• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Missouri lawmakers advance proposal for Bible classes in public schools

Seems like religion has had a pretty outsized influence on history and cultures all over the world.

You can’t cover everything in depth in general history or social studies courses.

We don't need an in-depth look at every absurd fairy-tale to be found in these religious texts. It's all silly garbage, and if we really want to zone in on what's important, then religion should mostly be discussed from the angle of it's influence on the world, society, politics, war, etc. The contents of the books are irrelevant, save for that which specifically influenced these things.
 
I was just challenging claim that Islam was taught as a required course. Which, of course, he has not offered any evidence to support.

I just don't think I'm all that interested in knocking Joko down a peg if we are, indeed, teaching Islam or any other religion in public schools at all. Though, I must admit that I should have thought of the reprocussions of not calling someone out when they make a bold, completely unfounded claim. It's a bad habit to let slide.
 
We don't need an in-depth look at every absurd fairy-tale to be found in these religious texts. It's all silly garbage, and if we really want to zone in on what's important, then religion should mostly be discussed from the angle of it's influence on the world, society, politics, war, etc. The contents of the books are irrelevant, save for that which specifically influenced these things.

Well, to understand the cultural influence, one needs to understand the conceptual framework people are working from.

Studying comparative religions is a valuable class if you want to understand history.

I take it you never took a course or read anything about the subject.
 
They're electives, there is nothing wrong with this. Just as if there were classes offered on Islam or Buddhism, or Hinduism -- as electives. Now if they tried to make them mandatory, then there is a problem.

Freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion, people...
 
Well, to understand the cultural influence, one needs to understand the conceptual framework people are working from.

Studying comparative religions is a valuable class if you want to understand history.

I take it you never took a course or read anything about the subject.

I spent the first two decades of my life completely and utterly indoctrinated by Christianity, and can remember one chapter in one class that dealt with Islam, but other than that, no, can't say that I have. I must admit that I may, perhaps, be overly influenced by my emotions, and I don't actually know how much actual scripture reading goes into such a class. I'm all for teaching kids about religion, but squicked by the prospect of teaching the actual dogma, save for that which actually has an impact on society, such as how certain verses influence, or have influenced homophobia in this country. I don't see any need to go into the beattitudes (though that's one of the few parts that I actually admire) or how any of the stories are really relevant to anything.
 
I spent the first two decades of my life completely and utterly indoctrinated by Christianity, and can remember one chapter in one class that dealt with Islam, but other than that, no, can't say that I have. I must admit that I may, perhaps, be overly influenced by my emotions, and I don't actually know how much actual scripture reading goes into such a class. I'm all for teaching kids about religion, but squicked by the prospect of teaching the actual dogma, save for that which actually has an impact on society, such as how certain verses influence, or have influenced homophobia in this country. I don't see any need to go into the beattitudes (though that's one of the few parts that I actually admire) or how any of the stories are really relevant to anything.

Nobody is teaching religious dogma in a comparative religion class!

It’s generally an exploration of the major world religions (Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Judaism and others) and how they impacted each of their associated cultures- and how they impact them today.

Understanding how these religions work is pretty useful for understanding mindsets in other parts of the world.
 
Nobody is teaching religious dogma in a comparative religion class!

It’s generally an exploration of the major world religions (Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Judaism and others) and how they impacted each of their associated cultures- and how they impact them today.

Understanding how these religions work is pretty useful for understanding mindsets in other parts of the world.

Alright, I concede. I'm obviously speaking from a place of ignorance, and what you describe seems perfectly fine to me.
 
I may be wrong on this but compulsory religious education is, in my experience, practiced in the U.S. only in parochial schools & fundamentalist colleges such as Liberty & Oral Roberts. Home schooling especially in the south (aka The Bible Belt) also falls into this group. In Utah Mormonism is taught at Brigham Young University & Latter day Saints Business College. I'm sure I missed some, especially where religious training is either conducted in church on Sundays or at Bible schools & such on other days.
 
Back
Top Bottom