A man without religion is like a fish without a bicycle.

[Godelsensei]

[COLOR=Gray][FONT=Courier New]Let's start out by saying this post isn't intended to be any sort of religion-bashing fest. If you turn it into one, may something particularly nasty happen to you.

Religion is often used as an excuse to do things that one usually wouldn't do. For instance, I do believe that a certain type of dagger is a Sikh symbol of something or other, and that it is supposedly very spiritual to carry one around.
Certain religions require people to cover their faces, which, in Western society, is generally perceived as the mark of a criminal who doesn't want to be identified. Some people who follow these customs also adorn large, baggy full-body coverings (I'll elaborate on the importance of this point in a paragraph or two).

Then, there are things that are not in any way suspicious or illegal that people do because of religion. Some people like to keep a copy of the bible lying around at school, which I find kind of weird. (I'm not making this up, btw; people have done this at my school.) It would get pretty irritating to have to lug an extra book around all day.

Then, there are people who want to read the bible during "silent reading time" during English class. A teacher tells them that he does not think that this is appropriate, as the school is not an environment that is supposed to have anything to do with religion and that even if it is important to the student, certain religious items can be used as weapons, because that is what they are (the daggers I mentioned before).
The student argues that the book isn't hurting anybody.

I agree with the teacher, simply because you need to draw the line somewhere. Religious headgear that does not obstruct the face is the only kind of symbol that should be tolerated in a school environment (you're supposed to wear turbans all the time, as far as I know), simply because people will start to argue that their "religious" weapons etc... should be allowed, also.
You can read the bible on your own time.

This isn't saying that all religious gear is dangerous or carried about with a sinister intention, but, in my view, you have to get rid of any chance of anything that [i]is[/i] harmful being tolerated. Political correctness is no cause to jeopardize people's safety.

Also, flaunting one's religious beliefs in such a diverse society can lead to tension between less mature members of whatever group, something that budget dollars simply shouldn't have to deal with.

I do not agree with the values presented by certain religious garb (that that forces a woman to cover her body, for whatever reason, to name one major one), but that aside, I think my next few points do have non-emotional value.

Modern Western society does not tolerate sexism. Using religion as an excuse to disempower women (or any other group, for that matter), should not be tolerated. It goes against the values of Canada, America, England, Australia (any country you would describe as First World, really) to discriminate.
Religion is used as an excuse to descriminate too often.

How do you know that the nice lady wearing the head- and body-covering isn't a man with a gun, playing host to all intentions to hold up the next bank he walks into?

As far as I am concearned, society's values and cautions override those of immigrant religions.

It might sound like I'm picking on Middle-Eastern religions, but those are the ones that you see and hear about when it comes to this kind of thing most often.
I'm in [i]no way stating that other religions are not discriminatory or in any way superior[/i]. That in mind, do you have any comments?[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Dragoon1942]

Hmmmm...Although I'm not very religious, and in fact describe myself as an agnostic, semi-Christian I have to agree with the kid in your example. Religion is fine in public schools. Just don't try putting one above the others or say that this one is the correct one or this one is evil. The Bible could actually be considred appropriate reading material, as long asthe kid doesn't start preaching in class. THe teacher is in fact violatiing the child's First Amendment rights.

-Dragoon1942

[Godelsensei]

[COLOR=Gray][FONT=Courier New]School board rules state that the only religious items allowed in schools are to be religious headgear and small charms that can be worn like any other, on a bracelet etc...

School is an organization, and one could argue, following your logic, that having to raise one's hand to speak is an infringement of rights.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[wiccansamurai]

You'r school doesn't have CCD? Or anything like that? Mine does... I guess ur school rules probably differ, but I don't see what's wrong with reaing the bible. Hell, I could read the bible at school, and what would it matter? Its not religous to ME. Its just a book, its not going to hurt anyone.

[Guest Sean]

The way i see it, well i am a Chrisitian, not wishing to be, but i am. But i am more into the scientific approach to life. The big bang theory and all that. But what i have determined from religion is that.....

1) Most have no meaning but to fill the gap of knowledge. We use religion as a reason for things we don't know.

2) Is an afterlife real, most probably not. Religion is used to make us think that there is. It is all psychological.

3) Same with ghosts, if weren't told any stories about them, we wouldn't think they existed.

They point out that it is all in the mind, however it can go to show that. 'The Force, God, Buddha' whatever you call your 'spiritual leader' may exist in some way or another.

Take the big bang theory, there was nothing, that nothing exploded (something like that). And made our planets, solar systems and whole universe. Take the book of Genesis.......'and God made light'. They are similar, if you think that the big bang theory was caused by the molecules rushing into each other and causing an explosion to make everything then it is something like Genesis.

You just have to take into account that there is a stronger force out there that made us. Colliding Molecules? God? The Force? Or Buddha? There are many religions out there.

[John]

[QUOTE=Godelsensei][color=gray][font=Courier New]Then, there are people who want to read the bible during "silent reading time" during English class. A teacher tells them that he does not think that this is appropriate, as the school is not an environment that is supposed to have anything to do with religion and that even if it is important to the student, certain religious items can be used as weapons, because that is what they are (the daggers I mentioned before).
The student argues that the book isn't hurting anybody.

