Total Posts:99|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Christian censoring continues in Arizona

dee-em
Posts: 6,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 7:28:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Thank you for the link.

An understanding of biology at that level does not need a dose of sex education.

Thanks to the constitution and thanks to the way government in America was intended to be done by our founding fathers the choice of these things, LIKE many other things should be left to the people that live and work in that community.

What a crazy idea. that the people who have their kids going to that school that moved there and live to support that community MIGHT have some say in what goes on. Heaven forbid the practicing of Democracy!

It's freedom OF Religion, not inject liberal atheist thinking in every cornerstone or facet of our National indoctrination, I mean Education system.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 8:57:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

As it should make you sick to the stomach. The article provides yet another piece of hard evidence showing that religions do little more than cause conflict. Here's the religious agenda raised by a member of the school board in Gilbert. AZ:

Ms. Smith, the school board member and parent, said she had been driving her family home from church back in January when her son told her about what was in the textbook. "I almost drove off the road," she said.

"I"m Catholic; we do not contracept," Ms. Smith said. "It is a grave sin." By including those pages in the curriculum, she added, "you have violated my religious rights."


Of course, on these very forums, we've observed far more absurd rationale for violating ones religious rights by those who perpetrate the most conflict.

Here is the result of that religious agenda, the inevitable conflict:

The dispute has metastasized into fiery exchanges at board meetings, rumors about secret redacting sessions, and angry confrontations in local grocery stores. One school board member, an opponent of censoring the book, was so unnerved by the swirl of gossip about her that she felt compelled to post on Facebook that she had not been endorsed by Planned Parenthood.
Continue reading the main story

Christina M. Kishimoto, the schools superintendent in Gilbert, who started in the job just this summer, has found herself caught in the crossfire. "I"m constantly getting emails about so-and-so threatening this or that," she said. "The accusations are going back and forth. It"s a distraction. It"s upsetting families."


Do the loving Christians in Gilbert care about how much conflict they're causing? Obviously, not, they want to cause more conflict:

Ms. Accurso reached out to the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group that has been active in conservative causes. The organization, based in Scottsdale, has been particularly busy in Arizona: It championed a bill, passed by the State Legislature but vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, that would have allowed business owners to cite religious beliefs as a reason to deny service to same-sex couples. More recently, the group has challenged the school district in Tempe, also on the grounds of violating SB 1009, for taking material from Planned Parenthood in developing a new sex-education curriculum.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 10:55:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 8:57:32 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

As it should make you sick to the stomach. The article provides yet another piece of hard evidence showing that religions do little more than cause conflict. Here's the religious agenda raised by a member of the school board in Gilbert. AZ:

Ms. Smith, the school board member and parent, said she had been driving her family home from church back in January when her son told her about what was in the textbook. "I almost drove off the road," she said.

"I"m Catholic; we do not contracept," Ms. Smith said. "It is a grave sin." By including those pages in the curriculum, she added, "you have violated my religious rights."


Of course, on these very forums, we've observed far more absurd rationale for violating ones religious rights by those who perpetrate the most conflict.

Here is the result of that religious agenda, the inevitable conflict:

The dispute has metastasized into fiery exchanges at board meetings, rumors about secret redacting sessions, and angry confrontations in local grocery stores. One school board member, an opponent of censoring the book, was so unnerved by the swirl of gossip about her that she felt compelled to post on Facebook that she had not been endorsed by Planned Parenthood.
Continue reading the main story

Christina M. Kishimoto, the schools superintendent in Gilbert, who started in the job just this summer, has found herself caught in the crossfire. "I"m constantly getting emails about so-and-so threatening this or that," she said. "The accusations are going back and forth. It"s a distraction. It"s upsetting families."


Do the loving Christians in Gilbert care about how much conflict they're causing? Obviously, not, they want to cause more conflict:

Ms. Accurso reached out to the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group that has been active in conservative causes. The organization, based in Scottsdale, has been particularly busy in Arizona: It championed a bill, passed by the State Legislature but vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, that would have allowed business owners to cite religious beliefs as a reason to deny service to same-sex couples. More recently, the group has challenged the school district in Tempe, also on the grounds of violating SB 1009, for taking material from Planned Parenthood in developing a new sex-education curriculum.

I protest the pages on the fact that are sex educational in nature. Do not add to that level of understanding in the realm of Biology.

I protest that you sir do not understand what the "separation of church and state" is. That you do not understand the levels of government under the federal level. that states, yeah even counties have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to set precepts and standards that the community there want to live by.

No where in any legislation or right is it said that a group of people have to be subjected to material that the community finds offensive to good health and social well being.

The community is doing what is guaranteed to them to do by the law. they are voicing their concerns and through local redaction making the town they see fit to live in.

Seriously are the few pages neccassary for an understanding of K12 Biology? NO
Seriously do the towns have right to vote and legislate on the material being handed to their children (law expressly protects the rights parents to raise their children)? YES
Is this how a democracy works? YES

If you have a problem with this go live in another country, stop trying to make the United STATES into The One Big Gov.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 11:08:59 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 8:57:32 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

As it should make you sick to the stomach. The article provides yet another piece of hard evidence showing that religions do little more than cause conflict. Here's the religious agenda raised by a member of the school board in Gilbert. AZ:

Ms. Smith, the school board member and parent, said she had been driving her family home from church back in January when her son told her about what was in the textbook. "I almost drove off the road," she said.

"I"m Catholic; we do not contracept," Ms. Smith said. "It is a grave sin." By including those pages in the curriculum, she added, "you have violated my religious rights."


When I read this I laughed out loud. Apparently she doesn't realize legislating based on whether something is a sin or not is illegal. Her personal religious views have no relevance to the law.

