Creationism to be taught in UK schools

[Aldebaran]

Although if as I would guess is the case you and your Catholic family are middle clas you will find the picture somewhat different but the working masses in this country have always been in advance of the middle classes with respect to religion.

I don't know about the situation in the UK. In the country of my mother and the schools my relatives there attend "classes" do not count as they are accessible for all and hence give a mix of every possible "class" in society.

I didn't ask if you want citizens of the UK to obey the laws in the UK. I asked if you find it normal that muslims in a secular nation obey the laws of their nation.

What I demand of Muslims as I do of any man is that they do not attempt to have their personal religious, moral or ethical views embodied in the laws of the state.

You can demand that. It does not make you able - nor does it give you any right - to try to impose your personal demands onto the governments or people in other nations then your own.

I don't see why mentioning the impact of religion on societies in context of sociological study would be discriminatory.
In case you meant the choice to follow religion of choice or to not follow any class in any religion as it is provided for in the education system in my mother's country: I don't see where a free choice can be discriminatory.

That you would seem to voice support for the state education of children in the religious tenets of one faith, in this case Islam but that is really immaterial, suggests to me an opposition to the democratic rights of those who believe in different faiths or none at all.

In every Islamic nation Islam is the State religion and as such not only part education. It is part of every day life and of people's identity. Islam is as such not even comparable with a religion as Christianity is these days. (I posted a thread providing for some insight on the "Middle East" forum.)

What protection do yoyu advocate for them must they do be educated in the ideas of a faith which they reject? Is such an 'education' not dangerously close to forcible conversion to Islam?

There is no "forcible conversion" possible for someone born into the religion.
In Islam every newborn child is considered to be born Muslim = every child is considered to be born unconsciously aware of the existence of Allah. The Islamic education aims to prevent the child to be led astray by temptations and confusions of life, causing continious suppression of this inborn unconscious awareness. (Instead of being a natural part of the overall conscious awareness a child gains when it grows up).

I was born and raised in an Islamic nation and educated in Islam since birth. Besides that I was also educated in the religion of my mother. Not only because she was Catholic but moreso because her priest came to visit her daily until she died. Even afterwards I was often in Europe to visit her mother and other relatives, all Catholic and most of them practicing.
It was in retrospect a rather unusual position to be in as a child. I can't possibly claim that such a tolerance, openess and respect towards other religions exists everywhere when speaking of attitudes (family, society, general politics) in Islamic nations. Even outside such nations many women in "mixed marriage" with a Muslim seem to convert at some point, probably especially when they get children. I can imagine this factor to cause frictions within a marriage yet I don't think that counts only for Islam or Christianity.

Would you be married to someone religious, would you object your children to receive education in this religion?

salaam.

 

[neprimerimye]

I don't know about the situation in the UK. In the country of my mother and the schools my relatives there attend "classes" do not count as they are accessible for all and hence give a mix of every possible "class" in society.

I didn't ask if you want citizens of the UK to obey the laws in the UK. I asked if you find it normal that muslims in a secular nation obey the laws of their nation.

You can demand that. It does not make you able - nor does it give you any right - to try to impose your personal demands onto the governments or people in other nations then your own.

I don't see why mentioning the impact of religion on societies in context of sociological study would be discriminatory.

In every Islamic nation Islam is the State religion and as such not only part education. It is part of every day life and of people's identity. Islam is as such not even comparable with a religion as Christianity is these days. (I posted a thread providing for some insight on the "Middle East" forum.)

There is no "forcible conversion" possible for someone born into the religion.
In Islam every newborn child is considered to be born Muslim = every child is considered to be born unconsciously aware of the existence of Allah. The Islamic education aims to prevent the child to be led astray by temptations and confusions of life, causing continious suppression of this inborn unconscious awareness. (Instead of being a natural part of the overall conscious awareness a child gains when it grows up).

Would you be married to someone religious, would you object your children to receive education in this religion?

salaam.

1/ The situation in britain is that schools more or less reflect class society. The richest in society attend public (that is to say private) schools and the state schoolm system is segregated by class too due to various factors. I suspect this is the same in the whichever country you are refering to.

2/ You falsify your previous question here. In fact you accused me of hypocrisy in presuming that Muslims should obey the laws of what you describe as secular countries.

3/ You mistake my position. I do not wish to enforce my personal views on any nation - I acknowledge no nation as my own - but simply assert that the workers of the world create all the wealth of society and should therefore assert their class rights in all countries.