I agree with the teacher, simply because you need to draw the line somewhere. Religious headgear that does not obstruct the face is the only kind of symbol that should be tolerated in a school environment (you're supposed to wear turbans all the time, as far as I know), simply because people will start to argue that their "religious" weapons etc... should be allowed, also.
You can read the bible on your own time.[/font][/color][/QUOTE]It's not that schools should ban any religious articles simply [i]because[/i] they're religious - that would be discrimination. It's not the school's responsibility to ensure that nothing religious occurs, just that nothing religious is forced upon the students (morning prayers, etc.). If a religious item conforms to school rules, then how could you keep the student from having it? I can understand not allowing the dagger or even the headgear if it was against rules, but telling a kid what and what not to [i]read [/i]is taking it more than a little too far.


[quote name='Godelsensei][font=Courier New][color=#808080]Also, flaunting one's religious beliefs in such a diverse society can lead to tension between less mature members of whatever group, something that budget dollars simply shouldn't have to deal with.[/color'][/font][/quote] So following religious beliefs on how to dress or simply reading to yourself is "flaunting your beliefs"?


[quote name='Godelsensei][font=Courier New][color=#808080]How do you know that the nice lady wearing the head- and body-covering isn't a man with a gun, playing host to all intentions to hold up the next bank he walks into?[/color'][/font][/quote] How do you know the kid next to you in the computer lab isn't about to bomb the school? You can hardly ever make even an educated guess about someone or their intentions based on appearance, and someone in a garb is no more suspicious than anyone else out there.

And Icarus, that had nothing to do with the topic at hand. Godel directly said she didn't want any religious bashing (or anything that would start it), anyway.

[Godelsensei]

[quote name='wiccansamurai']You'r school doesn't have CCD? Or anything like that? Mine does... I guess ur school rules probably differ, but I don't see what's wrong with reaing the bible. Hell, I could read the bible at school, and what would it matter? Its not religous to ME. Its just a book, its not going to hurt anyone.[/quote]
[COLOR=Gray][FONT=Courier New]
Dissallowing all forms of religious wear/reading material prevents accusations of racism when you try to explain your "anti-violent-religious-gear" rules to other groups.

It's all or nothing, when it comes to things like this. (Making the exception of clothing that does not cover the face, because I don't think they're ever going to be able to ban that.)

The only time religious material should be presented to a class is when it us being used for references in a class that studies the teachings of religions for learning purposes, not to enforce them.

It's silly to ignore huge chunks of what influenced history the most (aside from maybe salt), but such teachings should be kept impersonal, to prevent controversy.

You have the rest of your life to practice your religion, anyway. Having people cart symbols around all day has potential to develop into something very similar to gang colours. It only takes one or two entirely silly people to start major conflicts.
Silly people are a plague on us all, but they're not about to go away any time soon.

Religion is a major form of division when it comes to conflicts--as much so as race.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Guest Midnight Rush]

[QUOTE=Godelsensei][COLOR=Gray][FONT=Courier New]Let's start out by saying this post isn't intended to be any sort of religion-bashing fest. If you turn it into one, may something particularly nasty happen to you.

Religion is often used as an excuse to do things that one usually wouldn't do. For instance, I do believe that a certain type of dagger is a Sikh symbol of something or other, and that it is supposedly very spiritual to carry one around.
Certain religions require people to cover their faces, which, in Western society, is generally perceived as the mark of a criminal who doesn't want to be identified. Some people who follow these customs also adorn large, baggy full-body coverings (I'll elaborate on the importance of this point in a paragraph or two).

Then, there are things that are not in any way suspicious or illegal that people do because of religion. Some people like to keep a copy of the bible lying around at school, which I find kind of weird. (I'm not making this up, btw; people have done this at my school.) It would get pretty irritating to have to lug an extra book around all day.

Then, there are people who want to read the bible during "silent reading time" during English class. A teacher tells them that he does not think that this is appropriate, as the school is not an environment that is supposed to have anything to do with religion and that even if it is important to the student, certain religious items can be used as weapons, because that is what they are (the daggers I mentioned before).
The student argues that the book isn't hurting anybody.

I agree with the teacher, simply because you need to draw the line somewhere. Religious headgear that does not obstruct the face is the only kind of symbol that should be tolerated in a school environment (you're supposed to wear turbans all the time, as far as I know), simply because people will start to argue that their "religious" weapons etc... should be allowed, also.
You can read the bible on your own time.

This isn't saying that all religious gear is dangerous or carried about with a sinister intention, but, in my view, you have to get rid of any chance of anything that [i]is[/i] harmful being tolerated. Political correctness is no cause to jeopardize people's safety.

Also, flaunting one's religious beliefs in such a diverse society can lead to tension between less mature members of whatever group, something that budget dollars simply shouldn't have to deal with.

I do not agree with the values presented by certain religious garb (that that forces a woman to cover her body, for whatever reason, to name one major one), but that aside, I think my next few points do have non-emotional value.

Modern Western society does not tolerate sexism. Using religion as an excuse to disempower women (or any other group, for that matter), should not be tolerated. It goes against the values of Canada, America, England, Australia (any country you would describe as First World, really) to discriminate.
Religion is used as an excuse to descriminate too often.

