Students to be taught there is no God

[eldestofvic]

I thought I’d better keep to a similar tone as yours in your dismissive handling of atheism, you’d achieved it so impressively.

Ah here we sit, seperated by a common language. In my country patronizing and dismissive are not synonymous.

Furthermore, I fail to see how my attitude could be considered dismissive, considering that after two pages of thread drift I was the first to actually speak about the topic again. If I was indeed dismissive I think rather I would have continued to ignore the subject as being unimportant (just thought I’d throw in that definition of “dismissive”) and continue with one of the sidebar arguments that have infected this thread.

That being said, it is indeed true that I don’t give Atheistic Humanism (that is secular Humanism) much credence.

(note: Atheistic Humanism or secular Humanism needs to be seperated from Humanism itself. All major religions in the West even Christian have embraced to a degree Humanistic philosophies within their established othodoxies. Humanism, for instance in the Catholic experience, could be seen in the concepts of the “Natural Law” and our understanding of the great dignity of Man)

In its very brief history on this planet secular Humanism however, really cannot claim to have advanced culture or society one little bit. Any Ethics it would hope to teach cannot be supported by its secular Humanistic foundation. Secular Humanism would hold that apart from Gd ethics can be determined from some sort of universal moral code of behaviour that rises from the human condition. But at the same time the secular Humanist would have us believe that the discovery of ethics (moral behaviour) is best left to the individual and their own interests. Secular Humanistic “ethics” are therefore, by default, Relativistic and fall outside the pale of Ethics right from the git-go.

That does not mean I don’t take it seriously. I do, very much so. For everyone is, in my mind, created in the image and likeness of Gd and so Humanism (when viewed in an ordered way) is a celebration of that “creation”. The key is to view it correctly.

As I said, you do it so well.

Actually what you said was that I did “dismissive” well. That’s not the same thing. Though I suppose when one is dismissive one might become patronizing

Perhaps the humanist group have their curriculum online or some description of it.

Perhaps, but I doubt it.

 

[Kaninchen]

Ah here we sit, seperated by a common language. In my country patronizing and dismissive are not synonymous.

Your language was dismissive, your tone was patronizing - one of condescending superiority.

That being said, it is indeed true that I don’t give Atheistic Humanism (that is secular Humanism) much credence.

I’m sure that the atheist and agnostic parents of Victoria State will be profoundly influenced by your views.

 

[eldestofvic]

Your language was dismissive, your tone was patronizing - one of condescending superiority.

You neglect. of course, backed-up by argument and reason. So be it, at least I have engaged in the topic. You insist on continuing with nothing more than attacks on my character.

I’m sure that the atheist and agnostic parents of Victoria State will be profoundly influenced by your views.

Again you restate, without really addressing it, my exact position. It is indeed my contention that given a forum for objective comparison (what better than the classroom, I ask?) that atheist and agnostic parents would be “profoundly influenced by my views”. My views are firmly rooted in historical reality. My views are founded on the thoughts of some of the greatest philosophers of antiquity. My views are highly phenomenological. Therefore, I think it quite reasonable that my views should be influential. Why wouldn’t they be?

If you choose. You are more than welcome to continue your assail of my character (according to the master of this forum I’m highly uncharitable so I’ll just consider it penance). That being said until you are willing to actually address the points I’ve made I’ll just bid you a Merry Christmas (or whatever is acceptable to you)

 

[Kaninchen]

You neglect. of course, backed-up by argument and reason.

It wasn’t based on an ‘argument’ - just a lot of assertion like 'atheism is wrong and very, very silly ‘cause CS Lewis said so’.

So be it, at least I have engaged in the topic. You insist on continuing with nothing more than attacks on my character.

Hey, you started the ‘you’re being patronizing’ dialog, not me.

Again you restate, without really addressing it, my exact position. It is indeed my contention that given a forum for objective comparison (what better than the classroom, I ask?) that atheist and agnostic parents would be “profoundly influenced by my views”. My views are firmly rooted in historical reality. My views are founded on the thoughts of some of the greatest philosophers of antiquity.

