Listen to Erathoniel ranting on and on in good ol' conservative Christian fashion.
Published on July 15, 2008 By erathoniel In Current Events

     Our schools are failing. There is no question on that. However, a good question is: Why are our schools failing?

     To tell you the truth, our schools are failing because they have ceased to become academic establishments. Instead, they're the great American melting-pot. Personal Thought: Melting down our youth and turning them into nothing. However, are schools meant to be a source of idealogy or a source of knowledge. See, children can only take in so much. It's why their grades suffer when they take on too many extra-curricular activities. But, now the extra-curricular has become the curriculum. Instead of having huge classes sit through an hour of learning, they sit through a half-hour of learning, a half-hour of programming. Classes exist with no merit other than this programming. English classes teach this programming. Language classes teach this programming. Art classes teach this programming. And this programming is not all-inclusive. Anything that causes the slightest twinge of discomfort is thrown out. It becomes one great happy day at school. But certain groups are opressed. See, in order to forge the great alloy of the American machine, certain ores must be excluded, and certain ores should be included more prominently, even though there's less of them. You see, traditional people, that's all fine. They have their own schools, their own worship, they don't have to do it in school. However, everyone else must. This is intentionally confusing. The people they have to thank for the weekends can do their work then, but not during the week. There is no hope, there is no debate.

      With their eyes sewn shut, no light can shine, they ensure they'll never wake from dead, they try to trample any trace of His divinity's hope, they'll sacrifice their young. -Demon Hunter (paraphrased)


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jul 15, 2008
Evolution is not a religion.
on Jul 15, 2008

So they say. But it is a belief taking up the slot of religion, is it not?

on Jul 16, 2008

Education really isn't about "fair."  Is it fair that students who have difficulty learning get to go to special classes?  Why don't gifted students get more special classes?  Education, really, is about doing the best with what you've got these days.  We barely have enough time to teach the basics, let alone teaching Christian "tolerance" to the Buddhist, Muslim, etc. students at school.  You teach kids that people are people no matter what.  That's all you can do.

I honestly don't see how someone can "worship" evolution.  That's a religion to me.  And just because YOU weren't presented with creationism doesn't mean that millions of other students haven't been.

I definitely think that homeschooling would probably be the best option for your family.  I can't see your children succeeding in a public school because a teacher could do NOTHING right in your eyes.  And what if your child got a teacher that wasn't Christian, heaven forbid? 

on Jul 16, 2008

Or even better, a GAY teacher?  Or your kids had to go to school with a child who had gay parents?  Oh, the heresy!

 

on Jul 16, 2008

However, are schools meant to be a source of idealogy or a source of knowledge.

Schools are meant to be ONE of many sources of knowledge.  Education does not just pertain to schools.  Unfortunately, for many families...the mindset is there that you go to school to learn and then come home to....do whatever.  Some of the brightest students I had where the ones where the parents / guardians took charge of their childs education (not the teacher) and made sure learning was taking place at home as well. 

As far as ideology...that shouldn't take place in schools. I don't want the way I teach creating a certain mindset in the students. They need to learn themselves.  I want to create the opportunities for learning and make sure learning it taking place, but when I take away their ability to be themselves, I take away a ton of who they are. 

See, children can only take in so much. It's why their grades suffer when they take on too many extra-curricular activities. But, now the extra-curricular has become the curriculum

This is incorrect. Students are capable of so much, I believe that it is beyond the comprehension of many people.  That is why we often refer to them lovingly as sponges...just soaking it up.  Their grades suffer when they take on extra out of school activities, IF they are allowed to suffer and fail.  However, much learning takes place in out of school activities, probably more than anyone will know.  IE...I had some students in wrestling last year. Their focus during the school day wasn't on school, but on this that or the other thing.  Their grades slipped a bit...and to me...that was OK, perfectly fine.  Because, when they wrestled, they were allowed to be themselves moreso than they can be in school.  They could apply what they learned and succeed.  While they might not have been academic scholars in my class, they wre able to do something outside of class which made themselves proud, their families proud, and in a couple of circumstances...the city proud of themselves.  And when it comes to elementary school...too much focus is on grades...A's, B's...etc.  People need to get out of the mentality that they are working for a letter. 

Classes exist with no merit other than this programming. English classes teach this programming. Language classes teach this programming. Art classes teach this programming. And this programming is not all-inclusive. Anything that causes the slightest twinge of discomfort is thrown out. It becomes one great happy day at school. But certain groups are opressed.

this programming line is pathetic.  I mean, any decent example of a type of proof worth anything would be helpful here.

You seem to be referring moreso to middle and high schools where classes are broken down and subjects are taught by different teachers.  This allows a type of specialization in schools, being taught by someone who has somewhat extensive knowledge in an area.  Its not programming, but a focused education.  Our schools are set up to learn X, Y, and Z during ABC timeframe...and often in the upper levels of schooling, departments decide when to teach such parts of the curriculum to maximize learning.  

As far as discomfort...often that is because of limitations (good) put in place by parents, communities, school boards...etc.  At the same time, I don't think people are oppressed.  Take for example...Christians.  Tons of people have this whacko belief that we should teach Creationism.  Well which version of creationism? Which Christian version of Creationism?  So yeah, lets make the Christians happy because they can't teach it at home for some odd reason.  But why not teach about Buddhism in science class, or the Native American view point? HEck, why not just have one science (based on proven theories) class based on all the thosands upon thousands of views on how the world was created, so we don't 'oppress' anyone?

Religion does not belong in schools as far as in regards to scientific classes. when taught in terms of history, then it CAN be accepted.  But no matter how you look at it, teaching creationism is teaching religion and that does not belong in schools. 