4/ This marks a subtle change of position on your part. Previously you wrote of education concerning the five most numerous relgions not of religion considere from a sociological viewpoint. Obviously neither history or sociology can be properly taught if there is no discussion of religion but that is very different from education as to the dogmas and beliefs of any or all religions.

5/ It is certainly true that in those countries in which Muslims constitute a majority that Islam is a part of national identity. It is not however true despite your assertions that Islam is the state religion in all such countries. Moreover sanctioning Islam, in reality this usually means one of other sect or cult, as the state relgion is discriminatory to minority religions and members of minority sects. From a purely democratic viewpoint a state cult or religion is an obscenity.

6/ If Islam is the established religion and is taught as such in the state schools then it is tantamount to forcible conversion from the perspective of the minority non-Muslims. Indeed there are very real examples of far more forcible conversions in recent years in countries such as Pakistan and Indonesia to give two examples.

7/ I cannot concieve of entering into a permanent relationship with someone in thrall to superstitition.

 

[Aldebaran]

I suspect this is the same in the whichever country you are refering to.

Major class differences as you describe simply can't appear in a society where all schools are subsidised by the Ministry of education and hence have to follow the same education standard implemented by the Ministry (= the Law). There is no school allowed to operate "privately" outside that system.
Of course there are some differences between schools. The major difference in my mother's country is between the stricter standard and discipline of the Catholic schools and that of the state or community schools.
Nevertheless every child can go to every Catholic school everywhere. Many Muslim children go to Catholic schools because of their good name and discipline. Many Muslim children come from very poor families. They sit side by side with children from very rich familes. The same counts for other schools outside the Catholic from which many have a very good name to defend too. The same counts when it comes to higher education.

2/ You falsify your previous question here. In fact you accused me of hypocrisy in presuming that Muslims should obey the laws of what you describe as secular countries.

I don't follow you here. What do you refer to?

3/ You mistake my position.

My aplogies for that.

- I acknowledge no nation as my own -

Yet unless you are Stateless, you live in a nation as its citizen. Hence you must live by its laws and rules.

4/ This marks a subtle change of position on your part. Previously you wrote of education concerning the five most numerous relgions not of religion considere from a sociological viewpoint.

I think you should re-read that part of my post. There is some mutual misunderstanding here.
I thought I made it clear I was not quite sure which of my points you referred to. Hence I answered in twofold.

It is certainly true that in those countries in which Muslims constitute a majority that Islam is a part of national identity. It is not however true despite your assertions that Islam is the state religion in all such countries.

I referrred to Islamic countries. That means Islam IS the State Religion and a majority of citizens is Muslim in most cases. There are currently 50 so called "Islamic nations".

Moreover sanctioning Islam, in reality this usually means one of other sect or cult, as the state relgion is discriminatory to minority religions and members of minority sects.

That is most certainly true and has a history on its own although it goes directly against the commands of Islam itself.

From a purely democratic viewpoint a state cult or religion is an obscenity.

That depends completely on your view of what a "democracy" means. I don't see a state endorsing and even funding religions as a danger for democracy. My mother's country is a functioning democracy in the heart of Europe.

If Islam is the established religion and is taught as such in the state schools then it is tantamount to forcible conversion from the perspective of the minority non-Muslims.

In many nations non Muslims receive education within their own religion's schools. Fact is that minorities of all types are always in a disadvantaged position in every society.

Indeed there are very real examples of far more forcible conversions in recent years in countries such as Pakistan and Indonesia to give two examples.

In my opinion Pakistan was a failure as a nation from the start. I don't live in Pakistan, nor do I live in Indonesia nor do I know anyone living there or coming from there, so I really am not all that informed about the situation there, let alone about its details.

I cannot concieve of entering into a permanent relationship with someone in thrall to superstitition.

So you ask anyone you meet from the first second if they are religious and if they do, you drop them instantly?
Don't you find that an extremely one-sided, extremely intolerant position to be in?

You entered a sort of "relationship" with me though, be it not a permanent one, anonymous and on a rather uncontrolable medium. Despite that factor you do exist as a person here, and so do I, as superstitious as I am.
Maybe we should end this discussion at this point.

salaam.

 

[spring-peeper]

Funnily enough I do not expect Muslims to obey the laws of Britain. Why should I it is not my country. What I demand of Muslims as I do of any man is that they do not attempt to have their personal religious, moral or ethical views embodied in the laws of the state. Naturally I demand the same of the various sects and cults to which the Christians belong.

