Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

A Satanic activity book for children watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingStannis)
    Implying the creators, and leaders of religions in the past weren't religious and didn't believe what they taught. Which is nonsense highly likely.
    Corrected.

    Mohammed, a mediaeval warlord, for instance, wanted to motivate his unruly compatriots and to lead the domination of mecca by the city of Medina. he produced the rules (modifying existing religions), gained kudos and followers and then led a motivated people to military success.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    I'm pretty sure that according to the last survey, there were more Christians than Muslims in this country (although things have been changing more recently). More and more people are identifying as atheist and schools already cater for this because what is taught outside R.E is from a purely secular point of view.
    https://www.change.org/p/end-compuls...hip-in-schools

    Conclusion: you don't know what you're talking about.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Corrected.

    Mohammed, a mediaeval warlord, for instance, wanted to motivate his unruly compatriots and to lead the domination of mecca by the city of Medina. he produced the rules (modifying existing religions), gained kudos and followers and then led a motivated people to military success.
    Do you have any evidence as to what was going on in his mind at the time? More pertinently however, do you have any evidence to justify your claim that the majority of religious leaders and religious creators, theologians, religious philosophers and theocratic rulers didn't believe in religion? You want to be true =/= it is true.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Corrected.

    Mohammed, a mediaeval warlord, for instance, wanted to motivate his unruly compatriots and to lead the domination of mecca by the city of Medina. he produced the rules (modifying existing religions), gained kudos and followers and then led a motivated people to military success.
    Fair enough... but what about Christians, the people who were actually slighted in this situation? The early Christians were persecuted and died in poverty for trying to spread their religion. Pretty sure they weren't controlling anybody.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBLdHiaFYwk
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by trasitszy)
    Think about it...

    God:
    -Killed the whole human population (noah's ark)
    -Omnipotent but allows a huge amount of human suffering
    -Sends those that don't believe in him to hell.
    -Many other morally repugnant things

    Satan:
    -Taught humans about good and evil
    -Posessed a few pigs

    I think there might have been some misrepresentation here...

    EDIT: I am not actually a satanist just in case you were worried I am an athiest
    There's a "good guy Lucifer" meme which is pure Gold.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    Ridiculous, that was centuries ago.
    What a sheltered life you must lead. Read:

    Damage:

    http://www.tallahassee.com/story/new...tody/20811197/

    Threats:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014...n_5253153.html

    Persecution:

    http://pulse.ng/religion/it-s-an-att...id3025449.html

    More persecution:

    http://www.wcvb.com/news/church-cond...rvard/25928594

    All by Christians.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    As a Christian, I believe every other religion is false testimony. That's the whole idea of being a person with faith. A Muslim or Hindu would say the exact same thing.
    Check with a Hindu. I have had it explained by a Hindu they are happy to welcome another god or gods or even an entire trinity. Hence they are happy to celebrate christmas as just another feast day.

    So no, not all religions disclaim others.

    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    But I'll make them aware that these religions' Gods aren't real.
    Blasphemy! You'll burn in 999 other religions' hells for that!

    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    Clearly you're an Atheist
    Athiest does not need a capital letter, it is just 'atheist'.

    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    Being taught about Satanism is a step too far because it conflicts directly with the Christian notion of Satan.
    They are not teaching children about the Christian notion of Satan, they are teaching children about a Satanist's view of Satan. He's their Satan, not yours.

    Why is teaching children about Satan bad but you are happy about them being taught about other religions' gods or god? Isn't that worse, recognising false idols? AT least the devil is in the bible and if God is real, so is Satan.

    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    I believe that if my child dies whilst believing Jesus is their Saviour, they'll go to Heaven
    Not Catholic then? If the child does not confess, they're not going anyway.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crabbages)
    It makes sense that the Bible would be taught in American schools, seeing as 83% of Americans profess to be Christian.
    But of the remaining 17%, is it fair their children should be subjected to indoctrination, with the risk of punishment for apostasy?

