Comparative religion classes should be mandatory in grade school &/or high school

Adults can think for themselves,... which is what i like in your comments here.
But the purpose of Religion is to get young people to agree to sexually prudent behaviors when the sex glands start working full force at age 12-13.

The urges and thoughts that come with those Freudian archetypes in their minds are hard to settle down and control, especially for boys.
Raised with constant teaching/preaching about sexual prudence and getting married before sex once prevented fatherlessness.
And, it did get young people married around age 18, not 26 as does today.

 

Its a good idea with impossible contradictions.
Teachers could mention the HISTORY of Christianity and the roots of Judaism from which was derived, and speak about Mohammed in 616AD,...

But the various denominations would make things difficult in Public Schools.
Religious schools are a cut above Public schools and do fine, but are always denominational.

 

you can teach your kids your religion, not other peoples kids....

 

who needs a public school to teach their children about God... can they do a better job then say the church, a bigger question is why are churches sucking so bad these days that it's members are calling for the public schools to replace them?

heck, just give your kids the book and tell them to read it for themselves...

you know Sunday school is bad when republicans call on a civil power to replace them....
.

 

Why are you so concerned with other people's sex lives?

 

Teaching stories that have no basis in truth doesn't help with the ignorance part.

 

Why do you think religion is the way to encourage prudence in young people? If prudence is what you want for your kids, then just damn well teach it! Why the circuitous (and thereby diluted) circuit?

 

Jesus was also a conservative--he often talks of the virtue of hard work and making money (parable of the talents). He really doesn't fit into 21st century political paradigms. I understand why liberals claim him as well as conservatives.

 

Stories that aren't literally true can be great teachers. That is why we study literature. Also, in order to be an educated person, to some degree there is a basic knowledge of culture that you need to have (cultural literacy). You can't understand a lot of literature without knowing the Bible references that are often made in those works of literature.

I'm an active Catholic. I agree with you that most of the Old Testament is simply fiction. That said, there are a lot of lessons to be learned from that fiction about man's interactions.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, with their parents' permission, I teach other people's kids my religion. (It's called being a middle school Catechism teacher). I do agree, I'm against teaching other people's kids my religion without their permission.

 

Hard work and making money are conservative values?... damn I'm not a lock step conservative and I've worked all my life, made honest money. .. you know I also like freedom, justice and rule of law, does that make me a conservative?

 

WTF?....Really?...thats the purpose of Religion? If so, who is "Religion" to question something that gawd has made or instilled inside of every species?

 

I would call you a common sense Christian...

I am a common sense Buddhist I suppose as I do not believe in the virgin birth of the Buddha, ect...

.

 

They can be. But I am pretty sure the poster wasn't referring to a literature type lesson in regards to moses, abraham, and noah. I don't see much teaching in those stories.

 

Just wondering if by reading posts in the thread you started if you have any comments....have you changed your mind?

 

Only if you also believe that being ignorant of the Koran is being ignorant!

I would support a TRUE comparative study of ALL major religions. But It the OP, it seems to be referring only to "Christianity" and "The Bible."

 

Well, I beg to differ. Somebody’s belief system is something held holy by this person. While I may not want to take his/her belief on board, I will grant it the same respect that I would want for whatever is holy and of essential value to me. Whether you want to attribute this moral principle to the Golden Rule that pretty much all religions proclaim, or to Kant’s Categorical imperative, is up to you. IMHO it is a moral principle that children should be taught though.
You can scrutinize belief-systems and analyse them without going out of your way to insult them.

 

Mmmh, I seriously have to stretch my imagination for that kind of understanding. I simply don’t understand how somebody can mistake money mentioned in a parable for actual money. And I’d find it very hard to ignore the rather prominent “don’t gather riches on earth” bits.
However, Liberals are just as keen on making money as Conservatives these days, so I agree it’s probably better not to think of Christ as a political modern day figure but to ask ourselves how He would like us personally to follow His example … (healing the sick for free and all that. … .

 

What makes you think that only conservatives value work or what wealth can do? In the parable, the servant wasn't making money for himself, he was enriching his master. IOW he wasn't making the money for the sake of greed.

 

In the United states there is a separation of the state from the church. We don't need to teach about religion in school. Go to a religious academy if you want areligious education.