Rick Santorum: Let’s call secularism a religion so it can be banned from the classroom

[manualman]

I think we just won’t agree on this.
I don’t see it is undermining the God culture…I think it is just not adding it in–in this specific area.

Examples have already been provided how this dynamic works. We’ve shown how in literature, politics, history, philosophy, art, music (to name just a few) the influence of Christian thought and worldview has been removed from discussion in ways that simply falsify the subjects being taught.

How can anyone understand the fullness of certain Mozart pieces if they don’t know what a mass is and how the music supports the various parts of it? How does one study the magnificence of the Pieta if one has no understanding of the Immaculate Conception? How can one study the Medieval period at all without understanding the world view that permeated it?

The treasures of Western Civilization are irrevocably tied up with our history of Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. When people are educated in truncated versions that pretend that religious conviction is irrelevant to these topics it is no real education at all. To be sure, people still learn to read, write and do math. If that’s all you want from education, it’s fine. Many of us lament the fact that our civilization is no longer taught in our educational system.

 

[meltzerboy]

I

Educational systems impart a fully comprehensive set of knowledge, skills and ethics to students. Banning God from consideration forces the creating and accepting of precepts that are non ’God’. When you enforce people to live in a culture of non God, you are challenging and undermining the God culture. So it is a flawed system with regards to neutrality.

Take authority for example. The Christian says authority comes from the creator. Even the American declaration of independence says that our rights come from the creator. The secular school says ‘no God’ in education. In repressive atheist countries the schools teach authority and rights rest in the government. In western countries schools teach authority comes from democracy, the United Nations or else there is no ultimate form of authority and encourages students that any authority they meet is unjust and should be challenged. We’ve seen a couple of generations now of this individualistic rebellion that has come straight from our education system abandoning Christian precepts of authority and adopting precepts that involve ‘no God’.

Take history for example. The Christian teaches that Creation has a purpose for man to be redeemed and made holy through community and seeking God. Secular education cannot do this. It teaches there is no ultimate reality beyond what we make for ourselves.

Language is enculturated such as ‘constructing reality’ instead of ‘understanding reality; , ‘creating a purpose’ ‘rather than finding it’; accepting ‘all views are equal’ instead of measuring it against ‘the yardstick of the Creator’ teaching we are ‘accidental directionless by-products of natural forces ruled by natural law’ instead of ‘purposefully created spiritual beings with free-will, obligations and responsibilities’.

Such language, behaviour and formation enculturates students in a way which challenges the idea of God. Once you rule out any consideration of God you have to accept precepts and concepts which negate the idea of God.

The changing culture of the last generations caused by the mistake of secular education is testament to this.

No it makes the students live in a culture where the precepts are ‘without God’. It challenges the culture of parents and forces students to choose between cultures.

Schools inform students and is the most important lived culture for students at the time (along with secular media) Students often choose this culture of ‘no God’. That is, they are converted to ‘no God’ because of the biases of secular education. We’ve seen it happen. There is no argument that this does not happen.

This is why most children who rebel from Christianity do it under the false belief that it is not intellectually sound. They get this idea from school, which is supposed to be intellectually sound. The place that the children go to be intellectually developed promulgates precepts where there is no God. It teaches that all faiths should be considered equal which then leads inevitably to the belief all religion is constructed by man and none come from a God.

Because it is indoctrinating other peoples kids to your own philosophy whilst claiming a monopoly of public taxes to do so. In short. It is authoritarian repression.

Why would teaching that all faiths should be considered equal inevitably lead to the belief that all religion is man-made? Maybe G-d has a design in creating many faiths, as Judaism believes. What it does teach instead is respect and tolerance for all faiths even while one believes in one’s own faith, which I think is a worthy lesson.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

How can anyone understand the fullness of certain Mozart pieces if they don’t know what a mass is and how the music supports the various parts of it?

The treasures of Western Civilization are irrevocably tied up with our history of Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. When people are educated in truncated versions that pretend that religious conviction is irrelevant to these topics it is no real education at all. To be sure, people still learn to read, write and do math. If that’s all you want from education, it’s fine. Many of us lament the fact that our civilization is no longer taught in our educational system.

