Fortress Forever

Fortress Forever (https://forums.fortress-forever.com/index.php)
-   Debates & Arguments (https://forums.fortress-forever.com/forumdisplay.php?f=107)
-   -   Religion in schools (https://forums.fortress-forever.com/showthread.php?t=25124)

Bogdan6 05-20-2015 09:42 AM

Religion in schools
 
Small Disclaimer: First off, I'm not against religion itself, I'm cool with anyone believing in anything as long as it doesn't stay 24/7 at my door trying to convince me his beliefs are better than mine. I'm just here to get your opinions on the subject.

Ok folks, so I live in Romania, the country has it's flaws, but there is only one particular thing I want to discuss with you. What's your opinion on teaching religion in school? First here's a little background: after the fall of communism, religion was introduced in school, with the claim that it's "part of our tradition" (ok, most things they added was just to oppose what communism did before). The problem is religion that is taught in all public schools from Romania isn't anything like history of religions or presenting each religion/confession for you to know. It's teaching everyone christian orthodoxism, whenether their pupils are protestant, catholics or jews, everyone must learn orthodoxism and will be examined (yes, believe it or not, they give us tests to see how much we know). There are options to take your child from the religion class and do something else, but in some cases they will ask to either bring "examination results" from your church (yes, actually know a case. Guy was catholic and had to go to the church's priest to give marks so the school folks know whenether or not they would let the guy pass the class) or do work around the school (which is ok, but it's a pretty recent thing around).

Now starting with this year, there came a law in which said religion class is merely optional, so if you don't want it, you can change it with anything else, such as volunteering to help around the school, art class or applied physics. I'm ok with this, I'd always shoot the physics class rather than being examined on prayers, but a lot of people are protesting against this measure and blame that the parliament and gouverment are trying to force us become atheist "like in communist times" or (in extreme cases) claim that "The leaders from Brussels want to send our new generations to hell".

Now my question is, what are your opinions about this and how would you react if something similar happened in your country? I'd mention most religion-class-teachers are actually priests (thus they have the "right" to tell your beliefs are heresy and yadayada) and while they actually teach in a public schools, they directly attack phyisics and biology lessons (in my case, the priest actually screamed when he saw a picture's of Darwin's evolution chain on our wall in the classroom).

_BEAN_ 05-21-2015 01:09 AM

Why should it matter considering you can opt out of the class? Darwin in his own book stated his theory could be disproven by the scientific fact. The fact is no one knows how life began in the Universe, so dissing either belief on the matter is rather repugnant.

Bogdan6 05-21-2015 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _BEAN_ (Post 508866)
Why should it matter considering you can opt out of the class?

Well as stated, even previously you could opt out of the class, but before going to it, there were a protocols and "why"s and "shouldn't"s so they wouldn't need to bother with you. The process is claimed to be simplified by the new law, except a lot of people seem to protest against it. And the protests people bring are dirrectly attacking other religions and/or confessions and differend other educations. I'd like to know more about people's view about it, rather on the class itself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by _BEAN_ (Post 508866)
Darwin in his own book stated his theory could be disproven by the scientific fact. The fact is no one knows how life began in the Universe, so dissing either belief on the matter is rather repugnant.

Yes, a scientific theory bether than his can disaproove his theory, except that theory wasn't discovered yet. For me at least, Darwin's theory makes perfect sense, even the smallest bacteria is constantly mutating, adapting to a new environment or in other worlds, evolving, but we cannot be sure this isn't also God doing his job, I'm personally open to hear any kind of theory about life and origin of today's living creatures and I'll drag the conclusions myself. For a bunch of years, we were taught in biology classes about Darwin's theory, now we cannot simply boycott what other classes tell us and just follow the religion one. An actual quote from my teacher was that "We are adepts of the creationist theory, the oldest and the most accurate theory". ("we" as everyone attending his lessons, he wouldn't believe you if you told him otherwise).

