Indoctrination into Islam?
-
@coliver said:
Why write something random though, and lets be fair any statement out of the Quran would have gotten equal ire from the people who are complaining. This phrase is commonly taught to Islamic youths so it seems like it would make sense and fit with what the class is supposed to be teaching.
I lean this way. Using something random would not have solved anything here nor would it have taught quite as well. Unlike most religions, Islam has this clear, repeated statement. It's hard to understand or study Islam without it.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
As soon as the pledge of Allegiance is outlawed, I'll believe that one. Doctrinal statements have long been a staple of the American public school system
Both political and religious.The pledge of allergiance has been dropped from pretty much all public schools that I'm aware of. The last time I did it (during my schooling) was in the 5th grade.
Does anyone here have any kids that can answer if it is still performed daily?
-
@DustinB3403 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
As soon as the pledge of Allegiance is outlawed, I'll believe that one. Doctrinal statements have long been a staple of the American public school system
Both political and religious.The pledge of allergiance has been dropped from pretty much all public schools that I'm aware of. The last time I did it (during my schooling) was in the 5th grade.
Does anyone here have any kids that can answer if it is still performed daily?
Worked in an area high school. It was still recited on a daily basis. Although from what I saw there were few young adults who actually paid any attention to it.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
Right. However, in a public school system, you don't use things that can be translated as doctrinal statements. I would expect the same reaction if somebody were made to write in any language that "Jesus is the only begotten son of God"
As soon as the pledge of Allegiance is outlawed, I'll believe that one. Doctrinal statements have long been a staple of the American public school system
Both political and religious.I see the point, they could have had them write something random. Although if you were studying Christianity and didn't have to study the religious bits, would it be a study of Christianity?
I disagree with the banning of the pledge of allegiance... (but does anybody really even do that anymore anyway?).. In my mind, the Pledge of Allegiance shows support for our country and its people (not the politicians that run it!)
In a public school setting, I have no problem with the teachers doing a side by side of the world religions. I have no problem with them discussing the topic in class. I have no problem with them asking a student what they believe and why...
But ti give them an assignment that says "copy this statement" should be generic, and not overtly doctrinal... (See my last post on Proverbs vs the Islamic Statement of Faith)
-
Let me see if I can make an analogy to Catholicism...
This would require a different kind of art class, of course, but see if this makes sense.
In a class about world religions while studying the art and influence of Catholicism the class gets a famous work of art depicting the Virgin Mary. The homework assignment is to roughly copy the painting (this is where it is harder) to understand the iconography of the religion.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
As soon as the pledge of Allegiance is outlawed, I'll believe that one. Doctrinal statements have long been a staple of the American public school system
Both political and religious.The pledge of allergiance has been dropped from pretty much all public schools that I'm aware of. The last time I did it (during my schooling) was in the 5th grade.
Does anyone here have any kids that can answer if it is still performed daily?
Asking kids in Texas right now.
-
@dafyre said:
I disagree with the banning of the pledge of allegiance... (but does anybody really even do that anymore anyway?).. In my mind, the Pledge of Allegiance shows support for our country and its people (not the politicians that run it!)
It's not support, it's a pledge of obedience. It's indoctrination. And it is "one nation, under God."
It's indoctrination, it's religion, is fascism. It's everything we fear in the Islamic statement but not just a statement of what "is" but a vow to obey and submit to it!! The pledge is dramatically more indoctrinating. It's a whole different scale.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@dafyre said:
I disagree with the banning of the pledge of allegiance... (but does anybody really even do that anymore anyway?).. In my mind, the Pledge of Allegiance shows support for our country and its people (not the politicians that run it!)
It's not support, it's a pledge of obedience. It's indoctrination. And it is "one nation, under God."
It's indoctrination, it's religion, is fascism. It's everything we fear in the Islamic statement but not just a statement of what "is" but a vow to obey and submit to it!! The pledge is dramatically more indoctrinating. It's a whole different scale.
Ha ha ha. You do have a point. I take back my previous statement.
-
@dafyre said:
But ti give them an assignment that says "copy this statement" should be generic, and not overtly doctrinal... (See my last post on Proverbs vs the Islamic Statement of Faith)
So compare these two...
Homework: Copy an indoctrinal statement in an artistic way one time to understand what other people are made to do.
Pledge: Every morning state your unrelenting obedience to an indoctrinal statement that OTHER countries might be upset if their students had to write down one time in a homework assignment to understand how American students are indoctrinated.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
As soon as the pledge of Allegiance is outlawed, I'll believe that one. Doctrinal statements have long been a staple of the American public school system
Both political and religious.The pledge of allergiance has been dropped from pretty much all public schools that I'm aware of. The last time I did it (during my schooling) was in the 5th grade.
Does anyone here have any kids that can answer if it is still performed daily?
Just confirmed. I have kids from a couple different schools here...
- Pledge of Allegiance is said every morning before the start of the day.
- The Pledge to Texas is said every morning before the start of the day.
- A moment of silence goes with the pledges so the kids can reflect on their commitment to being good subjects of the country.
-
I personally don't care either way with the assignment of learning calligraphy. And I don't really mind that an Islamic statement was the chosen assignment.
I brought the topic up as it's an interesting one, since many parts of the world are dealing with Extremist Islamism and the people who choose to kill because of their religion. (Or at least that is their outward facing motive).
But Calligraphy is just fancy hand-writing, literally anything could have been chosen as the assignment.
