Page 1 of 10 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 96

Thread: Goddamit Kentucky, don't you have anything more pressing to do?

  1. #1

    Default Goddamit Kentucky, don't you have anything more pressing to do?

    Senate panel approves Bible literacy bill : Bluegrass Politics

    So the Kentucky senate has passed a bill that would introduce an elective bible class in public schools. Now, as I've said before, a comparative religion class or something is okay by me (and the ACLU). But as expressly stated by the bill's sponsors, this is to bring the bible back in to schools to avoid school shootings. One of the senators who voted to pass the bill even entered a vote of "amen". Another said that "preaching" may help the public schools. So while the bill on its face may be completely legit, the clear intention is to provide teachers with an avenue to preach in class as said by the very senators voting for the bill.


  2. #2

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by bgi39jsjw0ggg View Post
    So the Kentucky senate has passed a bill that would introduce an elective bible class in public schools.
    Elective. I think that's the big word here. It'd be one thing if it was mandatory, but because it isn't, I think it's a little ridiculous to be upset about it.

  3. #3

    Default

    christianity teaching isnt THAT bad, it should just be balanced, and kept in religeon, (im referring to creation scientists here)

  4. #4

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Dawes View Post
    Elective. I think that's the big word here. It'd be one thing if it was mandatory, but because it isn't, I think it's a little ridiculous to be upset about it.
    You think wrong. Doesn't matter if it's elective. It's being paid for with tax dollars, so it doesn't matter if it's mandatory to attend or not, because it has become mandatory to PAY for it if you live in Kentucky. That same reasoning would work to allow for a state owned and operated church as long as it wasn't mandatory to attend weekly services.

    And you're also missing the point that state lawmakers are trying to bring preaching in to public schools. Even though it's not mandatory for children to attend, the fact that it's happening in taxpayer funded public schools is flat wrong.

    Here's a good cheat sheet:

    Is it either directly religious or attempting to backdoor religion? If yes, then the government shouldn't be involved in it in any way at all.

    Now, if the law also allowed people to opt out of paying any and all state taxes that could in any way fund this program, then your "it's not mandatory" argument would actually be true. As it stands, this bill would not allow anyone to declare that they don't want to pay for this program, and as such, it IS mandatory.

  5. #5

    Default

    Frankly, I think you're thinking far too deeply into wanting to be insulted as a supposedly free-thinking American who doesn't want his secular education supposedly tainted by some governmental institution of religious recognition.

    It's my belief that the government has every right to use our taxpayer money to institute options of education to all Americans that cover a spectrum of beliefs, ideals, and values. I'd rather live in a society where -- as long as my choice is not inhibited by the ultimatum of the legislators -- the opportunity is open to me to take this class than not at all. Opting out of taxes is a riduclous idea, especially when these taxes are going back into some form of education to benefit my children and the children of a society where both religious and educational curiosity is encouraged and embraced.

    Don't accuse me of thinking "wrong" based on your ideals. I'm merely thinking from a different angle, and I'm perfectly fine with the implementation of elective Bible study in a public school system where the diversity of the whole can be recognized.

  6. #6
    Butterfly Mage

    Default

    Personally, I don't see how teaching the Bible is going to make people less violent. Anyone who has had even a passing exposure to the Old Testament knows that the Bible is full of stories in which the heroes of the piece commit mass murder in the name of God. King David has his own best friend killed just so can marry the guy's wife! Oh, the Old Testament also teaches that gays and people who engage in premarital sex should be stoned to death.

    The New Testament is, of course, a totally different story. If the school wants to use religion to teach pacifism, they'd be better off teaching Buddhism instead of Christianity.

  7. #7

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by bgi39jsjw0ggg View Post
    Senate panel approves Bible literacy bill : Bluegrass Politics

    So the Kentucky senate has passed a bill that would introduce an elective bible class in public schools. Now, as I've said before, a comparative religion class or something is okay by me (and the ACLU). But as expressly stated by the bill's sponsors, this is to bring the bible back in to schools to avoid school shootings. One of the senators who voted to pass the bill even entered a vote of "amen". Another said that "preaching" may help the public schools. So while the bill on its face may be completely legit, the clear intention is to provide teachers with an avenue to preach in class as said by the very senators voting for the bill.


    It's not school shootings we need to be worried about, it's Bear attacks dammit!



    2 Kings: 2:23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
    2:24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
    We should expel atheists from our schools immediately, what happens if one of them mocks the Bible and God sends wild animals to attack our small children again?

  8. #8

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Dawes View Post
    Frankly, I think you're thinking far too deeply into wanting to be insulted as a supposedly free-thinking American who doesn't want his secular education supposedly tainted by some governmental institution of religious recognition.
    Frankly, I think you're reaching really hard to justify this simply because you like the idea. Legally, it doesn't fly.



