ATHEISTS ONLY - Secular environment for raising children

[Mike Lovell]

Disclaimer:

*** This thread is for atheists only. ***
*** By viewing posts or posting here ***
*** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
*** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
*** you are certifying you now no longer ***
*** believe in God from that point on ***

:-)


Hello, back from a business trip, although I see it's same 'ol around
here.


Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
i.e. no forced prayer or religious education? Or does it depend on the
area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
forced prayers.

What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?


Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?


--
Jews, Christians & Muslims
The content of your posts will show how much you
really believe God is looking over your shoulder

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, May 20, 2012 5:44:20 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> Disclaimer:
>
> *** This thread is for atheists only. ***
> *** By viewing posts or posting here ***
> *** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
> *** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
> *** you are certifying you now no longer ***
> *** believe in God from that point on ***
>
> :-)
>
>
> Hello, back from a business trip, although I see it's same 'ol around
> here.
>
>
> Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
> i.e. no forced prayer or religious education?

Yes. I went to a public high school whose students were 98% Jewish.We received
no religious instruction at all.The only thing we had to recite was the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag.

Or does it depend on the
> area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
> forced prayers.
>
> What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
> you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
> doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?

Yes. Numerous Supreme Court decisions have outlawed the practice of religious indoctrination in public schools.They are not even allowed to use the bible
as a textbook.

>
>
> Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
> children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?

My parents took an enlightened position regarding religion for their children.
They exposed us to Judaism, but then let us decide for ourselves whether to follow it.My brother never did.I didn't for 20 years, but now I have come back to it.My Sister has had the same reaction as I did.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sunday, May 20, 2012 5:44:20 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
>> Disclaimer:
>>
>> *** This thread is for atheists only. ***
>> *** By viewing posts or posting here ***
>> *** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
>> *** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
>> *** you are certifying you now no longer ***
>> *** believe in God from that point on ***

> [...]

Well first of all, welcome to the dark side.

Did you miss me BTW? :-p

>> Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
>> i.e. no forced prayer or religious education?
>
> Yes. I went to a public high school whose students were 98% Jewish.We received
> no religious instruction at all.The only thing we had to recite was the
> Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag.

Interesting, especially that long ago. I assumed it would have been
rather like the UK up until recently. Especially as the US is a lot
more theistic than the UK.

> Or does it depend on the
>> area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
>> forced prayers.
>>
>> What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
>> you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
>> doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?
>
> Yes. Numerous Supreme Court decisions have outlawed the practice of
> religious indoctrination in public schools.They are not even allowed
> to use the bible as a textbook.

Good news at leas

>> Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
>> children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?
>
> My parents took an enlightened position regarding religion for their children.
> They exposed us to Judaism, but then let us decide for ourselves whether
> to follow it.My brother never did.I didn't for 20 years, but now I have
> come back to it.My Sister has had the same reaction as I did.

You may not have realized what a deep effect that exposure has, I mean
there is nothing more natural that trusting what your parents tell you.
The younger the age, the more it sticks.

I'd say they colored your choice with that exposure. It isn't always
necessary to "force" the religion on children.

That is the normal method of transmission though, parents to children.


Here's one for you, how would you feel if your son/daughter married a
Muslim and they raised your grandchildren Muslim (hardcore).
Granddaughter's in veils, grandsons praying toward Mecca multiple times
a day etc...?

[Waldo Tunnel]

On May 20, 5:44 pm, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
> Disclaimer:
>
> *** This thread is for atheists only.    ***
> *** By viewing posts or posting here     ***
> *** you acknowledge you are an atheist.  ***
> *** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
> *** you are certifying you now no longer ***
> *** believe in God from that point on    ***
>
> :-)
>
> Hello, back from a business trip, although I see it's same 'ol around
> here.
>
> Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
> i.e. no forced prayer or religious education?

Pretty much.

> Or does it depend on the
> area/state?  I grew up in the UK.  20 years ago at school they *did* have
> forced prayers.

Coming from the UK you may not know this about American law. The Bill
of Rights, including freedom of religion, speech, assembly, and all
the rest ONLY applied to the federal government. That is, up until the
Civil War, states were not obliged to respect any of the Bill of
Rights in their territory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_Rights

It was the 14th amendment that applied the Bill of rights to the
states. Well, almost. Each of the Amendments had to be individually
"incorporated" and this took many years. Some Amendments have never
been incorporated, like the 2nd.

My point is there was a great deal of church/state mingling until
incorporation of that portion of the First Amendment (which I believe
occurred in the late 40's). This is what took "god" out of the
classroom.

[Waldo Tunnel]

On May 20, 8:10 pm, Waldo Tunnel <waldotun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 20, 5:44 pm, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:

[...]

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_the_Bill_of_Rights
>
> It was the 14th amendment that applied the Bill of rights to the
> states. Well, almost. Each of the Amendments had to be individually
> "incorporated" and this took many years. Some Amendments have never
> been incorporated, like the 2nd.

Correction: The 2nd *has* been incorporated.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-21, Waldo Tunnel <waldo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]

Danke,

What about school sporting events? I thought there was some crap about
stopping prayers before football games (suggesting they happened in the
first place)?

[Waldo Tunnel]

On May 20, 10:41 pm, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:

> On 2012-05-21, Waldo Tunnel <waldotun...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > [...]
>
> Danke,
>
> What about school sporting events?  I thought there was some crap about
> stopping prayers before football games (suggesting they happened in the
> first place)?

I'm not sure about the sporting events. But I know that if you *don't*
bestow such special rights on believers (like a benediction before a
game) it is the same as persecuting them.

[Joe Bruno]

On Sunday, May 20, 2012 8:07:12 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On Sunday, May 20, 2012 5:44:20 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> >> Disclaimer:
> >>
> >> *** This thread is for atheists only. ***
> >> *** By viewing posts or posting here ***
> >> *** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
> >> *** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
> >> *** you are certifying you now no longer ***
> >> *** believe in God from that point on ***
>
> > [...]
>
> Well first of all, welcome to the dark side.
>
> Did you miss me BTW? :-p

I didn't even realize you had left.

>
> >> Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
> >> i.e. no forced prayer or religious education?
> >
> > Yes. I went to a public high school whose students were 98% Jewish.We received
> > no religious instruction at all.The only thing we had to recite was the
> > Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag.
>
> Interesting, especially that long ago. I assumed it would have been
> rather like the UK up until recently. Especially as the US is a lot
> more theistic than the UK.

But Britain has a national church, the Anglican, which is headed by the Queen.
The US Constitution forbids a national church.

>
> > Or does it depend on the
> >> area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
> >> forced prayers.
> >>
> >> What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
> >> you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
> >> doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?
> >
> > Yes. Numerous Supreme Court decisions have outlawed the practice of
> > religious indoctrination in public schools.They are not even allowed
> > to use the bible as a textbook.
>
> Good news at leas
>
> >> Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
> >> children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?
> >
> > My parents took an enlightened position regarding religion for their children.
> > They exposed us to Judaism, but then let us decide for ourselves whether
> > to follow it.My brother never did.I didn't for 20 years, but now I have
> > come back to it.My Sister has had the same reaction as I did.
>
> You may not have realized what a deep effect that exposure has, I mean
> there is nothing more natural that trusting what your parents tell you.
> The younger the age, the more it sticks.
>
> I'd say they colored your choice with that exposure. It isn't always
> necessary to "force" the religion on children.
>
> That is the normal method of transmission though, parents to children.

My Sister and her husband took the same casual approach to my Nephews.
One of them is mildly religious. The other wants nothing to do with Judaism at
all.

>
>
> Here's one for you, how would you feel if your son/daughter married a
> Muslim and they raised your grandchildren Muslim (hardcore).
> Granddaughter's in veils, grandsons praying toward Mecca multiple times
> a day etc...?

I wouldn't like it but I would try to understand and let them run their own lives.Once they become adults, it's time for the parents to let go.
Mine treated me that way.

My Father tried to dominate my brother and sister even after they left home, but he never tried to dominate me, even when
I was still a child.He always gave me the impression that he trusted me completely. I think I know why. It's because he and I are so much alike, in
thought and morals and standards of behavior. We even look alike.
He probably knew I would always do the right thing and didn't need his guidance.
>
>
> --

[Waldo Tunnel]

On May 21, 12:33 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sunday, May 20, 2012 8:07:12 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:

> > On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, May 20, 2012 5:44:20 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> > >> Disclaimer:

[...]

>
> My Father tried to dominate my brother and sister even after they
>left home, but he never tried to dominate me, even when
> I was still a child.He always gave me the impression that he trusted
> me completely. I think I know why.

I think we all do.

>It's because he and I are so much alike,

Molesters?

>in thought and morals

(or lack of them)

> and standards of behavior. We even look alike.

Birds of a feather...

> He probably knew I would always do the right thing and didn't need his guidance.

Of course! BTW, when did he start molesting you and your sister?

[hypatiab7]

Hey, look, everyone! Joe Bruno (Art Tandy) just admitted that he no loner believes in his God!

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, May 21, 2012 1:06:16 AM UTC-7, Waldo Tunnel wrote:
> On May 21, 12:33 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
> > On Sunday, May 20, 2012 8:07:12 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> > > On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, May 20, 2012 5:44:20 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> > > >> Disclaimer:
>
> [...]
> >
> > My Father tried to dominate my brother and sister even after they
> >left home, but he never tried to dominate me, even when
> > I was still a child.He always gave me the impression that he trusted
> > me completely. I think I know why.
>
> I think we all do.
>
> >It's because he and I are so much alike,
>
> Molesters?

Actually, we both hate liars and fools(like you, for instance)
>

[Joe Bruno]

Some things never change. For example, I still believe that you are a mental retard who should have been aborted.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> Disclaimer:
>> >>
>> >> *** This thread is for atheists only. ***
>> >> *** By viewing posts or posting here ***
>> >> *** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
>> >> *** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
>> >> *** you are certifying you now no longer ***
>> >> *** believe in God from that point on ***
>>
>> > [...]
>>
>> Well first of all, welcome to the dark side.
>>
>> Did you miss me BTW? :-p
>
> I didn't even realize you had left.

Only for a few days on business.

>> >> Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
>> >> i.e. no forced prayer or religious education?
>> >
>> > Yes. I went to a public high school whose students were 98% Jewish.We received
>> > no religious instruction at all.The only thing we had to recite was the
>> > Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag.
>>
>> Interesting, especially that long ago. I assumed it would have been
>> rather like the UK up until recently. Especially as the US is a lot
>> more theistic than the UK.
>
> But Britain has a national church, the Anglican, which is headed by the Queen.
> The US Constitution forbids a national church.

Well yes, mind you there is a kind of "implied" national religion.

You said your sister came back to Judaism after 20 years like you.

Did she do that before or after she got married, and is her husband
Jewish?

If after, did she have her kids before or after the conversion?


Would be interesting to know if it might have colored her partner
decisions, and then of course there might then be pressure form her
in-laws.

>> Here's one for you, how would you feel if your son/daughter married a
>> Muslim and they raised your grandchildren Muslim (hardcore).
>> Granddaughter's in veils, grandsons praying toward Mecca multiple times
>> a day etc...?
>
> I wouldn't like it but I would try to understand and let them run their own lives.Once they become adults, it's time for the parents to let go.
> Mine treated me that way.
>
> My Father tried to dominate my brother and sister even after they left home, but he never tried to dominate me, even when
> I was still a child.He always gave me the impression that he trusted me completely. I think I know why. It's because he and I are so much alike, in
> thought and morals and standards of behavior. We even look alike.
> He probably knew I would always do the right thing and didn't need his guidance.

Ah but the problem is it's not really them leading their lives after
they've been brainwashed as children. A lot of people never break the
bonds of the religion of their upbringing.


Your grandchildren in this scenario has Islam chosen for the, and then
were raiding in a hardcore Muslim fashion.


Take the fictional granddaughter in the veil, and a lot of Muslim women,
it's not so much by choice but due to oppressive men that they have to
live the way they do.

Say straight into marriage, not allowed to drive, has to sit their
quietly in the corner, beaten etc... --- You would not intervene?

[Joe Bruno]

Yes.

>
> Did she do that before or after she got married, and is her husband
> Jewish?

