|
|
Post by denounced on Jun 23, 2010 6:03:15 GMT -5
"""You mention indoctrination, but you seem to imply its a bad word. But FYI, ALL INSTITUTIONS INDOCTRINATE! Can you provide me some examples under which my conclusion is incorrect? " Denounced But Secular Humanism seeks to indoctrinate without regard to the first amendment. This is why Christians are persecuted if they even mention intelligent design in public schools, yet evolution, with all of its proven fallacies is still taught without the biblical worldview. Denouce, Secular Humanism is not an institution but a philosophical perspective that has found itself in our PUBLIC school system. Intelligent design supports a religious perspective and that has no place in our PUBLIC schools. We do have Private Schools and CHURCH for such discussions and indoctrination! Evolution is based on SCIENCE which is a discipline traditionally taught in ALL schools. Again, our 1st Amendment at work yet you don't like it. Do you really understand our 1st Amendment? Because you can't support something you don't understand. Sounds like you want to make some constitutional changes...ones that support the trampling of rights?  "Secular Humanism is not an institution but a philosophical perspective that has found itself in our PUBLIC school system." MD Denounced You are so very ignorant of the reality of what secular humanism is and who its promoters are, and have probably never read any of the humanist manifestos. By the way, if it's mere philosophy, why then has it been acted upon in this country for atleast 2 centuries? By the way, it didn't find its way into the public school system, it was strategically placed there. I will guess and say that you are about 30, so when I was learning about secualr humanism in seminary, you were an unwitting product of its success. "Intelligent design supports a religious perspective and that has no place in our PUBLIC schools." MD Denounced Intelligent Design is purely an interpretation of historical evidence based on a biblical worldview. Here's an example of how you have been fooled. Evolutionists attack ID, because they believe ID scientists are scientifically ignorant. So answer this, why is Genesis and the word "DAY" in Genesis the most attacked book and of the Bible. The word day is not attacked by evolutionists anywhere else, but Genesis with maybe a few exceptions? Why are Nebraska Man, Piltdown Man, Lucy, etc. still presented in Biology books as steps in human evolution, although they have been proven to be either monkeys or a pig? My point is clear. Even if you remove ALL religious reference, science is still on the Bible's side. Explain, or better yet have evolutionists explain why an extinct 65 million year old fish was found swimming alive and well in 1938? Better yet, have them explain why soft bone marrow tissue was found in a T-Rex bone along with red blood cells? See, this is what evolutionists, or secualr humanists want the ignorant masses to know. "We do have Private Schools and CHURCH for such discussions and indoctrination! Evolution is based on SCIENCE which is a discipline traditionally taught in ALL schools. Again, our 1st Amendment at work yet you don't like it." MD Denounced Nope, you are very wrong. Teach both side by side. I see you have been fooled. How can evolution be based on science when it is the study of historical data. Scientific investigation requires repeatability to prove a fact. I don't see any T-Rex's alive, do you? So it's not the first amendment at work, it's your good old philosophy of secualr humanism at work. I suggest you take a beeter look at the Scopes trial. "Do you really understand our 1st Amendment? Because you can't support something you don't understand. Sounds like you want to make some constitutional changes...ones that support the trampling of rights?" MD Denounced I believe you need to ask yourself that question, because again, it is one that requires historical interpretation. If you look at the first amendment, IN IT'S ORIGINAL FORM, you may be a little suprised. Next, when discussing the first amendment, you may want to have some healthy historical documents handy. But you definitely need to brush up on your knowledge of secular humanism. |
|
|
|
Post by denounced on Jun 23, 2010 6:07:51 GMT -5
Laws for a country that believes in freedom of religion can not base its laws from the Bible because then you are infringing on the rights of those who do not subscribe to Christanity. People kill me with this socialist nonesense. We do have the right as Americans to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but your pursuit to obtain these rights cannot infringe on anyone else's right and that is what people fail to understand. The Bibical World View works for you and me Denounced because we are both Christians but all Americans are not and it would be unjust to make non-Christians adhere to Bibical law.An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere. Don't include me in on your biblical worldview based on what you just said. You do not hold a biblical worldview when it comes to law. Who said, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not murder, thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife? Let's see your biblical worldview of law stands now. |
|
|
|
Post by denounced on Jun 23, 2010 6:14:23 GMT -5
Denouce, Secular Humanism is not an institution but a philosophical perspective that has found itself in our PUBLIC school system. Intelligent design supports a religious perspective and that has no place in our PUBLIC schools. We do have Private Schools and CHURCH for such discussions and indoctrination! Evolution is based on SCIENCE which is a discipline traditionally taught in ALL schools. Again, our 1st Amendment at work yet you don't like it. Do you really understand our 1st Amendment? Because you can't support something you don't understand. Sounds like you want to make some constitutional changes...ones that support the trampling of rights?