Back on-topic, at least in my city, there were marches about countering the law (which again, doesn't remove religion classes from school, makes them optional) and people bringing large crosses and other religious symbols. This kind of shit is pretty uncommon, since people didn't protest like this even when ACTA was a thing, nor when they did changes in the medical system.

Innoc 05-21-2015 06:31 PM

It sounds like you're describing people with an axe to grind and the law change is just an excuse.

I agree with Bean. If it's optional then I am fine with that. I have to say that one of the best courses I attended during my college years was title "Bible as Literature". The professor gave a very balanced presentation that was impressive. Through the course there was never any clue given by the professor of what his beliefs may have been. What I learned from the course has stayed with me some 25+ years later. I believe that such material can be taught even in the earlier school years provided you have the right people presenting the material. All it takes is one immature idiot with an agenda to soil the impression for the public.

AfterShock 05-22-2015 02:54 PM

Assuming the schools are run by the state then yes, the majority of developed countries agree there should be a separation of church and state. (Secularism).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separat...urch_and_state

http://www.secularism.org.uk/about.html

Quote:

Secularism is not atheism (lack of belief in God) and nor is it humanism (a nonreligious belief system). It is a political movement seeking the separation of religion and government, and eliminating discrimination on the basis of religion. This is said to add to democracy by protecting the rights of religious minorities. Secularism is often associated with the age of Enlightenment in Europe and plays a major role in Western society. Many secularists are religious and many religious people – recognising the value of keeping religion and government separate – are secular. There are states in Europe with an established church, such as Sweden and Norway, which are in the process of disestablishment. They do not see this as an anti-religious development and, indeed, the Lutheran church has endorsed the process.
Typically as countries become more developed and educated, their people (such as yourself) will start demanding more separation and balanced viewpoints, so they can decide and think for themselves what they want to believe, rather than being told.

_BEAN_ 05-24-2015 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bogdan6 (Post 508869)
Yes, a scientific theory bether than his can disaproove his theory, except that theory wasn't discovered yet. For me at least, Darwin's theory makes perfect sense, even the smallest bacteria is constantly mutating, adapting to a new environment or in other worlds, evolving, but we cannot be sure this isn't also God doing his job, I'm personally open to hear any kind of theory about life and origin of today's living creatures and I'll drag the conclusions myself. For a bunch of years, we were taught in biology classes about Darwin's theory, now we cannot simply boycott what other classes tell us and just follow the religion one. An actual quote from my teacher was that "We are adepts of the creationist theory, the oldest and the most accurate theory". ("we" as everyone attending his lessons, he wouldn't believe you if you told him otherwise).

Evolution has yet to be empirically proven and the current genetic research keeps destroying the arguments for said theory. Bacteria do not evolve nor do they adapt when attacked with medicines. The medicine kills 99.9% of the bacteria and .01% have a genetic variation that help the percentage survive. This bacteria reproduces creating a stronger form of the bacteria. Its genetic variation saved it. This is natural selection. something mankind has been doing for centuries when it comes to livestock and plants. Evolution is still clinging to abiogeneis which has been proven to be scientifically impossible. I won't even get into the fact that it is a bigot's theory whose foundation states black people are less of a human than white people, or the fact that most of the "transitional fossils" were manufactured hoaxes. All of this data is left out of the discussion, which should not be going on.

If you don't believe in religion fine, but if you have the ability to opt out of a class that teaches it it isn't being forced on you. The US is a Constitutional Republic that has a democratic voting system; it is not a democracy. If you ask most people the difference between the two they could not tell you. In a democracy 51% of the people tell the 49% how to live. In a Constitutional Republic the people are garnered rights that 99% can't take away from the 1%.

As far as a separation clause in the US Constitution. It does not exist. In fact until 1956 the first amendment was used to allow presidents to call for days of prayer and fasting. Most people have no idea where the statement "separation of church and state" comes from; nor do they know that it has been used defend a person's right to exercise their religion in public for almost 200 years. The Separation clause has been used to allow church in public buildings, prayer on the Congress and Senate floors, the 10 commandments to be shown in schools and court houses, used to allow Congress to fund the printing of Bibles etc. Congress can make no law instituting a state religion or hinder people from exercising their faith in public or private.