Also, cutting facts out of the textbook is the wrong course of action. If I understood the law correctly, then could they not just add information about adoption? It seems unusual (and perhaps telling) they have chosen to redact information as opposed to providing more. The information on abortion methods is frightening and therefore more powerful (from their point of view) than the known information on adoption.

Of course, on these very forums, we've observed far more absurd rationale for violating ones religious rights by those who perpetrate the most conflict.

Here is the result of that religious agenda, the inevitable conflict:

The dispute has metastasized into fiery exchanges at board meetings, rumors about secret redacting sessions, and angry confrontations in local grocery stores. One school board member, an opponent of censoring the book, was so unnerved by the swirl of gossip about her that she felt compelled to post on Facebook that she had not been endorsed by Planned Parenthood.
Continue reading the main story

Christina M. Kishimoto, the schools superintendent in Gilbert, who started in the job just this summer, has found herself caught in the crossfire. "I"m constantly getting emails about so-and-so threatening this or that," she said. "The accusations are going back and forth. It"s a distraction. It"s upsetting families."


Do the loving Christians in Gilbert care about how much conflict they're causing? Obviously, not, they want to cause more conflict:

Ms. Accurso reached out to the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group that has been active in conservative causes. The organization, based in Scottsdale, has been particularly busy in Arizona: It championed a bill, passed by the State Legislature but vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, that would have allowed business owners to cite religious beliefs as a reason to deny service to same-sex couples. More recently, the group has challenged the school district in Tempe, also on the grounds of violating SB 1009, for taking material from Planned Parenthood in developing a new sex-education curriculum.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 12:13:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 10:55:13 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 11/30/2014 8:57:32 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

As it should make you sick to the stomach. The article provides yet another piece of hard evidence showing that religions do little more than cause conflict. Here's the religious agenda raised by a member of the school board in Gilbert. AZ:

Ms. Smith, the school board member and parent, said she had been driving her family home from church back in January when her son told her about what was in the textbook. "I almost drove off the road," she said.

"I"m Catholic; we do not contracept," Ms. Smith said. "It is a grave sin." By including those pages in the curriculum, she added, "you have violated my religious rights."


Of course, on these very forums, we've observed far more absurd rationale for violating ones religious rights by those who perpetrate the most conflict.

Here is the result of that religious agenda, the inevitable conflict:

The dispute has metastasized into fiery exchanges at board meetings, rumors about secret redacting sessions, and angry confrontations in local grocery stores. One school board member, an opponent of censoring the book, was so unnerved by the swirl of gossip about her that she felt compelled to post on Facebook that she had not been endorsed by Planned Parenthood.
Continue reading the main story

Christina M. Kishimoto, the schools superintendent in Gilbert, who started in the job just this summer, has found herself caught in the crossfire. "I"m constantly getting emails about so-and-so threatening this or that," she said. "The accusations are going back and forth. It"s a distraction. It"s upsetting families."


Do the loving Christians in Gilbert care about how much conflict they're causing? Obviously, not, they want to cause more conflict:

Ms. Accurso reached out to the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group that has been active in conservative causes. The organization, based in Scottsdale, has been particularly busy in Arizona: It championed a bill, passed by the State Legislature but vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, that would have allowed business owners to cite religious beliefs as a reason to deny service to same-sex couples. More recently, the group has challenged the school district in Tempe, also on the grounds of violating SB 1009, for taking material from Planned Parenthood in developing a new sex-education curriculum.

I protest the pages on the fact that are sex educational in nature. Do not add to that level of understanding in the realm of Biology.

When discussing sex education, the realm of Biology is tantamount to it's relevance and understanding. For example, physics or archeology are not relevant to sex education.

I protest that you sir do not understand what the "separation of church and state" is. That you do not understand the levels of government under the federal level. that states, yeah even counties have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to set precepts and standards that the community there want to live by.

Odd, that you say the "community", when it is not the community, it is the Christians. The community is separate on this issue.

No where in any legislation or right is it said that a group of people have to be subjected to material that the community finds offensive to good health and social well being.

Again, it is the Christian right who are offended, because they believe it is a sin, please try to get your facts straight.

The community is doing what is guaranteed to them to do by the law. they are voicing their concerns and through local redaction making the town they see fit to live in.

Baloney, it is a religious agenda based on a minority of people, get your facts straight.

Seriously are the few pages neccassary for an understanding of K12 Biology? NO

Yes, they are. Everything based in biology is key to understanding biology.

Seriously do the towns have right to vote and legislate on the material being handed to their children (law expressly protects the rights parents to raise their children)? YES

The biology book in question was already being used, it had already been legislated.

Is this how a democracy works? YES

Democracy requires separation of church and state to be effective.

If you have a problem with this go live in another country, stop trying to make the United STATES into The One Big Gov.

LOL. Stop trying to make the US into a Christian theocracy.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 12:34:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
http://www.msnbc.com...

Rachel Maddow posted the relevant pages for posterity.

The course, it should be noted, was an honors biology course. The section was on embryonic development. I think it's pretty darn relevant to talk about things that can interfere with the "natural" process of fertilization/development. No moral stances were taken on the issue. Listing facts should not be against anyone's religion if they expect to be taken seriously.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 12:43:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
To the parents who complained about this and turned this whole thing into a national spectacle: Great job keeping the information from your kids.

So let's go ahead and continue tearing out those pages, cause you know, that will keep your children from seeing what's in them...
http://www.msnbc.com...
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 12:45:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 12:34:08 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
http://www.msnbc.com...

Rachel Maddow posted the relevant pages for posterity.

The course, it should be noted, was an honors biology course. The section was on embryonic development. I think it's pretty darn relevant to talk about things that can interfere with the "natural" process of fertilization/development. No moral stances were taken on the issue. Listing facts should not be against anyone's religion if they expect to be taken seriously.

