. I guess you Christians aren't the only ones in the know.


The Sun is under the control of the Creator and will continue to warm Earth, sometimes more, sometimes less. And there is not ONE thing any of us can do about it.

That's your belief, it's not fact. You're right that there's nothing we can do about it, but I don't believe that your God is the one controlling everything.

Why is this thread in current events and not the Christianity forum?
Because the reddies would flow like rain from the religious types.

Irrelevant to the point, which was there aren't "billions" of nonreligious people in the world. Are the chinese religious? Not really (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_China).


And within that 1.1 billion nonreligious people, most would tell everyone else they're doing it wrong. So what's your point?Most atheists don't give a crap about what you believe in. However it doesn't take long in a christianity thread before someone tells an atheist that they are going to hell or they don't know the "Truth" (lol!).

Most atheists don't give a crap about what you believe in. However it doesn't take long in a christianity thread before someone tells an atheist that they are going to hell or they don't know the "Truth" (lol!).

It's not just the Atheists that get told this NK. The Diests, the Jews, Muslims, all groups that don't adhere to the vary narrow views of Christianity are told that they don't know the truth.

I guess everyone is wrong.

It's not just the Atheists that get told this NK. The Diests, the Jews... I guess everyone is wrong.Hello Alty:

How can you be the chosen people, and wrong at the same time?

excon

PS> I know what it is... I've been chosen to gather, so the Christians can float up to heaven, while I go to hell. Or, I could go to heaven, if I wanted to BE a Christian, but NOT as a "chosen" Jew.

It's kind of like the Nazis chose the Jews too, and the reason ain't a whole lot different.

Because the reddies would flow like rain from the religious types.

Funny how you never see the irony in your posts.

Hello Alty:

How can you be the chosen people, and wrong at the same time?

excon

PS> I know what it is... I've been chosen to gather, so the Christians can float up to heaven, while I go to hell. Or, I could go to heaven, if I wanted to BE a Christian, but NOT as a "chosen" Jew.

It's kinda like the Nazis chose the Jews too, and the reason ain't a whole lot different.

Exy, if I had the answers then I'd be in charge. ;)

If there is a God then he's the only one with the answers, sadly he's not sharing those answers with the rest of us. I wonder why that is? Could it be that he, a God, doesn't really care about the little ant farm he built?

Now I'm going to get it. Bring it on kids, I'm bored today. ;)

It's not just the Atheists that get told this NK. The Diests, the Jews, Muslims, all groups that don't adhere to the vary narrow views of Christianity are told that they don't know the truth.

I guess everyone is wrong.

NK began his response to this thread with "there is no god," so yes everyone tells everyone they're wrong.

NK began his response to this thread with "there is no god," so yes everyone tells everyone they're wrong.

Does he not have the right to an opinion?

You believe in God, nes pas? So wouldn't you state that as your opinion?

I don't understand why you're upset about this. Surely the fact the NK doesn't believe in God is not news to you.

Funny how you never see the irony in your posts.Explain it to me, I'm open to it.

Does he not have the right to an opinion?

Sure, and he expresses it often. I was just pointing out him telling us we're wrong - while making the point that most religious people tell others they're wrong.


I don't understand why you're upset about this.

Pointing out the irony in NK's posts means I'm upset about this? LOL!

Hello again:

Those numbers notwithstanding, religion is on its way out, thank god.

excon

That's what Voltaire thought.

He was wrong.

There is no god and the sky is indeed not falling. Feel free to vent your car's exhaust into your house, I'm sure you're "creator" will take care to make all things right.

American cities have cleaner air today than they did 40 years ago. This in spite of there being many more automobiles than 40 years ago.

And we did not destroy the economy to do that.

Sure, and he expresses it often. I was just pointing out him telling us we're wrong - while making the point that most religious people tell others they're wrong.

We all express our beliefs often, because they're our beliefs. The Christians quote the bible left right and center to prove that their beliefs are valid. Those of us that aren't Christian have the same right to express our beliefs and why we feel they're valid.


Pointing out the irony in NK's posts means I'm upset about this? LOL!

I guess you're not upset. Perhaps you're just trying to goad him into a confrontation.

Hello gal:

Surrender liberties??? SURRENDER LIBERTIES???? Really??? That's what we're GOING to do??????

We have NO liberties LEFT after the dufus TOOK them. Do you want me to list them for you??? No? It's ok, I'll do it for ME.

Bush took away our right to Habeas Corpus. It's the FOUNDATION of our legal system.... It's what the FIFTH Amendment to the Constitution is about. Bush took away your right to be FREE from the government reading your private email or listening to your phone calls. That's what the FOURTH Amendment is all about.. Certainly, he took away your right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. That's what the SIXTH Amendment is all about... The dufus also took your tax money and spent in on RELIGIONS groups, and that shattered the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution...

No, I'm NOT done... But that should keep you busy for a while...

excon

Why is everything Bush's fault?

Surely you know enough history to know about Woodrow Wilson and the Federal Reserve Act, whereby we have been ripped off ever since by a system that saddles us with both principal and interest by borrowing money into circulation instead of the government issuing it into circulation.

Surely you know that the Democrats set up the great Ponzi scheme known as Social Security, which is now bankrupt because of another Democrat, Lyndon Johnson, who put the SS trust funds into the general funds where it was promptly spent on a no-win war against poverty.

By the way, that is a Democrat war that has been going on a lot more than 8 years, and no exit strategy in sight.

And now, If Obama has his way, you will lose a lot of choice about your health care, and will have to pay exorbitant amounts for your energy because of cap and tax.

Dream on. Continue to blame everything on Bush.

We all express our beliefs often, because they're our beliefs. The Christians quote the bible left right and center to prove that their beliefs are valid. Those of us that aren't Christian have the same right to express our beliefs and why we feel they're valid.

Can't say that I've ever believed otherwise, not need to justify that with me.


I guess you're not upset. Perhaps you're just trying to goad him into a confrontation.

I have a great put down here but I'll be nice to him. I was merely pointing out an exaggeration of his and noting the irony in his posts. No need to read anything else into it.

[QUOTE=NeedKarma;2122130]There is no god and the sky is indeed not falling. QUOTE]

Do you believe that CO2 is a gas that must be reduced? Do you believe that the world must take itself back to 18th century modes of living, giving up our automobiles, central air conditioning, and other energy using amenities.

If you do, then you DO think the sky is falling.

Exy, if I had the answers then I'd be in charge. ;)

If there is a God then he's the only one with the answers, sadly he's not sharing those answers with the rest of us. I wonder why that is? Could it be that he, a God, doesn't really care about the little ant farm he built?

;)

He already gave us the answers.

He already gave us the answers.

He as in God?

That's your belief, not mine.

I don't want to get into the same fight again and again and again. We never accomplish anything when we talk about our beliefs. Not you and me, but Christians versus the rest of us. We just go around in circles until the thread is closed.

