Second Graders Sing About Allah

There are several levels to this "war on Christmas" thing. On the surface, it just looks like more right-wing radical looniness (and it is). But it serves a number of purposes.

• In Middle Eastern countries, fanatics and extremists can band together over real atrocities and grievances, such as Predator drones killing scores of innocent women and children during a wedding. Our far-right loons have no such legitimate grievances, so they make them up, thus allowing them to band together and wail about their mutual victimization. This "attack on Christmas" is perfect for their purposes.
• It keeps them in the media spotlight, especially on Fox News, where it has become a tradition to lie about "liberals attacking Christmas" and, by extension, Christians.
• It's another method to divide liberals (who all "hate Christmas," don'cha know) and conservatives, who are encouraged to Stand Together to Defend Our Sacred Holiday against the Enemy of Us All.

It's one small but effective propaganda tool in the far-right jihadists' arsenal.

The far left just pass off these attacks as simple right wing looniness. However, bring up anything about muslims, atheists, witchcraft they will chew your arm off.

The far left just pass off these attacks as simple right wing looniness.

If the shoe fits.......

RLW: The far left just pass off these attacks as simple right wing looniness. However, bring up anything about muslims, atheists, witchcraft they will chew your arm off.

Really? Makes a good claim, but in reality...source? Noone on this thread.

Kim, Bob,

Just look at the love in this thread. Like I said, it's okay to say things against Christians, but don't you dare say anything about any other religion!

Skip up a few posts to see what happened to their last efforts at "proof."

What kills me is that they can't seem to get it through their cast-iron skull plates that they have to actually leave their echo chamber to provide proof to convince people who aren't members of their cult. "Well, here's a link to some right-wing blog." "Well, here's a link to Rush on the radio." They live in a world completely insulated from any information or opinion that isn't pre-chewed, pre-digested, and certified 100% right-wing crazy by an approved provider.

Max Black

certified 100% right-wing crazy by an approved provider.

Wow, the stuff I'm getting is only certified to 75% , am I getting ripped-off?

LOL, ask for your money back.

Mike

I knew sooner or later we'd get to you :P)

Wellman

a)@Q"kX&68[ia.s0#rj%ETYDB.D)?g@&Q=6#3md^Ksj j<m+TroH48iYko@oi9Tjjo^;PY5P:)Vt1Go8

. ..... XfgH*NX*;mDbcYWhE/>/V@%kE/32#GQkMjYbAho@LJk^=35(gsL]>6r?Nm?TUV! ...

RLWellman:

I have nothing against Christianity. I have everything against rightwingers - no matter what their religion.

Kim-298921

I have nothing against Christianity. I have everything against rightwingers - no matter what their religion.

And do you call that being "open minded"?

I don't remember where I said I am 'open-minded' nor why I would be required to be.

I have, over the 40 something years of my life, many times reviewed right-wing positions, and rejected them. Actually, scratch some years off that 40+ because for awhile when I was in college I was a little Reaganite, like most other kids on the campus I attended. Am I supposed to not have a negative opinion for fear or being 'closed-minded'? How does that work, exactly? Because I'm not going back to square one in examining rightwing positions every single time. I've heard them. They've been rejected.

Tell me, do you have an opinion of left-wingers? Is it positive? Do you think your opinion is based upon due consideration and grounded in both the facts as you understand them to be and your own moral intuition? Well, surprise surprise, that's how I feel about my views. Therefore, to be 'open-minded' for the sake of being 'open-minded' to the rightwing is to betray what I know of facts and what my conscience guides me. I don't have time or interest in that.

kind of view them as special needs kids. Hard to get through too, needy, difficult to teach

I think I like your point of view.

Kim-298921

Well, it sounds like you have gotten your ideological beliefs fairly. Especially since you were willing to admit to the Reaganite period. I guess I just found the first statement a little harsh, but that's your right, and I'd be the first to defend it.

Thanks, Mike.

kind of view them as special needs kids. Hard to get through too, needy, difficult to teach, love to pass the buck, and sometimes crazy... but we still care about them though. They are still people after all. ;)

LOL

Yeah your technically correct about "Allah" simply meaning God in another another language... except in the song the kids sang "Praying ‘til night during Ramadan" which is exclusively Islamic only religious event / holiday. So I don't buy the rest of your explanation defending the school about inclusiveness, etc, etc. Was clearly Islamic only.

Agreed. You can't remove one and not the other.

Unfortunately, to be politically correct, they left out anything that would acknowledge the idea of Jesus as God, but have no problem acknowledging other religions figures. But if someone tried to leave out that Allah is god, or question Allah's existance as a divine figure, what do you think would have happened?

I heard a person call in to a radio program saying that their child was reading the Bible in her spare time at a public school, and the teacher forced her to put it away or took it away from her. Had the teacher been so irate if the girl was reading the Koran?

Good question, Kelly, why are we being so tolerant to Muslims, and not Christians. When did the Muslims become a special minority. Under the constitution, we are all created equal. What it reminds me of is a book I read a long time ago, Animal Farm, George Orwelle. After the animals took over the farmers land, Napoleon the pig, told the animals that they were all equal, but some animals were more equal than others.

I am tired of all these religions fighting for supremacy. I am an atheist. Whatever you believe in. GREAT. BELIEVE! Just don't let your bickering intrude on my life. I have may friends of many beliefs and non-beliefs. We get along together. This argument just furthers the division of church, christianity, islam, agnostics and atheists. (I noticed in my spell check that christianity and islam needed a capital letter but agnostic and atheist didn't. This furthers the division.) I respect people for who they are and not what they are. All these other labels only divide us. Talk to the person and listen to the person, and then make up your mind. Do not bring in religion or politics into this discussion.

Now tell me if they are not equal to you!

If you look down on others, they will not look up to you!

kiml,

So that's why you're mad at Christians? That's why it's okay to pick on them and leave the other religions alone? You're mad because atheists and agnostics isn't capitalized. That's why you have so much hate?