_BEAN_ 05-24-2015 01:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AfterShock (Post 508892)
Assuming the schools are run by the state then yes, the majority of developed countries agree there should be a separation of church and state. (Secularism).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separat...urch_and_state

http://www.secularism.org.uk/about.html



Typically as countries become more developed and educated, their people (such as yourself) will start demanding more separation and balanced viewpoints, so they can decide and think for themselves what they want to believe, rather than being told.


This statement is ironic considering the only viewpoint that is being taught in schools is based on the evolutionary theory. He has already stated that the school allows people to opt out of the class. Sounds to me he is upset that people are teaching religion in school, and due to his bias, wishes it to be removed.

Innoc 05-24-2015 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _BEAN_ (Post 508903)
Evolution has yet to be empirically proven and the current genetic research keeps destroying the arguments for said theory. Bacteria do not evolve nor do they adapt when attacked with medicines. The medicine kills 99.9% of the bacteria and .01% have a genetic variation that help the percentage survive. This bacteria reproduces creating a stronger form of the bacteria. Its genetic variation saved it. This is natural selection. something mankind has been doing for centuries when it comes to livestock and plants. Evolution is still clinging to abiogeneis which has been proven to be scientifically impossible. I won't even get into the fact that it is a bigot's theory whose foundation states black people are less of a human than white people, or the fact that most of the "transitional fossils" were manufactured hoaxes. All of this data is left out of the discussion, which should not be going on.

If you don't believe in religion fine, but if you have the ability to opt out of a class that teaches it it isn't being forced on you. The US is a Constitutional Republic that has a democratic voting system; it is not a democracy. If you ask most people the difference between the two they could not tell you. In a democracy 51% of the people tell the 49% how to live. In a Constitutional Republic the people are garnered rights that 99% can't take away from the 1%.

As far as a separation clause in the US Constitution. It does not exist. In fact until 1956 the first amendment was used to allow presidents to call for days of prayer and fasting. Most people have no idea where the statement "separation of church and state" comes from; nor do they know that it has been used defend a person's right to exercise their religion in public for almost 200 years. The Separation clause has been used to allow church in public buildings, prayer on the Congress and Senate floors, the 10 commandments to be shown in schools and court houses, used to allow Congress to fund the printing of Bibles etc. Congress can make no law instituting a state religion or hinder people from exercising their faith in public or private.

I was going to point out the miss on the Establishment Clause but what stated was broader than just the US. The real danger is in the binary choices that the religious orthodoxy or the anti-religious orthodoxy would have you believe are the only choices being offered or available. The truth is what's in place allows freedom already for the US for everyone. Its the zealots on either side that are the real problem.

Bogdan6 05-24-2015 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _BEAN_ (Post 508904)
Sounds to me he is upset that people are teaching religion in school, and due to his bias, wishes it to be removed.

Not necessary that they are teaching it, but more than the fact that they are teaching it the in the "tunel way". I'm personally fascinated by all sorts of religion and am willing to learn by anything from anyone, except around here the religion class is almost like going to church, you go there only to hear your priest saying to come at his church, share his belief and how much the other sect a few blocks away totally got religion wrong and should be boycotted.

Don't really know if I have an actual comparision term to you, imagine something like Westboro Baptist become it's own "confession" and it would be recognized by the state and suddenly it's members would educate your kids in your school. I'm exagerating a little bit with this, but probably you got the idea.

The problem around here is that religion is pretty messed up. Recently we decided to not give it that much importance and remove it from an obligatory class in school, yet anyone who considers entering politics is required to have a monodeist (yes, they are picky) religion to be allowed.
Another thing is that, as far as I know, in the US there are a bunch of confessions, from Orthodoxism and Catholicism to Mormons and don't what other kind, but none of them are proclaimed the "official confession/religion of the US" as far as I know, while here the Orthodox church is recognized as a state institute and others are neglected because they are "unofficial".