I respect your right to believe in the God of the bible.

Please respect my right to follow my own beliefs which are very different from yours.

I'm out of here. This will only lead to a headache.

Good luck with your fight, I mean discussion. :rolleyes:

Why is everything Bush's fault?Hello gal:

Let's see if we can keep the argument in one straight line...

I didn't say EVERYTHING is Bush's fault.. You said we'd LOSE liberties under Obama.. I just mentioned the liberties we lost under Bush. It's no more difficult than that.

Do I think, that NO MATTER which administration is in power, that my Constitutional rights have remained intact? I do not. I don't think the Democrats look out for 'em any better than you folks do.

excon

Hello gal:

Let's see if we can keep the argument in one straight line...

I didn't say EVERYTHING is Bush's fault.. You said we'd LOSE liberties under Obama.. I just mentioned the liberties we lost under Bush. It's no more difficult than that.

Do I think, that NO MATTER which administration is in power, that my Constitutional rights have remained intact? I do not. I don't think the Democrats look out for 'em any better than you folks do.

excon

Point taken.

Conservatives and Republicans are not necessarily the same thing.

I doubt if it will work, but we DO need a third party.

BTW, did you see a late poll that shows Palin's approval rating to be within 1% of Obama's?

BTW, did you see a late poll that shows Palin's approval rating to be within 1% of Obama's?Hello again, gal:

I did not. I DID predict that Sarah Palin would be our next president IF the Democrats failed to pass a public option. And, that's exactly what the Democrats did.

Obama has managed to do the unthinkable... He's pissed off EVERYBODY including me.

Since Huckabee folded, the right wing of the party is available to Sarah. As a matter of fact, that wing is the ONLY wing that has it together. Yes, I think she can win.

Do I think that would be good? No.

excon

Galv,


I think when someone places more faith and value in material things of this world, like money and possessions, then you get the current culture of overconsumption.

Regardless, when one dies, you can't take it with you. A mansion or BMW or huge bank account can't eulogize you. But if one helps others, makes others smile and laugh, improves the lives of others - I think these relationships are for eternity.


G&P

Galv,


I think when someone places more faith and value in material things of this world, like money and possessions, then you get the current culture of overconsumption.

Regardless, when one dies, you can't take it with you. A mansion or BMW or huge bank account can't eulogize you. But if one helps others, makes others smile and laugh, improves the lives of others - I think these relationships are for eternity.


G&P

I just want to point out that it doesn't take a faith in God to help others and improve their lives.

I think when someone places more faith and value in material things of this world, like money and possessions, then you get the current culture of overconsumption.Totally agree. Of course this happens whether you are religious or not.

I have to wonder how many of you know what I mean when I use the term "biblical world veiw".

Do you?

I have to wonder how many of you know what I mean when I use the term "biblical world veiw".

Do you?Well considering that it's the first time you use it then perhaps you should explain it.

I have to wonder how many of you know what I mean when I use the term "biblical world veiw".

Do you?

Even though I am a Christian I'm not sure what part of the Bible you are referring to, The part that says God so loved the world and sent his only son or the part that says it was so evil he destroyed it or the part that says as it was in the days of Noah so it will be. My interpretation of a biblical world view is the world is evil and liable to destruction. Is this your meaning also?

What I mean is that God is in control of the big picture and that climate is not part of man's responsibility.

Man was given oversight of the day to day affairs, and he is responsiblefor his own problems.

Property rights are sacred as are rights of inheritance.

We are supposed to treat our fellow man in the manner we wish to be treated. If this were followed, there would be no oppression of the weaker among us, whether by politicians, dictators, or CEO's.

But as it relates to this thread, it means that those who attempt to defraud the public with rigged information for their own personal gain are nothing more than predators.
They hope to make everyone else provide them with great wealth and power.

Definitely not a biblical world view.

If you do not believe in God, or have faith in God, any actions here in this life die with you. For those that believe and have faith in God, fruit is of the vine John 15, and Matthew 25:31 warns us of the consequences of our actions or inactions.

If your world view is like Philipians 4, then there is no need for the rat race of over consumption nor the inappropriate anxiety over AGW.

G&P

What I mean is that God is in control of the big picture and that climate is not part of man's responsibility.

Man was given oversight of the day to day affairs, and he is responsiblefor his own problems.

Property rights are sacred as are rights of inheritance.

We are supposed to treat our fellow man in the manner we wish to be treated. If this were followed, there would be no opression of the weaker among us, whether by politicians, dictators, or CEO's.

But as it relates to this thread, it means that those who attempt to defraud the public with rigged information for their own personal gain are nothing more than predators.
They hope to make everyone else provide them with great wealth and power.

Definitely not a biblical world view.

This is your belief. Mine is different.

You're stating this as if it's fact, but it's not.

You have the right to your belief, you do not have the right to state your belief as fact. You don't have any proof that your belief is anything other then a belief.

Look up the word belief. Maybe then you'll understand.

If you do not believe in God, or have faith in God, any actions here in this life die with you. For those that believe and have faith in God, fruit is of the vine John 15, and Matthew 25:31 warns us of the consequences of our actions or inactions.

If your world view is like Philipians 4, then there is no need for the rat race of over consumption nor the inappropriate anxiety over AGW.

G&P

Again, this is your belief.

Why do Christians always state their beliefs as if they're fact?

How do you know that my actions in life will die with me because I don't believe in your God? You don't know that. If there is a God, then he knows. But what if I'm right? What if God built this world and then walked away? What if he doesn't give a damn about any of us?

Do you ever even stop to consider that you may be wrong? I know I do.

As for my actions dying with me. No, they won't. Everything that I do in life affects someone. Haven't you watched the move "It's a wonderful life"?

My kids will carry on, as will their children. If I'm lucky I'll live long enough to be a part of my grandchildren's lives and they'll pass my legacy to their children. I will die, in body, but my life's work will live on. That's a fact.

I'm sick and tired of people thinking that their way is the only way. I'm a good person, I'm no less then you, I'm no more then you. We have different beliefs. I accept your right to believe, why can't you accept mine?

It's maddening.

This is why Christians get so many arguments, because they simply won't give an inch to anyone. They always have to be right, even though they have no proof that they are.

If only you'd open your mind enough to listen. What a wonderful world it would be.

I put a comment out there and you and NK then say you don't need faith or GOD, so it is you that are being argumentative. I'm not saying that I'm right or your wrong. I'm making a reference to where I'm coming from. I think the OP, Gal can relate to that.





What if God built this world and then walked away? What if he doesn't give a damn about any of us?



Then what we do in this life does not matter, does it? It only matters to our own egos.



Do you ever even stop to consider that you may be wrong? I know I do.


Nope, nada, nunca. I like the God that loves and forgives us, will never leave us :D



G&P

I put a comment out there and you and NK then say you don't need faith or GOD, so it is you that are being argumentative. I'm not saying that I'm right or your wrong. I'm making a reference to where I'm coming from. I think the OP, Gal can relate to that.