After and yes he is.

>
> If after, did she have her kids before or after the conversion?

No formal conversion was necessary, since she was born of a Jewish Mother.
Before.

>
>
> Would be interesting to know if it might have colored her partner
> decisions, and then of course there might then be pressure form her
> in-laws.

It did, I'm quite sure.She never dated any Gentile men in high school or college.Her in laws, the Tandowskys, were not very religious at all.
Matter of fact, her husband is her distant cousin.He was a distant nephew of my
Father.His Father was my Dad's cousin.

>
> >> Here's one for you, how would you feel if your son/daughter married a
> >> Muslim and they raised your grandchildren Muslim (hardcore).
> >> Granddaughter's in veils, grandsons praying toward Mecca multiple times
> >> a day etc...?
> >
> > I wouldn't like it but I would try to understand and let them run their own lives.Once they become adults, it's time for the parents to let go.
> > Mine treated me that way.
> >
> > My Father tried to dominate my brother and sister even after they left home, but he never tried to dominate me, even when
> > I was still a child.He always gave me the impression that he trusted me completely. I think I know why. It's because he and I are so much alike, in
> > thought and morals and standards of behavior. We even look alike.
> > He probably knew I would always do the right thing and didn't need his guidance.
>
> Ah but the problem is it's not really them leading their lives after
> they've been brainwashed as children. A lot of people never break the
> bonds of the religion of their upbringing.

Brainwashing???That might be true for my brother and sister but not for me.
I was the rebel of the family.I never settled down and had children, which is
the normal mode for Jewish children.I joined the Navy against my parent's wishes and went my own way.Many Jews, especially those from Eastern Europe, have a distaste for the military.I didn't give a shit.I got alot of heat from
some of my relatives, but I knew what I wanted for myself and did it.

The US Navy was the best thing that ever happened to me.It allowed me to see the world and see a different viewpoint.I went in a Liberal Democrat like all
my relatives, like most Jews, and came out a right-wing Republican.I tolerate
the Liberal viewpoint because that's the American way, but I dislike it intensely.Some people have called me a "reactionary" and a
"militarist".Tough shit. That's who I am and what I believe.

>
>
> Your grandchildren in this scenario has Islam chosen for the, and then
> were raiding in a hardcore Muslim fashion.

Islam and Judaism are worlds apart in most everything.That's probably why we
dislike each other so much.

>
>
> Take the fictional granddaughter in the veil, and a lot of Muslim women,
> it's not so much by choice but due to oppressive men that they have to
> live the way they do.
>
> Say straight into marriage, not allowed to drive, has to sit their
> quietly in the corner, beaten etc... --- You would not intervene?

If my daughter came to me and asked for help,I'd help her.
I wouldn't interfere if she didn't ask me to.She's an adult and has to make her own choices.My parents did not like my ex-wife at all, but they kept hands off
since I didn't ask them for help.That's one way Islam and Judaism differ so radically.They like to dominate people-we don't believe in that.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Monday, May 21, 2012 7:09:05 AM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
>> On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> Disclaimer:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> *** This thread is for atheists only. ***
>> >> >> *** By viewing posts or posting here ***
>> >> >> *** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
>> >> >> *** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
>> >> >> *** you are certifying you now no longer ***
>> >> >> *** believe in God from that point on ***

>> >> >> Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
>> >> >> children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?
>> >> >
>> >> > My parents took an enlightened position regarding religion for their children.
>> >> > They exposed us to Judaism, but then let us decide for ourselves whether
>> >> > to follow it.My brother never did.I didn't for 20 years, but now I have
>> >> > come back to it.My Sister has had the same reaction as I did.
>> >>
>> >> You may not have realized what a deep effect that exposure has, I mean
>> >> there is nothing more natural that trusting what your parents tell you.
>> >> The younger the age, the more it sticks.
>> >>
>> >> I'd say they colored your choice with that exposure. It isn't always
>> >> necessary to "force" the religion on children.
>> >>
>> >> That is the normal method of transmission though, parents to children.
>> >
>> > My Sister and her husband took the same casual approach to my Nephews.
>> > One of them is mildly religious. The other wants nothing to do with Judaism at
>> > all.
>>
>> You said your sister came back to Judaism after 20 years like you.
>
> Yes.
>>
>> Did she do that before or after she got married, and is her husband
>> Jewish?
>
> After and yes he is.

So pretty could have come from her husband and their family?

>> If after, did she have her kids before or after the conversion?
>
> No formal conversion was necessary, since she was born of a Jewish Mother.
> Before.

But did she go back to her faith before the children were born?

>> Would be interesting to know if it might have colored her partner
>> decisions, and then of course there might then be pressure form her
>> in-laws.
>
> It did, I'm quite sure.She never dated any Gentile men in high school
> or college.Her in laws, the Tandowskys, were not very religious at all.
> Matter of fact, her husband is her distant cousin.He was a distant nephew of my
> Father.His Father was my Dad's cousin.

Wouldn't you say that's the kind of pressure to avoid in order to
provide a secular upbringing?

To allow your children family a true choice over any religion they
choose (or none) without bias?

>> > I wouldn't like it but I would try to understand and let them run their own lives.Once they become adults, it's time for the parents to let go.
>> > Mine treated me that way.
>> >
>> > My Father tried to dominate my brother and sister even after they left home, but he never tried to dominate me, even when
>> > I was still a child.He always gave me the impression that he trusted me completely. I think I know why. It's because he and I are so much alike, in
>> > thought and morals and standards of behavior. We even look alike.
>> > He probably knew I would always do the right thing and didn't need his guidance.
>>
>> Ah but the problem is it's not really them leading their lives after
>> they've been brainwashed as children. A lot of people never break the
>> bonds of the religion of their upbringing.
>
> Brainwashing???That might be true for my brother and sister but not for me.
> I was the rebel of the family.I never settled down and had children, which is
> the normal mode for Jewish children.I joined the Navy against my parent's wishes
> and went my own way.Many Jews, especially those from Eastern Europe, have a
> distaste for the military.I didn't give a shit.I got alot of heat from
> some of my relatives, but I knew what I wanted for myself and did it.

I was talking about the fictional grandchildren being brainwashed into
Islam but if you brother and sister were brainwashed would you say that
was right or wrong?

A lot of the time children won't have the strength of character to go
against the families.


It's this pressure that is worrying, a true secular upbringing should
provide no pressure of religion teaching, but also should no discourage
them if they *do* take up religion, if they make their own decision to
do so. As discouraging them from their own decision to be religions
could of course also be brainwashing.

> The US Navy was the best thing that ever happened to me.It allowed me to see
> the world and see a different viewpoint.I went in a Liberal Democrat like all
> my relatives, like most Jews, and came out a right-wing Republican.I tolerate
> the Liberal viewpoint because that's the American way, but I dislike
> it intensely.Some people have called me a "reactionary" and a
> "militarist".Tough shit. That's who I am and what I believe.

Your family are liberal and you are right-wing?

>> Your grandchildren in this scenario has Islam chosen for the, and then
>> were raiding in a hardcore Muslim fashion.
>
> Islam and Judaism are worlds apart in most everything.That's probably why we
> dislike each other so much.
>>
>>
>> Take the fictional granddaughter in the veil, and a lot of Muslim women,
>> it's not so much by choice but due to oppressive men that they have to
>> live the way they do.
>>
>> Say straight into marriage, not allowed to drive, has to sit their
>> quietly in the corner, beaten etc... --- You would not intervene?
>
> If my daughter came to me and asked for help,I'd help her.
> I wouldn't interfere if she didn't ask me to.She's an adult and has to
> make her own choices.My parents did not like my ex-wife at all, but they
> kept hands off since I didn't ask them for help.That's one way Islam and
> Judaism differ so radically.They like to dominate people-we don't believe in that.

Exactly, and if that were true, Islam liking to dominate people - You'd
have your grandchildren and daughter *being* dominated.

A lot of women find it very hard to reach out from scenarios like this,
battered women often don't speak up even to family members.
Intervention could well be necessary.


But what's the limit? Where does religious tolerance end? Especially
if it results in suffering of your close family.

[Uncle Vic]

Mike Lovell <mike....@null.local> wrote in
news:slrnjrj3v4.h...@usenet.home.b0h0.com:

> What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
> you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
> doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?

The Constitution, of course, in the First Amendment. If you want your chid
raised religiously you have the option to send the child to a religious
*private* school.

But who follows the First Amendment these days?

--
Uncle Vic
aa# 2011
Matthew 6:5-6
"Keep thy religion to thyself"

Visit my You Tube Channel!
http://www.youtube.com/user/Vicman6311?feature=mhee

[Joe Bruno]

YES.
>

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, May 21, 2012 9:26:41 AM UTC-7, Uncle Vic wrote:
> Mike Lovell <mike....@null.local> wrote in
> news:slrnjrj3v4.h...@usenet.home.b0h0.com:
>
> > What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
> > you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
> > doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?
>
> The Constitution, of course, in the First Amendment. If you want your chid
> raised religiously you have the option to send the child to a religious
> *private* school.
>
> But who follows the First Amendment these days?

It's the law. Obeying it is mandatory, not optional.

[Joe Bruno]

Suffering, unfortunately, is part of adult life.I have medical conditions which
make life difficult for me at times.I get into conflicts and trouble often because I'm so independent.Someone took me to small claims court and told lies
in order to get a monetary judgement against me.I could have appealed, but it's
very expensive.I worked out an AJT solution-The judgement was for $150.

I'll pay her $5 a month for 2 1/2 years.Hopefully, she'll die before it's all paid.

[Joe Bruno]

I'm a Jew with Russian ancestors.Some people say I'm more Russian than Jewish.
Some people in my family consider me to be an oddball.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DA1y_s2D5M

They don't like my stubbornness,my aggressiveness and my militarism.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> > Brainwashing???That might be true for my brother and sister but not for me.
>> > I was the rebel of the family.I never settled down and had children, which is
>> > the normal mode for Jewish children.I joined the Navy against my parent's wishes
>> > and went my own way.Many Jews, especially those from Eastern Europe, have a
>> > distaste for the military.I didn't give a shit.I got alot of heat from
>> > some of my relatives, but I knew what I wanted for myself and did it.
>>
>> I was talking about the fictional grandchildren being brainwashed into
>> Islam but if you brother and sister were brainwashed would you say that
>> was right or wrong?
>>
>> A lot of the time children won't have the strength of character to go
>> against the families.
>>
>>
>> It's this pressure that is worrying, a true secular upbringing should
>> provide no pressure of religion teaching, but also should no discourage
>> them if they *do* take up religion, if they make their own decision to
>> do so. As discouraging them from their own decision to be religions
>> could of course also be brainwashing.

^
|_____ What aout this

>> > The US Navy was the best thing that ever happened to me.It allowed me to see
>> > the world and see a different viewpoint.I went in a Liberal Democrat like all
>> > my relatives, like most Jews, and came out a right-wing Republican.I tolerate
>> > the Liberal viewpoint because that's the American way, but I dislike
>> > it intensely.Some people have called me a "reactionary" and a
>> > "militarist".Tough shit. That's who I am and what I believe.
>>
>> Your family are liberal and you are right-wing?
>
> YES.

Are you shouting? I want just making sure I understood you correctly
:-)

[Mike Lovell]

Yes but what I'm talking about is imposed suffering, not nice having a
persistent medical condition but what if, for example, that medical
condition was imposed upon you?

Would you accept the abuse of your daughter by her husband, even if
culturally acceptable by Muslims, as just an unfortunate part of life
without thinking about intervening? (even if she didn't ask)

[duke]

On Sun, 20 May 2012 19:44:20 -0500, Mike Lovell <mike....@null.local> wrote:

>Disclaimer:
>
>*** This thread is for atheists only. ***
>*** By viewing posts or posting here ***
>*** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
>*** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
>*** you are certifying you now no longer ***
>*** believe in God from that point on ***
>
>:-)

>Hello, back from a business trip, although I see it's same 'ol around
>here.

Yep, atheists are still losers like they've always been.

>Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
>i.e. no forced prayer or religious education? Or does it depend on the
>area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
>forced prayers.