I keep nodding and saying “yes!” at your posts.

It is increasingly clear to me that my children’s education is in my hands, I can’t rely on the state to provide it. (I will send them to school but will heavily supplement the taught material at home). I want my children to be taught history, literature, art history and other subjects in their entirety, not the truncated, revised and heavily edited secularist version.

I grew up under communism in Eastern Europe, and even they did not have the audacity to revise history the way modern secularists are doing. I think that says a lot.

Just to add another anecdote I’m sure you will appreciate. I was once reading a review on a performance of a Mozart’s piece, a mass. The music critic commented that the piece would have worked better if the movements were arranged in a different way. He obviously had no clue that the parts of the mass are fixed and that the music must follow that sequence, and that the parts have their tone based on their theology. I was so shocked by the ignorance of the critic, I simply couldn’t believe my eyes. But this is the result of this truncated “education” people get these days.

I also want to add that my more recent experiences and examples are from the UK. Obviously, the political context there is different and the way secularism operates is not the same as in the US, but the spirit of it and the attitudes of its adherents are very much the same.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

Why would teaching that all faiths should be considered equal inevitably lead to the belief that all religion is man-made? (…) What it does teach instead is respect and tolerance for all faiths even while one believes in one’s own faith, which I think is a worthy lesson.

You know, this is how my kids are taught here in Malaysia. They go to a private international pre-school. Every religious holiday is marked by kids learning about it and doing some kind of arts and craft project. They have brought home things for Chinese New Year, Ramadan, Christmas, and a number of other holidays, both religious and secular. This is how you teach true tolerance and respect, not by banning the topic of religion. The only people who benefit from such a move are those who hate religion and are offended by it. It’s ironic how this is the case in a supposedly civilised, progressive country that is all about tolerance and respect, such as the USA, while those considered less developed have no problem teaching the kids about the reality of their society: that people have different religious beliefs that should be respected.

(I must clarify that this is not the case with Muslim educational establishments, but the private ones. This sector is growing and a number of Muslims choose to send their kids to private schools.)

 

[Darryl1958]

The GOP regularly mentions vouchers, but has not seemed to push them too hard IMO.

Opponents to vouchers often cite examples where Public Schools sometimes outperform private schools - but even there the question is begged - are these Public Schools doing better due to the competition?

The thing about vouchers is that it is a good way to reward excellence, even if that excellence is coming from the Public School system. It rewards the schools that the parents deem to be the best to spend their money on.

Vouchers mostly channel monies through the parents and instead of JUST governmental officials - but the monies go toward educating particular students. When parent(s) find the local public school system is undermining the core principles of one’s family (re: faith and values) - they sometimes opt to pay tuition to a private school (virtually forfeiting the “free public” benefit their child would have gotten by doing so. They still pay taxes that support the indoctrination they oppose - but must sacrifice further to send their children to a school that is not hostile to the family’s values.

Meanwhile some (all?) teachers’ unions feel free to take union monies to back ONE political party … even though a good percentage of their member teachers belong to the OTHER party. Should a religious school set up a similar system - there’d probably be a lawsuit.

If “official secularism” gets challenged at the local school board level - as it is sometimes - Santorum’s comments have served a good purpose of oversight.

But as it’s High School Football season now, we can likely expect a fresh lawsuit or an employment dismissal of some coach who leads or allows a prayer amongst his team.
As the end of one’s football career, and one’s superior athletic talents can come to an end with “like a thief in the night …” suddenness - it is not unusual to see football players, more than any other sport IMO kneeling in prayer. Before, after, or during games (this last especially when there has been an on the field injury). Public Schools too.
The idea of a team actually praying together turns some people just rabid.Secularism would allow for prayers to happen spontaneously without having an official policy. When the official policy is no prayers, then that is imposing values onto people.

It would be nice to sideline the rabid people, even from the public schools, and vouchers would be the way to do this.

 

[RGCheek]

The thing about vouchers is that it is a good way to reward excellence, even if that excellence is coming from the Public School system. It rewards the schools that the parents deem to be the best to spend their money on.