    (Original post by Veggiechic6)
    Ridiculous, that was centuries ago.
    Good point. Let's abolish all these centuries-old belief systems.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingStannis)
    Do you have any evidence as to what was going on in his mind at the time?
    Of course not. Do you?

    More pertinently however, do you have any evidence to justify your claim that the majority of religious leaders and religious creators, theologians, religious philosophers and theocratic rulers didn't believe in religion?
    I didn't quite say that. They obviously believed in religion as they used it to motivate and control their followers. They almost certainly believed in the benefits of the rules they promulgated. What they didn't believe was the mythology and justification - the mythology - they created around the rules in order to make it all believable.

    You want to be true =/= it is true.
    I agree. And it applies to you too.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crabbages)
    Pretty sure they weren't controlling anybody.
    They had long term ambitions.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crabbages)
    These people, in their shallow and immature doctrine, encourage cruelty to others, taking revenge, only being kind to 'those who deserve it', indulgence, and tell people to 'acknowledge the power of magic'.
    That sounds remarkably like what Christians are promised to me. Their god is only kind to those that deserve it; the others will go to hell. And the power of the Holy Spirit is nothing but a personification of magic.

    And what good would that do? That's not putting forth a worldview or any constructive philosophy. That's not teaching anything. That's just pushing an opinion that religion is some sort of tool to control people, which, for the most part, it isn't.
    I think helping people understand they don't need emotional crutches to get through life, that there are rational explanations for the mysteries of the world and to ignore the blandishments that promise eternal pleasures in return for loyalty is a constructive philosophy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simes)
    But of the remaining 17%, is it fair their children should be subjected to indoctrination, with the risk of punishment for apostasy?
    You're joking, right? Nobody is being forced to convert or read Christian literature. It's made available because the majority of students might want it. Punishment for apostasy? Come on man. Don't talk as if students would be punished for not being Christian, that's seriously weak and seriously intellectually dishonest.

    (Original post by Good bloke)
    They had long term ambitions.
    This means nothing. Care to back up your claim? I guess you didn't watch the video I posted?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crabbages)
    You're joking, right? Nobody is being forced to convert or read Christian literature. It's made available because the majority of students might want it. Punishment for apostasy? Come on man. Don't talk as if students would be punished for not being Christian, that's seriously weak and seriously intellectually dishonest.
    My wife's friend's small child started coming home from the child-minder singing hymns. That kind of thing doesn't go down very well in some communities.

    A child coming home from school telling bible stories and querying why they differ from the scriptures taught in the synagogue, mosque or temple is also not going to be appreciated. Especially in a country where they are already seen as operating a holy war in the Middle East.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crabbages)
    Care to back up your claim? I guess you didn't watch the video I posted?
    I guess you aren't familiar with the history of the Papacy in, for instance, the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    That sounds remarkably like what Christians are promised to me. Their god is only kind to those that deserve it; the others will go to hell. And the power of the Holy Spirit is nothing but a personification of magic.



    I think helping people understand they don't need emotional crutches to get through life, that there are rational explanations for the mysteries of the world and to ignore the blandishments that promise eternal pleasures in return for loyalty is a constructive philosophy.
    It doesn't seem like you're too familiar with Christian doctrine. Christians are commanded to love their neighbour as themselves. Satanists are commanded to love whoever they deem worthy. They don't even present a standard for who deserves it, so you could make up your own. You could say I don't deserve kindness because I disagree with you. And the Holy Spirit thing, no idea where you got that from. The Holy Spirit reveals the will of God and convicts us of sin, bringing us into repentance. Not sure where magic comes into it. The Church of Satan encourages magic, as in witchcraft, voodoo, rituals and the like.

    Religion isn't just an emotional crutch, it instills values, good ones at that. Do atheists have rational explanations for the mysteries of the world? How are they more rational than religious explanations? What makes the explanations rational? How can you even present a rational explanation for something that is a mystery?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    I guess you aren't familiar with the history of the Papacy in, for instance, the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. :rolleyes:
    Again, I guess you didn't watch the video?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crabbages)
    It doesn't seem like you're too familiar with Christian doctrine. Christians are commanded to love their neighbour as themselves.
    I'm not talking about what Christians are commanded to do. I'm talking about what Christians' god intends - heaven for those who deserve it, hell for the rest. If that isn't the very definition of loving only those who deserve it I don't know what is.