And what comment did you put out? Let me guess, because I don't feel like going back to look. It was probably something along the lines of people believing in God being the only good people, the only charitable people, the only people that make a positive impact on this world. Oh I'm sure that's not a direct quote, but I'm also sure I got the jist of it.

In other words, I don't believe in the same God you do, so I'm not a good person. That's what it boils down to.

I'm tired of hearing that only God loving bible quoting Christians can be good people, do good, live good lives. I love my kids just as much as any Christian. I give to charity. I help people in need. I am a good person. I don't need your God to be any of those things and I resent the fact that I've always been told that only Christians can be good.

It's not true.

It's insulting.

It's hurtful and I'm done with it.

We're always told to listen to your point of view. We're told that the bible is the "word" that we're lost, that all we have to do is believe, accept God into our lives and then we can be just like you. Well what if we don't want to be just like you? Did you ever stop to consider that we've read the books, done the research, searched for your God and didn't find him, because our minds told us that he's not there? What makes you think that we're somehow lacking? We're not. We simply didn't go down the same path as you. We're not lost, we just found something else.

Why are your beliefs so much more valid then mine? They aren't, but still, we're told to listen to your beliefs when none of you are ever willing to consider ours.

After 39 years of dealing with this, wouldn't you be argumentative too?

If there was a Deist forum, and I had the numbers, and everyone told you you were wrong, how would you feel if you kept talking but were never heard?

Well, that's how I feel right now.

Yes, I'm upset. Heck, I'm done. I give up. You win. I have no rights to believe what I want. Happy now?

Peace out. Obviously I'm too upset to be here. I probably shouldn't post this, but I have to get it off my chest.

Good night.

Hi altenweg,

There is no need to be angry or upset.

What makes it difficult for a Deist is there is no Deist Bible ( as far as I am aware). If there were then you could provide quotes of your own as evidence of your belief.

Christian religion is in the fortunate position of being able to quote from the bible (the Bible being a factual account)

As a Christian I am happy to entertain other evidence which supports or goes against the Bible. This is pretty much what theology is about. Now, some Christians don't entertain theology, what is said in the Bible is fact and that is the end of the argument. Given this, there is no basis for argument, so it is a pointless exercise.

Most, however are prepared to put their beliefs to the test in the form of theology and philosophy. The reason being is they see the importance of establishing what is written in the bible as truth. They also see the need to communicate the truth to others who may be believers or non-believers and perhaps to distinguish themselves from other religions.

I can come up with a number of arguments for the existence of God, but I know that as soon as I do someone will come up with a counter argument. This does not upset me because I know that knowledge of God and the physical world progresses this way.

If there is no Deist Bible to refer to then there must be a Deist philosophy. It is no more difficult to formulate an argument for Deism then it is to formulate any other type of theological argument.

In the end we can formulate a logical argument for just about any position we like.

I hope this helps

The Deist philosophy has been written by a number of people . A short list of people to read is the writings of Voltaire;
Lord Herbert of Cherbury ;considered the father of English deism... 'De Veritate (On Truth, as It Is Distinguished from Revelation, the Probable, the Possible, and the False)' (1624)

John Locke ' An Essay Concerning Human Understanding '


others include Peter Annet ;Charles Blount ,John Toland 'Christianity Not Mysterious' ,Antony Ashley Cooper, third Earl of Shaftesbury ,Antony Collins ,Thomas Woolston ,Matthew Tindal ,Thomas Morgan ,Thomas Chubb .

Herbert was big on the concept of common notions . From De Veritate

No general agreement exists concerning the Gods, but there is universal recognition of God. Every religion in the past has acknowledged, every religion in the future will acknowledge, some sovereign deity among the Gods.. .
Accordingly that which is everywhere accepted as the supreme manifestation of deity, by whatever name it may be called, I term God.

While there is no general agreement concerning the worship of Gods, sacred beings, saints, and angels, yet the Common Notion or Universal Consent tells us that adoration ought to be reserved for the one God. Hence divine religion— and no race, however savage, has existed without some expression of it— is found established among all nations.. .

The connection of Virtue with Piety, defined in this work as the right conformation of the faculties, is and always has been held to be, the most important part of religious practice. There is no general agreement concerning rites, ceremonies, traditions... ; but there is the greatest possible consensus of opinion concerning the right conformation of the faculties.. . Moral virtue... is and always has been esteemed by men in every age and place and respected in every land...

There is no general agreement concerning the various rites or mysteries which the priests have devised for the expiation of sin... General agreement among religions, the nature of divine goodness, and above all conscience, tell us that our crimes may be washed away by true penitence, and that we can be restored to new union with God.. . I do not wish to consider here whether any other more appropriate means exists by which the divine justice may be appeased, since I have undertaken in this work only to rely on truths which are not open to dispute but are derived from the evidence of immediate perception and admitted by the whole world.. .

The rewards that are eternal have been variously placed in heaven, in the stars, in the Elysian fields... Punishment has been thought to lie in metempsychosis, in hell,. or in temporary or everlasting death. But all religion, law, philosophy, and... conscience, teach openly or implicitly that punishment or reward awaits us after this life.. . [T]here is no nation, however barbarous, which has not and will not recognise the existence of punishments and rewards. That reward and punishment exist is, then, a Common Notion, though there is the greatest difference of opinion as to their nature, quality, extent, and mode.. .

It follows from these considerations that the dogmas which recognize a sovereign Deity, enjoin us to worship Him, command us to live a holy life, lead us to repent our sins, and warn us of future recompense or punishment, proceed from God and are inscribed within us in the form of Common Notions.. .

Revealed truth exists; and it would be unjust to ignore it. But its nature is quite distinct from the truth [based on Common Notions]... [T]he truth of revelation depends upon the authority of him who reveals it. We must, then, proceed with great care in discerning what actually is revealed... [W]e must take great care to avoid deception, for men who are depressed, superstitious, or ignorant of causes are always liable to it.. .


And of course Jefferson wrote "Jefferson's Bible " or 'The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth' in which he edited out of the Bible any supernatural reference .

In other words, I don't believe in the same God you do, so I'm not a good person. That's what it boils down to.

I'm tired of hearing that only God loving bible quoting Christians can be good people, do good, live good lives. I love my kids just as much as any Christian. I give to charity. I help people in need. I am a good person. I don't need your God to be any of those things and I resent the fact that I've always been told that only Christians can be good.

It's not true.

It's insulting.

It's hurtful and I'm done with it.

I think you're being unnecessarily defensive. In fact I'd guess most Christians agree with the notion that you don't have to believe in God to be a good person. I think most Christians would agree that being a Christian DOESN'T necessarily make you a good person.

The message of Christianity isn't "you must be a Christian to be a good person" or "being a Christian makes you a good person," it boils down to "God loves you." If they send the first message they're just wrong... in my opinion.

