This forum is designed to address the issues of separation of church and state. You need not be of any particular religious ideology (or non-religious ideology) to post here. If you have questions or comments regarding issues of the legality (in whatever country you hail from) of religion intruding into the public sphere then feel free to comment or query.
Personally, secularism is a driving force with me and I hope that this forum will bring forth some insightful and thoughtful discourse.
Rules: Discussions regarding separation of church and state and those issues (current or past) relating thereof shall only be permitted here. Any commentary espousing prosyletization by any scriptural means may be allowed if directly relating to the public sphere and the law "of the land"; ie. constitutional or legal law. No inflammatory attacks will be tolerated.
Secularism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Secularism is generally the assertion that certain practices or institutions should exist separately from religion or religious belief. Alternatively, it is a principle of promoting secular ideas or values in either public or private settings. It may also be a synonym for "secularist movement". In the extreme, it is an ideology that holds that religion has no place in public life.
In one sense, secularism may assert the freedom of religion, and freedom from the government imposition of religion upon the people, within a state that is neutral on matters of belief, and gives no state privileges or subsidies to religions. In another sense, it refers to a belief that human activities and decisions, especially political ones, should be based on evidence and fact rather than religious influence.
The purposes and arguments in support of secularism vary widely. In European laicism, it has been argued that secularism is a movement toward modernization, and away from traditional religious values. This type of secularism, on a social or philosophical level, has often occurred while maintaining an official state church or other state support of religion. In the United States, some argue that state secularism has served to a greater extent to protect religion from governmental interference, while secularism on a social level is less prevalent. Within countries as well, however, differing political movements support secularism for equally varying reasons.
Showing posts with label Secularism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Secularism. Show all posts
Friday, 12 October 2007
Secularism
Posted by
Unknown
at
17:11
1 readers' views
Labels: forums, Secularism
Wednesday, 3 October 2007
One Reason Why I'm a Secularist
Christian Interference in Public Education & Everything Else
Educational Research Analysts:
Excerpts of the FAQ page from Mel Gablers' Educational Research Analysts: An Original Contribution to the Christian Conservative Intellectual Renaissance
Q: How do your ratings impact textbook sales so much?
A: Local schools respect our work. We absolutely document all we say. Texas itself cannot match our thoroughness. (We took eight months of quality time to critique five 1999-copyright high school World History books that averaged 1000 pages each.) Our academically rigorous standard textbook review criteria correlate with the state curriculum. We offer valuable info free.
Q: Where does Texas rank in national influence on textbooks?
A: Texas state-adopts textbooks at all grade levels, California only through Grade 8. Texas therefore most influences high school textbooks, and is second only to California in influencing Grades K-8. Other states should always demand the Texas edition of a book if there is one; and if there is no Texas edition it is probably an inferior book, since publishers submit their least offensive books in Texas, because Texas has "watchdogs."
Q: You no longer testify at the Texas State Board of Education annual textbook adoption public hearings. Why?
A: Lowering our voice and working under opponents' radar gets better results.
Q: When evolution is considered a fact in America's modern scientific community (evolution has been seen in action over the years, and has yet to be logically and scientifically disproven), why is it required to be treated as a theory in biology textbooks?
A: Textbooks' treatment of evolutionary theories is about the art of persuasion, not the science of biology.
The claim is that because genetic variation has been observed, increases in net genetic complexity have occurred. But though the mechanism for genetic variation may be mutation, there is no proven mechanism for increased net genetic complexity, which evolution requires. Rhetorical stealth phrases in textbooks mask this scientific weakness. They define evolution as "change over time" or "descent with modification," that is, as two very different concepts - observed genetic variation (antibiotic-resistant bacteria, insecticide-resistant insects) and unobserved increases in net genetic complexity (i.e., new genes) - the former supposedly validating the latter. Yet with no mechanism for the appearance of more complex kingdoms, phyla, and classes, evolutionary theory cannot explain biodiversity.
Q: Who are the analysts chosen to go over the textbooks in question, and what qualifications have they?
A: This credential mongering is an ad hominem tactic to dodge inconvenient criticism. If points raised are valid, what matters the source? Why stoop to personalities rather than judge ideas on their merits?