Wellman, he's mad at religion in general, not just Christianity. From what I've seen, it's mostly Christians that howl and moan and play the Victim Card when nothing's hating them directly. I go to a Christian private school and said that I'm atheist/agnostic, and I got slammed by a few people for dissing Christianity. I said I never dissed Christianity, I slammed all religions. However, a couple of them just wouldn't listen.

I've said that to an Islam-practicer and while he looked at me quizzically, he never spoke against me. I said that to a Jew and he said "Whatever you believe in." I don't see why Christians, or any other religion, need to play the Victim Card.

kiml wrote: I am tired of all these religions fighting for supremacy. I am an atheist. Whatever you believe in. GREAT. BELIEVE! Just don't let your bickering intrude on my life. I have may friends of many beliefs and non-beliefs. We get along together. This argument just furthers the division of church, christianity, islam, agnostics and atheists. (I noticed in my spell check that christianity and islam needed a capital letter but agnostic and atheist didn't. This furthers the division.) I respect people for who they are and not what they are. All these other labels only divide us. Talk to the person and listen to the person, and then make up your mind. Do not bring in religion or politics into this discussion.

With that, I concur. I believe it is Jesus' intent that Christians live in a manner pleasing to God, with faith in Jesus (since no one is saved through works), answering those who ask about the Faith without repeatedly pointing out the message of salvation to those who simply are not receptive. In my experience, nobody was ever "argued" into becoming a Christian.

The only thing I would add is that if schools wish to separate religion from their activities, that they should do so for all established religions. And no, I don't see the theory of evolution as a religion.

Allah is the Arabic word for God. Sometimes people attach other words, when speaking about a certain religion. Allah, (the Muslim god) is not the same God Jews and Christians worship. The Muslim, Allah comes from a tribal moon god. That why the moon is used in their symbol.

Barry Bildeburgers

Don't cherry pick your meanings.

Name of Allāh written in Arabic calligraphy by 17th century Ottoman artist Hâfız Osman

Allah (Arabic: الله‎, Allāh, Turkish: Allah, IPA: [ʔalˤːɑːh] ( listen)) is the standard Arabic word for God.^[1] While the term is best known in the West for its use by Muslims as a reference to God, it is used by Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews, in reference to "God".^[1][2][3] The term was also used by pagan Meccans as a reference to the creator-god, possibly the supreme deity in pre-Islamic Arabia.^[4]

Jay-

I am actually a bit "humbled" by this particular comment,
in that I bashed you for it in another place on this seed.
My BAD, and my apologies. You actually DID intend it for
clarification, and not as "filler". (Voted it up)

I "knee-jerked", sorry about that.

Funny, for Christian holiday songs being "banned" from public schools, I watched a high school choir sing religious carols just the other week. "Silent Night," "The First Noel," and "Hark the Herald Angels Sing" were among the songs sung. The choir concert was broadcast on local television.

Banned? Only in your fevered little right-wing fantasies.

Which brings up my question from #3 above-- do we know what else was on the program at this particular concert, and did it include any other traditional carols?

One song does not make a culture war, people...

Max maybe in your school district they allow them, but i know for a fact they do not allow them in the one I live in. I was in choir in high school, my sophomore year we did the song the "Hallejah Chorus" which is one of the greatest Christmas songs ever written. When I was a senior, we were going to do it again, but our teacher said that we couldnt do any song with references to God, Jesus, Lord etc. So that is my personal experience with it.

It's sad that you in this thread say you don't discriminate or hate Christians, but look up at these comments. There is just one hate comment after another. I'm not complaining either, just stating an observation!

Does that mean you think that ALL forms of religion should be banned? Including Islamic references?

besides teaching the kids about the origins of religion or the basics (what it's about, what some of the main beliefs and traditions are, etc) then yes, everything except what I just stated should remain outside of the school.

Does that mean you think that ALL forms of religion should be banned? Including Islamic references?

I'll believe this school actually had their kids singing songs about Allah when I see it on a more reliable source than Fox News.

Max, they were singing songs about all religons not just Allah (which is another word for God) I linked the actual article from the Indianipolis Star further down. Its just plain silly that people get worked up about even mentioning Islam. They were trying to teach inclusiveness as opposed to decisiveness that we adults seem to be guilty of.

Schools and politics should be religion-neutral. Neither encouraging nor prohibiting any one religion or religion in general nor atheism.

Is this a difficult concept? To many, yes.

I'll believe this school actually had their kids singing songs about Allah when I see it on a more reliable source than Fox News.

So you will only believe it if it comes from a liberal leaning news source? Noted.

Come on Simp,

People only CHOOSE to validate sources if they agree with THEM!

Otherwise, they are like a sieve holding water.

Schools and politics should be religion-neutral. Neither encouraging nor prohibiting any one religion or religion in general nor atheism.

Is this a difficult concept? To many, yes.

No reason it should be-- the USA was intended to be a secular nation of people who had the individual freedom of conscience in confessional matters. We can be, are, and always have been a religious people-- but (God willing) we will never be a religious nation...

If the dominionists think they're being prosecuted, perhaps they should take a clear-eyed look at how the rhetoric of a "Christian nation" and their seeming desire to mandate their personal beliefs as the shape of the public square strike at the foundations of our society and government-- which many among us hold with the same fervor of belief as they do their Lord and Savior...

Alex- ( #6.4 )
"They were trying to teach inclusiveness"

No, they weren't. "Inclusiveness", by definition, would have
"included" the "Christian" God AS God, and the Muslim God AS
God, and (one or more of) the Hindu God(s) AS God, there are
MULTITUDES of "God's" to have included. (but they DIDN'T)

According to the article, GOD is "Allah", the johnny-come-
lately" God. "...declaring, "Allah is God" while including
"references" to Christmas, Hanukkah, Ramadan... However,
no deity, other than Allah, was referenced."

The word "deity" means the "God", not the "holiday". That
means EXACTLY what it says, "Allah" is the only "GOD" the
children were to sing about, all other "references" and/or
"inclusions" were HOLIDAYS.

Serving up Muslim "God" on a Christmas platter.

None is the best policy. We have homes and churches to sing all the songs we want about Allah, Jesus, Krishna, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Agree. Schools shouldn't be doing anything with religion except the histories and very basics, at most.