Do you know the meaning of the word ‘pretentious’?

My views are highly phenomenological. Therefore, I think it quite reasonable that my views should be influential. Why wouldn’t they be?

Some of us shudder at the word ‘phenomenological’ but not because we don’t understand it.

If you choose. You are more than welcome to continue your assail of my character (according to the master of this forum I’m highly uncharitable so I’ll just consider it penance). That being said until you are willing to actually address the points I’ve made I’ll just bid you a Merry Christmas (or whatever is acceptable to you)

I’m not one of those Jews who gets upset about ‘Merry Christmas’.

 

[wapsi]

Perhaps the humanist group have their curriculum online or some description of it.

This seems to be it, but they are limiting access to its contents, prior to its publication.
ethicaleducation.net/

 

[Kaninchen]

This seems to be it, but they are limiting access to its contents, prior to its publication.
ethicaleducation.net/

Thanks, we’ll await developments!

 

[Robert_Bay]

GENERAL REMINDER

Please discuss the issues and not each other.

 

[eldestofvic]

So I went to the link posted above, as was indicated by the supplier they are limiting access (assumedly until it is published). That being said the website does provide another link to their Humanist website. On this website one can glean a fair bit, I think, of the message that will be contained in the curriculum. Fair bit, I say because it is common Humanist rhetoric.

I’m not going to deal with the whole in this post…

One group often cited in humanist histories, are the Sophists who attacked conventional morality and sought new standards. The founder of the Sophist school, Protagoras (around 480 - 411 BC) taught that justice is a matter of agreed rules, and that “man is the measure of all things”. He claimed that there is no standard, or ideal, apart from human purposes and values as derived from human experience.

Note bolded text. History, in particular the writings of Plato and Aristotle, depict rather that the Sophists sought no standards at all and were entirely uninterested in Ethics. Aristophanes called them nothing more then word splitters (which is what the word sophistry has come to mean). Protagoras’s credo was in essence then the beginnings of Relativism (the modern “do your own thing” attitude) which is, in fact, diametrically opposed to any discussion of Ethics. Indeed by the time of the Roman Empire sophistry was seen as completely distinct from philosophy, and a Sophist was nothing more then a teacher of rhetoric.

Humanists also look favourably on Socrates (469 - 399 BC) who rejected the Homeric myths and the gods of Athens, and proposed that ethics should be based on reason. He was accused of corrupting the young and tried by a jury of Athenians who sentenced him to death if he did not recant his irreverent views.

Like the Sophists, the Humanists claim heritage of, this paragraph is nothing more then their famous word-splitting. Yes, Socrates rejected Homeric myths and yes he did reason strongly his case for ethics which he based on the pursuit of virtue. No he was not put to death for this. He was, in fact, put to death for goading the Athenian public in their practice of the highly humanistic pursuits of wealth and comfort at the expense (he felt) of their immortal souls. Contrary, to the Humanist’s presentation, Socrates felt he was singled out by the gods to do this. Finally, Plato records that Socrates very last spoken sentence was a direction to one of his servants to go and pay an indebtedness on his behalf to the Greek god Asclepius.

Aristotle:

Aristotle used reasoning to understand things of the environment and daily life. These different ways of using reason sowed the seeds for the much later division, in European thinking, between religion and science.

… so the Humanists say completely ignoring that it was Aristotelian concept of causes that Aquinas was reflecting on when he developed the Catholic Church’s teaching of Transubstantiation and the Real Presence. They also completely ignore Aristotle’s writings on metaphysics which he considered the “theological science”.

That’s enough for now. I think even from this small sampling it is clear that if the Humanists intend to draw their curriculum from their stated teachings (and why wouldn’t they?) they clearly intend to instruct their children in historical half-truths and all out lies. And they intend to call this course “Applied Ethics”??? As I said earlier, I think Christians should welcome every opportunity to greet this in the public square of the classroom.

(For the record) Pretentious: making usually unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing). For instance, the secular Humanist presenting themselves as anything more than whining children who just want to their own way.