Vouchers mostly channel monies through the parents and instead of JUST governmental officials - but the monies go toward educating particular students. When parent(s) find the local public school system is undermining the core principles of one’s family (re: faith and values) - they sometimes opt to pay tuition to a private school (virtually forfeiting the “free public” benefit their child would have gotten by doing so. They still pay taxes that support the indoctrination they oppose - but must sacrifice further to send their children to a school that is not hostile to the family’s values.

Meanwhile some (all?) teachers’ unions feel free to take union monies to back ONE political party … even though a good percentage of their member teachers belong to the OTHER party. Should a religious school set up a similar system - there’d probably be a lawsuit.

If “official secularism” gets challenged at the local school board level - as it is sometimes - Santorum’s comments have served a good purpose of oversight.

But as it’s High School Football season now, we can likely expect a fresh lawsuit or an employment dismissal of some coach who leads or allows a prayer amongst his team.
As the end of one’s football career, and one’s superior athletic talents can come to an end with “like a thief in the night …” suddenness - it is not unusual to see football players, more than any other sport IMO kneeling in prayer. Before, after, or during games (this last especially when there has been an on the field injury). Public Schools too.

The idea of a team actually praying together turns some people just rabid.Secularism would allow for prayers to happen spontaneously without having an official policy. When the official policy is no prayers, then that is imposing values onto people.

It would be nice to sideline the rabid people, even from the public schools, and vouchers would be the way to do this.

The problem with vouchers here in the USA is that the federal government has claimed to have the right to regulate ANY institution that receives federal funding in any way.

The one good thing about our educational system is the right to go to a private school where they still use older tried and effective techniques, or homeschool.

I would rather do without the vouchers and still have an effective choice than have the vouchers with no real choice left to me between public schools and private schools turned into the same failures that the public schools are.

 

[Mulligan2]

says the man as he makes reference to the news story, lol

My comment stands. It is not “news” every time a failed politician goes on a radio show and makes an absurd comment, especially when the radio host is known for making outrageous comments himself.

 

[abucs]

I don’t see it is undermining the God culture…I think it is just not adding it in–in this specific area.

.

You are belying a secular mindset where God culture is ‘added in’ that is it is not part of or integral to ‘proper’ culture but something extra. The historical reality of western culture is that is was Christian and there are efforts to take it out. If you are enculturated in secular education this is another mis-understanding which is given to students. I don’t want kids to be mis-educated in this way. You have no right to demand it.

And we are not talking about removing religion from the entire culture, anyway. We are talking about in the classroom in this discussion. Even if public classrooms are absent of religious talk, the world is filled with churches and mosques and temples and ashrams as soon as the child walks out the classroom door. And it’s in their homes, too.
.

This is so authoritarian it is breathtaking. Could I say to the Muslim that his kids should have Christian education because hey there are lots of mosques and chances for them to talk about Islam outside the classroom. You do not have the right to demand a place where kids have to be enculturated with philosophies of 'no God’. You just don’t have that right. You should not have the right of an exclusive use of our tax monies to do so. Absolutely shocking comment!

And…even if not talking about faith in the classroom is seen as “challenging” the “God culture”…there is nothing wrong with that, either.
Do you have a problem with people, including children, questioning if a God exists or not?
That would be taking away free will and the use of one’s mind.

.

Do I have the right to challenge Islam by forcing kids into an exclusive publicly funded 8 hour day artificial culture in opposition to Islamic precepts? The answer is no. If I want to challenge Islam I need to find other ways to do it rather than forced indoctrination of kids between the ages of 5 and up. Do you not have the confidence to argue your cause to adults on its merits without indoctrinating kids with our taxes?

What gives you the right to use teachers and textbooks and homework and lived school culture to challenge the existence of God? Why do you have this right and the Muslim doesn’t? This is not kids thinking for themselves and asking questions. This is indoctrination by school educators in a curriculum where there can be no underlying principle of God. Why does your viewpoint get forced on children? Completely unjust situation which cannot be defended.