How do you know that the nice lady wearing the head- and body-covering isn't a man with a gun, playing host to all intentions to hold up the next bank he walks into?

As far as I am concearned, society's values and cautions override those of immigrant religions.

It might sound like I'm picking on Middle-Eastern religions, but those are the ones that you see and hear about when it comes to this kind of thing most often.
I'm in [i]no way stating that other religions are not discriminatory or in any way superior[/i]. That in mind, do you have any comments?[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

I'm really sorry. I might be stupid, or mentally incompetent (Don't say a word CHW), but I fail to see 2 things:

1. Your point.

2. Why you created this thread.

Please enlighten me... I'm rather bamboozled.

[Godelsensei]

[COLOR=Gray][FONT=Courier New]My [i]point[/i] is that religion is used as a scapegoat.

Since it's clear that you only replied in order to be a dick, I don't see

1. Your point.

2. Why you get kicks out of being a dick.

Edit:

I'm sorry. I was rather frustrated due to outside circumstances when I made this reply a few minute ago.

Gomen ne yo, Rush-san.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[DeathBug]

[quote name='Godelsensei']Religion is often used as an excuse to do things that one usually wouldn't do. For instance, I do believe that a certain type of dagger is a Sikh symbol of something or other, and that it is supposedly very spiritual to carry one around. [/quote]

There's a big difference between "excuse" and "reason". Some women choose to wear full-body coverings when they live in the desert. Their respect for their religion [b]is[/b] their reason. It's not like there's much of a practical use for it, and I doubt that many of them would do that if their faith didn't ask it.


[QUOTE]Certain religions require people to cover their faces, which, in Western society, is generally perceived as the mark of a criminal who doesn't want to be identified. [/QUOTE]

That's a simple cultural gap; doesn't mean anything.

[QUOTE]Some people who follow these customs also adorn large, baggy full-body coverings [/QUOTE]

So do some people who follow the customs of rap music.

[QUOTE]Then, there are things that are not in any way suspicious or illegal that people do because of religion. Some people like to keep a copy of the bible lying around at school, which I find kind of weird. (I'm not making this up, btw; people have done this at my school.) It would get pretty irritating to have to lug an extra book around all day.[/QUOTE]

So...what? What does their carrying a book have to do with you? Many people get an emotional lift by having their book of faith nearby. I fail to see how this affects you at all.

[QUOTE]Then, there are people who want to read the bible during "silent reading time" during English class. A teacher tells them that he does not think that this is appropriate, as the school is not an environment that is supposed to have anything to do with religion and that even if it is important to the student, certain religious items can be used as weapons, because that is what they are (the daggers I mentioned before).[/QUOTE]

Yes, because a book can easily slay a legion...

Maybe things are different in Canadia, but in the US, we allow the free exchange of information of all types. Basically, if "silent reading time" allows for the reading of any materials, then the Christian Bible is certainly eligible. So are the Koran, the Torah, and Mein Kamphf.

Again, this is just how it works in America, but here, schools don't stifle religion, they simply can't endorse it or fund it. There were three Christian clubs at my old high school, but because the school didn't run them, but students did, (and teachers working in their own free time), then it was okay. It was equally okay because anyone who was interested could start a Jewish, Muslim, Athiest, Stanist, etc, group.

[QUOTE]The student argues that the book isn't hurting anybody.[/QUOTE]

From what you say, it sounds like it wasn't; it wasn't an issue until the teacher made it so.

[QUOTE]I agree with the teacher, simply because you need to draw the line somewhere.[/QUOTE]

So you draw it by restricting the flow of information? Banning books?
[QUOTE] Religious headgear that does not obstruct the face is the only kind of symbol that should be tolerated in a school environment (you're supposed to wear turbans all the time, as far as I know), simply because people will start to argue that their "religious" weapons etc... should be allowed, also.[/QUOTE]

Except you're mixing your example of a book with examples of weapons. Schools are full of books, at least in this country. =P

If the student were carrying a dagger with a psalm etched into it, then I would certainly agree that the line should be drawn.

But he wasn't; he was reading a book in his free time, not hurting anyone. So...wherein lies the problem?

[QUOTE]You can read the bible on your own time.[/QUOTE]

It sounds like it was his time.

[QUOTE]This isn't saying that all religious gear is dangerous or carried about with a sinister intention, but, in my view, you have to get rid of any chance of anything that [i]is[/i] harmful being tolerated. Political correctness is no cause to jeopardize people's safety.[/QUOTE]

Listen very carefully to what you're saying.

[b]You have just advocated restricting books because they might cause problems.[/b]

I think that speaks for itself.

[QUOTE]Also, flaunting one's religious beliefs in such a diverse society can lead to tension between less mature members of whatever group, something that budget dollars simply shouldn't have to deal with.[/QUOTE]

So, I have to restrict what I do, because some idiot might get offended? Bummer, eh?

Here's another angle: What if I was advocating a political stance? What if I carried a party affiliation symbol with me? No doubt this would offend members of opposition parties. Should my ability to voice my political opinion be silenced as well?

[QUOTE]I do not agree with the values presented by certain religious garb (that that forces a woman to cover her body, for whatever reason, to name one major one), but that aside, I think my next few points do have non-emotional value.[/QUOTE]

Niether do I, but I respect their right to do so.