Why would you not expect people to respect the laws of a country? Why do you think that Muslims can't be part of your country?

 

[neprimerimye]

Why would you not expect people to respect the laws of a country? Why do you think that Muslims can't be part of your country?

As a worker and a communist I acknowledge no state as my own. Those who rule this state, Britain, the bourgeoisie are my class enemies. It is their state the point is to destroy it.

Your second question makes no sense to me.

 

[neprimerimye]

Major class differences as you describe simply can't appear in a society where all schools are subsidised by the Ministry of education and hence have to follow the same education standard implemented by the Ministry (= the Law). There is no school allowed to operate "privately" outside that system.
Of course there are some differences between schools. The major difference in my mother's country is between the stricter standard and discipline of the Catholic schools and that of the state or community schools.
Nevertheless every child can go to every Catholic school everywhere. Many Muslim children go to Catholic schools because of their good name and discipline. Many Muslim children come from very poor families. They sit side by side with children from very rich familes. The same counts for other schools outside the Catholic from which many have a very good name to defend too. The same counts when it comes to higher education.

Yet unless you are Stateless, you live in a nation as its citizen. Hence you must live by its laws and rules.

That is most certainly true and has a history on its own although it goes directly against the commands of Islam itself.

That depends completely on your view of what a "democracy" means. I don't see a state endorsing and even funding religions as a danger for democracy. My mother's country is a functioning democracy in the heart of Europe.

In many nations non Muslims receive education within their own religion's schools. Fact is that minorities of all types are always in a disadvantaged position in every society.

In my opinion Pakistan was a failure as a nation from the start. I don't live in Pakistan, nor do I live in Indonesia nor do I know anyone living there or coming from there, so I really am not all that informed about the situation there, let alone about its details.

So you ask anyone you meet from the first second if they are religious and if they do, you drop them instantly?
Don't you find that an extremely one-sided, extremely intolerant position to be in?

You entered a sort of "relationship" with me though, be it not a permanent one, anonymous and on a rather uncontrolable medium. Despite that factor you do exist as a person here, and so do I, as superstitious as I am.
Maybe we should end this discussion at this point.

salaam.

Major class differences do exist in this country in which the Ministry of MisEducation subsidises the schools. From discussions with people educated in other countries the same is true of all advanced capitalist countries.

From what you write I'm guessing that your Mothers country is France. The recent revolt of oppressed youth speaks more to the class nature of the education system of that country than a million words from me.

That I was born in UK PLC does not make it my country. I reject it just as Christians are enjoined to reject Satan. If there is evil in this world the British state is it. I do not steal or murder people because i choose not to do so not because of their laws which are of no consequence to me. If they are wrong and it is practical to do so then I disregard them. Or should I have paid the Poll Tax for example?

Its good that you acknowledge that in some Islamic countries people are persecuted for holding different religious convictions to the state cult. It does rather suggest that in the real world we live in theology is of no importance where such matters are concerned.

If you do not see the endorsement and funding of a state cult as a danger to democracy then you are poorly informed as to both history and the nature of democracy. Is it not a principle of a democratic society that all citizens be treated equally before the law? In which case how can taking money from one person to subsidise the beliefs of another be in accord with this democratic principle? Again in what sense is it democratic to privilege the beliefs of one section of society over another section? It cannot be if one is a democrat.

Minorities are always disadvantaged you tell us. But this is not the case. The rich are a minority, a small minority indeed a shrinking minority, but can they be said to be disadvantaged? But where minorities are disadvantaged is it not the best policy to strive to end the discrimination that they suffer? Or do you perhaps endorse their suffering as the will of Allah and bestow a few coppers on them in charity as the Quran commands of you?

Pakistan was never a nation. It was part of India and will be again. And is not India the most populous Muslim country in the world?

It is not my policy to reject people who adhere to religion. But that is not what you asked of me is it? You asked what i would do were I in a relationship with a believer and our views conflicted. Such a situation would not arise for the reasons I gave. Such a position is no more intolerant than would be the position of a hypothetical partner who would enforce her views concerning the religious indoctrination of an equally hypothetical child. But such hypothetical games are for infants and Jesuits.

 

[Aldebaran]

From discussions with people educated in other countries the same is true of all advanced capitalist countries.

No (again). Some differences exist, not caused by "class" but due to schools themselves and their good or bad reputation.
Besides that I firmly object to the term "capitalist" applied to nations as if they are the USA. Maybe you should look a bit closer to Capitalism with a capital C = US style to see the differences between the USA and Europe.