No, there is no openly acknowledgeable cases of forced praying. If there had
been, we would have less criminals.

>What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
>you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
>doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?

In-doctorate [sic] is pretty severe.

>Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
>children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?

Faith based schooling is really producing fine Americans today. Others teach
how to bounce a basketball.


duke - American American

*****
2012 - end of an error
Vote Republican in 2012
*****

[duke]

On Sun, 20 May 2012 23:23:01 -0700 (PDT), Waldo Tunnel <waldo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Not persecution, but the Constitution does guarantee us the freedom from
interference.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-21, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 May 2012 19:44:20 -0500, Mike Lovell <mike....@null.local> wrote:
>
>>Disclaimer:
>>
>>*** This thread is for atheists only. ***
>>*** By viewing posts or posting here ***
>>*** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
>>*** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
>>*** you are certifying you now no longer ***
>>*** believe in God from that point on ***
>>
>>:-)

^^^

Didn't realize you were an atheist now, welcome.

>>Hello, back from a business trip, although I see it's same 'ol around
>>here.
>
> Yep, atheists are still losers like they've always been.

Love thy neighbor?

>
>>Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
>>i.e. no forced prayer or religious education? Or does it depend on the
>>area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
>>forced prayers.
>
> No, there is no openly acknowledgeable cases of forced praying. If there had
> been, we would have less criminals.
>
>>What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
>>you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
>>doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?
>
> In-doctorate [sic] is pretty severe.
>
>>Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
>>children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?
>
> Faith based schooling is really producing fine Americans today. Others teach
> how to bounce a basketball.

I don't see how brainwashing children can ever be right.

You have no problem with, for example, someone opening a Scientology
high school?

Sounds like socially acceptable mental child abuse to me.


VERY evil and immoral, almost off the scale.

[Joe Bruno]

Shouting, no.I'm answering you with emphasis.

[Joe Bruno]

Parents have a duty and a right to raise their children as they see fit.
If they break the law in the process, the justice system takes over.

My parents were very strict.I accepted that from my Father, but not from my Mother.I've never had respect for her. She was manipulative and unprincipled.
She always did what was popular, never what was right.

Our personality conflict began when I was 6 years old.I have had some emotional problems and all my therapists traced them to her.That's probably why I have no wife and no girlfriend.I don't trust or respect women.The only exception is my older sister.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:

> Parents have a duty and a right to raise their children as they see fit.
> If they break the law in the process, the justice system takes over.

But do they? The law doesn't cover mental abuse or brainwashing very
well.

Is it my right to raise my children as racists for example? The cycle
continues.

I'd say that's child abuse, it's not physical child abuse but it's abuse
all the same.

The same with (not saying you are your parents did this of course)
raising children with religion, especially young Earth creationism or
other extremist beliefs - This clouds them and pressures them.

> My parents were very strict.I accepted that from my Father, but not from my
> Mother.I've never had respect for her. She was manipulative and unprincipled.
> She always did what was popular, never what was right.

Is this not in conflict with your religion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_your_father_and_your_mother#Judaism

> Our personality conflict began when I was 6 years old.I have had some
> emotional problems and all my therapists traced them to her.That's
> probably why I have no wife and no girlfriend.I don't trust or respect
> women.The only exception is my older sister.

Well not trusting or respecting women isn't doing what's right, right?
Which was your mantra.

Rather like overcoming religion, overcoming a problematic (mentally
abusive?) upbringing requires a lot of strength of character. It
effects everyone differently.


I'd not be sitting on it that problem as an absolute, I'd be changing
it. Although easier said than done, you never start, you never finish.
I've had to overcome similar issues.


Letting your mother dominate your personality and outlook this far into
adulthood is a very good example of how deeply children are effected by
their parents in a negative fashion --- Could have been a lot worse too.

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, May 21, 2012 12:43:42 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> > If my daughter came to me and asked for help,I'd help her.
> >> > I wouldn't interfere if she didn't ask me to.She's an adult and has to
> >> > make her own choices.My parents did not like my ex-wife at all, but they
> >> > kept hands off since I didn't ask them for help.That's one way Islam and
> >> > Judaism differ so radically.They like to dominate people-we don't believe in that.
> >>
> >> Exactly, and if that were true, Islam liking to dominate people - You'd
> >> have your grandchildren and daughter *being* dominated.
> >>
> >> A lot of women find it very hard to reach out from scenarios like this,
> >> battered women often don't speak up even to family members.
> >> Intervention could well be necessary.
> >>
> >>
> >> But what's the limit? Where does religious tolerance end? Especially
> >> if it results in suffering of your close family.
> >
> > Suffering, unfortunately, is part of adult life.I have medical conditions which
> > make life difficult for me at times.I get into conflicts and trouble often
> > because I'm so independent.Someone took me to small claims court and told lies
> > in order to get a monetary judgement against me.I could have appealed, but it's
> > very expensive.I worked out an AJT solution-The judgement was for $150.
> >
> > I'll pay her $5 a month for 2 1/2 years.Hopefully, she'll die before it's all paid.
>
> Yes but what I'm talking about is imposed suffering, not nice having a
> persistent medical condition but what if, for example, that medical
> condition was imposed upon you?

It was.It's hereditary.My Grandfather had it.

>
> Would you accept the abuse of your daughter by her husband, even if
> culturally acceptable by Muslims, as just an unfortunate part of life
> without thinking about intervening? (even if she didn't ask)

My solution???If she didn't ask for help, I'd have a conversation with him.
Once we were alone with no witnesses, I'd make him an offer he couldn't refuse.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> Yes but what I'm talking about is imposed suffering, not nice having a
>> persistent medical condition but what if, for example, that medical
>> condition was imposed upon you?
>
> It was.It's hereditary.My Grandfather had it.

Not quite the same thing, it wasn't optional.

When raising kids you can impose suffering on them, or not.

>> Would you accept the abuse of your daughter by her husband, even if
>> culturally acceptable by Muslims, as just an unfortunate part of life
>> without thinking about intervening? (even if she didn't ask)
>
> My solution???If she didn't ask for help, I'd have a conversation with him.
> Once we were alone with no witnesses, I'd make him an offer he couldn't refuse.

Good, good - That's more like it.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 20 May 2012 19:44:20 -0500, Mike Lovell
<mike....@null.local> wrote:

>Disclaimer:
>
>*** This thread is for atheists only. ***
>*** By viewing posts or posting here ***
>*** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
>*** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
>*** you are certifying you now no longer ***
>*** believe in God from that point on ***
>
>:-)
>

>Hello, back from a business trip, although I see it's same 'ol around
>here.
>

>Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
>i.e. no forced prayer or religious education? Or does it depend on the
>area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
>forced prayers.

However when I grew up in the UK you could be excused the - but never
understood why I had to be "excused" when I had nothing wrong to be
excused for.

David Cameron seems to want all children including non-Christians to
be forced to take classes in Christianity.

When I was a boy Catholic kids, Jewish kids and the rare kid from an
Eastern religion were all "excused". I was the only atheist. The
teacher who supervised this class while the other kids were in
assembly was probably an atheist - he taught interesting things" I
remember him asking us what historical event we would have liked to
see; one boy said "the day the Earth cooled so he could see
dinosaurs". He explained how it happened slowly over a long time
before the first life appeared and how the dinosaurs were
comparatively late, etc,

My event was the opening of the Stockton to Darlington Railway in
1825.

>What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
>you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
>doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?

Britain isn't as religious as the US.

David Cameron seems to want to roll back the clock though.

I went through what you described in the mid=1950s when the class
teacher tried to convert me. But like the god-bots here she was an
idiot who didn't know how to talk to people who didn't already
believe.

Stupid questions like "Who create all this?" and my puzzled "Why did
it need somebody to do it?", "Surely you don't think it all happened
by accident?".

Cue for what I'd read in a kid's astronomy book.

"Ah, but God created everything" a concept I had first hear the same
day.

"Well then, who created God?"

"God has been here forever"

"If something can have been here for ever, why can't it be the
universe, not something out of a story you read the class?"

"You've got to have faith.

But faith what? Something I had just heard of from obvious myths and
legends that were no different from the Greek, Anglo-Saxon, Celtic,
Norse and other myths?

This got me into trouble and I never understood why until much later.

I later learned that she and the principal wrote to my parents
accusing me of blasphemy and summoning them to the presence.

Where they laughed in their faces.

She called me an atheist and set the other kids on me, which was
unforgivable.

>Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
>children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?

My grandmother and aunt lived with us, so we never had religious
baby-sitters.

On that side of the family there were atheists going back to the first
half of the 1800s.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-21, Christopher A Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
>>i.e. no forced prayer or religious education? Or does it depend on the
>>area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
>>forced prayers.
>
> However when I grew up in the UK you could be excused the - but never
> understood why I had to be "excused" when I had nothing wrong to be
> excused for.

Yes, same here. We have some Jehovah's Witnesses that used to go
outside. I can't say I ever asked to be excused.

I never thought of myself as an atheist TBH. Even though I was not
religious.

I too don't think it should have been mandatory requiring someone to be
excused

> David Cameron seems to want all children including non-Christians to
> be forced to take classes in Christianity.

Do they still do the prayers in school to this day?

> When I was a boy Catholic kids, Jewish kids and the rare kid from an
> Eastern religion were all "excused". I was the only atheist. The
> teacher who supervised this class while the other kids were in
> assembly was probably an atheist - he taught interesting things" I
> remember him asking us what historical event we would have liked to
> see; one boy said "the day the Earth cooled so he could see
> dinosaurs". He explained how it happened slowly over a long time
> before the first life appeared and how the dinosaurs were
> comparatively late, etc,
>
> My event was the opening of the Stockton to Darlington Railway in
> 1825.
>
>>What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
>>you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
>>doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?
>
> Britain isn't as religious as the US.
>
> David Cameron seems to want to roll back the clock though.

Yes, I've occasionally seen some worrying Dailymail articles about him
wanted to bring back Christian values.

Really need a Bill of Rights to prevent this kind of meddling.

> I went through what you described in the mid=1950s when the class
> teacher tried to convert me. But like the god-bots here she was an
> idiot who didn't know how to talk to people who didn't already
> believe.
>
> Stupid questions like "Who create all this?" and my puzzled "Why did
> it need somebody to do it?", "Surely you don't think it all happened
> by accident?".

Indeed, otherwise where does it all end, they seem to suggest if God
existed, he must have existed by accident! :-)

> Cue for what I'd read in a kid's astronomy book.
>
> "Ah, but God created everything" a concept I had first hear the same
> day.
>
> "Well then, who created God?"
>
> "God has been here forever"
>
> "If something can have been here for ever, why can't it be the
> universe, not something out of a story you read the class?"
>
> "You've got to have faith.
>
> But faith what? Something I had just heard of from obvious myths and
> legends that were no different from the Greek, Anglo-Saxon, Celtic,
> Norse and other myths?
>
> This got me into trouble and I never understood why until much later.
>
> I later learned that she and the principal wrote to my parents
> accusing me of blasphemy and summoning them to the presence.

Blasphemy? :-) Geeez, can't believe that happening. Although I guess
back in the day.

> Where they laughed in their faces.
>
> She called me an atheist and set the other kids on me, which was
> unforgivable.

Very Christian of her.

>>Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
>>children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?
>
> My grandmother and aunt lived with us, so we never had religious
> baby-sitters.
>
> On that side of the family there were atheists going back to the first
> half of the 1800s.

Fair enough.

[Joe Bruno]

On Monday, May 21, 2012 2:47:31 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> > Parents have a duty and a right to raise their children as they see fit.
> > If they break the law in the process, the justice system takes over.
>
> But do they? The law doesn't cover mental abuse or brainwashing very
> well.
>
> Is it my right to raise my children as racists for example? The cycle
> continues.
>
> I'd say that's child abuse, it's not physical child abuse but it's abuse
> all the same.
>
> The same with (not saying you are your parents did this of course)
> raising children with religion, especially young Earth creationism or
> other extremist beliefs - This clouds them and pressures them.
>
> > My parents were very strict.I accepted that from my Father, but not from my
> > Mother.I've never had respect for her. She was manipulative and unprincipled.
> > She always did what was popular, never what was right.
>
> Is this not in conflict with your religion?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_your_father_and_your_mother#Judaism

No. The word "honor" means to show respect outwardly. I did that.
It was an act on my part. Everyone in the family knew how I really felt about her.
>

[Mike Lovell]

By what are you basing that? According to the link

"Honoring one's parents is also described in the Torah as an
analogue to honoring God.[26] According to the prophet Jeremiah, God
refers to himself as Father to Israel,"

Can you show outward respect to God, and really not respect God and
dislike him - Yet still be "good" with God?