I think you're being unnecessarily defensive. In fact I'd guess most Christians agree with the notion that you don't have to believe in God to be a good person. I think most Christians would agree that being a Christian DOESN'T necessarily make you a good person.

The message of Christianity isn't "you must be a Christian to be a good person" or "being a Christian makes you a good person," it boils down to "God loves you." If they send the first message they're just wrong...in my opinion.
I agree with you all the way. Unfortunately that's not what we often see on this website, this thread is a perfect example: gal's point is that the "godless" are fools.

American cities have cleaner air today than they did 40 years ago. This in spite of there being many more automobiles than 40 years ago.

And we did not destroy the economy to do that.

That depends on WHOSE economy you think we didn't destroy.

Talk to China, Russia, Argentina, Brazil, and Iraq about how THEIR economies are doing after the US meddled in them.

What I mean is that God is in control of the big picture and that climate is not part of man's responsibility. Hello gal:

Charlatans 3:02:94...

What ELSE isn't man's responsibility? Should man have flown in the air? Should we seek to travel in space... Should we mess with bacteria??

Those sound WAAAAAYYY beyond the day to day God authorized.

Ex

That depends on WHOSE economy you think we didn't destroy.

Talk to China, Russia, Argentina, Brazil, and Iraq about how THEIR economies are doing after the US meddled in them.

China's economy is doing pretty well right now. And they will NOT saddle themselves with some impossible climate control effort.

Russia's economy was destroyed by COMMUNISM, plain and simple. How did we figure in that?

I don't know about the economies of the others, but you are wrong on the first two and seem to be on the same page with Obama. Blame America for all the ills of the world.

Consider this.

If Congress ratifies some treaty made in Copenhagen look for the following results.

You will be told what temperature to set your home thermostat at.

You will not be able to take that driving vacation that you wanted because of high fuel prices and/or rationing.

Do you remember what happened to food prices recently when diesel fuel topped $5.00 per gallon? You want more of that?

Do you want some bureau monotering your carbon footprint?

And all because idiots presumed to intrude into an area that is not their responsiblility.

Have fun.

Clintoon came back with the Kyoto treaty signed in his back pocket . And that is where he kept it . Prior to voting on it the Senate did vote on the Byrd-Hagel Resolution rejecting the language of the treaty . It passed 95-0.

The same will occur with any agreement coming out of Copenhagen . The President knows he can't even get a cap and trade provision passed into law. That is why he authorized the EPA to take unilateral actions. I'm sure Congress will be thrilled with that usurpation .

Hello gal:

Charlatans 3:02:94...

What ELSE isn't man's responsibility? Should man have flown in the air? Should we seek to travel in space... Should we mess with bacteria???

Those sound WAAAAAYYY beyond the day to day God authorized.

ex

What we learn in space may be of benefit here on Earth, but man will never colonize space. It just isn't practical

You didn't mention genetic engineering. Are you OK with that?

Do you think man can ACTUALLY control the climate?

I'm guessing that long before man can produce enough air pollution to alter the climate, he will be extinct from asthma, lung cancer and COPD.

I posted earlier that in the USA, we have been cleaning our air up, despite millions more vehicles on the road. We just need to keep doing what we have been doing.

Under Bush, CO2 emissions were headed for a 14% reduction by 2020 or so. Progress was being made, but now we just have to destroy our economy to get another 3%. Do you think that makes any sense?

Speaking of a godless world view...


Child's Christmas artwork deemed 'violent' (http://www.wbz.com/Child-s-Christmas-artwork-deemed--violent------SOU/5896962)

Taunton (AP/WBZ Newsroom) -- A Taunton man says his 8-year-old son was sent home from school and ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation after drawing a stick figure Jesus on a cross.

The man told the Taunton Daily Gazette his second-grader made the drawing after his teacher asked children to sketch something that reminded them of Christmas. He said the teacher at Maxham Elementary School thought the drawing was too violent.

The father, who asked that his name not be used, said the family had recently seen a Christmas display at a religious shrine.

Superintendent Julie Hackett said she could not discuss an individual student and the school followed proper protocol.

Toni Saunders, an educational consultant working with the family, said the teacher was alarmed because the boy drew Xs in the eyes of Jesus.

A school committee member reacts:

School administrators have approved the father's request to have the boy transferred to another elementary school in the district.

The offending image by the 8-year-old ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation?

http://imgsrv.wbz.com/image/DbGraphic/200912/1442817.jpg?1260896799

Perhaps the lad should have been more of a Rembrandt...
http://www.rembrandtpainting.net/rmbrndt_1620-35/1620_35_images/crucifixion.jpg

Hello again, Steve;

You have a propensity for posting things about what some obscure wacko did, as though it means something. That, or you think this is the National Inquirer.

excon

Hello again, Steve;

You have a propensity for posting things about what some obscure wacko did, as though it means something. That, or you think this is the National Inquirer.

You have a propensity for dismissing the sublimely ridiculous things taking place in taxpayer funded institutions.

I'm bothered that they were asked to sketch something reminding them of Christmas!

It's NOT just a Christian holiday season--as a matter of fact, we're smack-dab in the middle of Hannukah right now, with Yule next week!

And let me tell you, if someone drew a dead person and said it reminded them of the "happy holiday season"--especially a dead person who was killed in a gruesome manner--I'd refer the kid for psychological evaluation too.

Please accept with no obligation, implied or explicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2010, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere.

Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

I'm bothered that they were asked to sketch something reminding them of Christmas!

Intruding on your constitutional right not to be offended?


It's NOT just a Christian holiday season--as a matter of fact, we're smack-dab in the middle of Hannukah right now, with Yule next week!

Who's to say that wasn't on the agenda as well?


And let me tell you, if someone drew a dead person and said it reminded them of the "happy holiday season"--especially a dead person who was killed in a gruesome manner--I'd refer the kid for psychological evaluation too.

Christmas isn't "the happy holiday season," it's about Jesus and it's a federal holiday, but there we go intruding on your right not to be offended again.

Christmas is about Santa Claus, c'mon!

Please accept with no obligation, implied or explicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2010, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere.

Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

Merry Christmas, tom.

Christmas isn't "the happy holiday season," it's about Jesus and it's a federal holiday, Many couldn't care less about this Jesus fellow.

Merry Christmas Steve

Merry Christmas to all!

many couldn't care less about this jesus fellow.

OK.

Happy Yule to all!


The man told the Taunton Daily Gazette his second-grader made the drawing after his teacher asked children to sketch something that reminded them of Christmas. He said the teacher at Maxham Elementary School thought the drawing was too violent.

That says to me that she asked them to sketch something that reminded them of Christmas--but hey, maybe I misinterpreted the word "Christmas". I guess it COULD have meant some other holiday too. And while Christmas is a federal holiday---separation of church and state to me says that either you have NO religious stuff in schools, or you cover it ALL. So hopefully the teacher DID ask them to sketch something that reminds them of the holidays and not just Christmas.