Going back to the class problem, I was born orthodox and always attended this classes and as a child never saw any kind of problem with this personally, but I saw my teacher being picky and discouraging people with other beliefs from attending the class and then talking behind their back and blaming them if they dropped it, which this kind of behaviour divides people, for a good part when I was around 7 I always asked people about their religion and managed how much I interracted with them based on that.
Furthermore, I've read about cases, such as teachers punishing their students for not making the cross sign (common at catholics and orthodox) during the prayer at the beginning of the class, this can be compared to your Pledge of Allegiance, where it can get you in trouble if you don't do it (as far as I know, which again as a non-american, I do not agree with it).

_BEAN_ 05-28-2015 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bogdan6 (Post 508911)
Not necessary that they are teaching it, but more than the fact that they are teaching it the in the "tunel way". I'm personally fascinated by all sorts of religion and am willing to learn by anything from anyone, except around here the religion class is almost like going to church, you go there only to hear your priest saying to come at his church, share his belief and how much the other sect a few blocks away totally got religion wrong and should be boycotted.

Don't really know if I have an actual comparision term to you, imagine something like Westboro Baptist become it's own "confession" and it would be recognized by the state and suddenly it's members would educate your kids in your school. I'm exagerating a little bit with this, but probably you got the idea.

The problem around here is that religion is pretty messed up. Recently we decided to not give it that much importance and remove it from an obligatory class in school, yet anyone who considers entering politics is required to have a monodeist (yes, they are picky) religion to be allowed.
Another thing is that, as far as I know, in the US there are a bunch of confessions, from Orthodoxism and Catholicism to Mormons and don't what other kind, but none of them are proclaimed the "official confession/religion of the US" as far as I know, while here the Orthodox church is recognized as a state institute and others are neglected because they are "unofficial".

Going back to the class problem, I was born orthodox and always attended this classes and as a child never saw any kind of problem with this personally, but I saw my teacher being picky and discouraging people with other beliefs from attending the class and then talking behind their back and blaming them if they dropped it, which this kind of behaviour divides people, for a good part when I was around 7 I always asked people about their religion and managed how much I interracted with them based on that.
Furthermore, I've read about cases, such as teachers punishing their students for not making the cross sign (common at catholics and orthodox) during the prayer at the beginning of the class, this can be compared to your Pledge of Allegiance, where it can get you in trouble if you don't do it (as far as I know, which again as a non-american, I do not agree with it).

When the pledge of allegiance was done in US public school you could always opt out. There were kids in my class that were Jehovah's Witnesses that did not have to say the pledge; they just sat in thier seats while everyone else did.

As far as your statement about your teachers running people down. Because you see one or two people doing something inappropriate does not mean that everyone does. Look at the way many atheists treat those who believe in God. Do you really believe they have an open mind as they belittle others? Can I state all atheists are ignorant people? No. Not to seem rude to your beliefs or anything, but I have dealt with far more zealots who are brainwashed by science textbooks that flat out lie to them then people who force their religion on others.

Bogdan6 05-28-2015 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _BEAN_ (Post 508939)
As far as your statement about your teachers running people down. Because you see one or two people doing something inappropriate does not mean the everyone does. Look at the way many atheists treat those who believe in God. Do you really believe they have an open mind as they belittle others? Can I state all atheists are ignorant people? No. Not to seem rude to your beliefs or anything, but I have dealt with far more zealots who are brainwashed by science textbooks that flat out lie to them then people who force their religion on others.

Didn't know about the skip pledge part.