I know at my school we did the basics of Jewish in 6th grade while talking about Phonecia, Basics of Islam in 8th grade when talking about Middle east, and basics of Christianity in 8th grade while talking about Europe.

That was fine with me. Just talking about it, how it came to be. Nothing questioning or imposing.

Luckily, down here we don't have a lot of controversies about religion. It's mostly Protestant, or Catholic, with a smattering of Mormon and Methodist

Thank God!!

At least ONE normal AMERICAN town left in the USA...

This is disturbing and disgusting as well.

I don't care what 'spin' they want to put on it, but Allah is representative of Muslim\Islamic Faith. I would be very angry at the allowing of that being Praised and not including all other Faiths.

This should not be allowed at all in the public school system.

The bigger picture is far more frightening.

The influx of Islamic influence and the citizens that think it is okay.

I was raised in a Christian environment in the UK, and I promise you, at 5 yrs old we knew the basic Bible stories and understood the grasp of who the Trinity was....so Yes to the query of explaining to a 7 yr old, they should already be familiar with the concepts.

so Yes to the query of explaining to a 7 yr old, they should already be familiar with the concepts.

ACtually brittlassy the sad reality is the majority of 7 years olds today dont have a basic grasp on the concepts. I was also raised in a Christian environment and I can tell you this in my experience children who are brought up in the way they should go will not stray from it the majority of the time, and are usually better behaved than those who dont. But once again this is just a representation of my experience and not hardly every single person.

What next, school uniforms consisting of berkas and candaras?

At least ONE normal AMERICAN town left in the USA...

so all other religions aside from christianity aren't ' normal ' ?

wow that's bigoted ! not to mention the US was not founded on christianity but the freedom of and from religion.

Lets get TECHNICAL...

The Pilgrims were ENGLISH settlers that brought with them 16th century Bibles.... BIBLES.... they established a branch of church that was related to the Church of England with out the politics and under the thumb monarchy rules.

So in essence the Under GOD..... Marriage performed with the BIBLE, and courts established that were sworn in ON the Bible , had Christian fundamental tenets.

And call it any negative thing you wish, but bigotry was not the basis for being scared to death that the Training Camps for Muslim and Islamic Women to learn out to slit throats IN the USA, would become NORMAL!!!

ACtually brittlassy the sad reality is the majority of 7 years olds today dont have a basic grasp on the concepts.

Isn't it?

Britlassy: Muslims came to this country over 100 years ago and "Under God" is from ~1952, and many framers were Deists and just because Christians have imposed their religon on us and shoved it down our throat does NOT mean it is accepted or appreciated by all or that it is correct to impose their Bible and religon in so many facits of our culture. I say NO religon of ANY creed in ANY facit of our gov't,...courts, schools, money, etc. Go to you tax free Church or go home and knock yourself out.

At least ONE normal AMERICAN town left in the USA...

So only your book of fairy tales, and only your sky daddy equals "normal"? Since you don't want Islam taught in schools (neither do I, although I doubt it is), how about we just knock off the religious B.S. period? If you want to brainwash your child into believing in your mythology, and you want it taught to them even in school, send your kid to a religious school.

I never once said or inferred that Religion should be taught in public school. I agreed that a history of facts and dates in reference to historical events should be included. Crusades and such.

Nor was I rude or attacking those that follow things I don't believe in. That is the biggest flaw in the so-called intelligent people on the Vine, if they are not in agreement, they seem to be incapable of debating the differences, rather that they attack and belittle the person who 'dares' disagree.

I care not if the Muslims came to this country 100 yrs ago or 5 yrs ago, we should have had a backbone that said... practice in home, church, meeting places, but Do not think we have to change OUR ways to suit yours, or be subjected to cries of discrimination and retaliation of terrorist acts.

Don't like it...... get a map and go back to your country, why be here in the first place?

Britlassy wrote: Nor was I rude or attacking those that follow things I don't believe in. That is the biggest flaw in the so-called intelligent people on the Vine, if they are not in agreement, they seem to be incapable of debating the differences, rather that they attack and belittle the person who 'dares' disagree.

A great many on the Vine employ logical fallacies, since they seem ignorant of them. Ad hominem attacks are among the most popular. Unfortunately for those posters who attempt fallacies with me, I recognize them for what they are and call the posters on them. Fallacies are often employed by those in debate for whom logic has proven ellusive:

A fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. This differs from a factual error, which is simply being wrong about the facts. To be more specific, a fallacy is an "argument" in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support. A deductive fallacy is a deductive argument that is invalid (it is such that it could have all true premises and still have a false conclusion). An inductive fallacy is less formal than a deductive fallacy. They are simply "arguments" which appear to be inductive arguments, but the premises do not provided enough support for the conclusion. In such cases, even if the premises were true, the conclusion would not be more likely to be true.

What your eloquent dissertation amounts to, is that here on the VINE, we are all of strong opinions. Each and every one believes theirs is valid and oft times more than not, we arrogantly think, we hold the only 'correct' viewpoint.

That is why the Vine is so wonderful and so aggravating, the debate becomes a way to inflate an ego by standing on the backs of others, whilst making certain someone hears their side, childish games, and bullying people because they cannot see, we are not always 'right' about everything.

What I state is MY opinion of the world or subject, however learned or inexperienced, I am here to share the ideologies of the state of the world and those that take an opposing stance, I will attempt to learn something of value there too.

UNA_Lion

Nice attempt at a red herring. Instead of commenting on the seed, you try to make yourself look better by projecting. Is that really the best you can do?

robynlewisTX.

Where do you see a red herring? Britlassy commented that many on the Vine engage in personal attacks upon those with whom they disagree:

Britlassy wrote: Nor was I rude or attacking those that follow things I don't believe in. That is the biggest flaw in the so-called intelligent people on the Vine, if they are not in agreement, they seem to be incapable of debating the differences, rather that they attack and belittle the person who 'dares' disagree.