Either way--sketching Christ DEAD for Christmas is a weird thing. Christmas is the Christian celebration of his BIRTH. EASTER is the Christian celebration of his death.

Either way--it showed a dead guy being killed in a horrible way for a holiday that is supposedly about celebrating His birth. If the drawing had been about witches burned at the stake, or the death of the Horned God at Beltane, I'd be JUST as worried.

He said he thought it was a joke when told his son needed an evaluation, and thinks the school overreacted.

The boy was cleared to return to school on Dec. 7 after the evaluation found nothing to indicate that he posed a threat to himself or others. But his father said the boy was traumatized by the incident and the school district has approved the family's request to have the child transferred to another school.

The father said in the days before the incident the family had gone to the National Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette in Attleboro where there are crucifixion statues (one of those statues is pictured below).


Perhaps this moronic teacher had never seen a church before, never knew anything of Jesus in art over the millennia, never been to Sunday School, knew nothing of the connection between Jesus and Christmas, doesn't believe in freedom of expression or just plain shouldn't be anywhere near 8-year-olds.

http://imgsrv.wbz.com/image/wbz/UserFiles/Image/news%20images/1215091032%5B1%5D.jpg

... or just plain shouldn't be anywhere near 8-year-olds.
No, you are confusing him with the priests.

PS--the ONLY reason Christmas is celebrated when it is, is because of the pagan celebrations of Yule and Saturnalia. It's actually been shown over and over that Christ couldn't have been born on December 25th. So... since Christians STOLE the holiday, maybe THAT should be part of the Christmas education programs at school?

"Hey kids! While many of you celebrate the birth of Jesus, let's talk about the history of the holiday! Did you know that the Romans? used to allow the slaves to be in charge for this one day called Saturnalia? This is also where the tradition of gift giving comes in, even though they tell you that it's because of the Three Wise Men. This is also the reason that Christmas is celebrated on December 25th. And the early Germanic peoples celebrated Yule, which involved feasting and fertility rituals and sacrifices. Traditionally, it was a day to venerate ancestors, but was also a wild revelry that called for many toasts of alcoholic beverages. They brought to the equation the Yule log, the custom of carols, and the Christmas ham, which dates to celebrate a goddess of fertility and harvest! Isn't that interesting?"

PS--the ONLY reason Christmas is celebrated when it is, is because of the pagan celebrations of Yule and Saturnalia. It's actually been shown over and over that Christ couldn't have been born on December 25th.

This is about an idiot teacher traumatizing an 8-year-old special needs boy for drawing a stick figure.


So... since Christians STOLE the holiday, maybe THAT should be part of the Christmas education programs at school?

Yule and Saturnalia are not federal holidays.


Isn't that interesting?"

Not really.

Hello:

Fortunatly, there's Festivus for the rest of us.

excon

Not really.http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/funny-pictures-beaver-cant-hear-you.jpg

Hello:

Fortunatly, there's Festivus for the rest of us.

Absolutely, you can buy your Festivus pole here (http://www.festivuspoles.com/pages/Festivuspoles.htm). Please enjoy and tell us all about your "Feats of Strength" ritual.

It's not about a teacher traumatizing an 8 year old at all.

It's about a teacher bringing up an inappropriate topic for 8 year olds in a PUBLIC school to begin with, and then feeling worried that the child drew a picture of a dead man--PLEASE tell me how Christ on the Cross is related to Christmas rather than Easter. Pretty please.

Any kid drawing dead people SHOULD be psychologically evaluated.

And while Christmas is a federal holiday---the FEDERAL side of that is SECULAR. Santa and Reindeer and presents, please. Keep Christ out of it. He has NOTHING to do with the FEDERAL holiday.

(PS--it was only MADE a federal holiday because so many people called into work that day anyway--just like Thanksgiving)

[QUOTE]It's not about a teacher traumatizing an 8 year old at all.

It's about a teacher bringing up an inappropriate topic for 8 year olds in a PUBLIC school to begin with

Get real Synnen, when in God's name did Christmas become an inappropriate topic for children? That is pathetic nonsense.


and then feeling worried that the child drew a picture of a dead man--

Not a dead man, a man, a historical figure considered by millions to be the Savior of mankind. A man children have been taught about for centuries from birth to death and beyond. I've seen hundreds if not thousands of children come through church and don't know of a single one traumatized by the story because it's a story of love and hope. Children tend to LOVE Jesus.


PLEASE tell me how Christ on the Cross is related to Christmas rather than Easter. Pretty please.

Any kid drawing dead people SHOULD be psychologically evaluated.

What difference does it make? The kid is 8 years old, he had just visited a church with depictions of Jesus on the cross and it's obvious he knows there's a connection between Jesus and Christmas, and you guys think he's a little psycho? Get a grip!


And while Christmas is a federal holiday---the FEDERAL side of that is SECULAR. Santa and Reindeer and presents, please. Keep Christ out of it. He has NOTHING to do with the FEDERAL holiday.

Um, you really believe that Christmas was entirely secular when Congress established it as a federal holiday? It was upheld as constitutional "because it has a valid secular purpose," but it did not and cannot remove the basis for the holiday. Teachers may indeed teach Christmas from a secular viewpoint including its religious significance, but they cannot control how the children express themselves unless it poses a threat of a significant disruption. If this idiot teacher didn't want to deal with how 2nd graders might express themselves on her assignment she should have chosen another assignment.


(PS--it was only MADE a federal holiday because so many people called into work that day anyway--just like Thanksgiving)

Uh, no. But if that works for you I'm OK with that.

Please accept with no obligation, implied or explicit, my best wishes for an environmentally conscious, socially responsible, low-stress, non-addictive, gender-neutral celebration of the winter solstice holiday, practiced within the most enjoyable traditions of the religious persuasion of your choice, or secular practices of your choice, with respect for the religious/secular persuasion and/or traditions of others, or their choice not to practice religious or secular traditions at all.

I also wish you a fiscally successful, personally fulfilling and medically uncomplicated recognition of the onset of the generally accepted calendar year 2010, but not without due respect for the calendars of choice of other cultures whose contributions to society have helped make America great. Not to imply that America is necessarily greater than any other country nor the only America in the Western Hemisphere.

Also, this wish is made without regard to the race, creed, color, age, physical ability, religious faith or sexual preference of the wishee.

To quote a perhaps not so well known line

You have the ability to complicate the obvious and travialise the important
We all tremble before the searing logic of your fiery intellect

.

to quote a perhaps not so well known line

you have the ability to complicate the obvious and travialise the important
we all tremble before the searing logic of your fiery intellect.Lol!

So this special needs child "broke the school's code of violence."

??

Catalyst Notebook :: Violence on the rise inside Chicago high schools (http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/notebook/index.php/entry/412/Violence_on_the_rise_inside_Chicago_high_schools)


Meanwhile, real violence is escalting. Hey wasn't the POTUS from Chicago?