[QUOTE]Modern Western society does not tolerate sexism. Using religion as an excuse to disempower women (or any other group, for that matter), should not be tolerated. It goes against the values of Canada, America, England, Australia (any country you would describe as First World, really) to discriminate.[/QUOTE]

Do you see people in Canadia, America, et al, discriminating against women because of religion?

(Doesn't Christianity teach men to "love their wives as themselves", or something to that effect? As a Christian, I should know...^^;)

[QUOTE]Religion is used as an excuse to descriminate too often.[/QUOTE]

By who?

[QUOTE]How do you know that the nice lady wearing the head- and body-covering isn't a man with a gun, playing host to all intentions to hold up the next bank he walks into?[/QUOTE]

How do you know the nice man with the sports jersey isn't carrying a bomb, going to blow up random people?

How do you know the girl with the backpack full of books isn't really carrying a backpack full of ammow, and about to mow down the gym?

How do you know the man with the large key-chain in his pocket isn't really holding a knife, and is about to mug you?

I mean this with no disrespect, Godel, but that statement was just...kinda' stupid. You're smarter than that.

[QUOTE]As far as I am concearned, society's values and cautions override those of immigrant religions.[/QUOTE]

Well, since you're Canadian, and I'm American, everything about us came from immigrants, including our religions...

As far as I'm concerned, protecting the free exchange and expression of thoughts and ideas is worth anything bad that may come of it. Those who trade freedom for security deserve niether.

[QUOTE]It might sound like I'm picking on Middle-Eastern religions, but those are the ones that you see and hear about when it comes to this kind of thing most often.[/QUOTE]

I don't think you are; your example concerned a Christian Bible.

[QUOTE]I'm in [i]no way stating that other religions are not discriminatory or in any way superior[/i].[/QUOTE]
Hate to say it, but I think you're wrong on this one, G-Girl.

[QUOTE]That in mind, do you have any comments?[/QUOTE]

Yeah; I think if a fish had a bicycle, he could get away from the damn shark a lot more often. And if the shark had, like, a mountain bike, he'd be unstoppable.

[Godelsensei]

[COLOR=Gray][FONT=Courier New]The main idea I was reaching for here wasn't that some one is going to grab a bible and start beating people over the head with it or that there should be a ban on opinionated books; it's that kids, especially teenagers, are known to blow things out of proportion.

Even in highly multicultural societies, like those of Canada and America's less hick-ish points, people of the same race like to hang out together, for whatever reasons, alot of the time. This is where alot of racial tension springs from.
Creating additional barriers by adding another element of division, religion, into the mix can create more tension than already exists.

I've read several posts even on OB about people in schools with a strong religious affiliation being picked on relentlessly because they did not, well, affiliate.

I've seen students being picked on because they happen to have a bible in their backpack, or because they happen to mention that they have a different view on whether or not any kind of god exists.

Little question is brought up when a teacher tells a student to remove a necklace with a penticle on it, but make it a cross and the whole world freaks out.

It's better to just remove the issue and take the unnecessary load off of teachers' and students' backs.

You could argue that people have to deal with religious differences in real life, but it is expected of adults to be, well, mature about it.
Most kids can't handle that responsibility.

And, for whatever god you believe in's sake, Buggie, it's Canada! Not Canadia! Wtf? xD

And how would the fish peddle the bicycle? Under water, no less! : O Bikes require legs to opperate properly! Your entire argument is full of holes![/FONT][/COLOR]

[TheShinje]

[quote][color=Gray][font=Courier New] Little question is brought up when a teacher tells a student to remove a necklace with a penticle on it, but make it a cross and the whole world freaks out.[/quote]
I disagree, I've seen just as much fuss over someone forced to remove a pentagram as a cross.


I am a Christian, but I'm not soemone who is going to abuse soemone of other or no religion, this is a violation of all I stand for, the free will of God, Love thy neighbour as thyself etc... The closest I'd get to such would be to simply talk to someone about my faith, provided they wanted to. Without them wanting to hear it, it's pointless lol, and all it'd do is drive them away.

That being said, I disagree wiht the practise of banning any forms of religion from the class, bibles or prayer, headscarves or pentagrams etc. Sure, while many may argue that such items have no place in education, those who belive in them would dusagree. I know from my school years that prayer and faiht can get you throught some tough exam times!

That's why I believe a persons right to religion should ntobe taken fromt he classroom.
[/font][/color]

[DeadSeraphim]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial]You know, I've [I]never[/I] heard this argument , or any of the situations you've outlined, in Australian schools at all. But I can see where you're coming from, heh, even if I don't necessarily agree with you.

Yes, there should be a line drawn somewhere, but come on... Restricting reading the Bible is going too far. I mean, as long as they don't stand up and suddenly start lecturing the class on why everyone's a dirty sinner, it isn't actually hurting anyway, or forcing beliefs.

The line should only have to be drawn, I think, when the religious items in question are dangerous. Like, the dagger you mentioned. As long as the item has no potential for immediate danger, I don't think it should be an issue.