Anyway I agree with your point, there are a bunch of atheists who are jerks too, everyone side has people who merely picked their beliefs and are happy with them and the ones that are forcing them down to other's throat just to make them feel better.
I agree, I saw only one or two teachers being inappropiate at lessons, because that's what I encountered so far and I'm not assuming that any other religion class is/was as shitty as on my case, but when I started the thread I just pointed out the things I encountered, and IMO arround here things aren't exactly right, but just wanted to know how other people view it.

KubeDawg 05-28-2015 08:58 PM

The original pledge did not mention God at all and would still be considered a piece of nationalistic garbage indoctrinated into the minds of American kids.

_BEAN_ 05-28-2015 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bogdan6 (Post 508951)
Didn't know about the skip pledge part.

Anyway I agree with your point, there are a bunch of atheists who are jerks too, everyone side has people who merely picked their beliefs and are happy with them and the ones that are forcing them down to other's throat just to make them feel better.
I agree, I saw only one or two teachers being inappropiate at lessons, because that's what I encountered so far and I'm not assuming that any other religion class is/was as shitty as on my case, but when I started the thread I just pointed out the things I encountered, and IMO arround here things aren't exactly right, but just wanted to know how other people view it.


Evolution, without being empirically proven, is being forced on children as fact. Parents in the US have been trying to get a more balanced approach to this topic brought into the public school system, yet the argument that is given is separation of church and state. These people are either ignorant on the term or using it to manipulate people. The fact of the matter is no one can empirically explain how life came into being, so your belief, be it scientific or religious, is based on faith. Both are theories and in the end everyone is going to find out who was right.

I have had my fair share of ignorant college professors that try to belittle people because they do not appreciate someone questioning their stance. I have had those angry feminists who believe every white male is the devil incarnate. Who refuse to look at the statistics that show women are just as violent as men, and are responsible for far more child abuse than their male counterparts. The stats also show they are far more abusive verbally in the confines of relationships. They can't seem to figure out feminism is male chauvinism without the penis. It is not equality.

I have also had biology and astrology professors who have tried to belittle people because they can't take the fact that their belief in evolution/the big bang is being torn apart by post and current genetic research. They learn to respect others when they are told, after giving proof to back a stance that proves them wrong, they will either apologize for their insult or explain to the dean why the felt they were justified in doing so. These ignorant individuals change their stance when they figure out they can get into trouble for being unprofessional. As I said prior, I cannot claim all feminists or atheists are ignorant, and there is plenty of ignorance on both sides of the isle. But to discredit one because your opinion aligns with the opposing theory should be rethought.

_BEAN_ 05-28-2015 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KubeDawg (Post 508953)
The original pledge did not mention God at all and would still be considered a piece of nationalistic garbage indoctrinated into the minds of American kids.


What do you feel about children not being allowed to wear the american flag to school on veteran's, memorial or flag day? What do you feel about the anti-nationalistic garbage that is being forced on the populace?

KubeDawg 05-29-2015 12:56 AM

While that's a far lesser problem, I feel the same way about that too. What happens when some kid who's family is from the middle east and decides to wear their country's flag lapel or arabic text on their t-shirt? Shouldn't that be allowed too?

_BEAN_ 05-29-2015 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KubeDawg (Post 508956)
While that's a far lesser problem, I feel the same way about that too. What happens when some kid who's family is from the middle east and decides to wear their country's flag lapel or arabic text on their t-shirt? Shouldn't that be allowed too?


That isn't a far lesser problem. There are currently multiple states sending children home who wear a shirt that has the US flag on it. This is against their first amendment rights in the US. The reason they are sent home is because they are being offensive to other children from other countries...Other people from other countries have the right to wear their country's flag or arabic text on their t-shirts; yet Americans do not..

KubeDawg 05-29-2015 02:24 AM

Yes but those instances are few and far between compared to the majority of kids having to say the pledge of allegiance in school.

And where should the line get drawn? What if the kid's shirt has the word "Fuck" on it or anything else that is potentially obscene? It's sad how politically correct the school systems have become but all it takes is for one person to complain and that's the end of it.