I concured with her observation, adding that such attacks were ad hominem, lending nothing to a debate. Please point out where you observed a red herring, or an attempt at one. A definition of ad hominem, from the link provided follows:

Description of Ad Hominem

Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

Britlassy wrote:

we should have had a backbone that said... practice in home, church, meeting places but Do not think we have to change OUR ways to suit yours

And the Founders did, Britlassy-- we are a secular nation with individual freedom of conscience in confessional matters.

Shouldn't having the "backbone" to say to the pious "it's your business, not everyone's", as you are supporting vis-a-vis Islam, also apply to your own religion? And mine, and theirs, and that other guy's as well?

Why should you be able to say such a thing to someone else, but no one be able to say it to you?

Britlassy:

and courts established that were sworn in ON the Bible ,

I always found it ironic that they would require someone to swear on a book in which it is written, "Swear not on any book". Wow, looks like we dropped the ball on that one.

AlanA0720

I always found it ironic that they would require someone to swear on a book in which it is written, "Swear not on any book". Wow, looks like we dropped the ball on that one.

Yes, just one more example of the heresy called religion. That's one of my problems with all religions, they are betrayers of their own faith. Hypocrisy.

At least ONE normal AMERICAN town left in the USA...

The person raised in the UK is judging what is "normal" and "American" and it had better be Christian, or it's not 'normal' or 'American.'

So someone who isn't Christian isn't a normal American? Or even an American at all? ("why be here in the first place? ")

Wow. That's some vileness, right there.

Kim as usual you type and no little of what you speak....in most of your seeds, your modus operandi is to attack and argue, with out the grasp of what the comment really meant.

I would gladly take a moment to explain, the obvious, but in this case, it is not worth the effort.

So your assumptions can stand, I care not for the little impact they make or how little there is of truth.

Britlassy, instead of turning the argument to what some one or other 'Viner has or has not done, could you address the questions that your statement has raised? I would certainly be interested in how you respond to my post above...

Who's questions?
Kims?
Not hardly.

I have been on the vine for over a year and painfully learned there are certain people who will doggedly follow people of differing opinions just to cause controversy. Some are worth addressing and some are not.

How about my questions, then?

I, for one, think it's WAY "out of order" for a BRIT ( #7.7 )
to have to be the ONE person to school (supposed) "Americans"
on the FUNDAMENTALS of their own HISTORY.

"Christian fundamental tenets" = DUH...

The entire United States, it's Founders and Forefathers, and
it's GREATEST attributes and assets ALL owe their origins to,
(dare I say it?) CHRISTIANITY. From the OUTSET, it's been,
"In GOD We Trust". (ALL others pay CASH!)

The base of ALL our fundamental FREEDOMS come from Jefferson's
"...they are endowed by their Creator...", as well as "appealing
to the Supreme Judge of the world..." and I can conclusively
PROVE beyond doubt Tommy was NOT speaking of the murderous
"Allah" or his pedophilic "prophet" Muhammed. He was also NOT
speaking of Krishna, nor Zeus, or Ba'al, or even Satan.

He was speaking of YAHWEH. Judeo (Christian) "God" of Abrahim,
"Father" of Jesus of Nazareth, ( "forgive them, Father..." ) and
"Head" of the Holy TRINITY.

"The Allah of the Muslims is not the God of Christians, nor
Yahweh of the Jews."

"The view of modern Islamic activists (is), that 'Islam must
rule the world and until Islam does rule the world we will
continue to sacrifice our lives', (Al- Badr spokesman Mustaq
Aksari, CNN, Sept 19, 2001)

Neither extreme nor even remarkable from the standpoint of
traditional Islam. It has been divinely sanctioned from the
moment Muhammed had established a safe power base in
Medina: 'O Prophet, Rouse the Believers to the fight', the
Qu'ran orders (8:65), and promises that 20 Muslims,'patient
and persevering', would vanquish 200 unbelievers; if a hundred
they will vanquish a thousand.

Allah further orders the faithful to fight the unbelievers,
(9:123). (Serge Trifkovic, The Sword Of The Prophet, Regina
Orthodox Press Inc., 2002, Boston, 87)."

I harbor "religophobia", an unyielding oppositional "disorder"
directly related to having other people's fake-ass "religions"
THRUST upon me. Save that crap for your CHURCH.

Oh, yeah, MERRY CHRISTMAS, Charlie Brown!

Tansy

Allah (Arabic: الله‎, Allāh, Turkish: Allah, IPA: [ʔalˤːɑːh] ( listen)) is the standard Arabic word for God.^[1] While the term is best known in the West for its use by Muslims as a reference to God, it is used by Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews, in reference to "God".^[1][2][3] The term was also used by pagan Meccans as a reference to the creator-god, possibly the supreme deity in pre-Islamic Arabia.^[4]

Damn, Jay! Sometimes, you kick ASS!

There's a LOT I didn't know in there...

("Pagan" Meccans, for one)

Jay-

On re-reading what you wrote, I realized 2 things...

Your reference was to basically "define" Muslim "Allah", (which
was how I took it as I read it) so I thought YOUR point was in
clarifying the origins. (It apparantly wasn't?)

Second, that ALL the references came from Wikipedia. Not that
that's a "bad" thing, just that there ARE more "sources" to
choose from.

MY point was, it takes a Brit to teach "Americans" U.S. History.
If American children are singing, it shouldn't be a song about
"Allah", or our FRESH "Savior", for that matter. Regardless what
the idiot "Organizer" says, this IS, in fact, a CHRISTIAN nation,
based on, and FOUNDED in Christianity.

Basically, I meant, Yahweh has kicked Allah's ass for Allah's
entire existance, which is why the child-molesting "prophet"
was called upon to "Rouse the Believers to the fight", in an
attempt to make THEIR crappy religion "rule the world". The
BritLass is right, ( @ #7.3 ) and right AGAIN. ( #7.7 )

Then we have non-thinking crap-artists attempting to interject
open ignorance about "the US was not founded on christianity",
and "Christians have imposed their religon on us and shoved it
down our throat", and other sheer IGNORANCE of America and
it's Christian Foundations. Like it or NOT, this stuff WASN'T pulled
out of the "Koran", or out of Thomas Jefferson's ASS, it came
from the BIBLE. The "Christian" B*I*B*L*E.