From the dictionary on "honor":

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/honor
honor [on-er]
verb (used with object)
13. to hold in honor or high respect; revere: to honor one's parents.
14. to treat with honor.



Nothing about it being outward only.

[Joe Bruno]

There is no parallel or valid comparison between my mother snd G-d.

>
>
> From the dictionary on "honor":
>
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/honor
> honor [on-er]
> verb (used with object)
> 13. to hold in honor or high respect; revere: to honor one's parents.
> 14. to treat with honor.
>
>
>
> Nothing about it being outward only.

WRONG. Look at #14. "Treat with honor" is an outward behavior which has nothing to do with your inner feelings.

You are really being silly. The Mosaic law can only regulate the behavior of people, as all laws can only regulate that.Neither code can regulate feelings and they don't try to.

[chibiabos]

In article <slrnjrj3v4.h...@usenet.home.b0h0.com>, Mike

Lovell <mike....@null.local> wrote:

> Disclaimer:
>
> *** This thread is for atheists only. ***
> *** By viewing posts or posting here ***
> *** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
> *** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
> *** you are certifying you now no longer ***
> *** believe in God from that point on ***
>
> :-)
>
>
> Hello, back from a business trip, although I see it's same 'ol around
> here.
>
>

> Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
> i.e. no forced prayer or religious education?

I can speak only for California, where I have been in public education
for the past thirty years.

Yes. The public schools are secular. There is no formal religious
instruction. An employee (i.e., a teacher or an administrator) cannot
compel students to pray. Students who have an objection to the "under
God" part of the Pledge of Allegiance have the option of not
participating (although social ostracism is usually the result).

BUT, religion is NOT outlawed. Students can pray all they want on their
own as long as doing so does not disrupt classroom activities or impact
instructional time. They can bring bibles to school. They can form
clubs based on religious affiliation, and faculty members can join,
sponsor, or advise those clubs. The school is required to provide space
for meetings as long as certain conditions are met, in the same way
they allow chess clubs or math clubs. There is no discrimination
against religion. A student can sing a religious song at a
school-sponsored talent show, assembly or other kind of performance.
He or she can wear clothing signifying his or her faith, and can talk
to other students about it outside of the classroom. These kinds of
activities are not prohibited, but they may not be compelled by
government employees.

Prayers at sporting events are allowed because they are not technically
classroom activities. They are "voluntary" activities. A football coach
can lead a locker-room prayer at halftime. After all, the student
athletes are not compelled to join a sports team.

Prayer is also allowed at public meetings such as school board
meetings, under much the same rationale.

Public education in California has a difficult enough time teaching
kids to read, write, add, subtract, multiply and divide, with maybe a
little science, history or art thrown into the mix. They don't have
time for religious nonsense like creationism or "comparative religion."

> What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
> you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
> doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?

Yes. There are laws. Public schools in California are government
agencies. We are bound by the strictures clearly outlined in the United
States Constitution to be completely secular. These strictures are
further enforced in the State Education Code. A teacher or other
employee who attempts to indoctrinate students in religion _during
classroom time_ is subject to review and discipline up to and including
dismissal.

I've seen it happen.

> Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
> children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?

Let's not bring my ex-wife into this, shall we?

-chib

--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_your_father_and_your_mother#Judaism
>> >
>> >
>> > No. The word "honor" means to show respect outwardly. I did that.
>> > It was an act on my part. Everyone in the family knew how I really felt about her.
>>
>> By what are you basing that? According to the link
>>
>> "Honoring one's parents is also described in the Torah as an
>> analogue to honoring God.[26] According to the prophet Jeremiah, God
>> refers to himself as Father to Israel,"
>>
>> Can you show outward respect to God, and really not respect God and
>> dislike him - Yet still be "good" with God?
>
> There is no parallel or valid comparison between my mother snd G-d.

Well apparently there is in Judaism.

"Because honoring parents is part of honoring God, the mitzvah does
not depend on the worthiness of the parent"

>> From the dictionary on "honor":
>>
>> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/honor
>> honor [on-er]
>> verb (used with object)
>> 13. to hold in honor or high respect; revere: to honor one's parents.
>> 14. to treat with honor.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nothing about it being outward only.
>
> WRONG. Look at #14. "Treat with honor" is an outward behavior which has nothing
> to do with your inner feelings.
>
> You are really being silly. The Mosaic law can only regulate the behavior of
> people, as all laws can only regulate that.Neither code can regulate feelings
> and they don't try to.

I don't see why this is being silly.

It's saying honoring your parents is an analogue to honoring God.

So surely if you can outwardly show respect for your mother but hate
her, you could do the same to God and still be good with him right?

That doesn't sound correct to me.

[Smiler]

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:16:41 -0500, Mike Lovell wrote:

> On 2012-05-21, Christopher A Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>>Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
>>>i.e. no forced prayer or religious education? Or does it depend on the
>>>area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
>>>forced prayers.
>>
>> However when I grew up in the UK you could be excused the - but never
>> understood why I had to be "excused" when I had nothing wrong to be
>> excused for.
>
> Yes, same here. We have some Jehovah's Witnesses that used to go
> outside. I can't say I ever asked to be excused.
>
> I never thought of myself as an atheist TBH. Even though I was not
> religious.
>
> I too don't think it should have been mandatory requiring someone to be
> excused
>
>> David Cameron seems to want all children including non-Christians to
>> be forced to take classes in Christianity.
>
> Do they still do the prayers in school to this day?

The National Curriculum mandates "A daily assembly of a mainly Christian
nature". Most schools, especially those in largely non-christian areas,
tend to ignore the fuzzily worded 'Christian nature' part and few, if any,
say prayers. Neither of our two children (one now 25, the other 18)
reported anything in their assemblies of a 'Christian nature' to us. The
only problem we had was when a Religious Education teacher (How does a JW
get to teach comparative religion!?!?) gave the class homework to 'draw
how they see their god'. My son went in the next day with a blank sheet
of paper and an explanatory note from me, copied to the head teacher. It
was the easiest piece of homework he'd ever done! I understand that the
teacher was removed from teaching Religious Education classes and may have
been fired.

--
Smiler,

The godless one. a.a.# 2279

All gods are tailored to order. They're made to

exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-22, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com> wrote:
> The National Curriculum mandates "A daily assembly of a mainly Christian
> nature". Most schools, especially those in largely non-christian areas,
> tend to ignore the fuzzily worded 'Christian nature' part and few, if any,
> say prayers.

Outrageous mandate, even if it's ignored in part.

> Neither of our two children (one now 25, the other 18)
> reported anything in their assemblies of a 'Christian nature' to us. The
> only problem we had was when a Religious Education teacher (How does a JW
> get to teach comparative religion!?!?) gave the class homework to 'draw
> how they see their god'. My son went in the next day with a blank sheet
> of paper and an explanatory note from me, copied to the head teacher. It
> was the easiest piece of homework he'd ever done! I understand that the
> teacher was removed from teaching Religious Education classes and may have
> been fired.

I'm on 30 myself and we had daily prayer in primary school from 5-12
years old.

Secondary school, I don't recall it happening but we did have RE
(compulsory!) up to the age of 14, taught by a C of E.

[Don Martin]

chibiabos <ch...@nospam.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnjrj3v4.h...@usenet.home.b0h0.com>, Mike
> Lovell <mike....@null.local> wrote:

<snip>

>> Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
>> children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?
>
> Let's not bring my ex-wife into this, shall we?

Ain't nobody wants to see no exes dragged in, here or anywhere!

--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/

[Joe Bruno]

You don't understand Judaism at all.We are not required by G-d to love Him.
He requires us only to OBEY Him.
>
>
> --

[Joe Bruno]

You don't understand religion.

God is omniscient. If I hate Him, He knows it.

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote in
news:94c77155-f4aa-4711...@googlegroups.com:

Tyrants are like that.

[hypatiab7]

On Monday, May 21, 2012 5:13:26 AM UTC-4, Joe Bruno wrote:
> On Monday, May 21, 2012 1:39:06 AM UTC-7, hypatiab7 wrote:
> > On Sunday, May 20, 2012 10:46:47 PM UTC-4, Joe Bruno wrote:

> > > On Sunday, May 20, 2012 5:44:20 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> > > > Disclaimer:
> > > >
> > > > *** This thread is for atheists only. ***
> > > > *** By viewing posts or posting here ***
> > > > *** you acknowledge you are an atheist. ***
> > > > *** If you are a theist, by posting here ***
> > > > *** you are certifying you now no longer ***
> > > > *** believe in God from that point on ***
> > > >
> > > > :-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello, back from a business trip, although I see it's same 'ol around
> > > > here.
> > > >
> > > >

> > > > Do public schools in the US these days operate in a secular fashion?
> > > > i.e. no forced prayer or religious education?
> > >

> > > Yes. I went to a public high school whose students were 98% Jewish.We received
> > > no religious instruction at all.The only thing we had to recite was the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag.

> > >
> > > Or does it depend on the
> > > > area/state? I grew up in the UK. 20 years ago at school they *did* have
> > > > forced prayers.
> > > >

> > > > What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
> > > > you children into a religion? Are there any laws to prevent people
> > > > doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?
> > >

> > > Yes. Numerous Supreme Court decisions have outlawed the practice of religious indoctrination in public schools.They are not even allowed to use the bible
> > > as a textbook.

> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Also has anyone come to blows with their extended family over raising
> > > > children in a secular fashion? Any interesting stories?
> > >

> > > My parents took an enlightened position regarding religion for their children.
> > > They exposed us to Judaism, but then let us decide for ourselves whether to follow it.My brother never did.I didn't for 20 years, but now I have come back to it.My Sister has had the same reaction as I did.
> >

> > Hey, look, everyone! Joe Bruno (Art Tandy) just admitted that he no longer believes in his God!
>
> Some things never change. For example, I still believe that you are a mental retard who should have been aborted.

Aren't you just the sweetest thing. Well, a thing, anyway.

[hypatiab7]

On Monday, May 21, 2012 6:51:49 PM UTC-4, Mike Lovell wrote:
> On 2012-05-21, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> Yes but what I'm talking about is imposed suffering, not nice having a
> >> persistent medical condition but what if, for example, that medical
> >> condition was imposed upon you?
> >
> > It was.It's hereditary.My Grandfather had it.
>
> Not quite the same thing, it wasn't optional.
>
> When raising kids you can impose suffering on them, or not.
>
> >> Would you accept the abuse of your daughter by her husband, even if
> >> culturally acceptable by Muslims, as just an unfortunate part of life
> >> without thinking about intervening? (even if she didn't ask)
> >
> > My solution???If she didn't ask for help, I'd have a conversation with him.
> > Once we were alone with no witnesses, I'd make him an offer he couldn't refuse.
>
> Good, good - That's more like it.

No, it isn't. He could take his wife and move and keep on beating her
where her family couldn't help.

[Mike Lovell]

I assumed it was a euphemism for killing the bastard.

[Mike Lovell]

And honor him apparently.

But that's what I'm saying, it's perfectly acceptable to hate God
providing you give an outward appearance that you do not?

By "OBEY" do you mean following all the Jewish laws laid out (no matter
how obscure and outdated)?

What happens if you DON'T obey?

[Joe Bruno]

Judaism is neither a democracy nor a popularity contest.
It's just like the military and I'm used to that.

[Joe Bruno]

On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 8:12:25 AM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> That doesn't sound correct to me.
> >
> > You don't understand Judaism at all.We are not required by G-d to love Him.
> > He requires us only to OBEY Him.
>
> And honor him apparently.
>
> But that's what I'm saying, it's perfectly acceptable to hate God
> providing you give an outward appearance that you do not?

