Wednesday, August 31, 2005

An Angry Rant!

WARNING - This post may not be suitable for all people. I am currently rather angry and this post (while it will not contain swearing) will be a very serious rant. So be warned that you may not like what i have to say, but this is a very real and serious issue to me.

I'm still writhing a little from a previous comment that i had to deal with on a previous post, but i wanted to touch on something that is very close to my heart.

It makes me very angry when i consider that the government finances an education system that is insulting, degrading, and spits in the face to anyone who takes religion and their religious beliefs seriously. It is insulting that our education system forces us to learn about evolution which, with its MANY flaws, is very anti-religious (some would say that evolution and religion can co-exist without conflict, but those who actually believe that and are Christian either don't understand evolution very well, or don't understand Christianity very well). Our country is founded on the freedom of religion, not the freedom to force anti-religious rhetoric down the throats of every child and young person in the country, so that they can then turn around and insult us and our children for not accepting that rhetoric as undenyable fact! This is a government that guarantees a quality education to every citizen and then when those citizens don't want to have to have their children listen to their rhetoric and do choose an alternative, they are still forced pay to have their neighbor be taught it, while at the same time having to pay out of their own pockets in order for their child to receive an education that is not prejudiced against them.

This is a problem that exists and is supported on all levels of the educational system, from grade school to state funded colleges. I am sick and tired of sitting back and listening to the rhetoric that places science and education as gods in our society and then claims that it separates church from state. When an alternative is brought forth that seeks to bring some balance to the problem and show that what has been forced on us is not as perfect as society would like us to think, it is criticized, rejected, and its supporters insulted. Now that's what i call a free country!

Do i have a reason to be angry? You bet i do!

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Are you wanting religion to be taught in schools? Does this mean that you want all religions to be taught in schools or just Christianity?

JCMasterpiece said...

I will try to answer this as quickly and simply as possible (good luck).

First off when this government was formed there was no such thing as a free government sponsored/financed education. Neither was there a theory of evolution. The seperation of church and state was in oppostion to government forced religious of which Eastern Europe (and most of the "civilized" world) was prominant for. People did not have a choice.

The founding fathers did not want religion rejected and publically criticized by the government. They wanted people to be able to have the freedom to choose their own religion. What the current educational system does is teach something that rejects and publically criticizes the basic beliefs of all major religions.

Well, i'm out of time. I will have to complete this thought later.

Eric said...

your knowlege of the founding fathers is pretty funny. Jefferson, for instance, was pretty much the direct opposite of the calvanist theology that fundamentalist christians of today practice. examples:

Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.

-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802

JCMasterpiece said...

Eric, i don't see your point. I don't disagree with what Jefferson said. The first quote doesn't really seem that relevant as no one is talking about "blindfolded fear", but then again it seems like it would make more sense and have more clarity if it was in context. Taken out of context it just doesn't work right.

"in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination." - correct

"make no law respecting an establishment of religion," As i said before the problem was with the government forcing a specific religion.
"or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," As i said, "The founding fathers did not want religion rejected and publically criticized by the government. They wanted people to be able to have the freedom to choose their own religion. What the current educational system does is teach something that rejects and publically criticizes the basic beliefs of all major religions.

Unfortunately i think that there is a flaw with what Jefferson sees as possible; "thus building a wall of separation between church and State." But alas i will have to go into this later

Eric said...

What would you have government teach about biology?