From what you write I'm guessing that your Mothers country is France.

Why would that be? You are completely wrong.

The recent revolt of oppressed youth speaks more to the class nature of the education system of that country than a million words from me.

The ongoing protests in France have nothing to do with "oppressed youth" or with the education system from far or nearby. It has to do with the planned introduction of a new law making it easier to employ young people yet also making it easier to end their contract too.

That I was born in UK PLC does not make it my country.

Do you use its infrastructure and civil service structure or do you sit all day at home and provide for heating and for electricity for you PC by manually turning a wheel or by a windmill-driven generator or something?

If there is evil in this world the British state is it.

Then why do you choose to live there nevertheless? It must make you sick waking up every morning in such an evil environment. Maybe yo could go to... say:Brazil? To live on the streets among the street children there? Nothing much to bother about except looking for food and water,which you can find everywhere, (a bit rotten but that shouldn't hold you back) and prevent yourself getting murdered or -at best- get picked up by the police and dropped somewhere to die all on your own.

I do not steal or murder people because i choose not to do so not because of their laws which are of no consequence to me.

I suppose, to stay true to yourself, you don't pay taxes etc...?

If they are wrong and it is practical to do so then I disregard them.

= You choose to live on the back of all the others who do respect the law in all its aspect and hence contribute fully in making your country function as a nation in which you choose to live, but do not want to fully contribute.

Or should I have paid the Poll Tax for example?

I have no idea what that might be.

Its good that you acknowledge that in some Islamic countries people are persecuted for holding different religious convictions to the state cult.

Why would that be "good"? (I suppose you took me for some sort of less priviledged retarded in desperate need of a brain and an education?).
They are not as much "persecuted" (let alone by the government in full view) as they can find themselves in a minority position which can lead to social consequences.

Since we are now talking about this and you seem to single out "Islamic countries": Are you informed about the situation of Arabs in Israel? (I don't even talk about the Palestinians. I mean Arab citizens in Israel and you can in fact add all non Jewish more or less to it.)

It does rather suggest that in the real world we live in theology is of no importance where such matters are concerned.

A very wrong idea.

If you do not see the endorsement and funding of a state cult as a danger to democracy then you are poorly informed as to both history and the nature of democracy.

I suggest you contact those who educated me as historian to hear what they have to say.

Is it not a principle of a democratic society that all citizens be treated equally before the law? In which case how can taking money from one person to subsidise the beliefs of another be in accord with this democratic principle?

It is when the same goes to non religious education (when children don't choose religioun class but "ethics" at school, for example) and non religious foundations, groups, activities.

Again in what sense is it democratic to privilege the beliefs of one section of society over another section? It cannot be if one is a democrat.

I said already several times this is not the case. But now that we are talking details: Do you believe it discrimination to see a stupid football game requiring so much tax money to ppay for the police to prevent those who attend the match getting wounded or killed by the "fans", all while at a tennisgame or other sport activities no such thing is done?
I never went to a footbal match in my life.
If I was a citizen the non-state you dream about, could I claim that the same amount of police protection should be given to me when I play a tennisgame with some friends and some others come to watch us playing? I'm as much worth the tax money to be spend on my safety as any other, am I not?

Minorities are always disadvantaged you tell us. But this is not the case. The rich are a minority, a small minority indeed a shrinking minority, but can they be said to be disadvantaged?

What you do here, downsizing the measurement of everything to the amount of posessions one gathered or inherited, is typical Capitalist thinking. I have other values in my life.

But where minorities are disadvantaged is it not the best policy to strive to end the discrimination that they suffer?

It depends what you would call discriminations since in most cases this is a very personal issue. You for example are showing yourself discriminating against the rich and those who believe in God.

Or do you perhaps endorse their suffering as the will of Allah and bestow a few coppers on them in charity as the Quran commands of you?

For a Muslim everything is the will of Allah. Good things that happen and bad things too. We thank Allah for both.
You have a wrong idea, view and impression of the charity we pay and why it is paid. It is not only a social service and sharing of property. When I can give something I thank the receiver for the honour shown to me in making me able to obey Allah's commands.

Pakistan was never a nation. It was part of India and will be again.

Please let me know when your New Rewritten World's History is ready.

And is not India the most populous Muslim country in the world?

No. That is Indonesia.

You asked what i would do were I in a relationship with a believer and our views conflicted. Such a situation would not arise for the reasons I gave.