G&P

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/funny-pictures-beaver-cant-hear-you.jpg

You mean this?

Yes!

[QUOTE=Synnen;2131413]

Get real Synnen, when in God's name did Christmas become an inappropriate topic for children? That is pathetic nonsense.

When it's in a PUBLIC school. Discussing a holiday is FINE--if you're discussing ALL of the religious holidays. If her curriculum included a day for Christmas, a day for Hannukah, a day for Yule, a day for Ramadan, and a day for Kwanzaa, then I'd be okay with the teaching of religious holidays. But if you don't want YOUR kids learning about Wicca on All Hallow's Eve (and if EVER there was a theft of a holiday, that's it) in October, then I don't want MY kids learning about Christmas at school in December. It's hard enough teaching the kids in my family the difference between Yule and Christmas, and why we celebrate it differently in my house without compounding it with the school teaching only Christmas. Would you want your kids taught ONLY about Hannukah, and not Christmas?

ONE religion taught in a public, non-parochial school is an inappropriate topic--unless, of course, it's how said religion influenced other areas of life, taught in a setting appropriate to age--for example, Greek Mythology in a history or philosophy or humanities class. NOT a teacher expounding on ONE religion



Not a dead man, a man, a historical figure considered by millions to be the Savior of mankind. A man children have been taught about for centuries from birth to death and beyond. I've seen hundreds if not thousands of children come through church and don't know of a single one traumatized by the story because it's a story of love and hope. Children tend to LOVE Jesus.

Yeah--sure they do. Children in general haven't been exposed to more than their parents' religions and whatever they get at school. Children also don't get told "Jesus was executed as a criminal as a political example, and in a horrible way. They hung him up by his hands and feet on a cross and let him starve to death--if his wounds didn't kill him first" I agree. Most kids aren't traumatized by it, because they don't understand the whole story. They only understand "Baby Jesus was born in a manger, and he was a miracle and his mommy was Mary and he died for my sins". They don't even understand what "died for my sins" MEANS. If you don't believe me, ask any 8 year old--and then see how upset they are when they DO finally start understanding.

I don't see it as a story of love and hope. I see it as a story of political influence through the church, and a way of controlling the masses.




What difference does it make? The kid is 8 years old, he had just visited a church with depictions of Jesus on the cross and it's obvious he knows there's a connection between Jesus and Christmas, and you guys think he's a little psycho? Get a grip!

If my (hypothetical) kid came to you with a picture someone throwing a man in a fire, would you be concerned? Even if you heard that he'd just gone to view a religious ceremony where the Wicker Man was burned? YOU get a grip. The teacher followed school protocols for reporting a child with a disturbing drawing, and she's over the top because the drawing just HAPPENS to be a guy that supposedly died to save the world?




Um, you really believe that Christmas was entirely secular when Congress established it as a federal holiday? It was upheld as constitutional "because it has a valid secular purpose," but it did not and cannot remove the basis for the holiday. Teachers may indeed teach Christmas from a secular viewpoint including its religious significance, but they cannot control how the children express themselves unless it poses a threat of a significant disruption. If this idiot teacher didn't want to deal with how 2nd graders might express themselves on her assignment she should have chosen another assignment.

And if my kid were in that school, I'd be the one in the paper because the teacher WAS teaching non-secular views of a federal holiday. Again--I'd like to know how you'd like a teacher to react to a drawing of an effigy of human sacrifice for All Hallow's (or to give it its correct name: Samhain) from a Pagan child. Would you think the teacher was over-reacting to seeing THAT? Or would you like your children taught the secular viewpoint of Samhain including its religious significance from the pagan point of view? I don't think the teacher was an idiot for her reaction to the picture. I think she was an idiot for teaching "Christmas" to begin with.

I have NO problem with teaching religion in public schools--as long as you're teaching ALL religions. I would NOT want my child taught about his classmates' Christmas traditions if his classmates were not taught about HER Yule traditions--both the secular AND religious views. And you can bet your a$$ I'd be down at the school complaining--and in the newspaper complaining, and on the internet complaining--if my child were to come home hurt and confused because his or her religion were completely dismissed. GREAT lawsuits are started that way.

When it's in a PUBLIC school. Discussing a holiday is FINE--if you're discussing ALL of the religious holidays.

Where is that rule found? Perhaps you should be familiar with the 12 rules of Christmas (http://www.rutherford.org/resources/legal-12rules.asp).


If her curriculum included a day for Christmas, a day for Hannukah, a day for Yule, a day for Ramadan, and a day for Kwanzaa, then I'd be okay with the teaching of religious holidays. But if you don't want YOUR kids learning about Wicca on All Hallow's Eve (and if EVER there was a theft of a holiday, that's it) in October, then I don't want MY kids learning about Christmas at school in December.

And I don't want mine learning a Planned Parenthood agenda. I have no problem with reasonably accommodating parents on their values, but the fact is the teacher had the right to this assignment and she overreacted like an idiot.


Yeah--sure they do. Children in general haven't been exposed to more than their parents' religions and whatever they get at school. Children also don't get told "Jesus was executed as a criminal as a political example, and in a horrible way. They hung him up by his hands and feet on a cross and let him starve to death--if his wounds didn't kill him first" I agree. Most kids aren't traumatized by it, because they don't understand the whole story. They only understand "Baby Jesus was born in a manger, and he was a miracle and his mommy was Mary and he died for my sins". They don't even understand what "died for my sins" MEANS. If you don't believe me, ask any 8 year old--and then see how upset they are when they DO finally start understanding.

It's been taught to children for centuries. I learned it at an early age and it didn't traumatize me or anyone else I knew.


If my (hypothetical) kid came to you with a picture someone throwing a man in a fire, would you be concerned? Even if you heard that he'd just gone to view a religious ceremony where the Wicker Man was burned? YOU get a grip. The teacher followed school protocols for reporting a child with a disturbing drawing, and she's over the top because the drawing just HAPPENS to be a guy that supposedly died to save the world?

Yeah, she's over the top. Funny how the left has no problem exposing kids to sex at an early age but not the history of Jesus. Obama's "safe schools czar" thinks child porn and explicit gay sex is fine for school (http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/12/breaking-obamas-safe-schools-czar-is-promoting-porn-in-the-classroom-kevin-jennings-and-the-glsen-reading-list/), but a stick figure of Jesus on the cross deserves a psych evaluation? Give me a break.

Speech, that link was a pile of steaming crap. Thanks for letting us know what you base your opinions on.

I can't even argue with you.

Suffice to say this: Religion has no place in schools. The teacher reacted to a kid making a picture of a dead person for a Christmas representation--and I can't blame her for her reaction.

What it comes down to is that kids don't NEED to learn about either in schools. Teach them to read. Teach them to do math. For the sake of all that's good and holy, please teach them how to write without using text speak.