As for where I stand on banning headscarves and stuff... no. It's taking away their right to practice any religion they want, and if practising that requires wearing headscarves, so be it. If the clothing they were forced to wear was in any way dangerous, I would look at it differently, but it's not, so they should feel free to wear it.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[DeathBug]

[QUOTE=Godelsensei]
Creating additional barriers by adding another element of division, religion, into the mix can create more tension than already exists.

I've read several posts even on OB about people in schools with a strong religious affiliation being picked on relentlessly because they did not, well, affiliate.

I've seen students being picked on because they happen to have a bible in their backpack, or because they happen to mention that they have a different view on whether or not any kind of god exists.

Little question is brought up when a teacher tells a student to remove a necklace with a penticle on it, but make it a cross and the whole world freaks out.

It's better to just remove the issue and take the unnecessary load off of teachers' and students' backs.[/QUOTE]

Again, the freedom to disploay your religion (without creating a disruption) is a form of freedom of expression. You want to restrict that because you think it's too much trouble. This way lies madness.

[QUOTE]You could argue that people have to deal with religious differences in real life, but it is expected of adults to be, well, mature about it.
Most kids can't handle that responsibility.[/QUOTE]

No, because none of my argumentrs would ever take someone's maturity foor granted. Age doesn't equal wisdom.

[QUOTE]And, for whatever god you believe in's sake, Buggie, it's Canada! Not Canadia! Wtf? xD[/QUOTE]

People from America are Americans. People from Puerto Rico and Puerto Ricans. People from Mexico are Mexicans. If you're county's name was really 'Canada', you'd be "Canadans", but you're "Canadians". Ergo, you come from Canadia.

I come from Floridia, so it's okay.

[QUOTE]And how would the fish peddle the bicycle? Under water, no less! : O Bikes require legs to opperate properly! Your entire argument is full of holes![/QUOTE]

They wouldn't be normal bikes, die; they'd be super-aquatic Fish Bikes!

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]Hmm interesting...

However Godelsensei I think you've already made it quite clear from the content and context of your posts that you are intolerant when it comes to religions. You have basically said, like it or not that it's OK for me to have my religion as long as you don't have to see or know about it. The fact that you go so far as to find it offensive for a person to have a Bible in class takes the issue a little too far for my own personal tastes.

I'm a Roman Catholic and I've always attended schools where Catholicism is the norm, in Ireland something like 75% people are Catholic so there is little objection to the practising of religion in school. In my High School we have religion classes and religious events held in the school of a Catholic nature and those who are not Catholic are given the option of non-participation.

Now while I do agree that banning dangerous religious items such as the dagger is prudent, things like Bibles or Headscarves is not appropriate, I think such acts are taking political correctness to the extreme. Yes I wouldn't like to have someone of a different religion come up and attempt to convert me to their way of thinking but I would never go so far as to ask that he not even engage in any form of religion near me.

As for your "hitting another person on the head with a Bible" I think that is just completely moronic in nature, you are aware that most major religions advocate the point that you should "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".[/SIZE]

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

[quote name='Kane']However Godelsensei I think you've already made it quite clear from the content and context of your posts that you are intolerant when it comes to religions. You have basically said, like it or not that it's OK for me to have my religion as long as you don't have to see or know about it. The fact that you go so far as to find it offensive for a person to have a Bible in class takes the issue a little too far for my own personal tastes.[/quote]
Kane you misunderstood much of what Godel said. It's not a question of one person finding it offensive, it's a question of it becoming divisive (as it clearly does, even here, in this thread). Godel says that because religion is a divisive issue, and the school environment can do without divisive issues, religion SHOULD be stifled in schools. For that reason.
Anyone who opposes this using the First Amendment argument doesn't know that schools don't really have to follow it to a large extent. Take dress codes, for instance.

[QUOTE]Now while I do agree that banning dangerous religious items such as the dagger is prudent, things like Bibles or Headscarves is not appropriate, I think such acts are taking political correctness to the extreme. Yes I wouldn't like to have someone of a different religion come up and attempt to convert me to their way of thinking but I would never go so far as to ask that he not even engage in any form of religion near me.[/QUOTE]
You in particular might not, but many others DO. This has next to nothing to do with "political correctness." This has to do with maintaining a school environment as conducive to learning as possible.

[QUOTE]As for your "hitting another person on the head with a Bible" I think that is just completely moronic in nature, you are aware that most major religions advocate the point that you should "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".[/QUOTE]
Not only is it obvious that you did not read half of what Godel had to say, looking at the first part of that sentence, but it is also obvious that your view of religion is quite naive. That "do unto others," along with "thou shalt not kill," etc. etc. are simply not followed. To view organized religion (that is what's in question, just so you're not confused) as some source of morality is to be ignorant of its history and its goals.

[Bio]

[font=Trebuchet MS]Alright, first my views:

I think it's alright for someone to wear any religious clothing they want too, as long as it's not obviously dangerous (like said dagger). I think it'd be alright for the kid to read a bible during class as long as he doesn't start preaching or anything.

I really don't agree with a school's [i]sanction [/i]of a particular religion, like say, CCD or other religious practices in school that are basically rule. Schools that focus on certain religion (unless they're private, which is alright I guess because no one other than someone of that particular religion would be applying anyway, unless the school was really good or something).

But even then, a private school should not refuse to accept someone for their religion.