No, I didn't add "if your views conflicted".
So you are 1000% sure that would you fall in love and next find out your partner is religious you are not in love anymore? You can make such an instant switch in your brain, you have such a full, complete control over your emotions? Interesting. Are there other occasions where you use that fascinating ability?

But such hypothetical games are for infants and Jesuits.

Not at all. You could study Islamic law to instantly discover the usefullness and possibilities of hypothetical cases.

salaam.

 

[Azrael23]

Its bad enough to tie a life to dogma.

But to tie a society to it is just abhorrent.

Then again creationism and intelligent design aren`t the same thing. It is liberating to be taught of the wonder inherent in the design of the world.

However if they fail to portray things like the golden mean or fibonacci sequence and instead turn to Genesis thats just wrong. Mainly because its actively discouraging people away from exploring the divinity in the world around them.

Was it Richard III who said (paraphrased) "I turn to scripture to justify my deeds and seem most saintly, whilst playing the devil"

 

[neprimerimye]

No (again). Some differences exist, not caused by "class" but due to schools themselves and their good or bad reputation.
Besides that I firmly object to the term "capitalist" applied to nations as if they are the USA. Maybe you should look a bit closer to Capitalism with a capital C = US style to see the differences between the USA and Europe.

The ongoing protests in France have nothing to do with "oppressed youth" or with the education system from far or nearby. It has to do with the planned introduction of a new law making it easier to employ young people yet also making it easier to end their contract too.

Do you use its infrastructure and civil service structure or do you sit all day at home and provide for heating and for electricity for you PC by manually turning a wheel or by a windmill-driven generator or something?

Then why do you choose to live there nevertheless?

I suppose, to stay true to yourself, you don't pay taxes etc...?

You choose to live on the back of all the others who do respect the law in all its aspect and hence contribute fully in making your country function as a nation in which you choose to live, but do not want to fully contribute.

I have no idea what that might be.

Why would that be "good"? (I suppose you took me for some sort of less priviledged retarded in desperate need of a brain and an education?).
They are not as much "persecuted" (let alone by the government in full view) as they can find themselves in a minority position which can lead to social consequences.

Since we are now talking about this and you seem to single out "Islamic countries": Are you informed about the situation of Arabs in Israel? (I don't even talk about the Palestinians. I mean Arab citizens in Israel and you can in fact add all non Jewish more or less to it.)

I suggest you contact those who educated me as historian to hear what they have to say.

It is when the same goes to non religious education (when children don't choose religioun class but "ethics" at school, for example) and non religious foundations, groups, activities.

I said already several times this is not the case. But now that we are talking details: Do you believe it discrimination to see a stupid football game requiring so much tax money to pay for the police to prevent those who attend the match getting wounded or killed by the "fans", all while at a tennisgame or other sport activities no such thing is done?
I never went to a footbal match in my life.
If I was a citizen the non-state you dream about, could I claim that the same amount of police protection should be given to me when I play a tennisgame with some friends and some others come to watch us playing? I'm as much worth the tax money to be spend on my safety as any other, am I not?

What you do here, downsizing the measurement of everything to the amount of posessions one gathered or inherited, is typical Capitalist thinking. I have other values in my life.

It depends what you would call discriminations since in most cases this is a very personal issue. You for example are showing yourself discriminating against the rich and those who believe in God.

For a Muslim everything is the will of Allah. Good things that happen and bad things too. We thank Allah for both.
You have a wrong idea, view and impression of the charity we pay and why it is paid. It is not only a social service and sharing of property. When I can give something I thank the receiver for the honour shown to me in making me able to obey Allah's commands.

Please let me know when your New Rewritten World's History is ready.

No. That is Indonesia.

No, I didn't add "if your views conflicted".
So you are 1000% sure that would you fall in love and next find out your partner is religious you are not in love anymore? You can make such an instant switch in your brain, you have such a full, complete control over your emotions? Interesting. Are there other occasions where you use that fascinating ability?

Not at all. You could study Islamic law to instantly discover the usefullness and possibilities of hypothetical cases.

salaam.

There are differences between the USA, Britain and Saudi Arabia for that matter but in all of them the mode of production is the bourgeois mode. That is to say despite various secondary differences all are capitalist in their nature.

Italy then? Not that it really matters.

Yes exactly the struggle in France is about the oppression of youth particularly working class youth. Many of whom are of Arab origin and at least nominally Muslim.