 

[CaptFun]

Originally Posted by Contra Mundum
Unfortunately, this is not what secularists want. They are imposing their non belief in God on others and call it neutrality. There is no such thing as neutrality - there is no intellectual vacuum. All our beliefs and ideas are related to other beliefs and ideas, and their worldview is not an exception. Secularists somehow believe that their beliefs about life, death and the universe are somehow not beliefs. This is ridiculous and utterly unintelligent.

Was responded to in post #61 thus:

This is incorrect.
This is not what “secularists” want.

Aargh.
“Secularists” don’t necessarily NOT believe in God.
They believe that religious institutions and government institutions should be separate, that is all. That is what a “secularist” is.

“Secularists” have many different views on life, death, and the universe, including all different kinds of religious views.

There are many Theists (take Melzterboy, for example) who are
“believers” who also believe there should be a separation of religion and classroom teaching.

Glad you switched to the qualifier “necessarily” and rid yourself of the burden of having to
speak for all secularists. Some of which go QUITE far to ban God, and even what might seem the SLIGHTEST references to Him as being worthy of Draconian legal measures. Diversity and tolerance has its limits in the Secular world I guess.

If you should happen to BE a secularist … you are probably the type close to the one you describe secularists to be … and not the type that runs about claiming all public places and times as their personal province for imposing what they imagine to be Constitutional godlessness.

A case in point was this fiasco. A JUDGE (of a track meet in Texas) with way too much power and no oversight stripped a Columbus High School Track Team of its title and chance to compete in the state finals because …

ONE member of the team, upon taking the tape and winning his relay race, pointed to the heavens and thanked God.

radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/track-team-disqualified-for-thanking-god.html

google.com/search?q=Columbus+High+School+Track+Team+reinstated+for+Texas+state+finals&hl=en&gbv=2&oq=&gs_l=

It was PLAYED as “taunting”. Ridiculous. The unappealable mandate stripped the winning team … YES - the whole team of its title. Governor Perry was angered … but as far as I can tell could and did do nothing to reverse this decision. I (who ran track in High School) was MAD. I wanted this rash, impulsive, cranky little martinet of a “judge” barred from being a “judge” again. I wanted an investigation into his strange behavior. I wondered if he were being PAID for his pitiable contribution to High School sports (whereas the boys he’d cheated worked and sweated hour upon hour as volunteers for their school of course are not paid). SOME may have lost out on a scholarship due to his recklessness - and the fact that he had so little decency as to not reverse himself.

BUT the board of the organization backed HIM up. Changing their story. Never his decision. It was NOT the “prayer” it was the “taunting”. (Taunting whom? THIS secular crank?) It was not even the taunting … it was the way the athlete responded to the judge’s ruling. (? So of course the whole TEAM must then be disqualified)? I’ll bet this kid didn’t go George Brett on the “judge”.

youtube.com/watch?v=PrTYdlaqtxE < Reason (finally) prevailed in this famous decision that negated a home run (and ended a game due to an OUT - instead of a Home Run - being called on a technicality - too much pine tar on a bat). I’ll bet that “prayer kid” did not taunt the judge with “the bird” or anything … or it’d have been mentioned to be sure.

This was OUTSIDE of the classroom too. Where will the hubris of some end? Not before someone stands up to it and actually does something.

Santorum’s comment is really just talk at this point. But as these kinds of things keep happening - it has touched a nerve. Some people are having a “Hey … yeah” moment.
Others?

Methinks they do protest too much. (Apologies to Mr. Shakespeare)

 

[abucs]

Incorrect. Secular education teaches math, English, computers, biology…
.

Incorrect. Education teaches math, English, computers, biology…… secular education does something else. Think about it.

It doesn’t teach that there is no God.
And it doesn’t teach that there is.
It leaves this to the parents and faith leaders of each religion.

.

No, as mentioned previously that description is a naïve simplification of what secular school has become. Have you taught in a secular school? I have. If you have you should know your description not only simplifies what you call religion, but it fails to properly detail the aims and complexities of educational institutions.

I disaree.
I think it leaves the child/person to make up their own mind. To weigh all the information they have and decided for themselves.
Do you not want people to decide for themselves?