Manners, religion, and personal beliefs should be taught at home.

The ONLY exception to that is that TOLERANCE should be taught at schools. You can believe what you want at home, but children should NOT be bullied or made fun of because their parents are Christian, or Jewish, or black or white or gay or straight or whatever. Acceptance of anything that does not hurt another should be taught. Yes, that means that teachers teach that being gay, black, white, Christian, pagan or whatever is okay. It's OKAY to be anything, in other words. You teach what isn't okay at home--and the teacher teaches that there still must be tolerance of differences in his or her classroom.

So--if a parent hates gays with a passion, and teaches that to the child, the teacher CAN and SHOULD tell the child to stuff himself/herself when he/she makes fun of someone else for acting "gay". If a parent thinks blacks should go back to being slaves, GREAT! The teacher should still teach that blacks are people too.

That's not imposing morals. That's imposing tolerance. That's teaching that you can believe whatever you want, as long as you let everyone else believe whatever THEY want too.

Maybe if that happened, we'd finally get people to stop being idiots about what their neighbors are doing.

Synn, 10 greenies for you! Heck, make it 100, 1000. Where is that damn rep button anyway?

I agree 200%!

Speech, that link was a pile of steaming crap. Thanks for letting us know what you base your opinions on.

Funny how every time the facts are so inconvenient that you have no response you just attack the source. Very revealing.

I can't even argue with you.

I could say the same, but the fact is Christmas can be legally taught in public schools - including the religious significance - as long is isn't promoting Christianity. Your objection is duly noted and understood, I have the same objection to the left's idea of sex education.


Suffice to say this: Religion has no place in schools. The teacher reacted to a kid making a picture of a dead person for a Christmas representation--and I can't blame her for her reaction.

Whether it does or not the facts I've mentioned before are still the facts. I'm sure the teacher has the right to teach the significance of Yule and Saturnalia the same way. That's fine, but she chose to do a Christmas assignment and punished the child because she didn't like the outcome. He didn't need a psych evaluation, I've could have determined his motives with 2 questions.


What it comes down to is that kids don't NEED to learn about either in schools. Teach them to read. Teach them to do math. For the sake of all that's good and holy, please teach them how to write without using text speak.

I've been arguing that for years, Synnen. Example again, sex education.


Manners, religion, and personal beliefs should be taught at home.

And respected by the system.


The ONLY exception to that is that TOLERANCE should be taught at schools.

Tolerance from who's point of view?


You can believe what you want at home, but children should NOT be bullied or made fun of because their parents are Christian, or Jewish, or black or white or gay or straight or whatever.

Agreed.


Acceptance of anything that does not hurt another should be taught. Yes, that means that teachers teach that being gay, black, white, Christian, pagan or whatever is okay. It's OKAY to be anything, in other words. You teach what isn't okay at home--and the teacher teaches that there still must be tolerance of differences in his or her classroom.

How about we stick to reading, writing, arithmetic and no text speak, because "whatever" is not necessarily OK. Man-boy relationships are NOT OK in spite of what Obama's "safe schools czar" thinks. Bestiality is NOT OK, child porn is NOT OK, and teaching my children about "fisting" is NOT OK. I can think of lots of things that are NOT OK.

How about we stick to reading, writing, arithmetic and no text speak, because "whatever" is not necessarily OK. Man-boy relationships are NOT OK in spite of what Obama's "safe schools czar" thinks. Bestiality is NOT OK, child porn is NOT OK, and teaching my children about "fisting" is NOT OK. I can think of lots of things that are NOT OK.

What kind of school do your kids go to that they teach fisting! :eek:

My kids go to a public school. My son is in grade 5, my daughter is in grade 2. They have health class (teaching them how to properly wash their hands, their bodies, etc), they have math, social, gym, music, English, German (for my daughter) science and that's it.

Every morning, even though it's a public school, they say the Lord's prayer and sing Oh Canada. Um, I'm not Christian, that's why I sent my kids to a public school. Why are they saying the Lord's prayer in a public school?

This year their Christmas concert is in the Pentecostal Church in our town. Why? I don't do church. Why are my public school kids going to a church for their Christmas concert?

I don't mind them exploring other beliefs. I'm all for it. In fact, they each have a bible (child's version) and yes, we do talk about the Christian belief of what Christmas represents and the Christian religion in general. I also tell them of my beliefs, and everyone that we know that has a different belief is encouraged to talk to my children of their traditions etc. I want them to decide for themselves, which is why I didn't send them to the Catholic school down the street.

Now we're going to church and my kid's know the Lord's prayer. Why?

So yes, I agree. Why can't they just be taught what they're sent to school to learn and leave religion at home, where it belongs.

[QUOTE=Synnen;2131351]Happy Yule to all!




Either way--sketching Christ DEAD for Christmas is a weird thing. Christmas is the Christian celebration of his BIRTH. EASTER is the Christian celebration of his death.

(Side issue)

Easter season (should be passover) is when Christians epecially celebrate the RESURRECTION of Jesus, not His death.

Teaching your children to make safe choices regarding sex IS okay, though.

Unfortunately, the best way to get information to mass numbers of students is through schools. Teaching them HOW to use condoms and other birth control is teaching them to be SAFE. Is it appropriate before age 12? I don't think so. However--I also think a large percentage of teenage pregnancies are because we took sex ed OUT of the schools, and parents don't talk about it at home either, other than to say "don't have sex!!!!"

HOWEVER--I don't know how it works in YOUR town, but in mine, those classes require a parental signature. I know several people in my grade that did NOT take those classes because their parents preferred they know nothing about sex, or only know the parents' version of it. GREAT! More power to those parents.

There is NOT an opt-out clause for religious topics, nor is parental permission required to talk about it--even if it is NOT promoting Christianity.

But then again, there's this: Talking about sex isn't promoting sex. Talking about how some people have different preferences in sex isn't promoting sex. Saying that being gay is okay isn't promoting being gay. And I don't know where your kids go to school, but in MY neighborhood, we teach that if someone touches you in a "bad" way, you should tell an adult you trust about it--which is kind of promoting the ANTI pedophilia, isn't it? I mean, telling kids that there ARE bad touches and that adults can make those touches bad says to me "pedophilia is bad"--but maybe you have a different take on that.

So... are we in agreement that TALKING about sex isn't promoting it?

Just like TALKING about only Christian customs isn't promoting them?

Synn, I'm all for sex education in school. I do think it should be the parents choice, because it is something that parents should have a say in, just like religion. Sadly I think that most parents that opt out of sex ed are the ones that have no intentions of talking sex with their kids. Those are the kids that end up here, on AMHD, asking if oral sex can cause pregnancy. Ignorance isn't always bliss.

When the request comes to my house (yes, the schools send a form asking if the parent wants their child in the class) I will be signing it. Of course our school also sends an outline on what they'll be teaching and it won't be until grade 7.