 

[Teen4Christ]

Every bit as reasonable as schools teaching god exists

 

[neat62]

Kaninchen;

Your language was dismissive, your tone was patronizing - one of condescending superiority.

You, of all people, would know.

 

[neat62]

eldestofvic;

(according to the master of this forum I’m highly uncharitable so I’ll just consider it penance).

Anything is considered uncharitable to the master here, unless it is said by a rude, arrogant, condascending, non Catholic.

 

[neat62]

Teen4Christ;

Every bit as reasonable as schools teaching god exists

Yeah, but most people there are religious Christians(66%). Humanism is not a religion, so the humanists claim.

For a side note, check this out:

LOL From Avondale Primary School, Victoria.

On the school enrollment forms, they won’t even say the word “Parents”, lol They call it: Adult A and Adult B

avondaleps.vic.edu.au/aps/documents/parent_forms/enrolment-form.pdf

Now, the use of the label Adult A and Adult B, instead of parents(or guardian), is PC. They did not want to offend anybody. “Parents” represents the majority, but they changed the words to suit the minority. The same applies to this humanist nonsense. They are allowing the minority status to trump any and all things in the majority.

And remember, secular humanism is a fancy show word for Liberalism. IE: supports gay marriage, abortion, anti religion, sex ed for children, socialism, etc.

 

[melbourne_guy]

This is, in my mind, an opportunity. Atheists are more wrong than even believers can imagine (source: Mere Christianity).

Believers are more wrong than athiests/agnostics could ever imagine (source: the god delusion). See anyone can make superficial claims!

:
In fact, it really is only believers who can possibly see how wrong they are.

Wow what a coincedence! we believe the same thing about believers.

I think it a rather glaring tactical error then that atheists want to bring open study of Atheism into the public sphere of the classroom.

Religion has lost its grip on this generation, the least religious generation in history, which is why churches are looking emptier.
Getting atheism into schools may be the killing blow.

In the classroom, optioned as a religious study, it will not be able to avoid objective comparison to Christianity.

It wont compare with christianity, it will just raise questions about god and the bible kids have been too afraid too ask or havent been able to get suitable answers to. It will plant a seed of skepticism.

As a belief system it will then be possible to show that it fails miserably by comparison

Its not actually a belief, its a philosophy, god cant be proven.

(and this can be done without even mentioning touchstone subjects like Evolution).

Of course your going to try and avoid evolution haha, it creates further questions about the validity of the bible, it shows the entire book of genesis to be a mere story. Evolution is a huge tool for athiest and agnostics.

 

[CWBetts]

Believers are more wrong than athiests/agnostics could ever imagine (source: the god delusion). See anyone can make superficial claims!

Wow what a coincedence! we believe the same thing about believers.

Religion has lost its grip on this generation, the least religious generation in history, which is why churches are looking emptier.
Getting atheism into schools may be the killing blow.

It wont compare with christianity, it will just raise questions about god and the bible kids have been too afraid too ask or havent been able to get suitable answers to. It will plant a seed of skepticism.

Its not actually a belief, its a philosophy, god cant be proven.

Of course your going to try and avoid evolution haha, it creates further questions about the validity of the bible, it shows the entire book of genesis to be a mere story. Evolution is a huge tool for athiest and agnostics.

The Church will never be destroyed. If the efforts of modern communism failed, getting atheism in schools will fail as well. And as for evolution, it can be reconciled with Genesis, and even if it could not, it would only call into question the first two chapters. Atheism’s only arguments are easily defended straw men. This can be discussed, but only if you desist from your pompous, mmocking attitude. THis shows you have no interest in real discussion, only attack.

 

[dad2seven]

I’m not surprised at what comes out of that state now. They are feral now that Brumby is in control.

 

[grampben]

Kaninchen;

You, of all people, would know.

Oh yay a fight! Let’s all be great people and gang up on each other!
We can have nicknames and everything!

Sly remarks have no place on a forum such as this.

 

[Dale_M]

Sly remarks have no place on a forum such as this.

:dts:
Hmph… so says the communist atheist.

 

[grampben]

:dts:
Hmph… so says the communist atheist.