_BEAN_ 05-29-2015 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KubeDawg (Post 508959)
Yes but those instances are few and far between compared to the majority of kids having to say the pledge of allegiance in school.

And where should the line get drawn? What if the kid's shirt has the word "Fuck" on it or anything else that is potentially obscene? It's sad how politically correct the school systems have become but all it takes is for one person to complain and that's the end of it.


You are discussing something obscene, we are discussing flags. You should consider doing a search on the topic. You will find those instances are not as rare as you believe.

KubeDawg 05-29-2015 05:44 AM

Sorry, the word I meant to use was offensive, which I believe still applies to a nation's flag. It might not offend you, but you're naive if you don't think some might find the American flag offensive.

_BEAN_ 05-29-2015 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KubeDawg (Post 508962)
Sorry, the word I meant to use was offensive, which I believe still applies to a nation's flag. It might not offend you, but you're naive if you don't think some might find the American flag offensive.

1. It's a flag, there is nothing offensive about it. I have no issues recognizing people who don't like the US, but this is our country, we have a right to display our nation's colors even if you don't agree with our foreign or domestic policies. I for one have issues with both the current and the previous three administrations because their foreign and domestic policies have lead our country to the breaking point.

2. It represents the country we live in. It should be respected regardless of
you political affiliation because it represents those who fought and died to
give us the freedoms that we all take for granted.

3. What are you doing living in America if you find the the country and the
flag it represents offensive? I have no issue with people having a problem
with current or post administrations, but if you are here just to use our
country to get ahead in life(as you piss all over it), not to be mean, go make
your own country better instead of running from the issues it has.

4. Do you realize you are saying because someone is offended they have a right to censor another person's first amendment right to display the US flag?

5. Logical fallacy is something that people should not use in debate.

KubeDawg 05-29-2015 09:43 PM

There's nothing offensive about it... TO YOU.... But to other people it clearly is. Otherwise this would not be a problem in schools.

_BEAN_ 05-30-2015 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KubeDawg (Post 508966)
There's nothing offensive about it... TO YOU.... But to other people it clearly is. Otherwise this would not be a problem in schools.


So let me get this straight. You are stating someone should give up their first amendment right to wear a flag because someone is offended? You do know what the first amendment is right?

KubeDawg 05-30-2015 11:41 AM

Simply stating people are offended by something does not mean I am also offended, or believe a person's first amendment right should be disregarded. I'm just playing devil's advocate, as one cannot know a truth in its entirety without first seeing an issue from both sides. This is why my position might be occasionally perceived as for or against something, but with most subjects, it is neutral.

However, I do have an opinion on matters such as this, so let me state very clearly, so as to prevent any further misunderstanding. My opinion is that the pledge of allegiance should not be forced on kids, nor should forcing religious teachings in school. That's what churches, mosques and temples are for. Should kids be disallowed from creating their own social group to study their religion of choice or be disallowed to learn about a religion via an elective class? No. It's not my place to impose my beliefs on others.

Innoc 05-30-2015 05:51 PM

Much of what I see being discussed makes me glad that both of my children went to private school. Frankly qualifying the Pledge of Allegiance as indoctrination is silly. You're making it sounds like it's some bit of mind-numbing hypnosis. It is entirely possible to go through 12 years of time in government schools, say the pledge of allegiance, believe in the defined concepts that organized the US and, yet, despise the villainous pieces of shit that work so hard to keep us divided and in conflict.

So what is this thread really intended to discuss? It seems to me that there are already safeguards in place to allow those who dissent in government schools to opt out. I also firmly believe that having a well rounded education means having the opportunity for knowledge about all things. So for those that are objectionable...make them optional and move on.

How long before we have political monitors in the class room comrades?

traxamillion 05-30-2015 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KubeDawg (Post 508962)
Sorry, the word I meant to use was offensive, which I believe still applies to a nation's flag. It might not offend you, but you're naive if you don't think some might find the American flag offensive.


