Should bible studies be compulsory at schools.

[phk]

Religous clubs only serve as a source of hate and should be banned.

[John Dibble]

Religous clubs only serve as a source of hate and should be banned.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

The Bible is an important historical and literary document.  I have no problem with public schools assigning it as reading, as long as it is being taught for historical context and not for the truth of its contents.

[MissCatholic]

I think if we have faith schools where the policy is clearly stated that bible reading is apart of the school semisters then why not.

it is a parents decision where the child attends school. if they want the child to be around people of faith why not? I`m not promoting a theocracy. i`m just saying that its not a bad idea.

[7,052,770]

We have THREE different prayer groups at my school, meeting on different mornings.  I've never been to one though.

[Beet]

The Bible is an important historical and literary document.  I have no problem with public schools assigning it as reading, as long as it is being taught for historical context and not for the truth of its contents.

Exactly. You can assign various religious texts in schools (the Holy Bible included) without forcing children to believe in what they are reading.

What? A perfectly reasoned argument? What's the world coming to?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What Nick and Everett said

[TeePee4Prez]

Religous clubs only serve as a source of hate and should be banned.

Actually, no they shouldn't though it should be optional to join.  I don't see a problem with a Jewish or Catholic students union like many universities have in the public schools.  I also had secular Bible study in a class called Intellectual Heritage at when I attended a state university, Temple.  However, the Koran was also covered and compared with the Bible.  I'm against promoting religion in public schools, but I maybe open for a secular Bible study class in History or whatnot.

[Democratic Hawk]

Yes, and if secularists or atheists object - TOUGH!

Dave

[Emsworth]

Yes, and if secularists or atheists object - TOUGH!

Surely, you do not believe that schools should indoctrinate students by teaching them that the Bible is absolute truth?

[Democratic Hawk]

Yes, and if secularists or atheists object - TOUGH!

Surely, you do not believe that schools should indoctrinate students by teaching them that the Bible is absolute truth?

No, but it should be taught and then left for the individual to decide whether they take the Bible to be literal truth or not. For me, it's not an issue of indoctrination

Dave

[opebo]

Yes, and if secularists or atheists object - TOUGH!

Dave

So, you want theocracy.  Why don't you get over into the Religious Party and out of the Democratic Party, you intolerant.

Why on earth should an atheist, a secularist, or for that matter a Buddhist have to learn about your personal favorite fairy tale?

 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I fail to see how this:

No, but it should be taught and then left for the individual to decide whether they take the Bible to be literal truth or not

Is "intolerant". If anything it's what the education system should be like as regards divisive and potentially divisive topics (Evolution being another example).

Now, ranting on about "your personal favourite fairy tale" is intolerant and is bigoted.

[A18]

I think Al's a religious. Please join the Religious Party.

[skybridge]

with parent consent. should every christian child pracitice bible reading?

Perhaps every Chrisitian, but since other faiths' children deserve knowledge just as much, religion should be taught from--at best--a scholarly perspective in social context, but not with any dogmatism.

[Gabu]

I think Al's a religious. Please join the Religious Party.

I think you're a gay.  Please join the Green Party.

[Democratic Hawk]

Yes, and if secularists or atheists object - TOUGH!

Dave

So, you want theocracy.  Why don't you get over into the Religious Party and out of the Democratic Party, you intolerant.

No - I'm sticking with the Democratic Party thank you. Of course, I don't want a theocracy and have never remotely advocated a theocracy. In fact, I've long been scathing in my criticism of the 'Talibangelicals'. On the other hand, I'm equally scathing towards secularist extremists

Dave

[phk]

Yes, and if secularists or atheists object - TOUGH!

Dave

So, you want theocracy.  Why don't you get over into the Religious Party and out of the Democratic Party, you intolerant.

No - I'm sticking with the Democratic Party thank you. Of course, I don't want a theocracy and have never remotely advocated a theocracy. In fact, I've long been scathing in my criticism of the 'Talibangelicals'. On the other hand, I'm equally scathing towards secularist extremists

Dave

What are you talking about?

Your either a Talibangical or a Secular.

This so-called middle ground is only for people that don't have any principles.

[Democratic Hawk]

Yes, and if secularists or atheists object - TOUGH!

Dave

So, you want theocracy.  Why don't you get over into the Religious Party and out of the Democratic Party, you intolerant.

No - I'm sticking with the Democratic Party thank you. Of course, I don't want a theocracy and have never remotely advocated a theocracy. In fact, I've long been scathing in my criticism of the 'Talibangelicals'. On the other hand, I'm equally scathing towards secularist extremists

Dave

What are you talking about?

Your either a Talibangical or a Secular.

This so-called middle ground is only for people that don't have any principles.

Nonsense. Are you saying moderates are devoid of principles? I think it's pretty frightening if you are seeking to assert that only extremists have principles

Dave