It is not necessary under Judaism to like Him, only to obey Him.
Judaism is not a popularity contest.

>
> By "OBEY" do you mean following all the Jewish laws laid out (no matter
> how obscure and outdated)?

The Torah contains the original Mosaic law.Any updates or revisions will be found in the Talmud.

>
> What happens if you DON'T obey?

You will be judged on the Day of Judgement, soon after your death.



>
> --

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> > You don't understand Judaism at all.We are not required by G-d to love Him.
>> > He requires us only to OBEY Him.
>>
>> And honor him apparently.
>>
>> But that's what I'm saying, it's perfectly acceptable to hate God
>> providing you give an outward appearance that you do not?
>
> It is not necessary under Judaism to like Him, only to obey Him.
> Judaism is not a popularity contest.

Well that's handy as I really don't like him.

>> By "OBEY" do you mean following all the Jewish laws laid out (no matter
>> how obscure and outdated)?
>
> The Torah contains the original Mosaic law.Any updates or revisions will be found in the Talmud.

You must obey the Torah? Does that not include a LOT of very archaic
laws?

The Torah is supposed to have come directly from God via Moses. The
Talmud appears to be debating between rabbis, so not binding if the
original laws are clear.

So you obey every law in the Torah?

>> What happens if you DON'T obey?
>
> You will be judged on the Day of Judgement, soon after your death.

And if he judges you to be bad, then what?

[Joe Bruno]

On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 9:02:38 AM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> > You don't understand Judaism at all.We are not required by G-d to love Him.
> >> > He requires us only to OBEY Him.
> >>
> >> And honor him apparently.
> >>
> >> But that's what I'm saying, it's perfectly acceptable to hate God
> >> providing you give an outward appearance that you do not?
> >
> > It is not necessary under Judaism to like Him, only to obey Him.
> > Judaism is not a popularity contest.
>
> Well that's handy as I really don't like him.
>
> >> By "OBEY" do you mean following all the Jewish laws laid out (no matter
> >> how obscure and outdated)?
> >
> > The Torah contains the original Mosaic law.Any updates or revisions will be found in the Talmud.
>
> You must obey the Torah? Does that not include a LOT of very archaic
> laws?

I said we must obey both Torah and Talmud.The Talmud updates Torah law.

>
> The Torah is supposed to have come directly from God via Moses. The
> Talmud appears to be debating between rabbis, so not binding if the
> original laws are clear.

WRONG.G-d gave Moses the Talmud in preliminary oral form.It was not written down until 70 AD.

>
> So you obey every law in the Torah?
>
> >> What happens if you DON'T obey?
> >
> > You will be judged on the Day of Judgement, soon after your death.
>
> And if he judges you to be bad, then what?

You're in deep shit.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> > The Torah contains the original Mosaic law.Any updates or revisions will be found in the Talmud.
>>
>> You must obey the Torah? Does that not include a LOT of very archaic
>> laws?
>
> I said we must obey both Torah and Talmud.The Talmud updates Torah law.

Right, but the Torah was apparently from God "directly" via Moses.

>> The Torah is supposed to have come directly from God via Moses. The
>> Talmud appears to be debating between rabbis, so not binding if the
>> original laws are clear.
>
> WRONG.G-d gave Moses the Talmud in preliminary oral form.It was not written down until 70 AD.

He gave Moses a set of laws, then a set of different laws of nullified
the earlier laws?? Then didn't bother recording it??

Doesn't sound right to me.


"The Talmud (Hebrew: תַּלְמוּד talmūd "instruction, learning", from a
root lmd "teach, study") is a central text of mainstream Judaism. It
takes the form of a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to
Jewish law, ethics, philosophy, customs and history.
The Talmud has two components: the Mishnah (Hebrew: משנה)(c. 200
CE), the first written compendium of Judaism's Oral Law; and the
Gemara (c. 500 CE), an elucidation of the Mishnah and related
Tannaitic writings that often ventures onto other subjects and
expounds broadly on the Hebrew Bible."

>> So you obey every law in the Torah?
>>
>> >> What happens if you DON'T obey?
>> >
>> > You will be judged on the Day of Judgement, soon after your death.
>>
>> And if he judges you to be bad, then what?
>
> You're in deep shit.

More specific please :-) You said no afterlife, so what happens if
you're judged to be bad?

[Joe Bruno]

On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 9:02:38 AM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> > You don't understand Judaism at all.We are not required by G-d to love Him.
> >> > He requires us only to OBEY Him.
> >>
> >> And honor him apparently.
> >>
> >> But that's what I'm saying, it's perfectly acceptable to hate God
> >> providing you give an outward appearance that you do not?
> >
> > It is not necessary under Judaism to like Him, only to obey Him.
> > Judaism is not a popularity contest.
>
> Well that's handy as I really don't like him.

I thought you said He does not exist.What is it you don't like?

[Joe Bruno]

> > You must obey the Torah? Does that not include a LOT of very archaic
> > laws?

CRAP - The Torah is definitive, God laid it down.

Anything else is the work of man, and not Gods word.

> WRONG.G-d gave Moses the Talmud in preliminary oral form.It was not written down until 70 AD.

Horse shit. The Torahs laws must be followed, otherwise you're a FAKE JEW.

> > And if he judges you to be bad, then what?
>
> You're in deep shit.

Don't bother talking to fake Bruno, he's not a Jew.

He's an atheist loving, Jesus loving, idiot.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> > It is not necessary under Judaism to like Him, only to obey Him.
>> > Judaism is not a popularity contest.
>>
>> Well that's handy as I really don't like him.
>
> I thought you said He does not exist.What is it you don't like?

The Abrahamic God as he's depicted.


What if I said this:

"I don't live Voldemort"

What you take it that I thought Harry Potter was a true story? :-)


Come on, you're making yourself look a bit stupid here. You can dislike
a fictional character.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <joebr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > You must obey the Torah? Does that not include a LOT of very archaic
>> > laws?
>
> CRAP - The Torah is definitive, God laid it down.
>
> Anything else is the work of man, and not Gods word.

Makes sense from a Jewish angle.

>> WRONG.G-d gave Moses the Talmud in preliminary oral form.It was not written down until 70 AD.
>
> Horse shit. The Torahs laws must be followed, otherwise you're a FAKE JEW.

Sounds plausible

>> > And if he judges you to be bad, then what?
>>
>> You're in deep shit.
>
> Don't bother talking to fake Bruno, he's not a Jew.
>
> He's an atheist loving, Jesus loving, idiot.

1 out of 3 I'd say.

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote in

news:3aa8be36-0f7d-4320...@googlegroups.com:

So all is acceptable as long as you
are following orders?

Such a good little nazi.



Numbers 31:7-18

They fought against Midian, as the LORD commanded
Moses, and killed every man. "Now kill all the boys.
And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but
save for yourselves every girl who has never slept
with a man.

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 05:17:26 -0700 (PDT)
Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Monday, May 21, 2012 8:08:09 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:

[snip]

>> I don't see why this is being silly.
>>
>> It's saying honoring your parents is an analogue to honoring God.
>>
>> So surely if you can outwardly show respect for your mother but hate
>> her, you could do the same to God and still be good with him right?
>>
>> That doesn't sound correct to me.
>
> You don't understand Judaism at all.We are not required by G-d to
> love Him. He requires us only to OBEY Him.

That's slavery.

--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Jesus is unnecessary and a liar. ... It is useless for a man to come
to Jesus and follow Him, as all these earnest Christians will go on to
Hell, anyway. ..."
-- Broil Jab (April 13, 2012)

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 05:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Monday, May 21, 2012 8:08:09 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
>> On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:

[snip]

>>> WRONG. Look at #14. "Treat with honor" is an outward behavior
>>> which has nothing to do with your inner feelings.
>>>
>>> You are really being silly. The Mosaic law can only regulate the
>>> behavior of people, as all laws can only regulate that.Neither
>>> code can regulate feelings and they don't try to.
>>
>> I don't see why this is being silly.
>>
>> It's saying honoring your parents is an analogue to honoring God.
>>
>> So surely if you can outwardly show respect for your mother but hate
>> her, you could do the same to God and still be good with him right?
>>
>> That doesn't sound correct to me.
>
> You don't understand religion.
>
> God is omniscient. If I hate Him, He knows it.

If that's true, then God would effectively be hating himself, and only
have himself to blame for it -- he may be a good candidate for suicide
counselling and might even benefit from an anti-depressent prescription.

--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

"I love deadlines ... I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly
by."
-- Douglas Noel Adams, Satirical Statistical Scientist

[Mike Lovell]

>>
>> You don't understand religion.
>>
>> God is omniscient. If I hate Him, He knows it.

(don't have the original, piggy-backing).

Where do I say your God isn't described as being omniscient???

You say I don't understand something that I never commented on!


My point is, are you allowed to hate God (but outwardly respect him)?
Regardless of he knows or not.

You said honor is fine even its its outwardly only.

[Joe Bruno]

On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:09:57 AM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> > The Torah contains the original Mosaic law.Any updates or revisions will be found in the Talmud.
> >>
> >> You must obey the Torah? Does that not include a LOT of very archaic
> >> laws?
> >
> > I said we must obey both Torah and Talmud.The Talmud updates Torah law.
>
> Right, but the Torah was apparently from God "directly" via Moses.
>
> >> The Torah is supposed to have come directly from God via Moses. The
> >> Talmud appears to be debating between rabbis, so not binding if the
> >> original laws are clear.
> >
> > WRONG.G-d gave Moses the Talmud in preliminary oral form.It was not written down until 70 AD.
>
> He gave Moses a set of laws, then a set of different laws of nullified
> the earlier laws?? Then didn't bother recording it??
>
> Doesn't sound right to me.
>
>
> "The Talmud (Hebrew: תַּלְמוּד talmūd "instruction, learning", from a
> root lmd "teach, study") is a central text of mainstream Judaism. It
> takes the form of a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to
> Jewish law, ethics, philosophy, customs and history.
> The Talmud has two components: the Mishnah (Hebrew: משנה)(c. 200
> CE), the first written compendium of Judaism's Oral Law; and the
> Gemara (c. 500 CE), an elucidation of the Mishnah and related
> Tannaitic writings that often ventures onto other subjects and
> expounds broadly on the Hebrew Bible."

READ:


http://www.seedofabraham.net/talmud.html

>
>
> >> So you obey every law in the Torah?
> >>
> >> >> What happens if you DON'T obey?
> >> >
> >> > You will be judged on the Day of Judgement, soon after your death.
> >>
> >> And if he judges you to be bad, then what?
> >
> > You're in deep shit.
>
> More specific please :-) You said no afterlife, so what happens if
> you're judged to be bad?

I actually don't know. No rabbi I know has ever touched on the subject.
I suspect the Jews desire to be in G-d's good graces and avoid his wrath
is enough for us.

However, rabbis are always eager to answer any questions by anyone on the
subject of Judaism.They even help atheists as long as you act respectfully toward Judaism.
>
> --
The word is "RESPECT".Vi panimayete????

[Joe Bruno]

On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 2:49:20 PM UTC-7, Mike Lovell wrote:
> >>
> >> You don't understand religion.
> >>
> >> God is omniscient. If I hate Him, He knows it.
>
> (don't have the original, piggy-backing).
>
> Where do I say your God isn't described as being omniscient???
>
> You say I don't understand something that I never commented on!
>
>
> My point is, are you allowed to hate God (but outwardly respect him)?
> Regardless of he knows or not.
>
> You said honor is fine even its its outwardly only.

In the USA, you are required to obey American law.You cannot be arrested
and punished just because you don't like cops, legislators or judges.
>
> --
Panimayete???????

[Mike Lovell]

I'd rather not, the name of the website denotes it's not impartial on
these facts.

My excerpt is from Wikipedia BTW.

>> >> So you obey every law in the Torah?
>> >>
>> >> >> What happens if you DON'T obey?
>> >> >
>> >> > You will be judged on the Day of Judgement, soon after your death.
>> >>
>> >> And if he judges you to be bad, then what?
>> >
>> > You're in deep shit.
>>
>> More specific please :-) You said no afterlife, so what happens if
>> you're judged to be bad?
>
> I actually don't know. No rabbi I know has ever touched on the subject.
> I suspect the Jews desire to be in G-d's good graces and avoid his wrath
> is enough for us.
>
> However, rabbis are always eager to answer any questions by anyone on the
> subject of Judaism.They even help atheists as long as you act respectfully toward Judaism.