Source: Questions and Answers
If people are so concerned about secular education, not "liberal" education as many like to point out, then they should send their kids to a Christian school and convince others to do the same.
Quit influencing public textbooks to reflect your ideological viewpoint when not all parents agree with it.
By the way these are the same people, the Gablers', who caused the brujah over the "Evolution is just a theory" sticker on textbooks. The Gablers' are have since died but their legacy lives on (outlined further in this post).
Our Mission:
We are a conservative Christian organization that reviews public school textbooks submitted for adoption in Texas. Our reviews have national relevance because Texas state-adopts textbooks and buys so many that publishers write them to Texas standards and sell them across the country.
Our unique 46 years' experience gives us expertise equal to or beyond that of the education establishment itself in all phases of the public school textbook adoption process, and in that our standard review criteria spell out what public school textbooks often censor on certain topics.
Publishers market textbooks — and many teachers select them — based on convenience of their teaching aids. Unlike them, we review textbooks for academic content only. Parents, teachers, and school board members can all profitably use our materials.
Subject areas of concern include:
* Scientific weaknesses in evolutionary theories
* Phonics-based reading instruction
* Principles and benefits of free enterprise
* Original intent of the U.S. Constitution
* Respect for Judeo-Christian morals
* Emphasis on abstinence in sex education
* Politically-correct degradation of academics
Source: About Educational Research Analysts
Texans for Better Science Education:
TBSEF is a non-profit organization set up to assist teachers, parents, administrators, and others obtain information and resources relevant to better instructional materials and methods for teaching better science.
All 'workers' are currently volunteer. We do ask that you consider a donation that will assist in our obtaining videos and other materials for distribution to teachers and others.
We invite you to explore our website, particularly the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), and consider receiving our free, no-spam newsletter. Mostly, we trust you will think of a teacher, administrator, or others involved in teaching children and recommend them for materials.
Thank You.
Source: Texans for Better Science Education Foundation [home]-
Texans for Better Science Education is a group of concerned Texas citizens who support the right of all students and teachers to learn about both the strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theories free from censorship and intimidation, and as required by existing Texas law.
We oppose efforts by some groups to censor the teaching of evolution by preventing students from learning about scientific criticisms of the theory. We are appalled by the bullying tactics adopted by groups who try to smear anyone who disagrees with them as extremists or uneducated religious radicals. In reality, these groups are the real extremists as evidenced by their use of intimidation, censorship, character attacks, name-calling, and unsubstantiated charges to stamp out legitimate debate.
We do want to take well known scientific errors out of textbooks and in their place present well known scientific weaknesses of evolutionary theories and hypotheses.
You can help us now.
1. Help spread the word to your teachers and students that in Texas, teaching weaknesses of evolution is not only allowed, it is required.
2. Help locate errors in the book that you teach from or your child is learning from. Though many textbook errors were removed during the adoption process, many more remain.
3. Obtain and use supplemental material to teach students and teachers the profound scientific weaknesses now evident in neo-Darwinian thinking.
4. Sign up to support the teaching of both strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory in public schools. We invite all citizens who agree with this to sign our electronic petition - it is NOT necessary for you to have formal scientific training to be involved with this effort.
5. Call or write your State Board of Education (SBOE) member (see right column).
6. Write letters to your local papers and local school board supporting putting both strengths and weaknesses in the textbooks as required by Texas law, and
7. Contact the publishers themselves, particularly if you are a teacher, administrator, etc. in the school system, and let them know that you would WELCOME the addition of weaknesses being put in the books. (The publishers are concerned that they will not be able to sell books if they treat the science honestly and include both strengths and weaknesses. They are getting much pressure from the Darwinian thought police to leave the dogmatic 'evolution-as-fact' approach in the books.)
Source: About TBSE
The Discovery Institute:
Steven Buri is executive director of the Discovery Institute in Seattle. The think tank is a prominent opponent of Darwinian orthodoxy and has found many instances in which it says Texas biology textbooks are inaccurate or misleading. It also pushes school districts to have textbooks that teach the controversy over creationism and evolution.
Source: ReligionLink - Texas textbook vote has national implications
About Discovery (excerpt):
"...The point of view Discovery brings to its work includes a belief in God-given reason and the permanency of human nature; the principles of representative democracy and public service expounded by the American Founders..."
