The Louisiana Ten Commandments thread.

Pepper said:
I think it's about time we just accept @rgp for who he is and move on from his comments which many find offensive. It's just RGP being RGP. Let's move it along, nothing new to see here folks. After all, So What?
Click to expand...
And I feel the exact same about you ....... S What.
 

Paladin1950 said:
Nothing stagnates a country more than religion. Bible thumpers use God to push through their personal agendas or to block the ones that they are against. I have always been against letting religion creep into politics. And also into schools. They already have church and Sunday school for religion. I propose to make Sunday school start teaching about American History, Math, Science, and Grammar. See how the Bible thumpers like that. :geek:
Click to expand...
Now you are just being silly, but I get your point.

In the Australian school curriculum there is a strand of the social studies curriculum called General Religious Studies. It includes comparative studies of various religious sects/denominations in Australia and the part played by religious groups in colonial and contemporary history of Australia. It includes indigenous beliefs and customs (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders).

There is also provision for Special Religious Studies. This came about in the colonies before Federation when the then Church of England allowed state governments to take over their schools. Part of the deal was that at least 30 minutes was to be set aside for clergy to have access to children of their denomination for religious instruction. This was the situation when I was a student in government elementary and secondary schools.

Today this system has largely collapsed but the time must not by law be subsumed into general education. This means that in most schools the students have a 30 minute early mark once a week.
 

This IS a discussion forum so members SHOULD be able to discuss opposing views. Thereā€™s nothing in the forum rules that states otherwise. The problem comes in when people discussing opposing views use derogatory terms/ names.

Example: itā€™s against the rules to call homosexuals ā€œqueers.ā€
 
Pepper said:
See, we have something in common. But, I didn't mean to imply it was you who was 'so what'. I meant it is time to accept you as you. I actually meant something nice about you, or tried to. I was a bit clumsy about it. Hey, only had one coffee.
Click to expand...

I understand completely , and thank you for your intention. And ..... I appreciate being accepted [as me] . I admit, [and proudly so] that I am about as un-P/C as they come. I firmly believe that P/C-ness is bringing this country down. I'll shut-up now ;) because you know it is just going to start another bombardment form those who just cannot accept anything other than complete conformity with their view.
 
Pepper said:
See, we have something in common. But, I didn't mean to imply it was you who was 'so what'. I meant it is time to accept you as you. I actually meant something nice about you, or tried to.
Click to expand...
You said it just fine, Pepper, and I feel the same. I'm having a real problem with the "my way or the highway" things I've seen in some threads lately. Everyone's not going to agree on everything. Different feelings are what makes good conversations IF neither party gets all bent out of shape (aka butthurt) when someone feels differently. We're all "old and wise" enough (well, I hope) to know which thread topics are going to end up in controversy... I'm figuring either don't start them or expect the push-back and handle it in a respectful and mature manner.

Actually... I *think* one of our first interactions was a differing of opinion, and I remember saying to you, "don't worry, Pepper, we don't need to agree on everything!" :giggle: @Pepper
 
PeppermintPatty said:
This IS a discussion forum so members SHOULD be able to discuss opposing views. Thereā€™s nothing in the forum rules that states otherwise. The problem comes in when people discussing opposing views use derogatory terms/ names.

Example: itā€™s against the rules to call homosexuals ā€œqueers.ā€
Click to expand...
Why ? They call themselves queers. If not so, why is there a "Q" in the chosen header/label of the alphabet folks ? LGBTQ
 
rgp said:
I understand completely , and thank you for your intention. And ..... I appreciate being accepted [as me] . I admit, [and proudly so] that I am about as un-P/C as they come.
Click to expand...
I accept you, @rgp . Actually seeing how you've (and others) have been treated for sharing personal feelings has made me somewhat uncomfortable to share my own thoughts on many topics. :cry: Shouldn't be like that.
 
Last edited:
rgp said:
"Everyone deserves it, don't you think?"

Yes I do, but that is a two-way street. Do I not deserve it as well , regarding my opinion ? Read my opinion and just ... feel free to move on.

And i was not "bombing" his thread . Once again, I was merely making an opposing comment on the topic he posted.

If someone is going to praise the queers & their lifestyle ? I am going to offer-up an opposing view of them, as I think they are disgusting.