You beat me to it!
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 12:46:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 12:13:29 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/30/2014 10:55:13 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 11/30/2014 8:57:32 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

As it should make you sick to the stomach. The article provides yet another piece of hard evidence showing that religions do little more than cause conflict. Here's the religious agenda raised by a member of the school board in Gilbert. AZ:

Ms. Smith, the school board member and parent, said she had been driving her family home from church back in January when her son told her about what was in the textbook. "I almost drove off the road," she said.

"I"m Catholic; we do not contracept," Ms. Smith said. "It is a grave sin." By including those pages in the curriculum, she added, "you have violated my religious rights."


Of course, on these very forums, we've observed far more absurd rationale for violating ones religious rights by those who perpetrate the most conflict.

Here is the result of that religious agenda, the inevitable conflict:

The dispute has metastasized into fiery exchanges at board meetings, rumors about secret redacting sessions, and angry confrontations in local grocery stores. One school board member, an opponent of censoring the book, was so unnerved by the swirl of gossip about her that she felt compelled to post on Facebook that she had not been endorsed by Planned Parenthood.
Continue reading the main story

Christina M. Kishimoto, the schools superintendent in Gilbert, who started in the job just this summer, has found herself caught in the crossfire. "I"m constantly getting emails about so-and-so threatening this or that," she said. "The accusations are going back and forth. It"s a distraction. It"s upsetting families."


Do the loving Christians in Gilbert care about how much conflict they're causing? Obviously, not, they want to cause more conflict:

Ms. Accurso reached out to the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal advocacy group that has been active in conservative causes. The organization, based in Scottsdale, has been particularly busy in Arizona: It championed a bill, passed by the State Legislature but vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, that would have allowed business owners to cite religious beliefs as a reason to deny service to same-sex couples. More recently, the group has challenged the school district in Tempe, also on the grounds of violating SB 1009, for taking material from Planned Parenthood in developing a new sex-education curriculum.

I protest the pages on the fact that are sex educational in nature. Do not add to that level of understanding in the realm of Biology.

When discussing sex education, the realm of Biology is tantamount to it's relevance and understanding. For example, physics or archeology are not relevant to sex education.

Yeah no shizit. When discussing Sex-ED Biology is a prerequesite. But the topic and point I made is SEX-ED is not required for an understanding of Biology.

A needs B to exist is NOT reciprocal that B needs A.

I see Atheist do this swap a lot. It's down right shifty and illogical.


I protest that you sir do not understand what the "separation of church and state" is. That you do not understand the levels of government under the federal level. that states, yeah even counties have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to set precepts and standards that the community there want to live by.

Odd, that you say the "community", when it is not the community, it is the Christians. The community is separate on this issue.

Christian are part of the Community and in a community with two factions of differing opinion the decision goes to the majority. FFS do you know what voting is even for?


No where in any legislation or right is it said that a group of people have to be subjected to material that the community finds offensive to good health and social well being.

Again, it is the Christian right who are offended, because they believe it is a sin, please try to get your facts straight.

It does not matter christian or Atheist. The majority of the community have the right as protected by the constitution and the court orders protecting parental rights that the MAJORITY of the voice or representation have the right to establish legislation. FFS do you know how laws are made?


The community is doing what is guaranteed to them to do by the law. they are voicing their concerns and through local redaction making the town they see fit to live in.

Baloney, it is a religious agenda based on a minority of people, get your facts straight.

Baloney i want you to support this claim. I'll take it you are claiming that Christians are the minority in this jurisdiction. Please back that up or shut up.


Seriously are the few pages neccassary for an understanding of K12 Biology? NO

Yes, they are. Everything based in biology is key to understanding biology.

o.0 Are you getting enough sleep? these 2 pages are talking about contraception. the man made product of biological research. it is one of millions of products of biological research. Contraception is not ground breaking nor needed for the proper understanding of biology.

Again Horse then Cart, reversing them looks just as silly as what you are saying.


Seriously do the towns have right to vote and legislate on the material being handed to their children (law expressly protects the rights parents to raise their children)? YES

The biology book in question was already being used, it had already been legislated.

the Biology book is a piece of material, it is a product sold by publishers. It was not legislated. legislated means law. the choice of the Book and any material exposed to the youth is purview of the PARENTS in that community. this is called democracy and is such local governing by the community is protect by the constitution WHICH is the highest document in this land.


Is this how a democracy works? YES

Democracy requires separation of church and state to be effective.

no Democracy doesn't require that. i just challenged support your claim with premises and I will support my counter by disproving yours. And that's how Burden of Proof works. So don't try shifting it to me. You made the claim i challenge and I will tear your reasoning for such a statement apart.


If you have a problem with this go live in another country, stop trying to make the United STATES into The One Big Gov.

LOL. Stop trying to make the US into a Christian theocracy.

theocracy is being ruled by God. And if we are staying with the christian view point here that will happen in it's own time hence the phrase in the prayer "Your Kingdom COME".

I'm just going to assume your education is still in school and some of your replies seem be rhetoric or word games more than they are thoughtful consideration of the statements I make and replied with thoughtful counter points you make. It's nice having you here, I hope to engage with you in reasonable discussion and debate Not to win but we all grow, we all benefit from the exploration of different views.

thank you.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,386
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 12:59:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.
The school board decided that those 2 pages were a violation of a law passed in Arizona, which in itself has nothing to do with religion. Is it the fact that a religious person (Catholic) is raising her voice the problem you are having, or is it the law itself designed to encourage alternatives to abortion?

And of course, a theme so common that anyone could have made this post for you without any dictation, resulting in about 95% accuracy, you made a broad statement about organized religion in relation to an isolated incident in a small community in Arizona (most cities in Arizona are quite small). What do you mean by organized religion? Buddhists are quite organized, do you include them?