Source: Discovery Institute
Atheist Blogroll Searches: "Discover Institute", Gabler, "Public Education", Texas Education
What I take away from this is that there are Christians out there that seek to influence our public educational system with an agenda to insert the worm of religion into the minds of ALL the children. Never mind that they might be of another faith or non-faith. Never mind that the parents of these children really won't mind Christians meddling with their children's education. Wanna know why? Because it's all for the betterment of humanity that everybody be a good little Christian, so let's start with the children. We all know how malleable they are. So curious and willing to believe what the grow-ups tell them to believe.
Oh, yeah. I know where some of the fundies and the Bigot are going to say: "Evolution is a religion". If this crops up, please Modusoperandi; put thier metaphorical foot in their mouth for them as I have trouble arguing this point. Also the whole "atheism is a religion" argument. It's not. Sure, call it a belief, but don't call it a religion. There's a big difference and they don't teach how to BE an atheist in public schools. If anything public schooling (I would hope) would teach children how to be open-minded and TRULY curious about learning. Not just one particular ideology that Christianity teaches.
I will say this about evolution: the theory does not seek to disprove a god or gods. It just so happens that the theory flies high in the face of Creationism. This isn't a problem with evolution. It's a problem with Christian doctrine.
Having said that, there are plenty more Christians I think who agree more with the theory of evolution than the literal interpretation of the creation myth. It's just that some Christians are so hell-bent and flabbergasted with the notion of evolution that they bang the drum ever so loudly. You are few but you find the biggest drum and bang it so loudly that it's utterly irritating. You spread your lies while banging this drum and speak with a silky voice when you get peoples attention. You obfuscate (often unknowingly) that what you believe is right for all. And that those who don't agree with it are unworthy of your Gods graces. Unfortunately, I think that you have friends in high places who seek to institute a veiled theocracy. This is the goal of Christianity in the current climate of the United States.
You are wrong. Freedom. Does that mean anything to you? Liberty? Will there be a day when a Christian is forbidden to marry an atheist? It's shameful right? If such a thing is so shameful then I guess it should be forbidden and unlawful because it goes against the Christian god. Who likes to point out that retards and imbeciles are not to approach the alter. Could this explain the past offenses of people locking up mentally disabled persons; subjected to horrendous living situations? Could we explain the rise of secularism in the rethinking of how we handle the mentally disabled? After all, these people were treated in a way (in the past) that really does fall in line with Christian scripture. In otherwords do your best to "heal" them, but in essence they are unworthy of approaching the sacred altar of Christ. They are/were unworthy. These "old" state mental institutions invariably carried this very "attitude" out in their treatment of the mentally disabled.
Among other very pertinent things, I would like to point out that religion has infused some of humanity with ideas that do not fall in line with the rest of us who choose to have a different outlook. This is the conundrum. I've said that: Go ahead and pray at your leisure. Go to your church if you feel the need. Express your religious views to others, a dialogue if you will. This is the clincher though (at least for me): DO NOT SEEK TO INFECT YOUR IDEOLOGY INTO PUBLIC POLICY THAT WILL INFECT ME AND MY FAMILY, AND OTHERS WHO DO NOT AGREE WITH IT EITHER!!!
Posted by
Unknown
at
05:43
29
readers' views
Labels: Creationism, Public Education, Secularism
Tuesday, 18 September 2007
Our Civil Liberties: Why They are Important and How Atheism is Targetted for "Shut Down"
I sit here cruising the net and I can't help but purposefully look for stuff relating to this issue. Much of what I come across is relatively innocuous: a post on a blog, a comment on a blog, a small article in some far off local newspaper, a comment on an article in some far off local paper; what have you.
What resurfaces time and again are peoples notions of civil liberties. How often have I heard that the ACLU "needs to be stopped"? I can't tell you.
Some past post comments here on Atheist Haven (yes, I'm pointing to the fundies) carry with them an air of...not disdain necessarily, but "wrongfulness" of the atheist mind-set. As if what is "wrong" should probably be snuffed out; left with no voice. Here we venture forth into minority rights. After all atheists do comprise a minority of people. The same could be said of black people in the run-up to the civil rights movement in the 60s.