I'm the type of mom that answers questions as they come. When my son asked if Santa was real last year, even though it broke my heart that he was old enough to ask, I told him to truth. I don't believe in lying to my kids. When my children ask then they're ready for an answer. I keep it age appropriate but suffice it to say that neither of my children think that the stork brings babies. They know how babies are made.

My son asked what a condom was a few month back. Apparently one of the neighbor kids found one in his parents bathroom and brought it out for everyone to see. So we had the safe sex talk.

I don't want my children going out into the world misinformed, or worse yet, not informed at all. I don't want them learning about sex from the 9 year old down the street that thinks kissing can make babies (yes, that happened).

I'd rather that they know what life is all about. My son is 11. To me he's still a baby. He's my little boy. Sadly, to the rest of the world, he's at the age where he'll start finding things out first hand. I can deny it all I want. I can pretend that my son won't be one of the young kids having sex, or doing drugs. I can live in my dream world or I can face reality. Why wouldn't I arm my children with knowledge? It could save their lives. Talking about sex doesn't mean I'm promoting sex.

Did I just ramble?

Ya, I did. :(

What kind of school do your kids go to that they teach fisting! :eek:

Technicaly it wasn't in a public class, but it was at a youth conference in 2000, "fully supported by the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Safe Schools Program, the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and some of the presenters even received federal money." It was sponsored by Obama's "safe schools czar" Kevin Jennings' GLSEN (http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/07/fistgate-barack-obamas-safe-schools-czars-2000-conference-promoted-fisting-to-14-year-olds/) group.

The repulsive material Jennings approves of for students is an outrage, an 8-year-old's stick figure of Jesus is not.


Every morning, even though it's a public school, they say the Lord's prayer and sing Oh Canada. Um, I'm not Christian, that's why I sent my kids to a public school. Why are they saying the Lord's prayer in a public school?

Don't know how public schools work in Canada but I doubt you'll find that here.


So yes, I agree. Why can't they just be taught what they're sent to school to learn and leave religion at home, where it belongs.

Fair enough.

Speech,
You simply posted a link to a website that copied the content from your previous dirtbag website. At no point do they show that "fisting" is appropriate content as per the Department of Education. You're making sh!t up again.

Glad to see you again assume the role of arbiter of what is a legitimate source.
AMHD appreciates your services .The major media is frequently behind the curve and their non-reporting of the issues involved with Obama's "safe school czar " ,Kevin Jennings ,is no exception .
Is the Washington Examiner a legitimate source ?
Obama appointee lauded NAMBLA figure | Washington Examiner (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obama-appointee-lauded-NAMBLA-figure-63115112.html)

You didn't answer the question. I'm not questioning the source, I'm questioning the content. You totally evaded the question which means you have no answer - the site spews out incorrect information and you buy it up.

BTW looks like tom = speech again. <yawn>

speech,
You simply posted a link to a website that copied the content from your previous dirtbag website. At no point do they show that "fisting" is appropriate content as per the Department of Education. You're making sh!t up again.

The audio from the conference is faked? I see. Is Jennings or anyone else denying it? And I never said the "Department of Education" said it was appropriate content, I said the conference was "fully supported by the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Safe Schools Program, the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and some of the presenters even received federal money." I'm not the one "making sh!t up," I'm posting the reality on one of Obama's most asinine appointments and you have no answer for it.

You didn't answer the question. I'm not questioning the source, I'm questioning the content. You totally evaded the question which means you have no answer - the site spews out incorrect information and you buy it up.

BTW looks like tom = speech again. <yawn>

Do a little more than question it, refute it. I bet you can't.

Do a little more than question it, refute it. I bet you can't.
You posted it, you back it up. You're moving dangerously close to Glen Beck style of "opinionating".

You posted it, you back it up. You're moving dangerously close to Glen Beck style of "opinionating".

Sorry, that's not how it works. I posted the evidence, it's up to you to refute it. And you can't.

Sorry, that's not how it works. I posted the evidence, it's up to you to refute it. And you can't.I'm telling you there is no evidence in the website you read. The guy writes up but he has no evidence to back it up.

I'm telling you there is no evidence in the website you read. The guy writes up but he has no evidence to back it up.

Both sites are full of links to the evidence in their reports, you know how links work. The evidence is posted, you have no rebuttal, and I'm OK with that.

You obviously don't follow those links. Lol!

You obviously don't follow those links. Lol!

What are you, 12 years old?

Wow... have we degenerated into insults instead of discussion?

That seems to happen when I call them on some inaccuracies that they take as fact.

Wow...have we degenerated into insults instead of discussion?

Sadly it's the norm.

I think everyone needs a time out, separate corners.

That seems to happen when I call them on some inaccuracies that they take as fact.

Strange how you accuse me of "making sh!t up," that I buy up incorrect information, that I'm "moving dangerously close to Glen Beck style of "opinionating" and that I base my opinions on "a pile of steaming crap," and I'm the one insulting you and have no answers? Only in your alternate reality...

The website you link to is the pile of crap not you. As you may know Beck posits his craziness by saying "his just asking questions here". I already explained that your website offers no backup to the ludicrous things it and you are offering as fact.

Is it time to close down the thread before this gets out of hand or can we all play nice?

Wouldn't it be interesting to have a religious based discussion without name calling and childish behavior?

I'm sure we can do it. After all, we are all adults, nes pas? So let's act like adults.

By his own admission and in his own book(One Teacher in Ten: Gay and Lesbian Educators Tell Their Stories) ;the "safe school czar " Kevin Jennings described an encounter he had with a student (originally it was a 15 year old ,but in later versions he changed the story to a 16 year old ) . The boy confided in Jennings, his teacher ,that he had gone home with a man the boy had met in a bus station rest room. Instead of using the story as a teachable moment to tell the boy about the dangers he was subjecting himself to ;so perhaps that behavior could be discouraged; Jennings told the boy "be sure to wear a condum" .

This is who we want as a 'safe school czar '?
All the controversies surrounding this guy could've easily been revealed in some basic vetting . But as in other cases ;it appears that the Obots don't do due dilligence and they end up spending their time initially defending the appointee before ultimately throwing them under the bus.

Edit . I know some teachers .They have told me they are required by law to report potential abuse cases. I'd say the example above qualifies as one . Perhaps that is why he changed the story to a boy of 16 . That is the age of consent in Mass.

The website you link to is the pile of crap not you.

NK, that's not what I claimed. I was accurate in my assessment, you should read it again.


As you may know Beck posits his craziness by saying "his just asking questions here".

For at least the 3rd time, I don't watch Beck.


I already explained that your website offers no backup to the ludicrous things it and you are offering as fact.

Refute the links if you can, but simply repeating your claim doesn't make it any more true.

Okay, obviously we can't play nice.

Mods, I think it's time to shut her down.

Twelve pages. Not bad for a religious discussion. Sad that we can't do better. :(

Closed.