So if you're indicating that religion is a problem in America, tell me what the solution is (if there's a problem there must be a solution). Put on your George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, etc. mind meld cap" and give us your inerrant interpretation of Separation of Church and State.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 1:09:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 12:46:24 PM, Mhykiel wrote:

Yeah no shizit. When discussing Sex-ED Biology is a prerequesite. But the topic and point I made is SEX-ED is not required for an understanding of Biology.

Is that supposed to be a joke? How else does one understand the biological function of having sex and all that entails? Physics? Basket weaving? Prayer?

A needs B to exist is NOT reciprocal that B needs A.

This isn't a matter of existing, it is a matter of understanding where one does require the other.

I see Atheist do this swap a lot. It's down right shifty and illogical.

Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.

Christian are part of the Community

Thank you for acknowledging that fact.

and in a community with two factions of differing opinion the decision goes to the majority. FFS do you know what voting is even for?

Yes, it was used to initiate the separation of church and state, to which you are completely ignoring.

It does not matter christian or Atheist.

Yes, it does, because there is no atheist agenda to remove facts from a book of learning in a school.

The majority of the community have the right as protected by the constitution and the court orders protecting parental rights that the MAJORITY of the voice or representation have the right to establish legislation. FFS do you know how laws are made?

Yes, they created the separation of church and state, which you are completely ignoring.

Baloney i want you to support this claim. I'll take it you are claiming that Christians are the minority in this jurisdiction. Please back that up or shut up.

Right here dude:

Gilbert Public Schools board members, backed by a conservative religious group, voted 3-2 to make the change, arguing that they are complying with a 2-year-old state law that requires public schools to "present childbirth and adoption as preferred options to elective abortion." ["]

The board made its decision after listening to a presentation from Natalie Decker, a lawyer for Scottsdale-based Alliance Defending Freedom. The advocacy group brought the chapter to board members" attention.


http://www.msnbc.com...

o.0 Are you getting enough sleep?

Have you got any brains?

these 2 pages are talking about contraception. the man made product of biological research. it is one of millions of products of biological research. Contraception is not ground breaking nor needed for the proper understanding of biology.

Funny how you say they are "products of biological research" and then go on to say they're not "needed for the proper understanding of biology". Hilarious.

Again Horse then Cart, reversing them looks just as silly as what you are saying.

the Biology book is a piece of material, it is a product sold by publishers. It was not legislated. legislated means law. the choice of the Book and any material exposed to the youth is purview of the PARENTS in that community. this is called democracy and is such local governing by the community is protect by the constitution WHICH is the highest document in this land.

It looks like your argument is becoming quite desperate considering you keep pretending the small group of Christian right advocates is the community and that they are actually engaging in democracy rather than just ignoring what democracy has already provided, the separation of church and state, which you keep ignoring time and again.

no Democracy doesn't require that.

Uh, yeah, it does. If it didn't, there would be a theocracy.


theocracy is being ruled by God.

Uh no, it is being ruled by religious dogma.

And if we are staying with the christian view point here that will happen in it's own time hence the phrase in the prayer "Your Kingdom COME".

I'm just going to assume your education is still in school and some of your replies seem be rhetoric or word games more than they are thoughtful consideration of the statements I make and replied with thoughtful counter points you make. It's nice having you here, I hope to engage with you in reasonable discussion and debate Not to win but we all grow, we all benefit from the exploration of different views.

Funny, how your views align with the Christian right, ruled by myths and superstitions.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 1:21:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 1:09:29 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/30/2014 12:46:24 PM, Mhykiel wrote:

Yeah no shizit. When discussing Sex-ED Biology is a prerequesite. But the topic and point I made is SEX-ED is not required for an understanding of Biology.

Is that supposed to be a joke? How else does one understand the biological function of having sex and all that entails? Physics? Basket weaving? Prayer?

An understanding of modern contraception techniques and medicine is NOT needed to understand Biology.


A needs B to exist is NOT reciprocal that B needs A.

This isn't a matter of existing, it is a matter of understanding where one does require the other.

I see Atheist do this swap a lot. It's down right shifty and illogical.

Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.

Christian are part of the Community

Thank you for acknowledging that fact.

and in a community with two factions of differing opinion the decision goes to the majority. FFS do you know what voting is even for?

Yes, it was used to initiate the separation of church and state, to which you are completely ignoring.

It does not matter christian or Atheist.

Yes, it does, because there is no atheist agenda to remove facts from a book of learning in a school.

The majority of the community have the right as protected by the constitution and the court orders protecting parental rights that the MAJORITY of the voice or representation have the right to establish legislation. FFS do you know how laws are made?

Yes, they created the separation of church and state, which you are completely ignoring.

Baloney i want you to support this claim. I'll take it you are claiming that Christians are the minority in this jurisdiction. Please back that up or shut up.

Right here dude:

Gilbert Public Schools board members, backed by a conservative religious group, voted 3-2 to make the change, arguing that they are complying with a 2-year-old state law that requires public schools to "present childbirth and adoption as preferred options to elective abortion." ["]

The board made its decision after listening to a presentation from Natalie Decker, a lawyer for Scottsdale-based Alliance Defending Freedom. The advocacy group brought the chapter to board members" attention.


http://www.msnbc.com...

o.0 Are you getting enough sleep?

Have you got any brains?

these 2 pages are talking about contraception. the man made product of biological research. it is one of millions of products of biological research. Contraception is not ground breaking nor needed for the proper understanding of biology.

Funny how you say they are "products of biological research" and then go on to say they're not "needed for the proper understanding of biology". Hilarious.

Again Horse then Cart, reversing them looks just as silly as what you are saying.