Many of you fail to notice Godel's willingness to debate as well. She doesn't want to flame you, she just wants to discuss (which she's said numerous times) and judging by some of the rabid responses, you need to tone it down a bit, methinks.

Thanks to the poeple who were [i]civil [/i]about this.

And Midnight Rush, your post is spam.[/font]

[quote] Please enlighten me... I'm rather bamboozled.[/quote] [font=Trebuchet MS]Please enlighten [i]me. [/i]I'm rather [i]bamboozled [/i]about why such an old member thinks he has the right spam. You know the rules.[/font][font=Trebuchet MS]
[/font]

[Brasil]

I second what Bio said.

The issue here is not about a student bringing in explosives in their bookbag, being determined to committ a suicide bombing, and while Ideological warfare certainly is a less-than-honest procedure of war, I hardly think Ideological warfare/religious propaganda/public disturbance is the intent of most students reading a Bible, Quuran, Torah, etc in a Study Hall.

Granted, there may be some who want to convert, but if we're talking about someone who is merely reading a religious book quietly and to themselves, I honestly don't think they're grabbing their neighbor's head and shoving the book in their face. Just the fact that the student is sitting there peacefully is a big sign that they're just reading because they want to, not because they're trying to show others "the light."

Under that circumstance, I see no problem at all with letting them read it. If a student or students have a problem with it, then that's an opportunity for the instructor to have a class discussion about it, and educate the class about varying perspectives. Yes, there is legislation that prohibits an instructor from preaching, but as I've learned in my classes here at Rutgers, you can talk and educate about any religion, as long as you don't say, "Religion A is better than Religion B."

It simply comes down to being objective when you talk about it, and honestly, because of this, I think much of the controversy surrounding "Religion in schools" is fairly absurd, especially in these innocuous contexts.

So a student is reading the Bible to his or herself. So what?

So a student is wearing a scarf that's a religious tradition. So what?

For those arguing that students having religious items in school, such as a Bible, will cause strife and impede the class' educational progress is missing a key point here:

When a student asks about the Bible, the Bible can actually lead into a very educational experience, which means it will not impede educational progress, but rather [i]encourage[/i] intellectual growth.

It's not a negative to talk about religion in school. It just isn't. It becomes negative when it gets out of hand, or when it's not discussed objectively. Ultimately, [i]that's[/i] the issue here: religion becoming an issue because it isn't handled appropriately.

[Attimus331]

I?d have to disagree with Siren and Bio.

I simply believe in the separation between church and state. The French recently had an issue (actually they still might be, I haven't checked up on it for a while) about this kinda stuff. They wouldn't let the girls wear the scarf things, they were angry, and I even think some terrorists kidnapped some journalists threatening there lives if the French didn't change the law.

I really don't think any of that religious stuff should be allowed. You can't say yes to a kid carrying around a bible or a cross and say no to the kids carrying around the daggers (well maybe not daggers, but you get my point), that's being hypocritical. And personally I just plainly don?t like it when I see the Christians carrying around their bibles; it just reminds me of some of their ideals that I don?t necessarily agree with. Luckily at my school I don?t see any of that?although I do here some rude comments every now and then. ?Oh, you?re gay? I guess I won?t see you in Heaven then?.? Stupid remarks like that? I?m not saying rather it?s true or not, or even saying there is a Heaven, but I am saying I think it?s very rude and ignorant to say something like that, nobody needs that, and it definitely doesn?t help anybody either.

As far as the whole ?intellectual growth? thing, I disagree with that as well. In a class of 30 kids, you can?t possibly get people to have the same view, so yeah, there?s going to be an argument. Sure, if there wouldn?t be any of that, the discussion can be both educational and promote intellectual growth, but I don?t think that?ll happen. Yes, school is for education, but you also have classes, you can?t have a discussion about religion in a math class, or English class. Maybe in science if you?re discussing the whole evolution thing, maybe in history if you?re discussing religion?s involvement in history, but other than that, no, you can?t really leave with anything valuable for the class. If you want to talk about religion, and discuss it, wait till Sunday and go to church, or heck just get on the internet and do what I?m doing right now.

Eh, well that?s what I have to say, sort of. I just hope it won?t come off the wrong way?..maybe my hopes are a little high.

[Brasil]

Atti, a few things you need to keep in mind.

This..talk about the dagger...I have no idea why anyone brought it up, because religious inscription or not, [i]it's a dagger[/i]. It's a stabbing weapon. It shouldn't be allowed into school regardless of what is written on it. It's a dangerous object, and can be used violently to physically injure students. It's something that endangers the lives of students there, because it's a weapon. So, right there, it's a moot point, because it shouldn't be in the school to begin with.

Those comments about homosexuality and Heaven are hurtful, yes, but they need to be addressed. The students need to understand that intolerance is unacceptable. Religion in school is not the cause of that intolerance, either. The intolerance comes from people applying religion inappropriately.

Yes, there is talk in the OT about gays being banished to Hell, etc, but in modern society, that view holds little bearing, and when you hear of talk like that, you need to report it, because intolerance itself is a violation of most school's guidelines. It's harassment above everything else.