Dont take me that direction, dont want to see my shadow. The road to unfamiliar. I never want to go. - Leaderdogs for the Blind.

so before i plead my case, before we start again, do you know your place? do you understand who started this? have you thought this through? and who is it you answer to, do you think i still care too? i'm afraid this one's on you - AP2

on Jul 16, 2008

In regards to Creationism being taught in schools I have a question:

Since this is a pluralistic nation, respecting the religious views of all citizens why can't we estbalish a pluralistic educational system?

Some schools could teach from the traditional Judeo-Christian base, others from the secular base.  Parents could choose the institutions their children would attend.  Or both POV's could respectflly and objectively be included in the classroom allowing the students to choose for himself what to believe.  After all, humanists claim that they believe in "free inquiry" do they not? 

So why not let the students hear both sides and make up his own mind?  Anything less is nothing short of brainwashing.  A pluralistic school system would not be hostile to the teaching of scientific creationism but would admit that many very credible scientists hold this view. 

I wrote on my blog concerning this subject yesterday showing that in 1987 the American Bar Assoc, made up of a very liberal membership, took a vote on this and came up with 62%  saying teaching both did not violate the first amendment of separation of chuch and state. 

And I do believe, as do many others, that Evolution is indeed a religion.  Anything that replaces God and inserts man or anyone or anything else is a false belief system in the eyes of God. 

 

 

 

on Jul 16, 2008

Or even better, a GAY teacher? Or your kids had to go to school with a child who had gay parents? Oh, the heresy!

It's not about people, it's about the system.

I definitely think that homeschooling would probably be the best option for your family. I can't see your children succeeding in a public school because a teacher could do NOTHING right in your eyes. And what if your child got a teacher that wasn't Christian, heaven forbid?

I've had non-Christian teachers just as good as Christian ones.

Religion does not belong in schools as far as in regards to scientific classes. when taught in terms of history, then it CAN be accepted. But no matter how you look at it, teaching creationism is teaching religion and that does not belong in schools.

The Bible was used in one school for teaching history, and instead of saying "God", they had to say "The Deity" (though, granted, the Old Testament, so it could've been done for the benefit of Jewish students).

But is not teaching the Big Bang and Evolution attempting to replace Christianity?

But why not teach about Buddhism in science class, or the Native American view point?

Teach everything, I don't care. I'm an amateur theologian, and that means I try to learn about all faiths.

 

on Jul 16, 2008

The voucher system would allow parents to choose whatever school their kids would go to, but I have issues with that, too. 

God help all of you, that's what I have to say.

on Jul 16, 2008

But is not teaching the Big Bang and Evolution attempting to replace Christianity?

This doesnt make sense...so I might be reading it wrong.  It seems you are asking if they replace Christianity by teaching Big Bang and Evolution theories.


I don't think they are.  Mainly because when you replace something you take something and substitute it for something else. They aren't doing that because...they aren't taking it away.  It is a scientific theory.  In many ways, so is Creationism.  However, the scientific facts behind the Evolution theories hold more weight in the scientific world. 

Granted, many people have theories about creationism and such...but scientifically its hard to back up. 

Either way, even IF we allowed creationism, thats another whole can of worms there too because there are umpteen different versions of creationism out there, Christian and non Christian...leading me to my next point...

Teach everything, I don't care. I'm an amateur theologian, and that means I try to learn about all faiths.

So am I...I took a world religions class in college as an elective, to learn more about world religions and beliefs.   But the problem with religion and schools is that, in each and every branch of every faith out there, there are individual versions of how the world was created, thousands upon thousands of versions...and probably more than that.  All very realistic (to the believers) theories.  How do we choose to teach this in a scientific class?  I doubt that the creation of the world takes up much time in the classroom anyways. 

Now let me clarify.  I dont' think we should be taeching the different religions viewpoints in a scientific class, however....I would personally like to see more religion in schools.  Moreso from a historical perspective (taking the worlds biggest events involving religion...etc)....maybe offering an elective to high school students on world religions...etc.  Something they can choose to study. 

on Jul 16, 2008

This doesnt make sense...so I might be reading it wrong. It seems you are asking if they replace Christianity by teaching Big Bang and Evolution theories.

I'm saying they are. Secular humanism is recognized by judges as a religion.

Granted, many people have theories about creationism and such...but scientifically its hard to back up.

Scientifically prove Evolution or the Big Bang.

Either way, even IF we allowed creationism, thats another whole can of worms there too because there are umpteen different versions of creationism out there, Christian and non Christian...leading me to my next point...

Why, however, would it be necessary to teach any orgin, since it doesn't really matter if you choose the secular worldview anyways.

on Jul 16, 2008

I'm saying they are. Secular humanism is recognized by judges as a religion.

Now you are twisting little stuff to try and make something big. They themselves can't even agree if it is a religion.  The courts say so, but when Chrisians try to take secularism out by saying it is a religion, the Humanists themselves say they aren't a religion.  How does that work?  They get the courts to work in their favor by declaring themselves a religion while the next day saying they arent?

While it maybe recognized as a religion...I haven't heard the humanism issue brought up in any recent cases before the courts for teaching Evolution and Creationism.  What IS going on is scientific theory (based on Science) and Christian theory....based on alot of stuff not scientific. 

Scientifically prove Evolution or the Big Bang.

Yeah, well first prove to me you can life without breathing air for 3 days.  While I don't think it is officially proven as a fact...nothing in Science can...its based on theories which are based on fundamental scientific principals that Most everyone in the scientific world agrees upon. 

Why, however, would it be necessary to teach any orgin, since it doesn't really matter if you choose the secular worldview anyways.

Well for that matter, why teach students to use their brains when they can just use a calculator?

2 Pages1 2