Again Horse then Cart, reversing them looks just as silly as what you are saying.


the Biology book is a piece of material, it is a product sold by publishers. It was not legislated. legislated means law. the choice of the Book and any material exposed to the youth is purview of the PARENTS in that community. this is called democracy and is such local governing by the community is protect by the constitution WHICH is the highest document in this land.

It looks like your argument is becoming quite desperate considering you keep pretending the small group of Christian right advocates is the community and that they are actually engaging in democracy rather than just ignoring what democracy has already provided, the separation of church and state, which you keep ignoring time and again.

no Democracy doesn't require that.

Uh, yeah, it does. If it didn't, there would be a theocracy.


theocracy is being ruled by God.

Uh no, it is being ruled by religious dogma.

And if we are staying with the christian view point here that will happen in it's own time hence the phrase in the prayer "Your Kingdom COME".

I'm just going to assume your education is still in school and some of your replies seem be rhetoric or word games more than they are thoughtful consideration of the statements I make and replied with thoughtful counter points you make. It's nice having you here, I hope to engage with you in reasonable discussion and debate Not to win but we all grow, we all benefit from the exploration of different views.

Funny, how your views align with the Christian right, ruled by myths and superstitions.

If the community was a bunch of Atheist and the 2 pages said God makes every baby in the womb, I would be just as supportive of the redaction. My reasoning is on the merit of local self governing law abiding citizens. And that one state is meant to be different from another in these kinds of respects. being also capitalistic society means that the difference states would exhibit growth or decay based on their decisions.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 1:32:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 1:21:13 PM, Mhykiel wrote:

An understanding of modern contraception techniques and medicine is NOT needed to understand Biology.

LOL. That is firetrucking hilarious, dude. A direct contradiction of fact.

If the community was a bunch of Atheist and the 2 pages said God makes every baby in the womb, I would be just as supportive of the redaction.

That is a strawman argument. Stick with the issue at hand.

My reasoning is on the merit of local self governing law abiding citizens.

The citizens who do not have a religious agenda to remove the pages are also law abiding. They actually aren't the ones ignoring the separation of church and state.

And that one state is meant to be different from another in these kinds of respects. being also capitalistic society means that the difference states would exhibit growth or decay based on their decisions.

So what?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 1:40:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Abortion is not a religious issue.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 1:40:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 12:59:11 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.
The school board decided that those 2 pages were a violation of a law passed in Arizona, which in itself has nothing to do with religion. Is it the fact that a religious person (Catholic) is raising her voice the problem you are having, or is it the law itself designed to encourage alternatives to abortion?

It's worth noting that in this case, no reasonable person could argue that those passages were in violation of the law--and the Department of Education official they reached out to ask about it told them that they were not in violation.

"In general, the mere mention of a means of medically inducing abortion does not automatically signal a lack of preference for childbirth and adoption ... the responsibility lies with the teacher to provide context for the student," said Kotterman, a deputy associate superintendent."

http://www.cbsnews.com...

I'm inclined to accept the school board's own words as evidence of their actual motivations--in this case the quote is:

"Ms. Smith, the school board member and parent, said she had been driving her family home from church back in January when her son told her about what was in the textbook. "I almost drove off the road," she said.

"I"m Catholic; we do not contracept," Ms. Smith said. "It is a grave sin." By including those pages in the curriculum, she added, "you have violated my religious rights.""

She's just flatly wrong.

There is no violation of her rights to provide facts about contraception, or even abortion. The facts are what they are, and there is no moral stance in the book. If the state wants to push adoptions and is arguing they have a valid reason to do so (though I would argue they do not sufficient to warrant the law that was passed), the teacher could contextualize the information. REMOVING the information merely removes facts from the curriculum which are relevant to the curriculum. It is not the simplest, easiest, or best solution--if they REALLY wanted to have the textbook address the issue, they could have ADDED pages. Instead they tore pages out--their motivation to hide factual information seems clear.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 2:19:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

There shouldn't even be an argument here. If this doesn't sicken people then their social priorities are completely off base. The mind wobbles in the wake of such purposeful ignorance in the education system. Sickens is an understatement.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
dee-em
Posts: 6,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 4:53:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 12:59:11 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.
The school board decided that those 2 pages were a violation of a law passed in Arizona, which in itself has nothing to do with religion. Is it the fact that a religious person (Catholic) is raising her voice the problem you are having, or is it the law itself designed to encourage alternatives to abortion?

Did you read the full article? If you did, you would know what the motivation was. The education department gave the board clear advice that the text was not in violation of the law but they ignored it and went ahead with their religiously motivated agenda.

And of course, a theme so common that anyone could have made this post for you without any dictation, resulting in about 95% accuracy, you made a broad statement about organized religion in relation to an isolated incident in a small community in Arizona (most cities in Arizona are quite small). What do you mean by organized religion? Buddhists are quite organized, do you include them?

What exactly are you complaining about? Is Catholicism not an organized religion?

So if you're indicating that religion is a problem in America, tell me what the solution is (if there's a problem there must be a solution). Put on your George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, etc. mind meld cap" and give us your inerrant interpretation of Separation of Church and State.

The solution is actually keeping Church and State separate. Let the education department do its job unhindered by religious concerns. It's really quite simple. Yet theists just seem to keep crossing over that line every chance they get.
dee-em
Posts: 6,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 4:59:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 1:40:26 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Abortion is not a religious issue.

You must surely be joking?
dee-em
Posts: 6,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 5:18:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 7:28:25 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Thank you for the link.

An understanding of biology at that level does not need a dose of sex education.

It wasn't sex education.

Thanks to the constitution and thanks to the way government in America was intended to be done by our founding fathers the choice of these things, LIKE many other things should be left to the people that live and work in that community.