Forgive me for thinking you had made an actual POINT. I forgot
you had complained of my using links for references on other
comments I've made, as well as "copy/pasting" to bash ignorance
on a point-by-point. (A swing and a miss for ya, strike ONE)

Exactly, Mike, I think that the society we live in is being fundamentally changed. That is the agenda of the present adminstration. People better wake up, and realize that the progressives are brainwashing our children. I could be wrong, but by logically examining the events around me, it points to that direction.

Imagine this...

"You see class, some people worship Jesus, some Allah, some Buddha, and some people worship Satan. Some people like to embrace the occult, and pray to the devil, and then do drugs and have wild sex orgies. They believe that through mind altering drugs and pagan sex rituals that they are brought closer to The Fallen Angel, Lucifer, and they long for the day when they can join him in hell. Sometimes, they incorporate a corpse in their bizarre sex rituals, having sex with, in, on and around the corpse. Now, let's watch this video of a Satanic Necrophiliac Sexual Orgy"

That's good education right there! And open minded too. I mean, how are you going to choose a religion fairly unless you know about ALL of them.

/sarc

Instead of squealing about the schools becoming "temples of darkness" and teaching atheism and homosexuality, here's a challenge.

Turn off your talk-show radio for one week. Devote the time you spend listening to Limbaugh and his bunch on volunteering at a local public school. Get in there and help those good-hearted, overworked teachers and staffers with educating the kids. Then come back and post as to how many times you heard teachers trying to "brainwash" kids to do anything besides learning their subject and treating each other with a modicum of courtesy and respect.

Max Black

I've worked inside dozens of schools, and I have seen first hand just how terrible they are. Of course if you really want to see their failures, just look at test scores, or better still, go talk to a kid and have them tell you some of the stuff they "learn" about in schools. It's unbelievable.

Mike -

All the more reason to take Max Black's advice, if that is what you think. If you spend all your time listening to raving fools rant about what is wrong with our country and it's education system, and your only solution is to trash it some more, then you are part of the problem.

jacq24

I'm curious, what's one thing have to do with the other?

mike lonkouski

Imagine this...

"You see class, some people worship Jesus, some Allah, some Buddha, and some people worship Satan. Some people like to embrace the occult, and pray to the devil, and then do drugs and have wild sex orgies. They believe that through mind altering drugs and pagan sex rituals that they are brought closer to The Fallen Angel, Lucifer, and they long for the day when they can join him in hell. Sometimes, they incorporate a corpse in their bizarre sex rituals, having sex with, in, on and around the corpse. Now, let's watch this video of a Satanic Necrophiliac Sexual Orgy"

That's good education right there! And open minded too. I mean, how are you going to choose a religion fairly unless you know about ALL of them.

that was one of the most ignorant posts I've read here.

not to mention the fact that according to the bible Satan is still an angel of God. ( think Job where satan could do nothing to Job without God's consent ) .. who has a crappy job but can only do what God commands. and Lucifer ? in not Satan. nor the devil but reference to the king of Babylon !

this is just some of the things average christians do not know about their own beliefs / book of fairy tales . sad really.

Not to mention Lucifer ? is a latin term meaning shining , bright and clear . used for Venus the morning star.... how did that make it into the hebrew bible ?

actually , according to the bible .. God is the creator of evil.

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7

Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it? (Amos 3:6)

Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good? (Lamentations 3:38)

Who's beliefs? I am aware of the Bible, but I am not a believer of the Bible.

I am only speaking to the practice of Satanism as manifested by the idiots that are into it, I have no religious training on the Bible or any other religious text. I have a cursory knowledge of the major religions.

I mock all religions equally, that's my agreement with my god, called truth.

they should teach them Satanism as well.

That's easy. Turn on Rush Limbaugh's show.

Kim-298921

That's easy. Turn on Rush Limbaugh's show.

That has got to be the lamest Rush Limbaugh joke...ever.

As a teacher with over 20 years' experience in the public schools, it's been my experience that anyone who's worked in "dozens of schools" is either an outside consultant, someone with psych services or other clinicians, etc who travel from school to school, or someone who has been fired repeatedly. That or you're misrepresenting yourself.

I won't argue for a moment about how much better the schools could be doing than they are. But you shifted the argument from "schools are teaching Islam" (or "schools are teaching teh gay" or "schools are teaching Satanism" or whatever the day's meme is) to "schools are terrible." Nice rhetorical maneuver to avoid having the legs cut out from under you.

The schools are not "terrible," but they are vastly underperforming. That's because your Republicans have grossly underfunded them for three decades or more (and have viciously demonized teachers and school personnel for the same time period), and to a lesser extent, because Democrats have spent limited resources on curriculum inclusion of materials that aren't as necessary to our kids' education as other things that have been left out. Simplistic but a lot more accurate than your previous contention that teachers are trying to turn our kids into gay terrorist witches.

Mike,

I've been to many schools (99% public school) throughout my young life, and from what I remember there has been NO brainwashing. They didn't cram stuff down our throats and say "ONLY BELIEVE THIS!!!111ONEONE!!". The teachers I were with taught us open-mindedness and inclusiveness. Before moving out to Oregon, I lived in Iowa. In my little district, everyone was open-minded, Independent, and inclusive of other colors, religions, etc. There was no brainwashing, no one saying "BELIEVE IN -insert religion-".

Same for Oregon. In middle and high school, we have not been "brainwashed". I go to a Christian Private School now and while it's heavily Republican/Christian, they teach us open-mindedness and inclusiveness. I'd like to see what schools you went to. Did you go to Texan schools? Alabama?

alternate religions

What makes them "alternate" religions? Alternate to what? Last time I checked, we didn't have a state religion nor live under a theocracy. Your fables are as ridiculous theirs. Face it.