My energy needs are supplied by a giant hamster in a wheel. Seriously this has no relevance this is not my country. I did not and do not choose to live here. Of the few options I might have it is the best even if it is shite. Like the ruich i do not pay taxes by chhoice. Unlike the rich I cannot afford to pay tax avoidance lawyers so I actually pay a greater proportion of my income in tax than they do.

But like all workers I do contribute given that the only source of wealth in this society is labour power. It is the rich who contribute nothing of value towards society. Britain by the way is not a nation but a state. Please be a little more precise.

The Poll Tax was an unjust tax which milllions refused to pay. Some went to jail and many more were forced to pay that iniquitous tax by having it deducted from our wages by court order.

Aknowledgement of the truth is always good don't you agree. And in fact in some Muslim countries non-Muslim minorities have been systematically persecuted. Or do you not know of the persecution of the Bahai faith in Iran?

Yes I'm well aware of the plight of those Palestinian Arabs who hold second class Israeli citizenship. What about them?

Why would I wish to contact your teachers do you not feel confidant enough to argue your own case? After all is it not the case that there are many professional and academic historians who are charlatans. Now your trqchers might not be but unless I know who they are and something of them why should I be impressed?

Not quite sure what you are sayng here. but if you are asking is it not the case that state subsidisation of secular classes in ethics and such like are discriminatory then I agree. They are and as such should be prohibited. It is not the place of the education system to teach children what is right or wrong.

Compare like to like. Expenditure on the policing of chuildrens games and pastimes like football or tennis has nothing to do with belief systems. It is antithetical to the spirit of democracy to subsidise one faith with monies raised from society in general.

It is not capitalist thinking but philosophically materialist thinking as i suspect you well know. And like you I have values other than the accumulation of wealth one of them being the end to the material poverty which the Quran endorses and smiles upon.

Sophistry my friend. Certainly it would be discriminatory to subject the rich to suffering because they are rich. But in the real world it is not the rich who suffer but the majority who suffer at the hands of the rich. Nor contrary t your assertion do i wish to discriminate against believers on the contrary I wish them to be accorded as much respect and dignity as any other citizen. But I see no reason why their faiths should be subsidised by my taxes.

I note that you agree with my view that the charity which the Quran demands of you does endorse poverty as its aim is not the ending or even the amelioration of poverty but the glory of Allah. How selfish and indeed vain is Allah.

If Pkistan was/is a nation how come nobody thought so before 1946? How come few Pushtun speakers or Sindhis consider themselves as such? As for the Kshmiris they do not seem to think so do they? We shall not even consider the Bengalis or is it your opinion that they belonged to the Pakistani nation between 1947 and 1971 - the latter might be out a bit - but then changed their minds?

Yo nmight be right but even so that still makes India the second most populous Muslim country. But do the Muslims of India wish to be Pakistani, the rationale for that disster of a state being that the muslims of India desired their own state remember, or do they prefer to remain a part of India? To ask the question is of course to answer it.

A stupid question repeated remains stupid however often it is repeated.

Hypothetical questions are useful as anybody who has studied Socrates must know. But this question of yours is mere sophistry. As a materialist I far prefer real concrete problems and questions to the fantastic imaginings of the deluded and gullible.

 

[Aldebaran]

I said it does matter to me that you do not confuse US capitalism with the systems in other nations.

Again: The demonstrations in France have nothing to do with what you so desperately want to make of it. Let alone it has to do with French citizens who happen to have Islam as their religion.

Yes you do choose to live where you live since you are there. Are you imprisoned or chained?

You are free to study the law, are you not? Hence it is completely up to you do change the situation you complain about (and to discover if you have something to complain about to begin with.)

I think you have – in general - some twisted view on sources of wealth in societies. You would have no labour if there was no labour provided or possible. (If my use of this language is for your understanding of my posts not precise enough we could have used one that is among those I studied.)

Assuming that someone with a functioning brain is aware of what goes on and hence has no problem to “acknowledge” (please be a little more precise in your spelling) the facts that surround him is even better, don’t you agree?

In Iran Shia Islam is the State religion. That there are sometimes frictions between the State endorsed religion and other groups (very small minorities) is no secret. Which I said already.
I mentioned the Palestinians since you seem to focus on “Islamic nations”.

You are the one who wrote that I should study history hence you are the one who should be arguing that case.
In assessments and research of history errors are being made constantly and no serious historian I know claims to have reached the ultimate conclusion. But then I only lived some 30 years, which is a bit short in time to read all the works written in the past by everyone who ever claimed to be historian. I have very good reasons to be assured that those who educated me know very well what they talk about.