Censorship is a democratic right? What about the democratic rights of those students who actually want to get a proper education in biology? They get to miss out, unlike their colleagues in the next county, because of the outdated beliefs of the theists? Yeah, that sounds fair.

What a crazy idea. that the people who have their kids going to that school that moved there and live to support that community MIGHT have some say in what goes on. Heaven forbid the practicing of Democracy!


See above. That is why there is an education department to oversee all this. It is so that everyone gets an equal opportunity to a quality education without being held hostage to the religious whims of a factional group. What you advocate is not democracy, but anarchy.

It's freedom OF Religion, not inject liberal atheist thinking in every cornerstone or facet of our National indoctrination, I mean Education system.

And again, a perfect illustration of what is wrong with religion. Where has anyone here said that you shouldn't have freedom of religion? I'm fairly sure we've been talking about the teaching of advanced biology in senior high school where religion has absolutely no place.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 5:39:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Atheist logic:

1. Children must be taught to use contraceptives and that the Earth is 4.6 billion years old and their parents should not have any right to refuse to allow their children to be taught this. An education which doesn't involve religion but rather involves things that defy religious beliefs is a fair education because atheism should be taught to all children that is how things should be. Children should learn the truth, and by the truth I mean secular (AKA atheist) stuff like how to have an abortion.
2. Parents who decide to not teach their kids stuff like how to have an abortion are in clear violation of separation of church and state.

Yeah, my hatred for atheists is COMPLETELY unjustified...
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
dee-em
Posts: 6,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 5:51:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 5:39:05 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Atheist logic:

1. Children must be taught to use contraceptives and that the Earth is 4.6 billion years old and their parents should not have any right to refuse to allow their children to be taught this. An education which doesn't involve religion but rather involves things that defy religious beliefs is a fair education because atheism should be taught to all children that is how things should be. Children should learn the truth, and by the truth I mean secular (AKA atheist) stuff like how to have an abortion.
2. Parents who decide to not teach their kids stuff like how to have an abortion are in clear violation of separation of church and state.

Yeah, my hatred for atheists is COMPLETELY unjustified...

If I understand you correctly you think the above is "logic" and you have a problem with children acquiring knowledge which is evidence-based. Is that a fair summary?
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 5:57:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 4:59:36 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/30/2014 1:40:26 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Abortion is not a religious issue.

You must surely be joking?

I'm not joking. If abortion was a religious issue, abortion would be illegal in the United States, as the vast majority of Americans identify with a religion that would, on balance, oppose abortion. However, abortion is not a religious issue - there are pro-life atheists/agnostics and pro-choice Christians.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 5:58:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 7:28:25 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Thank you for the link.

An understanding of biology at that level does not need a dose of sex education.
Biology without sex isn't biology. It's a select segment of biology. And it's not up to a theology base to select what students should, or shouldn't, learn when it comes to any of the sciences. It is not the job of the schools to limit the student's knowledge. It is the school's job to provide them with useful knowledge, and allow them to apply their own moral judgements. Wanting to redact the pages amounts to little more than the book-burning of old.

Thanks to the constitution and thanks to the way government in America was intended to be done by our founding fathers the choice of these things, LIKE many other things should be left to the people that live and work in that community.
Thanks to the Constitution, it's not up to any religious group anywhere, to determine what is appropriate to teach, or what isn't. If it's potentially valuable information, then it should be taught regardless of what any (or all) religious groups believe. They're not teaching theology. They're teaching BIOLOGY.

What a crazy idea. that the people who have their kids going to that school that moved there and live to support that community MIGHT have some say in what goes on. Heaven forbid the practicing of Democracy!
The problem is this; they have no say in what is real or factual. And the schools should be teaching what is demonstrated to be factual. Censoring information is simply promoting ignorance. It's the religious idea that some knowledge is evil. Knowledge is never evil. The more knowledge, the better.

It's freedom OF Religion, not inject liberal atheist thinking in every cornerstone or facet of our National indoctrination, I mean Education system.
This isn't about "atheistic thinking" or "theistic thinking". This is about accurate information. When you start labeling information as "evil", then you begin to preach your doctrine. You can't do one without doing the other and the Constitution prohibits doing either one in a publicly funded school. If you want your child to be taught religion (censored information) instead of reality, you can send them to private schools for that. Then you can add to the shameful ignorance of the public and your child's difficulty in holding any grasp of reality. The Constitution does support your right to intellectually stifle your child.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
dee-em
Posts: 6,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 6:14:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 5:57:08 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 4:59:36 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/30/2014 1:40:26 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Abortion is not a religious issue.

You must surely be joking?

I'm not joking. If abortion was a religious issue, abortion would be illegal in the United States, as the vast majority of Americans identify with a religion that would, on balance, oppose abortion. However, abortion is not a religious issue - there are pro-life atheists/agnostics and pro-choice Christians.

Don't be absurd. Christians divorce even though it's frowned upon by the Church. Christians have abortions even though the Church prohibits it. Same with contraception, otherwise the population of America would be way in the billions by now.

Abortion is legal because women want the right to control their own bodies irrespective of their religious affiliations. That's it. Federal politicians, at least, are going to think long and hard before disenfranchising half the population.

Whether there are pro-life atheists or pro-abortion Christians is neither here nor there. It's where the movement began and which organizations are behind it. You don't have to look far:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Much of the pro-life movement in the United States and around the world finds support in the Roman Catholic Church, the Christian right, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, the Church of England, the Anglican Church in North America, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).