Ripley8, you are utterly misguided in your false quoting of the Bible! What "bible" have you been reading? The Jehowa's Witnesses'? God is not a "Creator of evil"! Isaiah 45, 7 says: "I make light and create darkness, cause prosperity and misfortune." Where there is evil here? Darkness is a necessity for the light to shine. Darkness helps you to rest after a day's work. It is not "evil"! Misfortunate is also a necessity to learn to avoid evil! It is not "evil"! Same thing with Amos 3, 6, which echoes exact same thought: "no misfortune happens in a city that God has not caused." This is the outcome of man's sins, the best outcome possible! In other words, God, the Good Father, knows that those misfortunes are the mildest possible beneficial responses to sin in the long run! Lamentations 3, 38, again, reiterates the exact same thought: "misfortune and happiness come from the Lord." The misfortune here is never evil when originating in God. Rather, it is a blessing for humankind! These "misfortunes" save us from hell in this life and in the next! How dare you call them "evil"?

Max Black

I wasn't speaking to the issue of brainwashing, I was speaking to the fact that the public education system sucks, and turns out idiots every year.

By the way, I was installing electronic systems into schools.

Underfunding is not the problem, the problem is teachers, administrators, and the government entities that run the schools. I never said they are teaching ISlam, I only know what I hear and read when it comes to that.

Mike, thanks for the civilized reply. The thread is about some idiot squealing about "brainwashing" our little kiddies by "making" them sing praises to Allah. You did not jump on that particular crazy train.

The public schools don't turn bright-eyed, well-scrubbed children into howling idiots. That's the parents, and TV, and video games, and in many cases, the horrific economic repression they grow up in. The schools aren't capable of overcoming all of those factors. Schools are underfunded, understaffed, overworked, given far too much responsibility, held to an incredible standard of accountability, and generally held up to ridicule and slander for no good reason. They're given an impossible task and then given nothing with which to perform that task.

Sorry you feel that the teachers and staff are a bunch of gibbering liberal twits, but you're dead wrong. And installing computers and phone systems in schools doesn't give you much of a clue as to what goes on in them (though I have no doubt you've seen some outrageous things -- the schools have their share of incompetent fools in them, sometimes running them). Get in there and pitch for a week, eight hours a day, then tell me what you think.

Max Black

Get in there and pitch for a week, eight hours a day, then tell me what you think.

I don't think I can do that. For one, I don't like children. They're like people, only smaller and dumber, and with less respect. All crappy people start out as crappy kids.

I won't contest much of what you say, because I do recognize that the failure of our society and families has contributed to the failure of our schools. People have irresponsibly turned-over the raising of their kids to the public schools, and that will never work.

I used to hate working in schools. The administrators were mindless government job knuckleheads, the teachers should have chosen another profession, and the kids all but kill your hope for mankind. If I were going to teach, it would have to be a military academy.

I don't know how you did it for 20 years, especially because I know that you must have seen firsthand the decline of our people and our society.

Shub Tnediserp Remrof

perhaps bring religious peace among the world.

Yeah, well, I wouldn't hold your breath waiting on that one.

Here's why. people tend to think that by educating people about different religions, it will help end bigotry and discrimination. It doesn't.

It teaches some people to be more accepting, but it doesn't cure the problem, and that's because it doesn't sway religious zealots, the real problem

Zealots believe too much in their own religion, that's the problem, and they aren't changed by being taught about other religions, they already know about other religions, they also "know" that their religion is the "right" one, and all the others are lessor.

Education of other religions doesn't cure the fact that each religion teaches their believers that their religion alone is the pathway to heaven.

Religious elitism is the root of religious discrimination, not religious ignorance.

Well, that's my opinion anyway.

Most don't have a problem with other religions, just with religious hypocrisies. Go back, oh say, 200 years. When whites were spreading the Word, as well as themselves. If the Indians (oh I am one, and I prefer Indian, not native american thx), would not be turned, they were subsequently murdered until the remainder submitted to the ways of the whites. Yet the Bible says, "If they will not be turned, leave and shake the dust from your feet".

AlanA0720

You're right, The way we treated the Indians in regard to their "education" was disgusting. One more reason why I hate public education.

Mike the only thing I can say about your thoughts on public education:

Take the teachers out of the equation. They run absolutely nothing. There are too many principals, superintendents (and all their office staff), idiot school boards, local, state and federal government that have absolutely no idea what they are are doing who are destroying public education. Teachers aren't even allowed to teach any more. Some makes up a curriculum and that's the end of things.

Of course there are bad teachers just like there are bad Marines. I guess we could go about blaming all the Marine Corp for the bad ones, right.

jaywow67

Take the teachers out of the equation. They run absolutely nothing. There are too many principals, superintendents (and all their office staff), idiot school boards, local, state and federal government that have absolutely no idea what they are are doing who are destroying public education. Teachers aren't even allowed to teach any more. Some makes up a curriculum and that's the end of things.

There is some truth to what you say, but teachers still represent where the rubber meets the road, so I wouldn't overly minimize their role.

Of course there are bad teachers just like there are bad Marines. I guess we could go about blaming all the Marine Corp for the bad ones, right.

Yes, I blame the Marine Corps for every bad Marine, because run properly, there would be no "bad Marines", we'd just weed them out (or send them over to the Army)!

but teachers still represent where the rubber meets the road,

Agreed but when they are told to teach exactly from a set curriculum without any relief from the variety of learning styles and learning abilities in a class. You go try it.

Where do you think the Marines get the less than the best. We send them to you and you eagerly take them.

jaywow67

We send them to you and you eagerly take them.

Sounds like someone is running out of ammo.

Agreed but when they are told to teach exactly from a set curriculum without any relief from the variety of learning styles and learning abilities in a class. You go try it

Yes, I know, but allowing teachers to get creative is what got us that rule.

I know that you have heard the stories, but sometimes one goes on a pro-jesus love fest, and another starts talking about doing acid at a grateful dead concert, and another tells them about fisting. So, now we have "structured curriculum"

I thought the left liked the public youth indonctrination centers?

We haven't found more common ground have we? -MikeWow69

Sounds like someone is running out of ammo.

Mine's fresh you're still using '60s duds. :)

Sounds like someone is running out of ammo.

Aw hell Mike we'v always had some things in common.

There has ALWAYS been separation of church and state in schools it just took us to the 1960's to get it right. The first 300 years (Schools, not government) was a huge mistake. Schools are much better NOW. I had much rather have my kid bowing to Mecca than learning Science. Let everyone do what "feels" good.....if you disagree you are a bigot.