Then they wouldn't help me out, I have no respect toward Judaism. Some
people that practice it maybe, but in itself it deserves no respect.

But then it would just be them winging it really. If nobody knows seems
a little odd.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> You don't understand religion.
>> >>
>> >> God is omniscient. If I hate Him, He knows it.
>>
>> (don't have the original, piggy-backing).
>>
>> Where do I say your God isn't described as being omniscient???
>>
>> You say I don't understand something that I never commented on!
>>
>>
>> My point is, are you allowed to hate God (but outwardly respect him)?
>> Regardless of he knows or not.
>>
>> You said honor is fine even its its outwardly only.
>
> In the USA, you are required to obey American law.You cannot be arrested
> and punished just because you don't like cops, legislators or judges.

So you are allowed to hate God then?

You can't tell me the punishment, or even if there is a punishment.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <XnsA05BA22F88907...@216.196.121.131>,

Mitchell Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:
> Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote in

> news:3aa8be36-0f7d-4320...@googlegroups.com:

> > Judaism is neither a democracy nor a popularity contest.
> > It's just like the military and I'm used to that.
>
>
> So all is acceptable as long as you
> are following orders?
>
> Such a good little nazi.

You'd think a Jew would have learned the dangers of blindly obeying
orders.

--
JD

"the lybian lier"

[Mitchell Holman]

Jeanne Douglas <hlw...@NOSPAMpacbell.net> wrote in news:hlwdjsd-
95D3A4.153...@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com:

Art Tandy and learning have very little in common.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <XnsA05BB6D2A9DA0...@216.196.121.131>,

Mitchell Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:

> Jeanne Douglas <hlw...@NOSPAMpacbell.net> wrote in news:hlwdjsd-
> 95D3A4.153...@5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com:
>
> > In article <XnsA05BA22F88907...@216.196.121.131>,
> > Mitchell Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:
> >> Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote in
> >> news:3aa8be36-0f7d-4320...@googlegroups.com:
> >
> >
> >> > Judaism is neither a democracy nor a popularity contest.
> >> > It's just like the military and I'm used to that.
> >>
> >>
> >> So all is acceptable as long as you
> >> are following orders?
> >>
> >> Such a good little nazi.
> >
> > You'd think a Jew would have learned the dangers of blindly obeying
> > orders.
> >
>
>
> Art Tandy and learning have very little in common.

Very sad.

[Smiler]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 00:29:01 -0500, Mike Lovell wrote:

> On 2012-05-22, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com> wrote:
>> The National Curriculum mandates "A daily assembly of a mainly
>> Christian nature". Most schools, especially those in largely
>> non-christian areas, tend to ignore the fuzzily worded 'Christian
>> nature' part and few, if any, say prayers.
>
> Outrageous mandate, even if it's ignored in part.

It's not so much ignored as circumvented. How "mainly Christian nature" is
interpreted is, within reason, up to the Headteacher and Governors.

>
>> Neither of our two children (one now 25, the other 18) reported
>> anything in their assemblies of a 'Christian nature' to us. The only
>> problem we had was when a Religious Education teacher (How does a JW
>> get to teach comparative religion!?!?) gave the class homework to 'draw
>> how they see their god'. My son went in the next day with a blank sheet
>> of paper and an explanatory note from me, copied to the head teacher.
>> It was the easiest piece of homework he'd ever done! I understand that
>> the teacher was removed from teaching Religious Education classes and
>> may have been fired.
>
> I'm on 30 myself and we had daily prayer in primary school from 5-12
> years old.

You obviously weren't in a suburban or inner city school in an immigrant
area. Our local primary is about 40% Muslim, 15% Hindu and 35% Eastern
Europeans of some flavour or other of Christianity. The remainder are
mainly apatheists. When my youngest son was in primary school, the class
was taken to visit a Mosque, a Hindu Temple, a Synagogue and a couple of
Christian Churches (RCC & CoE, IIRC), so even then it was comparative
religion.

> Secondary school, I don't recall it happening but we did have RE
> (compulsory!) up to the age of 14, taught by a C of E.

Nowadays, in secular secondary schools, Religious Education is purely
comparative religion. In CoE and RCC schools, I imagine it's the same, as
they have to now accept children of other religions to get their state
handouts.

But, even in my day (ancient history :-)), RE was never _compulsory_. A
letter from my parents 'excused' me from attending some of the lessons.

--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

[Waldo Tunnel]

On May 21, 11:42 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Monday, May 21, 2012 9:26:41 AM UTC-7, Uncle Vic wrote:
> > Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote in
> >news:slrnjrj3v4.h...@usenet.home.b0h0.com:

>
> > > What would you do if a teacher or authority figure tried to in-doctorate
> > > you children into a religion?  Are there any laws to prevent people
> > > doing this, or is it protected free speech (even though they are minors)?
>

> > The Constitution, of course, in the First Amendment.  If you want your chid
> > raised religiously you have the option to send the child to a religious
> > *private* school.
>
> > But who follows the First Amendment these days?
>
> It's the law. Obeying it is mandatory, not optional.

And what happens if you don't?

[Waldo Tunnel]

On May 21, 12:51 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 May 2012 23:23:01 -0700 (PDT), Waldo Tunnel <waldotun...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On May 20, 10:41 pm, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
> >> On 2012-05-21, Waldo Tunnel <waldotun...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > [...]
>
> >> Danke,
>
> >> What about school sporting events?  I thought there was some crap about
> >> stopping prayers before football games (suggesting they happened in the
> >> first place)?
>
> >I'm not sure about the sporting events. But I know that if you *don't*
> >bestow such special rights on believers (like a benediction before a
> >game) it is the same as persecuting them.
>
> Not persecution, but the Constitution does guarantee us the freedom from
> interference.

Hahahahahahaha!

duke -- chickenhawk American, just like the real Duke was.

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

Your sense of humour would be a nice fit for writing South Park
episodes; I suspect this 23-second-long episode clip might make you
laugh (it's an even better laugh when watching the entire episode):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPhmE0vXXJk

--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

"I love California, I practically grew up in Phoenix."
-- Dan Quayle

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:18:48 -0500
Mike Lovell <mike....@null.local> wrote:
> On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> You don't understand religion.
> >> >>
> >> >> God is omniscient. If I hate Him, He knows it.
> >>
> >> (don't have the original, piggy-backing).
> >>
> >> Where do I say your God isn't described as being omniscient???
> >>
> >> You say I don't understand something that I never commented on!
> >>
> >>
> >> My point is, are you allowed to hate God (but outwardly respect
> >> him)? Regardless of he knows or not.
> >>
> >> You said honor is fine even its its outwardly only.
> >
> > In the USA, you are required to obey American law.You cannot be
> > arrested and punished just because you don't like cops, legislators
> > or judges.
>
> So you are allowed to hate God then?
>
> You can't tell me the punishment, or even if there is a punishment.

+1 for turning his argument, in its unmodified entirety, against him.

--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

"Reality is the eternal enemy of Salvation businesses."
-- R. L. Measures (May 14, 2012)

[Waldo Tunnel]

On May 22, 9:02 am, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:

> On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> > You don't understand Judaism at all.We are not required by G-d to love Him.
> >> > He requires us only to OBEY Him.
>
> >> And honor him apparently.
>
> >> But that's what I'm saying, it's perfectly acceptable to hate God
> >> providing you give an outward appearance that you do not?
>
> > It is not necessary under Judaism to like Him, only to obey Him.
> > Judaism is not a popularity contest.
>
> Well that's handy as I really don't like him.
>
> >> By "OBEY" do you mean following all the Jewish laws laid out (no matter
> >> how obscure and outdated)?
>
> > The Torah contains the original Mosaic law.Any updates or revisions will be found in the Talmud.
>
> You must obey the Torah?  Does that not include a LOT of very archaic
> laws?
>
> The Torah is supposed to have come directly from God via Moses.  The
> Talmud appears to be debating between rabbis, so not binding if the
> original laws are clear.
>
> So you obey every law in the Torah?
>
> >> What happens if you DON'T obey?
>
> > You will be judged on the Day of Judgement, soon after your death.
>
> And if he judges you to be bad, then what?

Joe doesn't want to be pinned down. Can you tell?

[Alex W.]

On Wed, 23 May 2012 03:55:11 +0100, Smiler wrote:

> On Tue, 22 May 2012 00:29:01 -0500, Mike Lovell wrote:
>
>> On 2012-05-22, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com> wrote:
>>> The National Curriculum mandates "A daily assembly of a mainly
>>> Christian nature". Most schools, especially those in largely
>>> non-christian areas, tend to ignore the fuzzily worded 'Christian
>>> nature' part and few, if any, say prayers.
>>
>> Outrageous mandate, even if it's ignored in part.
>
> It's not so much ignored as circumvented. How "mainly Christian nature" is
> interpreted is, within reason, up to the Headteacher and Governors.

Given that "god" is the neutral term for any deity and that
Yahweh and Allah are merely different names for the same entity,
it is not hard to devise prayers that are non-specific enough to
satisfy most reasonable and moderate parents.

I also think that some people will always take exception whatever
is done or not done. There is always somebody who goes around
looking for reasons to feel offended. Provided that prayers at
assembly are not phrased to promote one single faith or
denomination (like a certain pope who has reintroduced Easter
prayers asking for the conversion of the Jews), I see no problem.
Whomever it is addressed to, how offensive and prejudicial can it
be to stand up and express a wish for the end of hunger, world
peace, harmony in the community and the like?

>
>>
>>> Neither of our two children (one now 25, the other 18) reported
>>> anything in their assemblies of a 'Christian nature' to us. The only
>>> problem we had was when a Religious Education teacher (How does a JW
>>> get to teach comparative religion!?!?) gave the class homework to 'draw
>>> how they see their god'. My son went in the next day with a blank sheet
>>> of paper and an explanatory note from me, copied to the head teacher.
>>> It was the easiest piece of homework he'd ever done! I understand that
>>> the teacher was removed from teaching Religious Education classes and
>>> may have been fired.
>>
>> I'm on 30 myself and we had daily prayer in primary school from 5-12
>> years old.
>
> You obviously weren't in a suburban or inner city school in an immigrant
> area. Our local primary is about 40% Muslim, 15% Hindu and 35% Eastern
> Europeans of some flavour or other of Christianity. The remainder are
> mainly apatheists. When my youngest son was in primary school, the class
> was taken to visit a Mosque, a Hindu Temple, a Synagogue and a couple of
> Christian Churches (RCC & CoE, IIRC), so even then it was comparative
> religion.

We cannot really afford to be strictly one religion or
denomination anymore, not in the inner cities. For a start, the
percentages of religions you cited also applies to languages:
when 40 per cent of students at London prinary schools do not
speak English at home, we have problems of a wholly different
order than to worry about the correct way to address <insert name
of deity>.

>
>> Secondary school, I don't recall it happening but we did have RE
>> (compulsory!) up to the age of 14, taught by a C of E.
>
> Nowadays, in secular secondary schools, Religious Education is purely
> comparative religion. In CoE and RCC schools, I imagine it's the same, as
> they have to now accept children of other religions to get their state
> handouts.

If they are expressly and formally religious schools, they do
teach their particular faith. Parents of a different religion
who send their kids to that school have to accept this.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-23, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com> wrote:
>> I'm on 30 myself and we had daily prayer in primary school from 5-12
>> years old.
>
> You obviously weren't in a suburban or inner city school in an immigrant
> area. Our local primary is about 40% Muslim, 15% Hindu and 35% Eastern
> Europeans of some flavour or other of Christianity. The remainder are
> mainly apatheists. When my youngest son was in primary school, the class
> was taken to visit a Mosque, a Hindu Temple, a Synagogue and a couple of
> Christian Churches (RCC & CoE, IIRC), so even then it was comparative
> religion.

No indeed I was not, I grew up in the Sussex countryside. There was 1
minority student in our class, who was at it happens my best friend.