.

Yes I do. Don’t you? If you do then stop your claim of exclusive use of public money to create a culture of ‘no God’ and force kids to live, think and have to succeed in such a culture.

There is so much I don’t agree with, above, I don’t even have time to go into it. I kind of don’t even have the heart to go into it, either.
It makes me sad, what you say, above–especially implying that all faiths should not be considered equal. You play your hand with that sentence, right there.

.

It makes me sad that you have not thought through the authoritarian position of deciding what a faith is and then forcing everyone to treat them all the same without regards to reason, culture, usefulness and history. You then decide you are going to ban this from the classroom as part of ‘treating them all the same’ and ignore that the values and lived culture of the school are then forced to be something that embeds ‘no God’ and favours one particular community and viewpoint above all others.

Such a way of thinking is mistaken and it only is there because secular education creates an artificial morality so as to justify and promulgate itself. This is yet another secular morality that kids are enculturated with when they attend a secular school.

It is wrong, partisan and leads to the rejection of faiths, not just Christianity. If you want to make the case all faiths are the same and should be treated the same you should not have exclusive use of public money and teachers to make your case. Again, are you not confident enough to persuade people without forcing kids into a non God culture.

The anti God culture is the only culture which believes all faiths are the same. Why should they be given exclusive time with everyone’s kids spanning a dozen or more years where their partisan viewpoints are not only encouraged but demanded implicitly and sometimes explicitly? Your position is completely unjust.

 

[abucs]

Doesn’t ever, ever, *ever *occur to you that…there is a reason why, if given a chance to choose one’s belief through research and investigation instead of being indoctrinated into it…there may be a good reason why so many think religion is not intellectually sound?

.

Does it not ever, ever, ever occur to you that religion is a lived real spirituality and a lived culture of faith and morals as well as knowledge gleaned over the generations and passed on in community and not like choosing which football team you are going to support?

Does it ever, ever, ever occur to you that when children are given the chance to research and investigate God instead of being indoctrinated into a culture where God is explicitly banished that they will reject your enculturated secular viewpoint.

Does it not ever, ever, ever occur to you that your words resonate with Dawkins who claimed parents bringing up their kids in religion is tantamount to child abuse?

Does it not ever, ever, ever occur to you that your words resonate with the authoritarian atheist countries who forbade children to attend religious ceremonies until the age of 15?

Do you ever, ever, ever stop to think of all the parents who have decided not to bring their kids up in a religion, mistakenly so they can choose for themselves, only to have their children turn around and criticise their parenting because the moral and reasoned position of their faith was replaced by a secular culture which offers nothing but a dumbed down artificial morality cobbled together by university universalists of last century who have left the lives of countless people much worse than the lived culture of Christianity that was directly responsible for the successful and reasoned civilisation of the modern world?

 

[edwest2]

Examples have already been provided how this dynamic works. We’ve shown how in literature, politics, history, philosophy, art, music (to name just a few) the influence of Christian thought and worldview has been removed from discussion in ways that simply falsify the subjects being taught.

How can anyone understand the fullness of certain Mozart pieces if they don’t know what a mass is and how the music supports the various parts of it? How does one study the magnificence of the Pieta if one has no understanding of the Immaculate Conception? How can one study the Medieval period at all without understanding the world view that permeated it?

The treasures of Western Civilization are irrevocably tied up with our history of Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. When people are educated in truncated versions that pretend that religious conviction is irrelevant to these topics it is no real education at all. To be sure, people still learn to read, write and do math. If that’s all you want from education, it’s fine. Many of us lament the fact that our civilization is no longer taught in our educational system.

Very good points. Sure, parents should be the primary educators regarding religion but it is also true that religion has been pushed to the sidelines even when it is part of the history and understanding of a certain historical person, place or object, like a painting. “For God and country” used to be a sincere and common expression.

Peace,
Ed

 

[RGCheek]

My comment stands. It is not “news” every time a failed politician goes on a radio show and makes an absurd comment, especially when the radio host is known for making outrageous comments himself.