You claim that religious classes in a subsidized school system are discriminatory against those who are not religious. This is now the 3the time that I explain that children who do not follow such classes get “ethics” instead = they get the secular interpretation of values that are also covered by the religious classes. Hence there is NO discrimination at all in such schools.
You think a school should not teach children what is right and wrong? What means the term “general education” in your world? (I can’t place your remarks on sports in this context.)

You exposed a typical capitalist-inspired line of thinking.

??? Al Qur’an “endorses poverty”??? You must know it better then I do, which I find unbelievable at best. Where did you discover this fantastic, never heard of exegeses and which verse(s) does it explain so clearly that I never saw it before?

Sophistry my friend.

Are you talking to yourself?

If you want a discussion on Pakistan or India or both, please do that with someone else because I am not interested in the subject.
I told you I know nobody from Pakistan. I told you I am not informed but from a far distance on Pakistan, let alone I would be informed on details of Pakistan. The same counts for India.

1.You are – again- very good at throwing insults around. I gave you a second chance. My replies to your posts end here.
2. You said hypothetical questions are childish.
3. You are a materialist, yet you claim to have other values then materialism.
4. Next you make of materialism and real concrete problems and questions a synonym while in fact materialism itself is one of the main causes for real concrete problems and questions all over the world.

I could easily conclude that you are the creator of fantastic imaginings for the gullible to live -with you - a delusional dream in a dream.

salaam.

 

[neprimerimye]

I said it does matter to me that you do not confuse US capitalism with the systems in other nations.

Again: The demonstrations in France have nothing to do with what you so desperately want to make of it. Let alone it has to do with French citizens who happen to have Islam as their religion.

Yes you do choose to live where you live since you are there. Are you imprisoned or chained?

You are free to study the law, are you not? Hence it is completely up to you do change the situation you complain about (and to discover if you have something to complain about to begin with.)

I think you have – in general - some twisted view on sources of wealth in societies. You would have no labour if there was no labour provided or possible. (If my use of this language is for your understanding of my posts not precise enough we could have used one that is among those I studied.)

In Iran Shia Islam is the State religion. That there are sometimes frictions between the State endorsed religion and other groups (very small minorities) is no secret. Which I said already.
I mentioned the Palestinians since you seem to focus on “Islamic nations”.

You claim that religious classes in a subsidized school system are discriminatory against those who are not religious. This is now the 3the time that I explain that children who do not follow such classes get “ethics” instead = they get the secular interpretation of values that are also covered by the religious classes. Hence there is NO discrimination at all in such schools.
You think a school should not teach children what is right and wrong? What means the term “general education” in your world?

??? Al Qur’an “endorses poverty”??? You must know it better then I do, which I find unbelievable at best.

1.You are – again- very good at throwing insults around. I gave you a second chance. My replies to your posts end here.
2. You said hypothetical questions are childish.
3. You are a materialist, yet you claim to have other values then materialism.
4. Next you make of materialism and real concrete problems and questions a synonym while in fact materialism itself is one of the main causes for real concrete problems and questions all over the world.

I could easily conclude that you are the creator of fantastic imaginings for the gullible to live -with you - a delusional dream in a dream.

salaam.

1/ In no sense do I confuse the capitalist system in the USa with the capitalist system in European countries.

2/ You assert that the recent youth rebellion in France has nothin to do with the oppression of youth. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it but most left and luberal opinion would apper to disagree with you.

3/ I do not choose to live where I am. It is a matter of economic neccesity.

4/ I am not free to study law. No body is in this country. Regretably we do not have a system of free education in UK PLC.

5/ Your coments on wealth creation make no sense. That labour power is the source of all wealth in society is the opinion of most political economists since the time of Adam Smith.

6/ In Iran the "friction" as you describe it between the majority Shia community and the minorities was in fact state sponsored persecution of the latter. Your reference to Palestine was soley in order to represent my views as in some way prejudiced against Islamic countries. Which from a reading on my comments on Palestine you willl know is not the case.

7/ And yopu can explain how discriminatory subsidies for religious schools is not discriminatiory a fourth time if you will. But it will not change the reality that they are. Again I repreat the point that it is not the place of a school to provide the student with an education in ethics it is for there student to form his/her own views alone. Anything else is an unwonted interference in the right of the individual to autonomous personal development.