>
>> Secondary school, I don't recall it happening but we did have RE
>> (compulsory!) up to the age of 14, taught by a C of E.
>
> Nowadays, in secular secondary schools, Religious Education is purely
> comparative religion. In CoE and RCC schools, I imagine it's the same, as
> they have to now accept children of other religions to get their state
> handouts.
>
> But, even in my day (ancient history :-)), RE was never _compulsory_. A
> letter from my parents 'excused' me from attending some of the lessons.

Interesting.

[Joe Bruno]

Impartial??It's a Jewish website.Gentiles don't know shit about the Talmud.

>
> My excerpt is from Wikipedia BTW.
>
> >> >> So you obey every law in the Torah?
> >> >>
> >> >> >> What happens if you DON'T obey?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You will be judged on the Day of Judgement, soon after your death.
> >> >>
> >> >> And if he judges you to be bad, then what?
> >> >
> >> > You're in deep shit.
> >>
> >> More specific please :-) You said no afterlife, so what happens if
> >> you're judged to be bad?
> >
> > I actually don't know. No rabbi I know has ever touched on the subject.
> > I suspect the Jews desire to be in G-d's good graces and avoid his wrath
> > is enough for us.
> >
> > However, rabbis are always eager to answer any questions by anyone on the
> > subject of Judaism.They even help atheists as long as you act respectfully toward Judaism.
>
> Then they wouldn't help me out, I have no respect toward Judaism. Some
> people that practice it maybe, but in itself it deserves no respect.

From where I sit, it's obvious you respect just about nothing.
Your self-absorbed narcissism is the primary cause of crime and the
dissollusion of morals in the West.You respect only yourself.
Your parents did a lousy job of raising you.

>
> But then it would just be them winging it really. If nobody knows seems
> a little odd.

I said I don't know, not "nobody".
>
> --
Unlike you, I am always honest.My Father and Grandfather taught me that.
What did your parents teach you?

[Joe Bruno]

You can't read my mind, you ignorant clown.

[Joe Bruno]

Lawsuits or prison.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <20120522215929....@fidemturbare.com>,

"Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"

<god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:30:07 -0700
> Jeanne Douglas <hlw...@NOSPAMpacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article <XnsA05BA22F88907...@216.196.121.131>,
> > Mitchell Holman <nomailcomcast.net> wrote:
> >> Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote in
> >> news:3aa8be36-0f7d-4320...@googlegroups.com:
> >>
> >>> Judaism is neither a democracy nor a popularity contest.
> >>> It's just like the military and I'm used to that.
> >>
> >>
> >> So all is acceptable as long as you
> >> are following orders?
> >>
> >> Such a good little nazi.
> >
> > You'd think a Jew would have learned the dangers of blindly obeying
> > orders.
>
> Your sense of humour would be a nice fit for writing South Park
> episodes; I suspect this 23-second-long episode clip might make you
> laugh (it's an even better laugh when watching the entire episode):
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPhmE0vXXJk

One of my favorite shows.

Hmmm, I'm behind in my DVD purchases; I'm only up to somewhere 7, 8, 9,
would have to find them to know which.

[Smiler]

When I was a school governor, the headteacher told us that
there were 108 different mother-tongues spoken by children in the
school.

>>> Secondary school, I don't recall it happening but we did have RE
>>> (compulsory!) up to the age of 14, taught by a C of E.
>>
>> Nowadays, in secular secondary schools, Religious Education is purely
>> comparative religion. In CoE and RCC schools, I imagine it's the same,
>> as they have to now accept children of other religions to get their
>> state handouts.
>
> If they are expressly and formally religious schools, they do teach
> their particular faith. Parents of a different religion who send their
> kids to that school have to accept this.

But those schools don't get state handouts.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Thu, 24 May 2012 02:23:18 +0100, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com>

wrote:

>On Wed, 23 May 2012 13:20:48 +0100, Alex W. wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 23 May 2012 03:55:11 +0100, Smiler wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 22 May 2012 00:29:01 -0500, Mike Lovell wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-05-22, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com> wrote:
>>>>> The National Curriculum mandates "A daily assembly of a mainly
>>>>> Christian nature". Most schools, especially those in largely
>>>>> non-christian areas, tend to ignore the fuzzily worded 'Christian
>>>>> nature' part and few, if any, say prayers.
>>>>
>>>> Outrageous mandate, even if it's ignored in part.
>>>
>>> It's not so much ignored as circumvented. How "mainly Christian nature" is
>>> interpreted is, within reason, up to the Headteacher and Governors.
>>
>> Given that "god" is the neutral term for any deity and that
>> Yahweh and Allah are merely different names for the same entity,

Three different versions with major differences in attributes - the
Jewish one didn't have a son who became divine, and neither did the
Islamic one although it had a Prophet called Jesus and it is
blasphemous to elevate him to the same level as Allah.

>> it is not hard to devise prayers that are non-specific enough to
>> satisfy most reasonable and moderate parents.

So atheist and agnostic parents aren't moderate, and are unreasonable?

That's for clearing that up.

Even though adherents.com shows that Britain has between 31% and 44%
atheists and agnostics.

And as we all know, a large number of nominally CofE are only
culturally Christian and functionally atheist or agnostic.

http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html

>> I also think that some people will always take exception whatever
>> is done or not done. There is always somebody who goes around
>> looking for reasons to feel offended.

AlexW has used this amateur-psychologised falsehood on previous
occasions, which is why he is in my killfile.

Why can't theists, even manque theists, even try to understand
atheists?

There is no reason for this kind of nastiness rather than admit people
have genuine reasons to object.

How would theists like their kids forced to listen to an atheist
substituting the words "figment of your deluded imagination"
substituted?

I suspect they'd go ape shit.

Just like Americans who heard somebody making the same substitution in
the pledge of allegiance kids are forced to say.

>> Provided that prayers at
>> assembly are not phrased to promote one single faith or
>> denomination (like a certain pope who has reintroduced Easter
>> prayers asking for the conversion of the Jews), I see no problem.

APART FROM THE 31% TO 44% WHO ARE ATHEIST OR AGNOSTIC, AS WELL AS
THOSE WHO ARE NOMINALLY COFE BUT ARE ONLY CULTURALLY NOT RELIGIOUSLY
CHRISTIAN.

>> Whomever it is addressed to, how offensive and prejudicial can it
>> be to stand up and express a wish for the end of hunger, world
>> peace, harmony in the community and the like?

If it requires the imposition of prayer to a god perhaps half the
population don't believe in.

How would the poster like to be told to pray to Krishna for that?

What's wrong with him?

>> We cannot really afford to be strictly one religion or
>> denomination anymore, not in the inner cities. For a start, the
>> percentages of religions you cited also applies to languages:
>> when 40 per cent of students at London prinary schools do not
>> speak English at home, we have problems of a wholly different
>> order than to worry about the correct way to address <insert name
>> of deity>.

We cannot afford any deity.

>When I was a school governor, the headteacher told us that
>there were 108 different mother-tongues spoken by children in the
>school.

Those kids rapidly become bilingual.

My then girlfriend before I moved from England to the USA was Indian
(Punjabi). Her brother worked away from home during the week and when
he went home for the weekend he's dump his two young boys on their
grandmother who was really too old for that. So my girlfriend, being
the single daughter, ended up with them.

Which meant that very often we'd go out together as a mixed race
family.

They spoke Punjabi but when they started school, a combination of
remedial English classes and playing with kids who spoke English meant
that it didn't take them long to sound like any other Yorkshire kid.

>>>> Secondary school, I don't recall it happening but we did have RE
>>>> (compulsory!) up to the age of 14, taught by a C of E.

You could be "excused" from it. When I was at school it was a mixture
of high and low church Protestant.

Those of us who were excused included me (an atheist), Jews,
Catholics, and members of different Eastern religions.

I never understood why I needed to be "excused" when I hadn't done
anything.

You said "excuse me" after you had sneezed or farted, when you asked
directions of a stranger, when you left the room to go to the
lavatory, etc.

It was a long time ago now, and in those days atheists were expected
to stay in the closet and at least go through the motions of being
Christian.

But it was hard for a kid who didn't even know what religion was, to
stay in a closet he didn't even know about, when a teacher read the
Genesis stories and asked the class for comment expecting them to be
taken seriously.

>>> Nowadays, in secular secondary schools, Religious Education is purely
>>> comparative religion. In CoE and RCC schools, I imagine it's the same,
>>> as they have to now accept children of other religions to get their
>>> state handouts.

It should be comparative.

If they want to teach ethics, gratitude to doctors, firemen, police,
food providers etc by all means do that, but do it without a god.

The problem with comparative religion is that theists object to other
religions being taught at all, and theirs being reduced to a cultural
phenomenon taught at the same level.

Also, very few theists can step aside form their beliefs to teach it
comparatively.

Paradoxically atheists would probably be the best to do this because
they would treat all religions as beliefs Christians believe this,
Muslims believe that, Jews believe something else, Hindus believe
something different, atheists don't believe in any of the gods, etc.

I would encourage that.

But strongly theist parents wouldn't.

>> If they are expressly and formally religious schools, they do teach
>> their particular faith. Parents of a different religion who send their
>> kids to that school have to accept this.

In India many non-Catholics send their children to Catholic schools
for the quality of the education - and the schools acknowledge this by
teaching ethics classes as an alternative to religious classes.

>But those schools don't get state handouts.

They do.

It was the only way to get the CofE and the RCC to allow their schools
to become part of the state system under the 1944 Education Act.

Blair expanded this to include other faiths.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-23, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:
>> I'd rather not, the name of the website denotes it's not impartial on
>> these facts.
>
> Impartial??It's a Jewish website.Gentiles don't know shit about the Talmud.

Yep, impartial.

I'd rather have an impartial analysis of documents that people with a
motive.

>> > However, rabbis are always eager to answer any questions by anyone on the
>> > subject of Judaism.They even help atheists as long as you act respectfully toward Judaism.
>>
>> Then they wouldn't help me out, I have no respect toward Judaism. Some
>> people that practice it maybe, but in itself it deserves no respect.
>
>
> From where I sit, it's obvious you respect just about nothing.
> Your self-absorbed narcissism is the primary cause of crime and the
> dissollusion of morals in the West.You respect only yourself.
> Your parents did a lousy job of raising you.

As you would say ---- evidence?????

I'm not committing any crimes, nor do I have bad morals.

I don't have respect for any religion.

>> But then it would just be them winging it really. If nobody knows seems
>> a little odd.
>
> I said I don't know, not "nobody".

Well somebody better come forward.

[Mike Lovell]

On 2012-05-23, Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote:

>> > And if he judges you to be bad, then what?
>>
>> Joe doesn't want to be pinned down. Can you tell?
>
> You can't read my mind, you ignorant clown.

No, we can just observe the questions you forget to answer.

That tells us enough ;-)

[Mitchell Holman]

Joe Bruno <ajt...@cox.net> wrote in

news:500735bb-e21b-419a...@googlegroups.com:

>> --
> Unlike you, I am always honest.

Is your name really Joe Bruno?

[Smiler]

On Wed, 23 May 2012 19:05:54 -0700, Christopher A. Lee wrote:

> On Thu, 24 May 2012 02:23:18 +0100, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 13:20:48 +0100, Alex W. wrote:
>>

<snip>

It is (mainly).

>
> If they want to teach ethics, gratitude to doctors, firemen, police,
> food providers etc by all means do that, but do it without a god.
>
> The problem with comparative religion is that theists object to other
> religions being taught at all, and theirs being reduced to a cultural
> phenomenon taught at the same level.
>
> Also, very few theists can step aside form their beliefs to teach it
> comparatively.

Especially not a JW.

>
> Paradoxically atheists would probably be the best to do this because
> they would treat all religions as beliefs Christians believe this,
> Muslims believe that, Jews believe something else, Hindus believe
> something different, atheists don't believe in any of the gods, etc.
>
> I would encourage that.

That is the current approach in RE.

>
> But strongly theist parents wouldn't.
>

Where 'strongly theist parents' == bigots.

>>> If they are expressly and formally religious schools, they do teach
>>> their particular faith. Parents of a different religion who send
>>> their kids to that school have to accept this.
>
> In India many non-Catholics send their children to Catholic schools for
> the quality of the education - and the schools acknowledge this by
> teaching ethics classes as an alternative to religious classes.