Ok, now I have to talk about it. One particular comment before I joined Beast in the endevour known as Atheist Haven, Shaun said that my wife should be ashamed (if she be a Christian) for marrying an atheist. Taken into context; this would mean that Shaun believes that it is wrong for a Christian to marry an atheist and I'm assuming that he wouldn't have any qualms about a law being passed to bar this type of union. This is the utmost example of bigotry. Atheists, as a minority, are unworthy of the rights of the "faithful" majority.
Currently this debate is a firebrand amongst the gay and fundamentalist communities. The right to marry the opposite gender. So far it isn't illegal for me to marry my wife, be she Christian, Muslim, Jew, Black, Hispanic or Russian. It is illegal in much of the United States for gays to have the same benefits afforded to same-gendered couples.
Why do I bring up the gay marriage issue? Because the rationale is based entirely on the Christian biblical/moral code. If this kind of sentiment can shape the the law of the land; what can stop it in other aspects of our lives? And how has it affected our lives already?
As much as I like conspiracy theories, this is no conspiracy theory. Far from it. It's real. It's "wrong" for a man to have a marital relationship with another man and conversely it is "wrong" for a woman to have marital relations with another woman. I don't have to point any further than conversations I've had with Christians about this. It goes against god. Period. Hence, the infringement of civil liberty in this regard.
My main point is that we atheists, as minorities, are entitled to civil liberties as well as the next person. Currently this is so, but with the burgeoning rise of the atheist voice comes an equal rise of Christian enmity stemming from their "faith" being called into question and/or it otherwise being scrutinized. What else gets their goat is the rise of secularism in society and within the state.
This I think is the real hot-bed issue. After all with a true secular society comes virtual abolition of religion within the public sphere. This is probably why we are seeing increased enrollment of "Christian children" into private charter schools rather than send them to public schools that are secular. On the face of it that's fine. In the end though these types of schools are essentially Christian factories churning out citizens that will probably have a particular bias against secularism. Because they themselves have no experience with an education system that's secular. Hypothetically, some of these citizens are going to go on to become leaders in our communities having been raised with a bias FOR Christianity. I would hope that these citizen-leaders would embrace the notion of secularism, but that hope is ever so finite.
What happens when these citizen-leaders reach into politics? Under my assumption they will invariably tow the line of Christian mores. Generation by generation we could very well see the erosion of secularism in society and with that will come the erosion of our civil liberties.
So why are our civil liberties important?What resurfaces time and again are peoples notions of civil liberties. How often have I heard that the ACLU "needs to be stopped"? I can't tell you.
Some past post comments here on Atheist Haven (yes, I'm pointing to the fundies) carry with them an air of...not disdain necessarily, but "wrongfulness" of the atheist mind-set. As if what is "wrong" should probably be snuffed out; left with no voice. Here we venture forth into minority rights. After all atheists do comprise a minority of people. The same could be said of black people in the run-up to the civil rights movement in the 60s.
Ok, now I have to talk about it. One particular comment before I joined Beast in the endevour known as Atheist Haven, Shaun said that my wife should be ashamed (if she be a Christian) for marrying an atheist. Taken into context; this would mean that Shaun believes that it is wrong for a Christian to marry an atheist and I'm assuming that he wouldn't have any qualms about a law being passed to bar this type of union. This is the utmost example of bigotry. Atheists, as a minority, are unworthy of the rights of the "faithful" majority.
Currently this debate is a firebrand amongst the gay and fundamentalist communities. The right to marry the opposite gender. So far it isn't illegal for me to marry my wife, be she Christian, Muslim, Jew, Black, Hispanic or Russian. It is illegal in much of the United States for gays to have the same benefits afforded to same-gendered couples.
Why do I bring up the gay marriage issue? Because the rationale is based entirely on the Christian biblical/moral code. If this kind of sentiment can shape the the law of the land; what can stop it in other aspects of our lives? And how has it affected our lives already?
As much as I like conspiracy theories, this is no conspiracy theory. Far from it. It's real. It's "wrong" for a man to have a marital relationship with another man and conversely it is "wrong" for a woman to have marital relations with another woman. I don't have to point any further than conversations I've had with Christians about this. It goes against god. Period. Hence, the infringement of civil liberty in this regard.