In today’s politically correct world, somehow misguided people have found the American flag to be offensive. This is typical liberal nonsense.

The American flag is racist.
The American flag represents bigotry.
The American flag is offensive.

The only idiots who find the American flag offensive are liberal/politically correct/brainwashed/nimrods/muslims.

If you don't like it go live in Yemen under sharia law.

KubeDawg 05-30-2015 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by traxamillion (Post 508972)
This is typical liberal nonsense.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/ac/ac77...495020e4e1.jpg

_BEAN_ 05-31-2015 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KubeDawg (Post 508970)
Simply stating people are offended by something does not mean I am also offended, or believe a person's first amendment right should be disregarded. I'm just playing devil's advocate, as one cannot know a truth in its entirety without first seeing an issue from both sides. This is why my position might be occasionally perceived as for or against something, but with most subjects, it is neutral.

However, I do have an opinion on matters such as this, so let me state very clearly, so as to prevent any further misunderstanding. My opinion is that the pledge of allegiance should not be forced on kids, nor should forcing religious teachings in school. That's what churches, mosques and temples are for. Should kids be disallowed from creating their own social group to study their religion of choice or be disallowed to learn about a religion via an elective class? No. It's not my place to impose my beliefs on others.


1. If the school allows you to opt out of the class; why is there an issue? Teaching religion is no different than teaching a theory that hasn't been proven empirically, and in fact, the theory has more evidence against it than for it.

2. The pledge of allegiance was never forced on children and if you did not
feel like stating the pledge you didn't have to, so your point is moot.

3. You state that it isn't yoru place to impose your belief on others, yet
that is exactly what you're doing..

_BEAN_ 05-31-2015 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KubeDawg (Post 508973)


Yeah, liberal use to represent the founding fathers and their conservative approach to life; now it has been highjacked by socialists who have rewritten the definition..

_BEAN_ 05-31-2015 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Innoc (Post 508971)
Much of what I see being discussed makes me glad that both of my children went to private school. Frankly qualifying the Pledge of Allegiance as indoctrination is silly. You're making it sounds like it's some bit of mind-numbing hypnosis. It is entirely possible to go through 12 years of time in government schools, say the pledge of allegiance, believe in the defined concepts that organized the US and, yet, despise the villainous pieces of shit that work so hard to keep us divided and in conflict.

So what is this thread really intended to discuss? It seems to me that there are already safeguards in place to allow those who dissent in government schools to opt out. I also firmly believe that having a well rounded education means having the opportunity for knowledge about all things. So for those that are objectionable...make them optional and move on.

How long before we have political monitors in the class room comrades?

The way socialism has infected our current political structure, not long. People cannot see the bigger picture. The masses do not see that they are being used as pawns to manipulate society because they do not question the information that is placed before them because they are bullied into accepting it as fact. A perfect example of the brainwashing the masses have accepted is the man made global warming hoax that most environmental scientists laugh at. Yet anyone who states anything against, or actually brings scientific fact to the discussion, is branded a kook who wears a tinfoil hat. They have no idea that Al Gore's film was full of lie and that Europe voted on banning the film from being shown to children because of the misinformation in it. I guess people would rather believe a man's lies because he is CEO of many of the corporations that manufacture the green technology his film is advertising..Thankfully many are waking up, but is it to late?

The US had plenty of safeguards in place to protect the populace from what is currently going on, but what can you do when Congress refuses to throw the book at those breaking the nation's law(You know the Constitution and Bill or Rights)? You have bought and paid for politicians/judges that make laws to make their unconstitutional activity legal. It is repulsive to watch the deconstruction of the US because the masses allow the logical fallacy of the left and right bully them into giving up their rights.