Yep. My Hindu neighbour, from Mauritius, was taught in a Christian school.

>
>>But those schools don't get state handouts.
>
> They do.

You've taken my comment completely out of context.

> It was the only way to get the CofE and the RCC to allow their schools
> to become part of the state system under the 1944 Education Act.
>

Yep. But nowadays they have to take children of other faiths and none and
also follow the National Curriculum to get state handouts.

> Blair expanded this to include other faiths.

Only if the schools follow the National Curriculum.

[Alex W.]

On Wed, 23 May 2012 18:54:46 -0500, Robert Parker wrote:

> On Wed, 23 May 2012 13:20:48 +0100, "Alex W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 23 May 2012 03:55:11 +0100, Smiler wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 22 May 2012 00:29:01 -0500, Mike Lovell wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-05-22, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com> wrote:
>>>>> The National Curriculum mandates "A daily assembly of a mainly
>>>>> Christian nature". Most schools, especially those in largely
>>>>> non-christian areas, tend to ignore the fuzzily worded 'Christian
>>>>> nature' part and few, if any, say prayers.
>>>>
>>>> Outrageous mandate, even if it's ignored in part.
>>>
>>> It's not so much ignored as circumvented. How "mainly Christian nature" is
>>> interpreted is, within reason, up to the Headteacher and Governors.
>>
>>Given that "god" is the neutral term for any deity and that
>>Yahweh and Allah are merely different names for the same entity,
>>it is not hard to devise prayers that are non-specific enough to
>>satisfy most reasonable and moderate parents.
>>

> Why require any prayer to any deity, that you don't believe exist. It's not
> the context of the frigging prayer, it the public praying in a public
> place, which is objectionable. Keep your prayers in your church and homes.
> Adults talking to invisible friends are embarrassing, and the requirement
> to remain silent with your head down is outrageous.
> Have respect for your praying? Respect for my right to freaking ignore your
> idiocy.

There is prayer as a public expression of religious faith.
Reciting the Lord's Prayer falls into that category as it asserts
not only a person's own beliefs but lays claim to jurisdiction
over others, and there is good and ample reason to criticise or
see it stopped.

There is also prayer as a convenient form of expressing common
fears, desires and aspirations. When a coach stands before his
team and prays for victory against the Wampaging Weevils from
State and for their star quarterback's cruciate ligament to hold
out, that is not, IMO, an expressly religious act but an
expression and summation of the team's sentiments and ambition.

There is also prayer as a tradition and community ritual. An
army chaplain delivering a prayer at Remembrance Sunday before
the assembled throng of veterans, families and other locals is
not making a sneaky play for the souls of unbelievers.

The question is: do we really want it ALL stopped? Do we have
the right to try? Hopelessly naive it may be of them, but what
does it say about us if we decide that we cannot tolerate someone
expressing a public desire for world peace or an end to hunger?

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Fri, 25 May 2012 00:16:19 +0100, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com>

Not intentionally.

But I have personal and unpleasant experience of religion in state
schools from my own childhood.

The teacher concerned, and the headmaster, practically destroyed my
education.

The previous head teacher let children go through the early classes at
their own pace, so by the time I was seven I was a year ahead of the
other kids my age.

When she retired the new headmaster didn't like that, and although I
was near the top of the class he made me made me repeat the final year
of the infants so I would be the same age as my class-mates.

Which was a disaster because I was completely bored having done it all
already. All my friends had moved on leaving me behind.

That was the year they taught joined-up handwriting and they wouldn't
let me use this. I got bad marks I did,

Similarly at the start of the year we had to show all the steps in
some of the arithmetic, even the carry, to show we were doing it
correctly - which was relaxed when they knew we did.

So by that time I was accustomed to leaving those bits out.

Which also earned me bad marks.

So I went from being the top of the class to a poor performer.

Neither the headmaster not the class teacher bothered to find out why
- I was just a backward kid in their eyes who had learning
difficulties.

He never bothered to wonder why I had been moved on to the next class
early, two (or perhaps three) times.

The final straw was when she discovered I was atheist - by reading the
Genesis stories and asking the class for comment. It never occurred to
me that I was expected to take them seriously and compared them to the
Greek and other myths.

Which got me into trouble,

She tried to convert me and failed. She couldn't cope with a kid who
was completely outside her religion and couldn't do it without
assuming I already granted things only Christians did.

I saw through her loaded questions and already had better answers than
a god I hadn't previously heard of.

I was treated appallingly for this, and they thought it was rebellion
from a poor learner.

She called me an atheist in front of the class and set them on to me.
So I was bullied for it.

One upshot was that I had no reason to trust anything she taught and
asked searching questions to make sure she actually knew what she was
talking about.

Making me a disruptive child in addition to having supposed learning
difficulties.

All of which was the school's fault not my own.

They even told my parents I had no chance of passing the eleven plus
and going on to grammar school - in the event I was one of the very
few there who did.

I would demand to know exactly what they were going to teach and how,
before exposing any kid of mine to that.

And monitor it to make sure.

>> It was the only way to get the CofE and the RCC to allow their schools
>> to become part of the state system under the 1944 Education Act.
>
>Yep. But nowadays they have to take children of other faiths and none and
>also follow the National Curriculum to get state handouts.
>
>> Blair expanded this to include other faiths.
>
>Only if the schools follow the National Curriculum.

If there is one then all schools should.

But did they actually introduce one?

When I took the O- and A- levels in the 1960s there wasn't one - the
exams were set by the major universities and the schools had to treach
to the standards required to pass them.

In effect Oxford, Cambridge, London etc set an informal curriculum,
but the only subject actually required by law to be taught, was RE.

David Cameron seems to want Christianity to be taught in a
non-comparative way.

In any case, many schools that get government funding but are outside
DofE oversight, like the Vardy schools, teach religion as fact.

Emmanuel College, Gateshead did this below the radar until it felt
confident enough to host a creationist symposium whose keynote speaker
was Ken Ham.

[Waldo Tunnel]

On May 23, 10:43 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:12:23 PM UTC-7, Waldo Tunnel wrote:
> > On May 22, 9:02 am, Mike Lovell <mike.lov...@null.local> wrote:
> > > On 2012-05-22, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:

[...]

>
> > Joe doesn't want to be pinned down. Can you tell?
>
> You can't read my mind, you ignorant clown.

I knew you were going to say that.

[Waldo Tunnel]

Violate the Constitution... go to prison. Finally you admit the
Constitution contains criminal codes! (Yeah, you did. No back pedaling
now) I don't believe that myself even though you have just proven that
you do.

[Don Martin]

And should the cruciate ligament of the Weevils' quarterback go out in the
first half of the game, you can bet that both coach and team will suppose
their prayer was answered and will pray all the harder before the next
game.

> There is also prayer as a tradition and community ritual. An
> army chaplain delivering a prayer at Remembrance Sunday before
> the assembled throng of veterans, families and other locals is
> not making a sneaky play for the souls of unbelievers.

So long as the great mass of people continue to believe that the death of
their loved ones buys divine approval, military recruitment remains easy,
any bully governments, like that of the U.S., will thrive.

> The question is: do we really want it ALL stopped? Do we have
> the right to try? Hopelessly naive it may be of them, but what
> does it say about us if we decide that we cannot tolerate someone
> expressing a public desire for world peace or an end to hunger?

If that is what they pray for, sure, but your examples do not include these
laudable requests.

--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/

[Smiler]

On Thu, 24 May 2012 17:04:00 -0700, Christopher A. Lee wrote:

> On Fri, 25 May 2012 00:16:19 +0100, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com>
> wrote:
>

<snip>

I had similar, but not as severe, problems.

>
>>> It was the only way to get the CofE and the RCC to allow their schools
>>> to become part of the state system under the 1944 Education Act.
>>
>>Yep. But nowadays they have to take children of other faiths and none and
>>also follow the National Curriculum to get state handouts.
>>
>>> Blair expanded this to include other faiths.
>>
>>Only if the schools follow the National Curriculum.
>
> If there is one then all schools should.

There is one, but religious and private schools can opt out, but not get
state handouts.

>
> But did they actually introduce one?

Yes. There's been one for at least 20 years.

>
> When I took the O- and A- levels in the 1960s there wasn't one - the
> exams were set by the major universities and the schools had to treach
> to the standards required to pass them.

Ditto.

>
> In effect Oxford, Cambridge, London etc set an informal curriculum, but
> the only subject actually required by law to be taught, was RE.

Yep. In our day.

>
> David Cameron seems to want Christianity to be taught in a
> non-comparative way.
>
> In any case, many schools that get government funding but are outside
> DofE oversight, like the Vardy schools, teach religion as fact.

A very, very small minority. Some exclusively Moslem primaries also do
that, but don't get state funding.

>
> Emmanuel College, Gateshead did this below the radar until it felt
> confident enough to host a creationist symposium whose keynote speaker
> was Ken Ham.

I understand that they were told, either to change or to lose their state
funding.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sat, 26 May 2012 00:11:20 +0100, Smiler <Youm...@JoeKing.com>
wrote:

>> Emmanuel College, Gateshead did this below the radar until it felt
>> confident enough to host a creationist symposium whose keynote speaker
>> was Ken Ham.
>
>I understand that they were told, either to change or to lose their state
>funding.

OK.

I did a search but didn't find any mention of this.

But given the poison pills written into law when Thatcher privatised
everything else, that if the privatised railways and other businesses
railways were ever brought back into state ownership there would be
major financial penalties on the government that did it, I would be
surprised if there wasn't one here too.

When she introduced the law that established the City Technology
Colleges these were outside DofE oversight. An independant body was
set up called OFSTED handled all inspections etc and reported in
general terms to the DofE.

These were originally to be funded by local industry and teach the
skill those businesses needed - at a time when industry was shutting
down and manufacturing going overseas.

It was quickly found that this didn't generate enough funding and the
shortfall was made up out of taxes - often 90% or more.

Vardy was a fundamentalist who owned a chain of used car dealerships
across Northern England.

But this was "self-regulating" - Emmanuel College was inspected by the
principal of a private Seventh Day Adventist school and gave it a
glowing report.

[Alex W.]

Yup -- that's magical thinking for you. But then, they already
do that, don't they? Find me a team that does not have its
superstitions and good luck rituals, and I will show you a team
whose tour bus has crashed, with no survivors. Lucky boots,
lucky jersey, rubbing the mascot's belly, setting foot on the
pitch with your left foot first, (not) getting laid before the
match, the coach's rabbit's foot (or shamrock if he's Irish) ...
the principle behind it is the same as the pre-match beseechment
of Manitou.

>
>> There is also prayer as a tradition and community ritual. An
>> army chaplain delivering a prayer at Remembrance Sunday before
>> the assembled throng of veterans, families and other locals is
>> not making a sneaky play for the souls of unbelievers.
>
> So long as the great mass of people continue to believe that the death of
> their loved ones buys divine approval, military recruitment remains easy,
> any bully governments, like that of the U.S., will thrive.

They may do so in the US, but certainly not here in the UK. It's
an expression of patriotism, a gesture of respect for one's
father or grandfather, a communal ritual, an affirmation of
support for those still in the field. To carp at the ritual as
primarily religious is to misunderstand its purpose.

Last Saturday, as part of the Queen's diamond jubilee
celebrations, the armed forces held a parade for Her Maj which
concluded in a drumhead service. Now, we know that Elizabeth
herself is very much a believer, but among the assembled
servicemen (and women) there would have been representatives of
all major churches and religions (and probably a fair number of
the minor ones), not to mention atheists, agnostics and those who
just don't care either way. They did not come for the talking to
from the chaplain. They came to pay respect to their monarch and
commander-in-chief, a woman wo saw active duty herself and has
always supported the armed forces. This was not about religion.
So why rail against it?

[Don Martin]

I wouldn't. One advantage of having a monarch is that one has a person upon
whom to focus one's love for country. I would have happily participated for Her
Maj, wicked old atheist that I am.

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

He fears the saddist.

--

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess

"Everything must be organized in the most rational way."
-- Vladimir Putin