That being the case, why should the tenants of Secular Humanism be perpetuated in school while the tenants of [insert any religion name here] are not?Damie helps me make another point about secular humanism, which I had refrained from revealing and will allow you to try and find out. If you truly knew anything about secular humanism, you would know that it's more than a philosophy. |
|
|
|
Post by denounced on Jun 23, 2010 6:21:19 GMT -5
"The Bibical World View works for you and me Denounced because we are both Christians but all Americans are not and it would be unjust to make non-Christians adhere to Bibical law.An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere." JA I thank God for those who have taught me good apologetic skills. Julie, do you really see what is wrong with your last statement? It wreaks of a secular humanist, new ager, soicalist mindset. Just take a little time to evaluate, "An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere", and I hope you will see the folly of this staement alone. This is why cliches are never good for debate. Sound bite revelation at the bar or club or even major news networks tend to have serious flaws. And Mommy Dearest, you cosigned on the statement, so give JA some help. Laws for a country that believes in freedom of religion can not base its laws from the Bible because then you are infringing on the rights of those who do not subscribe to Christanity. People kill me with this socialist nonesense. We do have the right as Americans to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but your pursuit to obtain these rights cannot infringe on anyone else's right and that is what people fail to understand. The Bibical World View works for you and me Denounced because we are both Christians but all Americans are not and it would be unjust to make non-Christians adhere to Bibical law. An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere. Gone and get dat said! I totally support this statement!  |
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Jun 23, 2010 7:11:11 GMT -5
So do we also teach the Hopi (and many other native American cultures) story of creation that God is a woman? Where do we stop with the creation story? Adam and Eve is just as rediculous a story as any other, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jun 23, 2010 9:38:52 GMT -5
So do we also teach the Hopi (and many other native American cultures) story of creation that God is a woman? Where do we stop with the creation story? Adam and Eve is just as rediculous a story as any other, right?
Again I ask, is there room for philosophy in education? If we can learn about the teachings of Plato, why can't we learn about the teachings of Jesus?
Sure I know you'll argue for every religion having their turn to take a bite at the apple. No problem for me. Logistics would probably prevent you from teaching more than just the Abrahamic religions - but however it goes down is cool with me. Just as long as "theist" get to expose kids to their views in the same way "atheist" get to expose kids to their views. If they want to couch their views under the guise of science, there's no reason theist can't couch their views under the guise of philosophy and demand equal time. |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jun 24, 2010 0:44:43 GMT -5
Laws for a country that believes in freedom of religion can not base its laws from the Bible because then you are infringing on the rights of those who do not subscribe to Christanity. People kill me with this socialist nonesense. We do have the right as Americans to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but your pursuit to obtain these rights cannot infringe on anyone else's right and that is what people fail to understand. The Bibical World View works for you and me Denounced because we are both Christians but all Americans are not and it would be unjust to make non-Christians adhere to Bibical law.An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere. "Laws for a country that believes in freedom of religion can not base its laws from the Bible because then you are infringing on the rights of those who do not subscribe to Christanity." JA Is this the old legislate morality theme? Well the real case is what works best. Laws are always going to infringe on someone else, so it is always best to choose the laws that punish the wicked and reward the good. "People kill me with this socialist nonesense. We do have the right as Americans to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but your pursuit to obtain these rights cannot infringe on anyone else's right and that is what people fail to understand." JA I do not fail to understand that, but socialists do not. So it's the socialist nonsense that kills the ignorant. You can punish the "wicked" as you say without using any religious law. There is no way to justify basing the laws of a land from a specific religion when that land has freedom of religion. And then you state you understand that your rights can't infringe on anyone else's, yet because you believe in Christianity you feel the laws of the land should come from the Bible regardless if a citizen believes in that religion or not. So based on that train of thought, if you converted tomorrow to Islam then according to you America should have Islamic law, and if you converted to a Buddist 3 weeks later America should subscribe to the laws of Buddaism. That is ignorance not to mention ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jun 24, 2010 0:51:54 GMT -5