It is called a discussion group, so lets discuss it. And a discussion is a two-way street. Opinions, and opposition to those opinions.
Click to expand...
Ok, enjoy your hate filled life, just don't try to play the victim when someone exercises their god-given right to rebut your opinion.
 
rgp said:
Why ? They call themselves queers. If not so, why is there a "Q" in the chosen header/label of the alphabet folks ? LGBTQ
Click to expand...
Youā€™re absolutely right. The word queer is in LGBTQ. I think the main point is intention. If you are using the words in a derogatory manner to hurt then itā€™s not said with the same intention.

I think both sides of an argument should be respectful of each other at all times which doesnā€™t always happen. Thats how threads get locked up.
 
VisualBrian said:
This is the kind of post that makes people mad and gets threads locked. Please, make good arguments, but don't make personal attacks.
Click to expand...
Point taken. Rather than try to reason and appeal to someone's sensibilities I'll just use the Report button. Too bad that people can't show some self restraint with their negativity, getting a thread locked isn't fair to the OP, and I suspect some do instigate discord in order to do just that.
 
I think it would be pretty hard to push the Ten here in Canada where it isn't at all unusual to have an inner city elementary school with more than 70 percent of the kids being Muslims, or Sikhs, or Hindus, or just plain "no religious belief at all ". The Canadian point of view about religion is simple. Be what ever you want to believe, but keep it to your self at work, or in social settings. Our political leaders religious thoughts are not sought, and no one gives a hoot what church, or temple, or shrine they attend, or don't attend. JIMB.
 
I think what has given me the most pause about the ten commandments placed in schoolsā€¦is that is going to be mandatory. I think the ten commandments are a good thing, but if sex education can get pushed out of schools as being the job of a parentā€¦why is not religion? And what about schools that opt out of teaching evolution?. America is very diverseā€¦and the moral majority is not the majority.
 
Nathan said:
Ok, enjoy your hate filled life, just don't try to play the victim when someone exercises their god-given right to rebut your opinion.
Click to expand...
Despite your opinion, I do not live a hate filled life. I just exercise my god-given right to post my opinion, and for the most part I do not ridicule & insult others along the way.
 
I well remember one Sunday evening service when a minister tried to introduce a small congregation to the Toronto Blessing.

One of our more impressionable younger women collapsed to the floor and a senior lady, a staunch Methodist, stood up, stepped over her prone body and stormed out of the church in disgust.

The Toronto Blessing experiment was never repeated at my church although the same minister and his wife were known to have conducted exorcisms on other people, including babies. :mad:
 
Don't know how I never heard about this Toronto Blessing thing. Sounds pretty bizarre.

No, I do not believe it is legal or advisable for Louisianna to require any religious doctrine in public schools. I imagine it will waste everyone's time being litigated and will eventually be removed. Sounds like it probably has political roots.

However, when the words "under god" were added to the pledge I thought smacked of state sponsored religion, so what do I know?
 
rgp said:
Despite your opinion, I do not live a hate filled life. I just exercise my god-given right to post my opinion, and for the most part I do not ridicule & insult others along the way.
Click to expand...
We all have a right to post our opinion about the topic. . Respectfully to others. Saying they are disgusting doesn't seem that to me.

We dont have the right to hijack threads saying how we won't be silenced, other posters did this or that etc etc etc- that is posting about posting,not about the topic.

In order not to hijack it myself I am now leaving this tangent - if anyone wants to,they could start a thread about posting.
 
DebraMae said:
However, when the words "under god" were added to the pledge I thought smacked of state sponsored religion, so what do I know?
Click to expand...

What pledge do you mean, Debra? The citizen ship pledge?

I like how it is in Australia- the words 'under God' are optional - people can say them, meaning whatever God they want, or not say them

I guess if they believe in a plural God religion,they could say ' under gods'.
 
January said:
What pledge do you mean, Debra? The citizen ship pledge?

I like how it is in Australia- the words 'under God' are optional - people can say them, meaning whatever God they want, or not say them

I guess if they believe in a plural God religion,they could say ' under gods'.
Click to expand...

It is our pledge of allegiance to the flag and the republic. The vast majority of public schools recite this daily. It is not a requirement but the children do not know that or question it. I doubt that most teachers know it is not mandatory.

I think allegiance to country is fine. My objection is inserting religion into it. We are supposed to have separation of church and state and that line is frequently getting tested and blurred.

I have no problem with religion. My problem is with forced religion.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top