But the day of reckoning is coming.

A man made one I'm sure if there is one.

Just do not let the students draw pictures of crucifixes, someone might get offended

Nope... but, if when asked who that is on the cross, the child in question states "it's me", do expect a responsible teacher to suggest the boy get some help...

MA school denies suspending student for drawing

Johnson told reporters that administrators were concerned the boy drew Xs for Jesus' eyes, and particularly worried when his son said he'd drawn himself on the cross [emphasis mine]. He said his son was suspended and ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation. But the school district said it's unclear whether the boy even drew that particular sketch in school.

Before we jump all over this or that news story, perhaps we should start giving ourselves a bit more time for new information and analysis to come to light? Slow down the 24-hour news cycle to give ourselves (as a society) time for reflection? Just a thought...

Whitehood... I will discuss his failings with him, any child that dies is a failing! Any group that dies without reason is a failing. Any area that dies due to crop failures is a failure...Your idea of god is silly, absurd and ignorant.

Your idea of god could hit me with a lightning bolt! Oops, no thats Thor...

What if you're wrong?

Ah, Pascal's Wager. And if you're wrong?

Finding the right religion is like finding an atom in a galactic-sized haystack. You had better hope that you picked the right one.

The funny thing is that all these threats of hell and stuff are not biblically based, for the most part. It is actually based off of the brilliance of Dante Alighieri. He effectively created the world's first horror movie.

Heaven or Hell, in reality, is in the eyes of the beholder and in the memories of those that are left behind. For instance, Winston Churchill will be remembered as a great man who tried his best, despite his imperfections. Adolf Hitler will be remembered as a murderous douchebag (that's probably an understatement, but whatever).

What if you're wrong?

And what if you are? What if you're pissing off Allah more and more every day by worshiping Jesus? What if the Hindus are right? What if the ancient Greeks, Romans or Norsemen were right? Tell me, what makes you so sure your tall tales are the ultimate truth?

No, they mentioned HOLIDAYS, and ONE "god", Allah.

I do not think in ANY public school, should embrace any religious practice, that is what the Private schools, Church, Sunday School, Camp and home is for.

Teach it as history, fact and events.

These two statements are contradictory. Teaching religion as actual history (instead of its effect on history) is implying that there is something behind it. The Genesis story, Noah's Ark, and even the census in Jesus' time are all pretty much bunk.

Teaching about the Crusades, the influence of the Papacy on medieval governments, and the reach of Saladin is a good lesson in a "do not do this" kind of way.

What if you are wrong? I really do not want to start an argument. All these sites are about starting arguments.

I accept everyone. Richard Dawkins is an agitator.

I just want to live my life and accept everyone else.

No argument here!

Pascal's Wager is a crap argument anyway. See my post #17.2 for a better explanation.

History is usually painted in the eyes of the victors; it also comes with perceptions based on the culture of its time. The best we can hope to do is learn from the texts left behind, and the physical objects (remains of bodies, weapons, and pottery for example) that could corroborate the events.

As for being wrong, we are all imperfect, that is where the joy of learning from our mistakes comes from.

I have always wondered if those that choose Atheism as a 'choice' of principle, are doing so, because deep inside, are truly worried about not being worthy and good enough for Heaven.

Snort. Nice attempt to reframe the debate into "all them atheists want to be like Us Chosen, but they're a-scared or don't think they're good enough."

I have always wondered if those that choose Atheism as a 'choice' of principle, are doing so, because deep inside, are truly worried about not being worthy and good enough for Heaven.

Leaving aside, for the moment, your condescending assertion that atheists would even believe in Heaven "deep inside," or that they find themselves less worthy than their Christian brethren, I take issue with your use of the word "choice" (with or without quotes). I think one might "choose" to follow or not to follow a practice, but on the base question of believing in [G/g]od(s) or not, one simply follows what appears, to all evidence and reason, to be true.

And I echo..... what if you are wrong?

What if? Since no empirical test illustrates the existence of any deity, you'd think that deity would be a little flexible. After all, no particular religious claim can be illustrated to have greater veracity than all others.

Pascal's wager is a problematic bet. If the theist is wrong, and the Christian life was, for him/her, an unhappy struggle, the cost has been the opportunity to be happy in the one life we've got. That's no small price to pay for making the wrong bet. Better or worse than an eternity of hellfire? I guess that depends. Is a deity who punishes honest error the sort of company one would wish to keep?

If the theist is wrong, and the Christian life was, for him/her, an unhappy struggle, the cost has been the opportunity to be happy in the one life we've got.

You assume far too much. You assume, or rather the wager does, that Christians are somehow unhappy. Most of those with whom I am acquainted, (save a few in the "Obama is the anti-Christ" crowd) are quite happy. They are quite content in their existence, their finances, their positions in the community. Why do people automatically assume that following ANY religion somehow makes us miserable?

OOPs, too much coffee, I missed the "if", just ignore some of this rant.

You assume far too much. You assume, or rather the wager does, that Christians are somehow unhappy. Most of those with whom I am acquainted, (save a few in the "Obama is the anti-Christ" crowd) are quite happy. They are quite content in their existence, their finances, their positions in the community. Why do people automatically assume that following ANY religion somehow makes us miserable?

As a pantheist and a practitioner of Nichiren Buddhism, I'm not suggesting that religion inherently makes one miserable. Religious practice, of course, asks a lot of us. I'm happier as a Buddhist than I would be as a Christian, for more reasons than I'd care to get into now, but that's not why I'm a Buddhist; I would never choose happiness over the appearance of truth, because truth is the only directive that has any real meaning for me.

What I'm saying is that adopting religion on the basis of Pascal's wager, in light of no other evidence or even an intuition of truth, is futile AND potentially miserable if your nature conflicts with the particular strictures of that religion. No matter what sort of therapy he goes through, a gay man will never be as happy celibate or in a hetersexual marriage as in a loving, committed, homosexual relationship. Now, if he TRULY believes in God, in the divinity of Christ, in the atonement, then perhaps being Christian, whatever potential happiness it robs him of in this life, will seem worth it based on his hope for the life hereafter, and that hope will make up for any happiness lost. But if he's doing it merely on Pascal's wager--i.e., if he finds the Christian mythos no more historically or philosophically compelling than I do, but succumbs because a Christian life seems (marginally) less miserable than an eternity of hell--and IF that wager doesn't pay off, he HAS lost the potential for happiness.

