Subject: Re: Use of 'Lord's Prayer' in secular settings
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 03:25:15 GMT
From:  (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Reply-To:  
Organization: iiNet Limited
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian,nz.soc.religion,aus.religion

Nigel:
>|> If you and I are ever on a school board together, we will argue out
>|> the case of whether all religions should be given 'equal time', or
>|> whether the curriculum should represent proportionally the diversity
>|> of the community. 
>|> If there was one Muslim child and twenty Christian children, I would
>|> not see that as a reason to give them equal time. On the other hand,
>|> if there were no Muslim children I would not consider that a reason to
>|> ignore Islam. 

Julian:
>So what you are saying it that you will give more time to the more important
>religions. And suppose we had one Christian and 20 Atheists?

Then there would probably not be a religious education class at all,
unless the atheist students and their parents believed that learning
_about_ religion was an useful area of study.
Julian, in this discussion you are strongly reinforcing my view that
in presentation of your views you are no different from the most
extreme conservative literalist/fundamentalist Christians. The content
of your ideas is different, but in basic attitude ("no ideas but mine
should be granted any legitimacy whatsovever") you are exactly the
same.

>Which raises another point what will us atheists teach, or agnostics?

I think that any education curriculum that ignores either of the
following:
a) World religions, particularly those which have a significant
following or historical importance to the communitiy in which the
educational institution is based.
b) a-theistic and agnostic ideas and philosophies. 
... is unbalanced.

>|> >This would give them an unbalanced view.
 
>|> I would have thought that a "balanced view" would be one that
>|> accurately reflected the wider society.

>No that is a biased view.

That's the difference between us.
I want to teach my views, plus yours, and others as well.
You want to teach just yours or none at all.

>|> >So the Ark story is analysed and shown to be impossible?

>|> As an historical event, Yes, of course.

>And no Christian fundies object?

Of course they do.

>|> But it would also be studied as a powerful story in which Jewish and
>|> Christian people find a metaphor for the judgement and mercy of God.
>|> and Sin, and Death. No doubt many students would say that it shows God
>|> to be unjust, which is probably what you (Julian) would say, and I

>No more than that your religion shows your god to be morally bankrupt.

My religion doesn't show God to be morally bankrupt.
Your caricature of my religion reinforces you in that opinion, but you
would deny both yourself and others the oppportunity to find out
whether that caricature has any resemblance to reality.

cheers

N+
Nigel B. Mitchell