Religious education

[thomas]

I hope you're not implying that private schools are better than public schools...

actually I am, its true. some private schools are meh but overall yes, most public schools (in CA) are shit. I mean seriously my cits public schools av. sat score is like 950, my high schools is 1250.

[Acriku]

That may be your state (which I still doubt), but mostly in the entire United States, private schools do just as bad - despite their not having to abide by the regulations public schools do, and despite the fact that they can expel all problem students and welcome only successful students. You'd think that because of what they are allowed to do, they would be more successful, but it isn't so.

[Edric O]

I pay taxes to state. And state supports even jehovists, altough I hate all that annoying campaign they do as well as their twisted heresy. I give my money to state and only thing I can want is a specifical government which will work with them. If atheists would registrate a church with sufficient support, even these would receive some of my money in taxes, no matter how I am against it. You give those money to state, not borrow.

Yes, and THEIR tax money helps pay for YOUR Church, just as your tax money helps pay for their Church. Why should the state support only a select few religions, at the exclusion of others? The state must either support all religions or none of them. And the second option is utterly insane, because it would turn all religions into profit-driven corporations. Can you imagine having to pay to get into church? How about having to pay to have your sins forgiven? Now that is what I'd call a capitalist nightmare...

Oh wait, the Catholic Church already did that once. Whoops...

[TMA_1]

yes, and the eastern orthodox church has just as bad a history as the catholic church...

[Edric O]

Of course. I never said the Orthodox Church was better. And the various Protestant Churches have had their share of corruption and hypocrisy, too. Churches are human organizations, and as such they are subject to human flaws and sins.

[Acriku]

I don't see how the "none at all" option leads to profit-driven religions?

[thomas]

think what you want. but private schools in CA are better than public, I mean come on the LA school district is a joke.

[Acriku]

That may be your opinion, although it seems a bit rushed because you seem to speak for the entire state of California, while only citing an opinion on one district alone.

[Edric O]

I don't see how the "none at all" option leads to profit-driven religions?

If they don't receive any public funding, then where are they going to get all the money they need for their daily expenses? From their believers, of course. So, in other words, believers would have to pay an entry fee to go inside a church. I don't think I have to explain just how wrong that is.

[Acriku]

Edric, you're mistaken. They (private schools) get all of their money from the amount of money each student is being paid for, ranging in the thousands. Private schools right now, and for the past decades, have been on their own regarding funds, and they are perfectly fine. I don't see how you came to your conclusion.

[SurlyPIG]

Religious education = bad idea. If you want to be lied to, do it on your own time with your own money. Any public religious education at all means every Tom, Dick and Harry with their own religion will want a publicly funded school and maintaining a practical, fair balance between the competing faiths is impossible. My country has a stupid policy implemented to appease Frenchmen hundreds of years ago of funding a Catholic school system across the country. All that becomes of it is inefficient imbalance. Every day I bus past a Catholic high school that takes about 1/2 as long to get to as my HS. And the only difference is one class that not even every student takes. I've always thought the system should be consolidated to make it easier for students to get to school and to avoid any policy imbalances that favour one side or the other.

[Caid Ivik]

Edric, you're mistaken. They (private schools) get all of their money from the amount of money each student is being paid for, ranging in the thousands. Private schools right now, and for the past decades, have been on their own regarding funds, and they are perfectly fine. I don't see how you came to your conclusion.

Religion is not a company, you can't just "sponsor" it. We can't make a Church some educational organisation, some countries have such system with church taxes and that's why everyone is leaving it. Also such system would eliminate churchless religions. Jewish communities can find money, but what would you do with muslims?

[Anathema]

I think it comes down to this: do you believe that by shielding your child from other religions or convictions you're doing the right thing? Shouldn't children be put in contact with other children of other beliefs to prevent them from growing up with prejudice towards other people?

[SurlyPIG]

Precisely. IMO, if your faith is so weak that you see secular education as a threat to your children's quiet obedience to your religion, you probably shouldn't hold that faith.

[Acriku]

I think it comes down to this: do you believe that by shielding your child from other religions or convictions you're doing the right thing? Shouldn't children be put in contact with other children of other beliefs to prevent them from growing up with prejudice towards other people?

I didn't know that public schools were so uniform in children's beliefs ::)

[Edric O]

Edric, you're mistaken. They (private schools) get all of their money from the amount of money each student is being paid for, ranging in the thousands. Private schools right now, and for the past decades, have been on their own regarding funds, and they are perfectly fine. I don't see how you came to your conclusion.

I was talking about churches, not schools! And about what would happen if churches were forced to get all their money from private sources.

While having to pay for your education is generally seen as acceptable in our society (although I think it shouldn't), I think everyone will agree that having to pay to attend religious services is absolutely ridiculous (not to mention immoral). That is why religions and sects must always receive some public funding.

[Acriku]

Notice the topic Edric, religious education, if you're going off on a tangent, you'll need to specifically say so or otherwise I'll assume you're still on topic.

[Edric O]

Erm, sorry... :-

[thomas]

a religious education isn't bad, I mean some of the best Law schools in the US are catholic like Loyola Marymont, thats where Johnny Cockran(the man who defended OJ) went. but yeah religion class's suck, I mean they are boring we get lots of homework from em BTW religion is my worst class ;D ;D ;D

[Caid Ivik]

I think it comes down to this: do you believe that by shielding your child from other religions or convictions you're doing the right thing? Shouldn't children be put in contact with other children of other beliefs to prevent them from growing up with prejudice towards other people?

As a parent, you have full responsibility over child's religious education. I would use jewish system, popular in most Europe: child is considered as able to theologically think from 12 years. Religiously educated child should then consider if it's believing or not, as well as atheistic child should have free choice to search for religion or not. "Shielding" of kid before this age isn't very good thing, it may cause xenophoby, but also when smaller human turns to theological debate with other believer, it may cause too much confusion. Like when you say Jesus won't go personally to your home and put gifts under Christmas tree, small child wouldn't be able to understand, even if you'll start with descriptions of that like God created all for us and this is a remembrance for it. You know, find balance.