Examples....
So for introducing religion into a school, I do believe the teacher should be held accountable, since schools are supposed to be free of religion. Of all forms.
As for the choice of the assignment, poor judgement on their part.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
I personally don't care either way with the assignment of learning calligraphy. And I don't really mind that an Islamic statement was the chosen assignment.
I brought the topic up as it's an interesting one, since many parts of the world are dealing with Extremist Islamism and the people who choose to kill because of their religion. (Or at least that is their outward facing motive).
But Calligraphy is just fancy hand-writing, literally anything could have been chosen as the assignment.
Examples....
So for introducing religion into a school, I do believe the teacher should be held accountable, since schools are supposed to be free of religion. Of all forms.
As for the choice of the assignment, poor judgement on their part.
From my reading this class was all about teaching religion in schools. It was a world religion class (or a social studies class on world religions). I had a very similar one to it when I was in high school.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
So for introducing religion into a school, I do believe the teacher should be held accountable, since schools are supposed to be free of religion. Of all forms.
They are? Not in the US they are not. The US has very clear first amendment guaranteeing the state's freedom to choose and push religion. Schools have no mandate to be free of religion, there is no suggestion of that in the US. Very much the opposite. They are free to be arms of religious groups until the first amendment is repealed.
-
@coliver said:
From my reading this class was all about teaching religion in schools. It was a world religion class (or a social studies class on world religions). I had a very similar one to it when I was in high school.
Pretty much every school I've ever known includes religious education. You really can't talk about history, politics, have a daily indoctrinal statement, learn about social studies or study art without understanding religion. You can do math and science without it, but not the history of either.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
So for introducing religion into a school, I do believe the teacher should be held accountable, since schools are supposed to be free of religion. Of all forms.
They are? Not in the US they are not. The US has very clear first amendment guaranteeing the state's freedom to choose and push religion. Schools have no mandate to be free of religion, there is no suggestion of that in the US. Very much the opposite. They are free to be arms of religious groups until the first amendment is repealed.
My understanding, and several court cases back it up, of the establishment clause prevents this from happening.
-
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
So for introducing religion into a school, I do believe the teacher should be held accountable, since schools are supposed to be free of religion. Of all forms.
They are? Not in the US they are not. The US has very clear first amendment guaranteeing the state's freedom to choose and push religion. Schools have no mandate to be free of religion, there is no suggestion of that in the US. Very much the opposite. They are free to be arms of religious groups until the first amendment is repealed.
My understanding, and several court cases back it up, of the establishment clause prevents this from happening.
No, it has happened, for many years a few states had official religions. The states have every right, and have exercised it, to do this. The constitution guarantees it. That's what the first amendment IS. The federal government has no right to step in to the establishment of religion in the states.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@coliver said:
From my reading this class was all about teaching religion in schools. It was a world religion class (or a social studies class on world religions). I had a very similar one to it when I was in high school.
Pretty much every school I've ever known includes religious education. You really can't talk about history, politics, have a daily indoctrinal statement, learn about social studies or study art without understanding religion. You can do math and science without it, but not the history of either.
Religion is such a huge part of everything we talk about in history and literature it would be hard to teach anything without it being brought up. Our English class is highschool regularly talked about the catholic and christian influences on British and enlightenment literature.
-
Remember that the Constitution only gives the government the right to do things stated explicitly. It expressly forbids the federal government from overseeing religious matters. The separation of church and state (state being the fed) guarantees that the fed cannot step in should individual states have official religions.
The "separation of church and state" is the poorly named idea that makes the US a country without any guarantee of being non-religious. It was put in because several states were formed by religious groups and would not join the union without it. Now we are left in the dark ages worried that a religious group will gain control of a state or states and make them officially religious places without any way for the federal government to do anything about it without repealing the amendment first.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
So for introducing religion into a school, I do believe the teacher should be held accountable, since schools are supposed to be free of religion. Of all forms.
They are? Not in the US they are not. The US has very clear first amendment guaranteeing the state's freedom to choose and push religion. Schools have no mandate to be free of religion, there is no suggestion of that in the US. Very much the opposite. They are free to be arms of religious groups until the first amendment is repealed.
My understanding, and several court cases back it up, of the establishment clause prevents this from happening.
No, it has happened, for many years a few states had official religions. The states have every right, and have exercised it, to do this. The constitution guarantees it. That's what the first amendment IS. The federal government has no right to step in to the establishment of religion in the states.
I'm not arguing that it has happened but the interpretation seems to have changed to reflect the establishment clause covers all US entities, including state and local governments, there have been quite a few court cases in recent times that reflect that interpretation.
-
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
So for introducing religion into a school, I do believe the teacher should be held accountable, since schools are supposed to be free of religion. Of all forms.
They are? Not in the US they are not. The US has very clear first amendment guaranteeing the state's freedom to choose and push religion. Schools have no mandate to be free of religion, there is no suggestion of that in the US. Very much the opposite. They are free to be arms of religious groups until the first amendment is repealed.
My understanding, and several court cases back it up, of the establishment clause prevents this from happening.
Interesting, I'm unaware of the courts actively choosing to alter law. That would mean that the SC is now making law instead of reading it and is a very, very bad thing. Not that that is not how the law would hopefully be used, but there is no question about what the law was written as. It means the government has broken down and there is no further need for Congress and we are not really acting as a Republic with the law makers being appointed rather than elected.