My main point is that we atheists, as minorities, are entitled to civil liberties as well as the next person. Currently this is so, but with the burgeoning rise of the atheist voice comes an equal rise of Christian enmity stemming from their "faith" being called into question and/or it otherwise being scrutinized. What else gets their goat is the rise of secularism in society and within the state.
This I think is the real hot-bed issue. After all with a true secular society comes virtual abolition of religion within the public sphere. This is probably why we are seeing increased enrollment of "Christian children" into private charter schools rather than send them to public schools that are secular. On the face of it that's fine. In the end though these types of schools are essentially Christian factories churning out citizens that will probably have a particular bias against secularism. Because they themselves have no experience with an education system that's secular. Hypothetically, some of these citizens are going to go on to become leaders in our communities having been raised with a bias FOR Christianity. I would hope that these citizen-leaders would embrace the notion of secularism, but that hope is ever so finite.
What happens when these citizen-leaders reach into politics? Under my assumption they will invariably tow the line of Christian mores. Generation by generation we could very well see the erosion of secularism in society and with that will come the erosion of our civil liberties.
-Larro
Atheist Blogroll Search: "Civil Liberty", Secularism, "Charter School", ACLU, "Minority Rights", "Civil Rights", "Gay Marriage", "Christian children", "Public Education"
Posted by
Unknown
at
16:58
7
readers' views
Labels: ACLU, Charter School, Christian children, civil liberty, Civil Rights, Gay Marriage, Minority Rights, Public Education, Secularism
Sunday, 16 September 2007
Larro: A Brief Introduction
I'm going to begin this first post by drawing on a comment by Shaun. This started out as a comment on Blasphemy: A Blameless Crime?, but I found it turning out to be an excellent introduction for myself. The comment starts as follows:
Shaun, you said, "[I/Larro] think/hope/wish whatever, that God does not exist"
To be honest I could really care less about that. Really!
I've given up quite a long time ago about debating the existence of a god with the faithful. Not that I don't have any argument against it, but this: It's the whole point of faith. I can't argue against someones personal faith. If somebody feels so strongly in a belief, I am not even going to waste my breathe in convincing them otherwise.
Here is my position. I'm not out to debunk anybodies faith (as much as I relish the thought; and on occasion I may succumb to this). What I am about are, the social issues and how people of faith affect the current political and civil debate. This is ultimately what concerns me: this unseen and oft-times obfuscated interjection of religion and politics affects me as well as the next person. This is why atheists need to get their shit together and REALLY organize.
I guess what I am saying is that I am a very, very, very strict secularist. Don't get me wrong I am still a civil libertarian to a degree as well; kids can still pray in school of their own accord, I have no problem with that. Yes, contrary to bullshit arguments that there is NO prayer allowed in school, prayer itself is still allowed in schools here in the U.S.
I believe in freedom and liberty for all. If anybody wants to really know anymore about my views then feel free to ask and I will try to answer to the best of my ability.
Shaun, you said, "[I/Larro] think/hope/wish whatever, that God does not exist"
To be honest I could really care less about that. Really!
I've given up quite a long time ago about debating the existence of a god with the faithful. Not that I don't have any argument against it, but this: It's the whole point of faith. I can't argue against someones personal faith. If somebody feels so strongly in a belief, I am not even going to waste my breathe in convincing them otherwise.
Here is my position. I'm not out to debunk anybodies faith (as much as I relish the thought; and on occasion I may succumb to this). What I am about are, the social issues and how people of faith affect the current political and civil debate. This is ultimately what concerns me: this unseen and oft-times obfuscated interjection of religion and politics affects me as well as the next person. This is why atheists need to get their shit together and REALLY organize.
I guess what I am saying is that I am a very, very, very strict secularist. Don't get me wrong I am still a civil libertarian to a degree as well; kids can still pray in school of their own accord, I have no problem with that. Yes, contrary to bullshit arguments that there is NO prayer allowed in school, prayer itself is still allowed in schools here in the U.S.
I believe in freedom and liberty for all. If anybody wants to really know anymore about my views then feel free to ask and I will try to answer to the best of my ability.
Posted by
Unknown
at
18:19
76
readers' views
Labels: Larro, Secularism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