You're in denial if you really believe abortion is not primarily a religious issue.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 6:17:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 10:55:13 AM, Mhykiel wrote:

I protest the pages on the fact that are sex educational in nature. Do not add to that level of understanding in the realm of Biology.
What you're doing is demonstrating the kind of ignorance which results from such censorship. Here you are a supposedly educated adult and you don't seem to understand that sex is a realm of biology. It would appear that you were never provided with an understanding of what "biology" is about. Yet here you are voicing your opinion, despite the fact that in doing so, you're demonstrating the kind of ignorance which results from that which you promote.

I protest that you sir do not understand what the "separation of church and state" is. That you do not understand the levels of government under the federal level. that states, yeah even counties have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to set precepts and standards that the community there want to live by.
That is patently untrue and again demonstrates pure ignorance regarding what the Constitution is, and what it does. The Constitution sets the limitations provided to the democratic process. You can set your own standards as a community AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION. Otherwise, democracy is simply two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner. The U.S. is a republic, NOT a democracy. And you're hoping to turn it into a theocracy. And theocracies have a long history of persecution, censorship of information, and pure barbarity. It was the theocracy of the Catholic church which legalized torture (before the last Christian-promoted president did the very same thing).

No where in any legislation or right is it said that a group of people have to be subjected to material that the community finds offensive to good health and social well being.
No where does it say that anyone is allowed to limit what knowledge may be passed through public schools on the basis of theological beliefs. Yet that is what you're proposing should occur.

The community is doing what is guaranteed to them to do by the law. they are voicing their concerns and through local redaction making the town they see fit to live in.
You are ABSOLUTELY wrong about this. You're acting as though America is a democracy. Democracies have no need for Constitutional boundaries. The Constitution exists to limit the reach of democracy - to assure that regardless of majority opinion, each individual is guaranteed certain rights. And one of those rights is to the presentation of valid information - without theological limitations - within public schools. Learn the difference between a democracy, and a republic. You're living in a republic and have repeatedly presented it as a pure democracy.

Seriously are the few pages neccassary for an understanding of K12 Biology? NO
They are required for a properly presented and rounded understanding of Biology, YES.
But the more prudent point is that IT IS NOT UP TO ANY RELIGIOUS FOUNDATION, to decide what should, or shouldn't, be taught in public schools. You can elect to educate your children through private schools, or at home if you want to cripple their understanding of reality to match your own deficiencies in that regard.

Seriously do the towns have right to vote and legislate on the material being handed to their children (law expressly protects the rights parents to raise their children)? YES
NO THEY DO NOT! That's like claiming that they can make it legal to commit murder, simply by a majority vote. And they can't do that because murder violates the Constitutional rights of the victim! Stop pretending that the Constitution doesn't exist. That's what you're doing when you suggest that a community can flush out Constitutional rights by voting against them. They cannot. Any attempt to do so is unconstitutional, and thereby, ILLEGAL!

Is this how a democracy works? YES
You're NOT living in a democracy. Learn at least the basics of the governmental system under which you live. The U.S. IS NOT a democracy, silly. A democracy has no need for a Constitution.

If you have a problem with this go live in another country, stop trying to make the United STATES into The One Big Gov.
YOU are the one who either needs to accept that you live in a republic in which the citizens have a guarantee of Constitutional rights, or YOU should go live in a pure democracy. I would suggest you pick an Islamic democracy so that you can begin to value the superior nature of a republic, instead of flagrantly demonstrating your pure ignorance of the difference.

Do you not see that you're demonstrating the level of ignorance that you're promoting with your theocratic ideals? You don't even realize that you live in a republic, yet you think we should all listen to your ideas on how our governmental system works. You don't have a clue how our system of government is supposed to work and you keep showing us that with each subsequent post.

Why should we listen to the ignorant ideas of someone who doesn't even understand the form of government he's talking about, or the one under which he lives?
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 6:34:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 12:46:24 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 11/30/2014 12:13:29 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:


When discussing sex education, the realm of Biology is tantamount to it's relevance and understanding. For example, physics or archeology are not relevant to sex education.
Yeah no shizit. When discussing Sex-ED Biology is a prerequesite. But the topic and point I made is SEX-ED is not required for an understanding of Biology.

I want to express how much i appreciate you being here to demonstate the unbelievable ignorance which can result from the kind of censorship you're attempting to promote.
Please tell me how one is to possess a comprehensive understanding of human reproduction without sex education. Explain how a man and a woman each contribute to the production of a human baby, without explaining sexual reproduction. Reproduction is a necessary facet of biology, and sexual reproduction is a necessary facet of understanding reproduction. Yet here you are repeatedly claiming that sex education isn't necessary to holding an understanding of biology.

So back that up! Explain human reproduction without including an understanding of sexual reproduction.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 7:25:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 6:14:26 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/30/2014 5:57:08 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 4:59:36 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/30/2014 1:40:26 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Abortion is not a religious issue.

You must surely be joking?

I'm not joking. If abortion was a religious issue, abortion would be illegal in the United States, as the vast majority of Americans identify with a religion that would, on balance, oppose abortion. However, abortion is not a religious issue - there are pro-life atheists/agnostics and pro-choice Christians.

Don't be absurd. Christians divorce even though it's frowned upon by the Church. Christians have abortions even though the Church prohibits it. Same with contraception, otherwise the population of America would be way in the billions by now.

But is divorce a religious issue? No. Is contraception a religious issue? No. If they were truly religious issues, they would be illegal.

Abortion is legal because women want the right to control their own bodies irrespective of their religious affiliations. That's it. Federal politicians, at least, are going to think long and hard before disenfranchising half the population.

So you admit it isn't a religious issue. Nice to know! And FTR, there is no broad consensus among women in favor of abortion. 41% of women are pro-life (http://www.gallup.com...).

Whether there are pro-life atheists or pro-abortion Christians is neither here nor there. It's where the movement began and which organizations are behind it. You don't have to look far:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Much of the pro-life movement in the United States and around the world finds support in the Roman Catholic Church, the Christian right, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, the Church of England, the Anglican Church in North America, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).

