|
|
| Re: nonsense about atheism (241583) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: nonsense about atheism |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Aug 27 13:34:22 2007, in response to Re: nonsense about atheism, posted by soton si on Mon Aug 27 13:08:19 2007. "So there's several democracies that either allow cases to be judged on the personal religious belief of the judge, or condoning such a thing."Not really. You conveniently leave out a lot of details. However, there are democracies where an official religion helps decide legal cases - Israel is one such place. "In Kansas, didn't evolution get banned from being taught because of the public's will to have it banned, but then it got unbanned as the ban was unconstitutional?" Evolution was never banned due to "public will." Creationism was introduced and the Board members supporting it were booted out of office when it was clear the State of Kansas would become a laughingstock. "If a class full of children wanted to learn Biblical Theology, then surely they should be allowed to." But in the vast majority of cases, they do not. They take suggestion from the adults leading them. And in cases where opinion leaders among the children want it, they do not represent all the children in the group. That's where the tyranny and oppression start. "Likewise if a class of children wanted the teacher to lead them in prayer at the beginning of the day, surely they should be allowed to." No, they should be educated as to where and when it is appropriate, and where and when it is not. Yu are assuming the whole class asks for it, because you have difficulty imagining anyone who does not believe as you do. "And the time and the place to learn about the most important questions in the universe - Is there a creator, and if so, has he spoken to us" You believe that this is the most important question. Others believe that this qwuestion is rather trivial. If you think it's that important, find or start a school where that's what they talk about. "I said that there was historical proof - if you want, I could write a nice long thesis on here on the subject." With no facts to back it up. he resurrection is a belief system - mythology -. There is historical proof that certain groups of people have believed the story since 2,000 or so years go. That's all. It says nothing about the veracity of the alleged event itself. "you are now asserting that if other religions don't believe it, then it can't be true." False statement. I am saying that because non-Christians don't believe in it, that the Constitution rightly prevents you from cramming Christian mythology down the throats of people in public school. "You are using the loaded word "mythology" to 'beg the question' as to whether it's true." No. I'm using that trerm to show you that God and a resurrected Jesus are within a particular faith-based belief system, not subject to physical or science proof. There are other belief systems which do not include these particular beliefs that are as valid from the point of view of religious freedom. If you want to believe in the myth of the resurrection, that is your business. But without scientific or phhysical proof, it doesn't belong in public school. |
|
|
|