    Do atheists have rational explanations for the mysteries of the world?
    Not atheists as such - scientists. And yes, in many cases they do.


    How are they more rational than religious explanations?
    Because they are formulated for scientifically-gathered evidence.


    What makes the explanations rational?
    They follow the evidence.

    How can you even present a rational explanation for something that is a mystery?
    Obviously, after the explanation, it is rather less mysterious. There are scientific explanations for the origins of life and the origins of man (though the former have not yet been proven strongly enough). I'd rather give credence to them than to religious explanations that aren't in accordance with what we know.

    Galileo, rather famously, was held to be a heretic when he theorised that the heavens did not revolve around Earth. Religion was proved to be wrong; rationality, and science, had the explanation of a mystery.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crabbages)
    It makes sense that the Bible would be taught in American schools, seeing as 83% of Americans profess to be Christian. The board of education has every right to decide what materials are distributed in schools, and if they decide Bibles make sense but that it's pointless to hand out atheist literature (what would atheist literature even contain, what life lessons would it teach? I thought atheism wasn't a religion) then it is their prerogative to do so. If parents have an issue with it then they can take it up with the school board. However it wasn't the parents who took issue with this - it was an outside organisation, a specifically anti-Christian cult who decided to distribute their bizarre literature in order to get up the noses of Christian parents and manipulate the school board into not catering for 83% of their pupils, and it actually worked.
    You're forgetting the fact that the constitution exists which prohibits the establishment of religion and separates public institutions from organised religion.

    What the uber-Christians in the US are trying to do is unconstitutional.

    And saying that atheism can't teach us anything because it's not a religion is so stupid its ridiculous. So philosophy, science, literature, etc. can't teach us anything but only 70 year old virgins in stupid outfits can?

    (Original post by KingStannis)
    Implying the creators, and leaders of religions in the past weren't religious and didn't believe what they taught. Which is nonsense.
    Many of them didn't. It was one rule for those at the top and another for the laymen. Consider all the mistresses of Medieval Priests.

    Religion deliberately tries to stop people learning and only without it can we truly learn about the universe.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Crabbages)
    You're joking, right? Nobody is being forced to convert or read Christian literature. It's made available because the majority of students might want it. Punishment for apostasy? Come on man. Don't talk as if students would be punished for not being Christian, that's seriously weak and seriously intellectually dishonest.
    The discussion has gone rather beyond the specific issue of Christian literature being 'made available'. Though the idea that that is the limit of the behaviour of these American hyper-Christian schools is ridiculous.

    I'll link this again: https://www.change.org/p/end-compuls...hip-in-schools

    Children in the UK are not necessarily being forced to read Christian literature, no. Though that's often because they're too young to be able to read it themselves. Instead, various things (with varying connections to scripture and dogma) are read to them in assembly. They're also obliged to engage in acts of worship. Think about that for a second. Children of non-Christian parents, at non-faith schools, are being obliged to picture god and worship him.

    Schools are obliged to take part in something that passes for this, whether they want to or not - and if they do want to, they can run with it and indoctrinate people's children, despite there being no real awareness of this law among the population. Parents think that if they send their children to a non-faith primary school, their children will receive a secular education. Which is not true at all.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mighty_Bush)

    And saying that atheism can't teach us anything because it's not a religion is so stupid its ridiculous. So philosophy, science, literature, etc. can't teach us anything but only 70 year old virgins in stupid outfits can?


    Religion deliberately tries to stop people learning and only without it can we truly learn about the universe.
    Is it really necessary to bring up the fact Catholic priests are virgins, wear what you seem to be "stupid outfits" and the stereotype that they're old? I would also say that those aren't atheistic subjects, just normal subjects where religion isn't the focus.

    And religion doesn't try to stop people learning and Pope Francis even advocates scientific research. Of course you'll bring up the Galileo story but in modern times religion, as far as I know hasn't tried to hinder academic progress.
    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.