I'd agree that an off-topic discussion about religion in a Math class is inappropriate, but an English class? Perhaps you aren't aware, but English, History, Philosophy, Art, and Religion are very, very closely intercorrelated. You cannot study one without exploring the others.

There are literally thousands of works of Literature that are religious in nature. Augustine's Confessions, Beowulf, Merchant of Venice, Epic of Gilgamesh, The Odyssey, The Iliad, The Bible (yes, the Bible. You do study it here and there in high school), John Milton's Paradise Lost, The Lord of the Flies, The Stranger...these are only off the top of my head, and you'll find many of them on high school syllabi.

Regarding 30 people in a class, and the teacher being unable to retain control, that's the case here and there, but I've found that you have to be an utterly incompetent instructor to lose control of your class entirely. I have instructors here at Rutgers who barely--[i]barely[/i] maintain order in a lecture hall of 140 students, and a different instructor has everyone's undivided attention and respect in the same room, with more students.

Maintaining control in a controversial topic isn't impossible; it just requires that the instructor know how to handle it.

[Gavin]

[QUOTE=ScirosDarkblade]Kane you misunderstood much of what Godel said. It's not a question of one person finding it offensive, it's a question of it becoming divisive (as it clearly does, even here, in this thread). Godel says that because religion is a divisive issue, and the school environment can do without divisive issues, religion SHOULD be stifled in schools. For that reason.
Anyone who opposes this using the First Amendment argument doesn't know that schools don't really have to follow it to a large extent. Take dress codes, for instance.[/quote]

[SIZE=1]Well since I don't live in America you don't have to worry about me using the First Amendment as a shield for my opinions. First off I don't believe that I misunderstood Godel's point, who has made the point that he does not believe than religions of any description should be practised in schools. I disagree that religion is a divisive issue, if it is not forced upon a people then nobody has the right to tell me or anyone else that I don't have the right to practice my religion.[/SIZE]

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade']You in particular might not, but many others DO. This has next to nothing to do with "political correctness." This has to do with maintaining a school environment as conducive to learning as possible.[/quote]

[SIZE=1]And how exactly does it disrupt the conductive environment in a school if I decided to read a Bible quietly in a class, I'm not disrupting anyone, I'm not pushing someone else to read it and I'm certainly stand up and start pointing out peoples faults and telling them to seek redemption in God. To be honest I think it's fools who go around opposing all levels of religion who cause much of this tension and disruption when it comes to education.[/SIZE]

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade']Not only is it obvious that you did not read half of what Godel had to say, looking at the first part of that sentence, but it is also obvious that your view of religion is quite naive. That "do unto others," along with "thou shalt not kill," etc. etc. are simply not followed. To view organised religion (that is what's in question, just so you're not confused) as some source of morality is to be ignorant of its history and its goals.[/quote]

[SIZE=1]Not only to I find that statement to be grossly idiotic but I also find it to be most offensive. Who are you to say that idea of "Do undo others as you would have them do unto you" is not followed ? I can quite assuredly say than I follow the ideals of my religion as do tens of millions of people across the globe. The fact that you go on to saw that using the creed of any organised religion as a source of morality is to be ignorant of it's history and goals proves to me once and for all that you are completely intolerant of religion.

I am well aware of the history and goals of religion I think it is you who are not, perhaps if you read a Bible sometime you might heard of a thing called the [b]Ten Commandments[/b] or a being called [b]Jesus Christ[/b], if you haven't or choose to disregard them then your above point is moot at least in regard to the Catholic Church.[/SIZE]

[Dagger]

[quote name='Kane][SIZE=1']Not only to I find that statement to be grossly idiotic but I also find it to be most offensive. Who are you to say that idea of "Do undo others as you would have them do unto you" is not followed ?[/size][/quote]

I apologize for butting in, but I don't see how Sciros's statement was offensive, not to mention factually incorrect. Throughout history, religious beliefs have been used as a justification for all sorts of horrible atrocities--everything from the Crusades to modern-day terrorism. This doesn't mean there's anything inherently wrong with the concept of religion; the problem lies with the extremists who call themselves believers and yet do things which go against fundamental principles of their faith (i.e. when radical Christians bomb abortion clinics).

~Dagger~

[Brasil]

[QUOTE=Dagger IX1]I apologize for butting in, but I don't see how Sciros's statement was offensive, not to mention factually incorrect. Throughout history, religious beliefs have been used as a justification for all sorts of horrible atrocities--everything from the Crusades to modern-day terrorism. This doesn't mean there's anything inherently wrong with the concept of religion; the problem lies with the extremists who call themselves believers and yet do things which go against fundamental principles of their faith (i.e. when radical Christians bomb abortion clinics).

~Dagger~[/QUOTE]
But herein lies an issue, Dagger, because while religion has been known to be used as a justification for all kinds of villainous and cruel terroristic acts throughout history, there's a very, very, very real difference between that (blowing up government buildings) and merely reading a religious text.

And I think you actually summed up one issue quite well, because Religion isn't the problem; it's those who use it inappropriately who are.