8/ The Quran commands all Muslims to acts of charity. It follows logically that it thereby endorses poverty, want and suffering in general.

9/ Finally you claim I have insulted you. But you can provide no proof of this as such quotes are purely imaginary on your part. Indeed much of your argument is just as silly as when you seem to suggest that as my philosophy is characterised as materialist that i therefore have no values. Which only exposes that you lack of even the most rudimentary knowledge of philosophy. Which is again proven when you claim that materialism per se is a problem in the world today yet no war has ever been fought in the name of materilaism when many have been fought for various idealist ideologies. Given which one might ask which is the real problem?

 

[ZAMB]

8/ The Quran commands all Muslims to acts of charity. It follows logically that it thereby endorses poverty, want and suffering in general.

I don't see your logic here. I think it is more logical that, by commanding acts of charity, the Quran is endorsing the relief of poverty, want and suffering in general.

The Bible, and the Buddhist scriptures, also encourage acts of charity - I would imagine most religions do. Are you saying that they also endorse poverty, want and suffering?
Suffering exists, worldwide - do you think that any moral religious person, of any faith, should just turn their back on it if it doesn't affect them personally?

 

[neprimerimye]

I don't see your logic here. I think it is more logical that, by commanding acts of charity, the Quran is endorsing the relief of poverty, want and suffering in general.

The Bible, and the Buddhist scriptures, also encourage acts of charity - I would imagine most religions do. Are you saying that they also endorse poverty, want and suffering?
Suffering exists, worldwide - do you think that any moral religious person, of any faith, should just turn their back on it if it doesn't affect them personally?

It is not my concern what those beguiled by the delusions of religion should or should not do with regard to poverty. Nor is it the concern of the state what they should do which is th starting point of this thread shirley?

It is however entirely logical to argue that by commanding acts of charity that your gods are endorsing suffering. For is it not the argument of the believer that God is omnipotent? in which case it would seem logical that the purpose of suffering is to provide an object for the charity of others. Admitedly endorse might not be a precise charaterisation of such an inhuman creation.

 

[nick1181]

What is it that we're actually talking about teaching here?

That the world is only 6000 years old?
That man coexisted with dinosaurs?
That God made Women out of the first man's rib?

Sorry, it's all lies.

 

[ZAMB]

It is not my concern what those beguiled by the delusions of religion should or should not do with regard to poverty. Nor is it the concern of the state what they should do which is th starting point of this thread shirley?

It is however entirely logical to argue that by commanding acts of charity that your gods are endorsing suffering. For is it not the argument of the believer that God is omnipotent? in which case it would seem logical that the purpose of suffering is to provide an object for the charity of others. Admitedly endorse might not be a precise charaterisation of such an inhuman creation.

As a Buddhist I do not believe in God, but as a Buddhist, I also feel that I have a responsiblity to relieve suffering. Though I don't do it because it is part of the Buddhist teachings, I do it because it is right, because it is humane. I think the same thing goes for practitioners of all other religions - they help others because it is the right thing, the humanitarian thing to do - not because it is taught by their religion.

I still think your logic is faulty - the existence of suffering doesn't mean that it is endorsed by the God of Islam, or other religions. Peerhaps Aldebaran can clarify Islam's position on this.
I hope that you never have to suffer, need help, and see people turn away from you - though, by your logic, you could always console yourself that it was all part of an omnipotent God's plan, I guess.

 

[neprimerimye]

As a Buddhist I do not believe in God, but as a Buddhist, I also feel that I have a responsiblity to relieve suffering. Though I don't do it because it is part of the Buddhist teachings, I do it because it is right, because it is humane. I think the same thing goes for practitioners of all other religions - they help others because it is the right thing, the humanitarian thing to do - not because it is taught by their religion.

I still think your logic is faulty - the existence of suffering doesn't mean that it is endorsed by the God of Islam, or other religions. Peerhaps Aldebaran can clarify Islam's position on this.
I hope that you never have to suffer, need help, and see people turn away from you - though, by your logic, you could always console yourself that it was all part of an omnipotent God's plan, I guess.

No I could not as logic is clear that of all possible explanations for material reality, there is no other, that an omnipotent god is the least likely.

But if there were an omnipotent creator then it is only rationale that suffering is a s much a part of creation as say granite rocks are. It follows that suffering is accepted by the Quran as the subject of relief by charitable works.

Which seems remarkably pointless and quite juvenile on the part of an omnipotent entity.