You seem to think that you have the authority to decide what is news and what is not.

Do you march around with your right hand tucked into your left side of your shirt as well?

And if a politician that has risen to be the biggest challenger to the nominee of a party is your idea of what a failed politician is, then I wish I could fail so spectacularly as well.

roflm*o

 

[Mulligan2]

You seem to think that you have the authority to decide what is news and what is not.

Do you march around with your right hand tucked into your left side of your shirt as well?

And if a politician that has risen to be the biggest challenger to the nominee of a party is your idea of what a failed politician is, then I wish I could fail so spectacularly as well.

roflm*o

If you think every time a politician says something stupid, that it is somehow newsworthy, then we’ll certainly never run out of news in our lifetimes.

The news source the OP referenced is Raw Story. Raw Story wasn’t highlighting Santorum’s comments to legitimize them - they were highlighting them to show how ridiculous they were.

 

[RGCheek]

If you think every time a politician says something stupid, that it is somehow newsworthy, then we’ll certainly never run out of news in our lifetimes.

Lol, true, that would definitely be a case of ‘dog bites man’.

The news source the OP referenced is Raw Story. Raw Story wasn’t highlighting Santorum’s comments to legitimize them - they were highlighting them to show how ridiculous they were.

The internet is changing the way that news is sourced and the track record for accuracy will be something that lets people more or less decide which they want to get their news from. But the real question is ‘How accurate is the story’, at least to me.

And I am sure Santorum was making a joke, so of course it is ridiculous should you try to read it as a serious statement.

 

[meltzerboy]

Lol, true, that would definitely be a case of ‘dog bites man’.

The internet is changing the way that news is sourced and the track record for accuracy will be something that lets people more or less decide which they want to get their news from. But the real question is ‘How accurate is the story’, at least to me.

And I am sure Santorum was making a joke, so of course it is ridiculous should you try to read it as a serious statement.

I have no doubt Rick Santorum has a sense of humor and tells jokes in private settings; but in public, he always seems so serious and earnest in everything he says.

 

[RGCheek]

I have no doubt Rick Santorum has a sense of humor and tells jokes in private settings; but in public, he always seems so serious and earnest in everything he says.

Maybe he is trying to be more natural? I think he has a sense of humor, and is a normal human being, but he gets a lot of abuse targeting him.

 

[Darryl1958]

The problem with vouchers here in the USA is that the federal government has claimed to have the right to regulate ANY institution that receives federal funding in any way.

The one good thing about our educational system is the right to go to a private school where they still use older tried and effective techniques, or homeschool.

I would rather do without the vouchers and still have an effective choice than have the vouchers with no real choice left to me between public schools and private schools turned into the same failures that the public schools are.

Governments do love to encroach, don’t they?

The promise of a voucher system would that it would eliminate double taxation where parents pay privately, and their taxes go to public. It would open up poor people to use the tax dollars allotted for their children to opt into an option of their choice.

It also opens government up to encroach though, because the way that government gains power is through claiming the tax dollars as their own, and influencing the recipients of that money to do what they deem is in their political interests.

Yes, that is the problem for sure, and it dooms poor people especially to schools not of their choosing but of the choosing of big brother who knows what they need better than they do.

 

[CaptFun]

gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/video/video-rick-santorum-on-the-persecution-of-christians-worldwide/ < regarding attacks on Christians worldwide (not in this case by secularists). ISIS. Israel. Rick Santorum on other related matters. From August 2014.

Ironically (it strikes ME as ironic) some of Obamas later rhetoric regarding the ISIS situation
sounds just like Santorum’s words here.

theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/05/obama-core-coalition-10-countries-to-fight-isis

Admittedly the “convert or be killed” policy of ISIS is a more immediate threat to civilization than the creeping encroachments of secular orthodoxy in the classrooms of America.

Not to justify the lesser just because there is a greater evil.

 

[oldcelt]

Good Ole Rick…always good for a laugh and precious little else. Guess that’s why he is the ex-senator from Pennsylvania. What he has to say is relevant only to the narrow slice that agrees with him. Actually, he is probably more helpful to the opposition.