[Bio]

[font=Trebuchet MS]Atti, I [i]vehemently [/i]believe in the seperation of church and state. It's one of the things I want to see completely in effect in the future. However, sperating church and state has nothing ot do with [i]privately [/i]expressing religion. If for whatever reason a kid wants to read something religious, then so be it. As long as no one tries to cram religion down someone else's throat, I'm fine with it. Whether or not you take away religious adornment has absolutely nothing to do with what people say. If someone were to say

[quote][/font]?Oh, you?re gay? I guess I won?t see you in Heaven then?.?[/quote] [font=Trebuchet MS]
then they would have said it whether or not they were carrying a Bible with them. Taking away a physical object does nothing to change someone's beliefs.

[quote][/font]
[size=1]Not only to I find that statement to be grossly idiotic but I also find it to be most offensive. Who are you to say that idea of "Do undo others as you would have them do unto you" is not followed ? I can quite assuredly say than I follow the ideals of my religion as do tens of millions of people across the globe. The fact that you go on to saw that using the creed of any organised religion as a source of morality is to be ignorant of it's history and goals proves to me once and for all that you are completely intolerant of religion.

I am well aware of the history and goals of religion I think it is you who are not, perhaps if you read a Bible sometime you might heard of a thing called the [b]Ten Commandments[/b] or a being called [b]Jesus Christ[/b], if you haven't or choose to disregard them then your above point is moot at least in regard to the Catholic Church.[/size][/quote] [font=Trebuchet MS]That. That last thing right there. That was what you said people wouldn't do. I'll leave it until later in my post, however.

What I think Sciros meant was that "Do unto others..." is generally an accepted moral in religions, but [i]is really [/i]not [i]followed very well. [/i]Just look at schools. Considering that some bully somewhere must be religious, wouldn't you think they'd follow that rule?

No, no they wouldn't. They probably wouldn't even think about it. Not every single religious person is going to be completely benign or follow their religion [i]perfectly[/i].

As for the whole

[quote][/font][size=1]
I am well aware of the history and goals of religion I think it is you who are not, perhaps if you read a Bible sometime you might heard of a thing called the [b]Ten Commandments[/b] or a being called [b]Jesus Christ[/b], if you haven't or choose to disregard them then your above point is moot at least in regard to the Catholic Church.[/quote] [size=2][font=Trebuchet MS]
thing, there is something severely wrong with that. What you basically said was "I'm not listening to you because you don't agree with my religion".

Come [i]on[/i].[/font][/size]
[/size]

[Gavin]

[QUOTE=Dagger IX1]I apologize for butting in, but I don't see how Sciros's statement was offensive, not to mention factually incorrect. Throughout history, religious beliefs have been used as a justification for all sorts of horrible atrocities--everything from the Crusades to modern-day terrorism. This doesn't mean there's anything inherently wrong with the concept of religion; the problem lies with the extremists who call themselves believers and yet do things which go against fundamental principles of their faith (i.e. when radical Christians bomb abortion clinics).

~Dagger~[/QUOTE]

[size=1]Perhaps I was a little zealous in my projection of my thoughts, but I do stick to my previous points. To be honest I just found the statement offensive as a Catholic because of the way Sciros basically said that religions were not founded to be pillars of Good. I base much of what I consider to be right and wrong in this life on a mixture of common-sense and what I have been taught through my faith, fair enough some people do not follow religions but that does not give them the right to insult mine.

Yes I accept groups throughout history have used religion as a means for violence and some terrible things, I don't dispute that point because it is perfectly correct. What I do dispute is that fact that the vast majority of religions do not promote acts of violence in any shape or form and most certainly not in their name. However you have made the point that it is [b]extremists[/b] who carry out these acts, the fact majority of religious people (myself included) find these acts as terrible as people of no religion do.[/size]

[QUOTE=Bio][font=Trebuchet MS]That. That last thing right there. That was what you said people wouldn't do. I'll leave it until later in my post, however.

What I think Sciros meant was that "Do unto others..." is generally an accepted moral in religions, but [I]is really [/I]not [I]followed very well. [/I]Just look at schools. Considering that some bully somewhere must be religious, wouldn't you think they'd follow that rule?

No, no they wouldn't. They probably wouldn't even think about it. Not every single religious person is going to be completely benign or follow their religion [I]perfectly[/I].[/font][/quote]

[size=1]I didn't say that everyone followed the morals of religion perfectly because people have the freedom of choice to acts as they wish (to a reasonable degree). You have given an example, as I said before that bully is acting out of his own choice, yes if he did follow the morals of right and wrong in many religions he would bully people but it in the end is his choice.

As for the point about how everyone down somewhere is religious, I believe that point is disputable, not everyone follows religion and those who do not commit crimes the same as those who do. I don't think that religion can be used as a reason for a person's evil acts because religion beliefs can always be overruled by choice.[/size]

[QUOTE=Bio][font=Trebuchet MS]
thing, there is something severely wrong with that. What you basically said was "I'm not listening to you because you don't agree with my religion".

Come [I]on[/I].[/font][/size][/QUOTE]

[size=1]I've already addressed the beginning of that point in the first section of my post, however in dealing with the point you made I would bring up that it was directed at the statement made by Sciros that religions should not be looked to for moral guidance. The fact is that the Catholic Church, and those derived from it were based on the teachings of Jesus Christ and those who had come before him, they advocated a life of good and decency so I (maybe not in the clearest of ways) rebuked his point. I did not intend any insult I merely wanted to make a point.[/size]