You right I don't simply because I thoroughly understand that I can't infringe on anyone else's religious believe. You right, we don't have the same bibical ideology because you are so far to the right that you are an extremist. I don't deal with extremists. Laws for a country that believes in freedom of religion can not base its laws from the Bible because then you are infringing on the rights of those who do not subscribe to Christanity. People kill me with this socialist nonesense. We do have the right as Americans to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but your pursuit to obtain these rights cannot infringe on anyone else's right and that is what people fail to understand. The Bibical World View works for you and me Denounced because we are both Christians but all Americans are not and it would be unjust to make non-Christians adhere to Bibical law.An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere. Don't include me in on your biblical worldview based on what you just said. You do not hold a biblical worldview when it comes to law. Who said, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not murder, thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife? Let's see your biblical worldview of law stands now. |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jun 24, 2010 0:58:54 GMT -5
There is no folly. You say there is to you, fine. That is your right. I'm not going to beat you over the head to get you to subcribe to my point of view cause that is infringing on your rights to subscribe to what ever theory you want. It would be unjust and me violating your 1st amendment rights. Thanks for the nice setup to back my point. "The Bibical World View works for you and me Denounced because we are both Christians but all Americans are not and it would be unjust to make non-Christians adhere to Bibical law.An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere." JA I thank God for those who have taught me good apologetic skills. Julie, do you really see what is wrong with your last statement? It wreaks of a secular humanist, new ager, soicalist mindset. Just take a little time to evaluate, "An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere", and I hope you will see the folly of this staement alone. This is why cliches are never good for debate. Sound bite revelation at the bar or club or even major news networks tend to have serious flaws. And Mommy Dearest, you cosigned on the statement, so give JA some help. Gone and get dat said! I totally support this statement! |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jun 24, 2010 1:03:14 GMT -5
Damie does have a point. So do we also teach the Hopi (and many other native American cultures) story of creation that God is a woman? Where do we stop with the creation story? Adam and Eve is just as rediculous a story as any other, right?
Again I ask, is there room for philosophy in education? If we can learn about the teachings of Plato, why can't we learn about the teachings of Jesus?
Sure I know you'll argue for every religion having their turn to take a bite at the apple. No problem for me. Logistics would probably prevent you from teaching more than just the Abrahamic religions - but however it goes down is cool with me. Just as long as "theist" get to expose kids to their views in the same way "atheist" get to expose kids to their views. If they want to couch their views under the guise of science, there's no reason theist can't couch their views under the guise of philosophy and demand equal time. |
|
|
|
Post by denounced on Jun 24, 2010 5:55:14 GMT -5
So do we also teach the Hopi (and many other native American cultures) story of creation that God is a woman? Where do we stop with the creation story? Adam and Eve is just as rediculous a story as any other, right? You know what makes one much less ridiculous than the other. THE PROVEN HISTORICAL RELIABILITY OF THE BIBLE. |
|
|
|
Post by denounced on Jun 24, 2010 6:06:59 GMT -5
"Laws for a country that believes in freedom of religion can not base its laws from the Bible because then you are infringing on the rights of those who do not subscribe to Christanity." JA Is this the old legislate morality theme? Well the real case is what works best. Laws are always going to infringe on someone else, so it is always best to choose the laws that punish the wicked and reward the good. "People kill me with this socialist nonesense. We do have the right as Americans to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but your pursuit to obtain these rights cannot infringe on anyone else's right and that is what people fail to understand." JA I do not fail to understand that, but socialists do not. So it's the socialist nonsense that kills the ignorant. You can punish the "wicked" as you say without using any religious law. There is no way to justify basing the laws of a land from a specific religion when that land has freedom of religion. And then you state you understand that your rights can't infringe on anyone else's, yet because you believe in Christianity you feel the laws of the land should come from the Bible regardless if a citizen believes in that religion or not. So based on that train of thought, if you converted tomorrow to Islam then according to you America should have Islamic law, and if you converted to a Buddist 3 weeks later America should subscribe to the laws of Buddaism. That is ignorance not to mention ridiculous. "You can punish the "wicked" as you say without using any religious law." JA Denounced As I suspected, you do not hold a biblical worldview of law. Where do moral laws come from JA? "There is no way to justify basing the laws of a land from a specific religion when that land has freedom of religion." JA Denounced As I suspected, you have been duped by the first amendment clause, and have failed to study the founders writings on this very subject. Remember, they were the ones who wrote them, and understood better than you what they meant when it comes to the first amendment. "And then you state you understand that your rights can't infringe on anyone else's, yet because you believe in Christianity you feel the laws of the land should come from the Bible regardless if a citizen believes in that religion or not." JA Denounced You fail to understand that laws will always infringe on someone else's "SUPPOSED" rights. I also believe that any law should reward the just and punish the wicked. That should be the basis of any law. "So based on that train of thought, if you converted tomorrow to Islam then according to you America should have Islamic law, and if you converted to a Buddist 3 weeks later America should subscribe to the laws of Buddaism. That is ignorance not to mention ridiculous." JA Denounced It is when you do not hold a biblical worldview. Islamic law at face value punishes the innocent for not "BELIEVING" the way they do. You do not have to be a Christian to follow laws. Now that is common sense, not to mention biblical. |