You're in denial if you really believe abortion is not primarily a religious issue.

Being supported by religious people =/ it being a religious issue. Clearly a majority of religious people don't oppose abortion (as only 21% of people want abortion to be completely illegal). If it was a religious issue, it would be illegal.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2014 7:48:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 7:25:16 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 6:14:26 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/30/2014 5:57:08 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 4:59:36 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/30/2014 1:40:26 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Abortion is not a religious issue.

You must surely be joking?

I'm not joking. If abortion was a religious issue, abortion would be illegal in the United States, as the vast majority of Americans identify with a religion that would, on balance, oppose abortion. However, abortion is not a religious issue - there are pro-life atheists/agnostics and pro-choice Christians.

Don't be absurd. Christians divorce even though it's frowned upon by the Church. Christians have abortions even though the Church prohibits it. Same with contraception, otherwise the population of America would be way in the billions by now.

But is divorce a religious issue?
Absolutely. It's not a religious concept, but it's a concept rejected by many religions. That makes it an issue to religion, thusly, a religious issue.

No.
Wrong

Is contraception a religious issue?
Again, this is an issue to many religions, making it a religious issue.

No.
Wrong again.

If they were truly religious issues, they would be illegal.
That's a complete non-sequitur. Many concepts, ideas and practices are prohibited by various religions, yet remain legal.

Abortion is legal because women want the right to control their own bodies irrespective of their religious affiliations. That's it. Federal politicians, at least, are going to think long and hard before disenfranchising half the population.

So you admit it isn't a religious issue. Nice to know! And FTR, there is no broad consensus among women in favor of abortion. 41% of women are pro-life (http://www.gallup.com...).
He did no such thing. An issue can be addressed by religion, and addressed in accordance with secular concerns. The fact that it is addressed in accordance with secular concerns doesn't erase the fact that it is addressed by religion as well. And if it is addressed by religion, then it is a religious issue.

Whether there are pro-life atheists or pro-abortion Christians is neither here nor there. It's where the movement began and which organizations are behind it. You don't have to look far:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Much of the pro-life movement in the United States and around the world finds support in the Roman Catholic Church, the Christian right, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, the Church of England, the Anglican Church in North America, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).

You're in denial if you really believe abortion is not primarily a religious issue.

Being supported by religious people =/ it being a religious issue.
Wrong again. If religious people support (or reject) a particular concept/practice on the basis of their religion, that most definitely DOES make it a religious issue. What you're attempting to assert is the claim that if there are any secular issues involved in regard to a given issue, that it's no longer a religious issue. That's a pathetic attempt at best. People can object to abortion on many different grounds, some religion, some not. But when one objects on the basis of religious beliefs, it becomes a religious issue.

Clearly a majority of religious people don't oppose abortion (as only 21% of people want abortion to be completely illegal). If it was a religious issue, it would be illegal.
This isn't a matter of popularity. If one-tenth of 1% of people object to a practice on the grounds of religious beliefs, it's a religious issue.

You lose. You can dig in more deeply, or bow out gracefully. Depth will not prove to be your friend. It will serve as greater embarrassment.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
dee-em
Posts: 6,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2014 1:40:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/30/2014 7:25:16 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 6:14:26 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/30/2014 5:57:08 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 4:59:36 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/30/2014 1:40:26 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 11/30/2014 7:00:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
The concept of separation between Church and State continues to elude some Americans:

http://www.nytimes.com...

Atheists are often asked what they have against organized religion. This is one of the reasons. Meddling in the education of young (and not so young kids) because of a religious agenda. It makes me sick to the stomach.

Abortion is not a religious issue.

You must surely be joking?

I'm not joking. If abortion was a religious issue, abortion would be illegal in the United States, as the vast majority of Americans identify with a religion that would, on balance, oppose abortion. However, abortion is not a religious issue - there are pro-life atheists/agnostics and pro-choice Christians.

Don't be absurd. Christians divorce even though it's frowned upon by the Church. Christians have abortions even though the Church prohibits it. Same with contraception, otherwise the population of America would be way in the billions by now.

But is divorce a religious issue? No. Is contraception a religious issue? No. If they were truly religious issues, they would be illegal.

Why? Who would make them illegal? Luckily we have separation of Church and State and we don't elect pastors as congressmen or senators. Lol.
* scratches head *

Abortion is legal because women want the right to control their own bodies irrespective of their religious affiliations. That's it. Federal politicians, at least, are going to think long and hard before disenfranchising half the population.

So you admit it isn't a religious issue. Nice to know!

Don't be a child. The pro-life movement is very much a creation of religiously motivated groups. You deny the undeniable.

And FTR, there is no broad consensus among women in favor of abortion. 41% of women are pro-life (http://www.gallup.com...).

That makes 59% who aren't. Your point is what exactly? The statistics don't matter. Pro-choice has already won the argument and there's no prospect of any change. It's a dry argument.

Whether there are pro-life atheists or pro-abortion Christians is neither here nor there. It's where the movement began and which organizations are behind it. You don't have to look far:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Much of the pro-life movement in the United States and around the world finds support in the Roman Catholic Church, the Christian right, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, the Church of England, the Anglican Church in North America, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS).

You're in denial if you really believe abortion is not primarily a religious issue.

Being supported by religious people =/ it being a religious issue.

Really? You could have fooled me!

Clearly a majority of religious people don't oppose abortion (as only 21% of people want abortion to be completely illegal). If it was a religious issue, it would be illegal.

Here we go again. Are you under the impression that you are living in a theocracy?

You can't grasp the concept of something being a religious issue which doesn't have the total support of all people with religion?