I hope that cleared the matter up a little.

That was so much better than I could have put it. My problem is that whenever anyone asks "What if you are wrong", someone automatically says "Pascal's wager". I believe that it is a valid question, unless it is derived from the wager. Am I making any sense? (Sometimes coffee sucks). Why can't people just answer the question, as it is meant to be? To cause someone to reflect on their own life, and how they lead that life. Not to be leading into a self imposed hell on earth, full of misery, and having no fun.

Don't get me wrong here. I am not trying to argue against anything other than being a bad person. It is not about whom one worships (prays to, etc.) or doesn't. It's about how one lives their lives. Everyone seems to have missed the real message. It's about forgiveness, patience, treating people right. The message is lost in the rhetoric about hellfire and damnation. Whether the Jews accepted Jesus as the Messiah or not, I don't see anyone being stoned for adultery, or working on Saturday, etc. That was the whole point. "The rules have changed" "These actions are no longer acceptable" "I am paraphrasing".

My problem is that whenever anyone asks "What if you are wrong", someone automatically says "Pascal's wager". I believe that it is a valid question, unless it is derived from the wager. Am I making any sense?

Sort of. And yes, it's a valid question, up to a point. If belief matters more than actions, then the question becomes that much more urgent. But "what if you're wrong" doesn't lead you to an ontological or epistemic basis for whatever theological argument one might make; nor does it offer much of a recipe for happiness in this world IF this world turns out to be the one that matters (unless, of course, what makes one happy happens to resemble the theistic prescription).

Why can't people just answer the question, as it is meant to be? To cause someone to reflect on their own life, and how they lead that life. Not to be leading into a self imposed hell on earth, full of misery, and having no fun.

That's well and good, but I don't see what any of that has to do with deity. My ethical framework hasn't changed much from my Catholic youth to my agnostic/atheist college years to my pantheistic/nihilistic/Buddhist adulthood.

In my experience, most people DO regularly reflect on their lives, their modes of living.

It's about how one lives their lives.

Fair enough. But then, why hold out the wager at all?

DanaR I am curious as to WHERE in the article did it say or insinuate an attack on christians

It didn't. Just another air-raid siren let off by the right-wing jihadists that has no basis in reality.

This is another drive-by seed from DanaR. Don't hold your breath waiting for a response.

It's the "fart in the elevator" style of discourse, named by me for a guy I used to work with who thought the height of humor was to let off a silent but disgusting bioattack in the elevator and then dart out as soon as the doors opened, giggling.

First the libs want evulotion and not God but they want all children to sing to Allah just because BO does!

Can I put "evulotion" on my skin to keep the evil away? And who is "BO," Bo Jackson? Bo Derek? Beau Bridges? Beau Brummel? Beau the tabby cat that lives in my yard? If you mean Obama, why not find a YouTube video of him "singing to Allah" so we can all see for ourselves?

Oh, wait, this is humor. We're supposed to laugh. Warn us next time.

Barrack Obama went to a moslem school in Indanesia where they make everybody sing to Allah but there was no youtube back then so nobody made a video!

Your belief in creationism is as valid as your belief that Barack Obama is a Muslim. You cons will believe anything as long as you hear it at your fundy church or on Fox.

The word is Muslim. And you are wrong. Not about Obama going to a school in Indonesia, but he still kept his Christian roots. Cited here.

Obama >>>> Christian roots?
He acts like his tongue will snap off when he even says the word Christian.

His 20 yrs of listening to the MUSLIM based church spew white hatred and black power says otherwise.

If you type it in ALL CAPS, maybe that makes it more BELIEVABLE?

His first job was as a community organizer working with a network of Christian churches. He's been a member of a Christian church his entire adult life. His wife is a lifetime member of the Church of Christ, and her cousin is one of the country's most prominent black rabbis.

Go peddle your whackjob conspiracy theories somewhere where the facts don't matter. I believe the Free Republic has a blog post waiting for you to write it.

String Being:

Rest assured his immortal soul is in torment. He shall be tortured for all time...and after ten trillion years, his misery will just be beginning.... and rest assured that in some cosmic sense beyond human understanding, it is entirely just and proper that he be in pain forever.

How can anyone who considers him/herself a caring, compassionate human being be unmoved by the pain of someone else, let alone eternal pain and torture?

There is no "one, true religion." There is one Truth, one Being, the nature of which no human can fully comprehend. There are many paths to find this Truth and Joseph Campbell understood that and lived it. We grasp a tiny shard of this Light and think we have the whole thing and we try to box it up and shout, "Eureka, I have found it," and run arround telling others that our box and only our box contains the whole of all Truth and Light. Such silliness!

This Truth is so beyond us that the only way to explain it in inadequate human words is by myth and metaphor, and pray that each one finds the experience of God or Truth or enlightenment or whatever you want to call it.

Did you see Bill Moyers' interview with Joseph Campbell? At some point, Bill Moyers asked Joseph Campbell about faith and Joseph Campbell replied, "I don't need faith; I have experience." And that's the crux of the whole matter. Once that experience occurs, it's no longer a blind faith.

I care, but not about this. I'd rather be huntin' beaver and drinkin' whiskey, to be honest with ya, Mr. R. Donald Snyder (gulp gulp, ahh that's good stuff)

I care. Got a problem with that?

I care. Got a problem with that?

Who are you referring to?

Mike, go back to drinking your whiskey.

No problem with that

I care. Got a problem with that?

You're wrong. No problem.

Mike, go back to drinking your whiskey

I'm feeling purdy problem-free myself, Mr. R. Donald. Elvis must have been pissed off cause he ran out of fried naner sammiches or sumpin'. I heard he gets grumpy without 'em.

Watch out oscar, RDS likes his banana and peanut butter sandwiches too, and may actually worship them as a god