_BEAN_ 05-31-2015 01:11 AM

Btw, if you own a cell phone, you already have a monitor. My father worked for AT&T and the technology he showed me on how they can listen to everything in your home is disgusting. An example of such technology is found in your phone jack. Even if the phone line is not activated the mic present in the jack can pick up everything in the current and adjacent rooms. The only way to disable this is to unhook the leads to the jack.

traxamillion 05-31-2015 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KubeDawg (Post 508973)


http://www.omdurman.org/cartoons/myflag.jpg

KubeDawg 05-31-2015 07:40 PM

Wow what a smart and clever argument... Is that what you're forced to use anytime someone doesn't agree with anything about the US because you have no actual substantive rebuttal? Laff. GTFO of here with your false patriotism. It's clowns like you who give the US a bad name.

the_cake 06-01-2015 12:11 AM

lol this is like a bad fox news talk show.

Kube: I disagree with your thing, because...
Thread: Hey, this guy hates the constitution!
Kube: No, my point wa..
Thread: IF YOU DONT LIKE AMERKA YOU CAN GEEEET OUT

_BEAN_ 06-01-2015 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_cake (Post 508991)
lol this is like a bad fox news talk show.

Kube: I disagree with your thing, because...
Thread: Hey, this guy hates the constitution!
Kube: No, my point wa..
Thread: IF YOU DONT LIKE AMERKA YOU CAN GEEEET OUT

No, the debate went something like this..

OP: Do you guys have an issue with religion in schools?
Thread: No, as long as you have a means to opt out.
Kube: Why are you forcing your beliefs on me or anyone else?
Thread: How are people forcing their beliefs on anyone else when they allow
you to opt out? Isn't that what you are doing to others by not
allowing both theories to be taught?
Kube: Silence*crickets*
New post: Murica! (more than likely a troll)
Cake: Typical left leaning generalization mixed with hyperbole and rhetoric.

All we needed was some racism thrown in and it would have been perfect...

the_cake 06-02-2015 05:21 PM

I love that the guy who just wrote a few pages of generalized rhetoric is accusing me of generalized rhetoric.

This thread is the best.

_BEAN_ 06-02-2015 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_cake (Post 509002)
I love that the guy who just wrote a few pages of generalized rhetoric is accusing me of generalized rhetoric.

This thread is the best.

Here we have an example of a person who uses the typical left debating tactics. You will notice that those who lean left avoid pointing to fact and keep the argument based on emotion. You will see name calling and projection, but you will never, if ever, see them point out an example of anything in debate unless a mistake is made. You will also never see them agree with points made that are correct. Why? Because the left, like the right, don't care about truth or fact, they only care about what they can get over on others.

the_cake 06-03-2015 05:55 AM

lol I'm not even interested in the topic, I just find it funny when people use an attempt at an actual discussion to promote whatever one-size-fits-all ideological BS they happen to embrace.

And it sounds like your definition of "left-leaning" is "criticizes or disagrees with anything I say." The liberals must be everywhere, huh?

Innoc 06-03-2015 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_cake (Post 509006)
lol I'm not even interested in the topic, I just find it funny when people use an attempt at an actual discussion to promote whatever one-size-fits-all ideological BS they happen to embrace.

And it sounds like your definition of "left-leaning" is "criticizes or disagrees with anything I say." The liberals must be everywhere, huh?

If you're not interested in the topic why post? If something doesn't interest me I waste no time on it. I think it's weird to try to inject color commentary into a thread about which you don't care. Perhaps you should dig a little deeper and contribute to the thread in some meaningful or stop posting in it?

_BEAN_ 06-03-2015 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_cake (Post 509006)
lol I'm not even interested in the topic, I just find it funny when people use an attempt at an actual discussion to promote whatever one-size-fits-all ideological BS they happen to embrace.

And it sounds like your definition of "left-leaning" is "criticizes or disagrees with anything I say." The liberals must be everywhere, huh?

Cake, did you actually read the thread or did you censor the actual discussion as you skimmed over it? It was Moto who was promoting the "one-size-fits-all" approach to education, not the forum. As I stated prior, you debate like a typical leftist because you don't focus on what is being said. You resort to rhetoric as you project the failings of the opinion you support onto others..


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.