    Quote Originally Posted by Dawes View Post
    It's my belief that the government has every right to use our taxpayer money to institute options of education to all Americans that cover a spectrum of beliefs, ideals, and values. I'd rather live in a society where -- as long as my choice is not inhibited by the ultimatum of the legislators -- the opportunity is open to me to take this class than not at all. Opting out of taxes is a riduclous idea, especially when these taxes are going back into some form of education to benefit my children and the children of a society where both religious and educational curiosity is encouraged and embraced.
    Your beliefs are not law, nor should they be. This isn't an option. If you're paying taxes in Kentucky, you will be paying for this program should it be signed in to law. As such, it needs to pass the religion Lemon test established by the Supreme Court.



    Quote Originally Posted by Dawes View Post
    Don't accuse me of thinking "wrong" based on your ideals. I'm merely thinking from a different angle, and I'm perfectly fine with the implementation of elective Bible study in a public school system where the diversity of the whole can be recognized.
    I'm accusing you of being wrong based on Supreme Court decisions. Abington School District v. Schempp, Lemon v. Kurtzman, Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe and Board of Education v. Allen all clearly show you are wrong. You can try to rationalize it or rethink it all you like, but sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the government in religious activity all have to be examined and considered. That's the Lemon test.

    1. The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
    2. The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
    3. The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

    That's the criteria the Supreme Court uses to rule on these cases. Given the explicit statements of the bill's sponsors, 1) and 2) are clearly violated. Ultimately, this law will be shot down (likely using the statements of the bill's supporters in the senate), and likely cost Kentucky a crapload of money defending it, as well as deepening the divide between the religious and nonreligious simply because people like yourself don't see anything wrong with it.

    Another thing, I really, REALLY dislike your deification of opinion. I shouldn't accuse you of being "wrong"? Well sunshine, you ARE wrong. Your "different point of view" doesn't change the fact that you are WRONG. Unless you specifically think that the Lemon test should be amended to have "if involvement is optional, then never mind the other stuff" as a 4th bullet point, your opinion flies directly against 4 decades of Supreme Court rulings.

    ---------- Post added at 10:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:27 AM ----------



    Quote Originally Posted by Dan155 View Post
    It's not school shootings we need to be worried about, it's Bear attacks dammit!



    We should expel atheists from our schools immediately, what happens if one of them mocks the Bible and God sends wild animals to attack our small children again?
    My interpretation of that passage is that we should expel all bald heads from schools. Given that Elisha being bald was the instigator of this whole thing, it's clear that being bald causes bear attacks.

  9. #9
    Butterfly Mage

    Default

    I don't think this plan is going to withstand Constitutional challenge. The school could probably get away with teaching a comparative religion class (since that would not be advocating a particular faith). I also think they'll have a hard time equating "Bible literacy" with being non-violent. Christians are just as fallible as Muslims, Jews, Atheists, Wiccans, or whatever. Being familiar with the scripture of a particular faith isn't going to change anyone's behavior.

  10. #10

    Default

    lol I have found many so-called "religious people" to be the most closed-minded out there, and many times the most hateful as soon as you fall out of line with their opinions, but rarely violent. Maybe about as much as the rest of the world. I think the fact that so much has changed with teens today than it was with them in the 50s has as much to do with culture as with no Bible in the school anymore.

    Butterfly Mage - just for the record, Uriah was not King David's "best friend". David didn't even know him. He was just another guy in the king's army. Doesn't make what David did any less wrong, just wanted to be clear about that. Besides that, God severely punished David for that, so you can't say the Bible upholds that case as something that was righteous. The Bible heroes did not "commit mass murder", they killed, as in war ... but not knowing what your thoughts are on war maybe you define that as murder. I don't know and don't care to get into that argument. You're entitled to your opinions - just don't label something as "Bible facts" unless they are actually facts and not just opinion or incorrect.

    As for this bill - I really don't want the government teaching my kid the Bible. I'll do it myself, thank you very much. They are likely to screw it up, like everything else they touch. As an elective, I wouldn't argue against it - in fact, I'd like to teach it ... lol. I do have to say that the way it was framed sounds really out there - I'd like to see a little more proof on that than someone's word on a forum though. Not saying it is untrue AT ALL - just that rumors need more evidence. If that is in fact their reasoning behind bringing it back - it will fail. For one thing - it is an ELECTIVE - are the kids they think need to hear it going to take that class anyway? :: Rolls eyes ::

    BTW - complaining it is taxpayer funded and therefor is wrong won't work. There are many things in schools that are taxpayer funded that you may not agree with, but you can't put a stop to it. I've even seen palmistry and tarot reading classes.

    One other thing I'd like to add. Regarding "Christian Science" - I assume you mean Creation Science. It would seem to me that the idea behind education is to teach kids to take all evidence into account and make the best decisions based on ALL evidence, so, why shouldn't some challenges to evolution be entertained? I hear all these people holler about how kids shouldn't be "indoctrinated" when it comes to anything about teaching the Bible, but in anything else that is taught people call it "education". Interesting.

Similar Threads

  1. Hola from Kentucky!
    By JessycaNekoGirl in forum Greetings / Introductions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 31-Dec-2009, 04:59
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-Sep-2009, 21:13

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.