|
|
|
Post by denounced on Jun 24, 2010 6:16:12 GMT -5
There is no folly. You say there is to you, fine. That is your right. I'm not going to beat you over the head to get you to subcribe to my point of view cause that is infringing on your rights to subscribe to what ever theory you want. It would be unjust and me violating your 1st amendment rights. Thanks for the nice setup to back my point. "The Bibical World View works for you and me Denounced because we are both Christians but all Americans are not and it would be unjust to make non-Christians adhere to Bibical law.An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere." JA I thank God for those who have taught me good apologetic skills. Julie, do you really see what is wrong with your last statement? It wreaks of a secular humanist, new ager, soicalist mindset. Just take a little time to evaluate, "An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere", and I hope you will see the folly of this staement alone. This is why cliches are never good for debate. Sound bite revelation at the bar or club or even major news networks tend to have serious flaws. And Mommy Dearest, you cosigned on the statement, so give JA some help. "There is no folly. You say there is to you, fine. That is your right. I'm not going to beat you over the head to get you to subcribe to my point of view cause that is infringing on your rights to subscribe to what ever theory you want." JA Denounced Are you aware that you are infringing on my rights by what you just said? "It would be unjust and me violating your 1st amendment rights. Thanks for the nice setup to back my point." JA Denounced It is not unjust, especially when we both have the right to free speech understanding that it is also a privilege. Thanks for the beautifully nice trap you set for yourself to for me to make another point. "An unjust law anywhere is an unjust law everywhere." JA Denounced How so? You're going to learn a lot by just having to think about this one. You will see why the Biblical Moral Law is Supreme and why it is based on the fact of an Absolutely Perfect Moral Law Giver. |
|
|
|
Post by Noble Work on Jun 24, 2010 11:33:28 GMT -5
JA let's going shopping....You like to shop don't you?....Shoes and purses are your thing right?.......Green you say? Girrrrl I just passed by a shop the other day....Hop in let's do this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jun 24, 2010 23:45:59 GMT -5
lol @ Work! I get it without you saying it, lets roll.
|
|
|
|
Post by BlackPrincess on Jun 29, 2010 0:52:02 GMT -5
whoa snap! Lots to e-catch up on! Im working on a mentally intense projects and don't have the mental energy to expend right now. I'll be back with responses shortly!!  |
|
|
|
Post by denounced on Jul 8, 2010 11:20:10 GMT -5
"JA let's going shopping....You like to shop don't you?....Shoes and purses are your thing right?.......Green you say? Girrrrl I just passed by a shop the other day....Hop in let's do this. GOML"
"lol @ Work! I get it without you saying it, lets roll." JA
This is a perfect example of why the UNCF exists.
|
|
|
|
Post by denounced on Jul 12, 2010 12:21:25 GMT -5
You right I don't simply because I thoroughly understand that I can't infringe on anyone else's religious believe. You right, we don't have the same bibical ideology because you are so far to the right that you are an extremist. I don't deal with extremists. Don't include me in on your biblical worldview based on what you just said. You do not hold a biblical worldview when it comes to law. Who said, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not murder, thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife? Let's see your biblical worldview of law stands now. And by the way being a Christian and having a biblical worldview are not synonymous. If you do not deal with extremists, then how did you accept a Savior that said His way was the ONLY? Jesus is an extremist when it comes to your personal rights. Just take the time to read some of His extremist statements. It would be interesting to see what the Muslim would say to Jesus. Well the U.S. Constitution granted me freedom of religion, you granted me freedom of choice, etc. All freedoms have their consequences and rewards, and just because you are free to do something doesn't mean you won't be punished for it. By the way, if you allowed religions to practice their faiths unequivocally, there would be violence in the streets. You would have to stifle free speech, and freedom of religion would disappear. I suggest you think your personal worldview through to its final conclusion. This is why Biblical Law should be the law of all governments. |
|
|
|
Post by denounced on Jul 20, 2010 12:10:28 GMT -5
Glenn Beck has had several Christian ministers on his show. My problem is that they allow Beck to spew his religious pluralisms, while they sit there saying nothing. Spineless men and a woman, playing politics to get some face time. But this is what happens when men of God play politics. Jesse Jackson is a prime example.
|
|
