Another bunch of religious nutters, another example that demonstrates a need to prevent teaching religion, all religions, to very young children, until such a time where they have acquired the ability to challenge and only after that age.
Since we get atrocities like these carried out by non-religious people as well, ippy, perhaps we need to make sure that we don't teach any 'philosophy' to 'very young people, until such a time where they have acquired the ability to challenge and only after that age.'
I certainly would have been wrong if I had said said it was the whole answer, have another look, I was being precise.
The removal of special set aside lessons for any kind of religion wouldn't have a dogs of a chance of happening if the idea was imposed on any one religion.
When you see the dogged determination of he parents to ram religion into the heads of their young it'll certainly be an uphill struggle, but worthwhile and if we can achieve it, that would be all we could reasonably hope for.
There's no need to think removing specifically religious lessons from schools, would involve rewriting history and how could any history teacher tell as near to the truth as possible without covering religions?
Plus the removal of religion from schools would involve a bonus where all of the children mixing at random, rubbing shoulders with all sorts of religions during in their school years, whatever religion the parents happen to have put forward to their children in their own private time.
So when you look at the ideal above I'm certain this would reduce all sorts of areas where religions cause problems such as the problem the French are suffering at the moment.
ippy
Eh? France is one of the most secular countries around? France is your secular paradise. Don't seem to have worked, pal!
Don't you blokes hate the idea of religion being on a level playing field, without privileges?
I disagree with your ban on teaching about religion. The state school business in which diversity is respected is OK. However your model just happens to favour the Secular Humanist and of course the antitheists so called love of critical thinking never extends to their own thinking.
I hear you but I don't trust you not to establish something which promotes your own intellectual intolerance.
Looks to me you've either read my post and misunderstood it or you have read it and missed a lot of things I was saying.
What's the point if you're not going to read things properly or introduce things not said.
Try again but read it properly this time, see if you can send a reply that relates to that post.
ippy
No you said religions (plural) were causing France problems. As far as I can see it is only one.
You said removal of religions from schools would involve a bonus.
You have said that religious peoples children need to mix ........nothing about atheists, agnostics or secular humanists. That betrays a ridiculous assumption that kids in state schools are from agnostics atheists or secular humanist schools.
It all adds up to you holding some profound misconceptions Ippy.
Vlad you're not reading me right you've missed some key parts of my post and you seem to think I have said things that I haven't said, you've miss read me.
You say: "No you said religions (plural) were causing France problems. As far as I can see it is only one".
This is the part of my post you were addressing: "So when you look at the ideal above I'm certain this would reduce all sorts of areas where religions cause problems such as the problem the French are suffering at the moment".
=====
You said:
"You said removal of religions from schools would involve a bonus".
Yes I did say: removal of religions from schools would involve a bonus, which picked out of context misses out where I have actually said: " There's no need to think removing specifically religious lessons from schools, would involve rewriting history and how could any history teacher tell as near to the truth as possible without covering religions"?
=====
You then went on to say:
"You have said that religious peoples children need to mix ........nothing about atheists, agnostics or secular humanists. That betrays a ridiculous assumption that kids in state schools are from agnostics atheists or secular humanist schools".
Where in that previous post of mine I had said: "Plus the removal of religion from schools would involve a bonus
where all of the children mixing at random, rubbing shoulders with all sorts of religions during in their school years, whatever religion the parents happen to have put forward to their children in their own private time".
=====
So you've not really read through my post with very much accuracy Vlad.
I'm
not advocating banning religion off of the face of the Earth, I'm only for putting religion in it's place, how can history be rewritten, how could humanities be taught without giving religion a mention, now where I say giving religion a mention is where we part company only I think, not just yourself, most religious believers have this idea that there should be some sort of elevated part of school curriculums for teaching religions, they're all as bad as each other in this respect.
I like most secularist people only want to see a level plating field and that necessitates religion loosing any kind of elevated position it has at present and Secular Humanism should have no more or any less position than any other similar ideas; a level playing field.
I find it difficult to see why you don't get it Vlad, unless you really do think religion should be in some kind of elevated position, particularly in our schools for the very young children.
ippy
