Is it possible to morality in schools without invoking a religion?

[BreezeWood]

"Is it possible to teach 'morality' in schools without invoking a religion?"

hopefully public schools are somewhere morality may be correctly interpreted than what is taught in scriptural churches ...

.

 

[PostmodernProph]

The bible is loaded with rape, incest, murder and the christian religion is based on infanticide.

those that have read the Bible are aware that it teaches those are the things we AREN'T supposed to do.....

those who haven't read it haven't grasped that part yet......

Abraham married his half-sister.

omigorsh...we should burn down the Vatican.....quote me the verse in the Bible that says "thou shalt marry your half sister".........(assuming for the sake of argument, that what you've just posted is true and not just more bullshit).......

 

[PostmodernProph]

"Is it possible to teach 'morality' in schools without invoking a religion?"

hopefully public schools are somewhere morality may be correctly interpreted than what is taught in scriptural churches ...

.

rat's chance......

 

[thebrucebeat]

those that have read the Bible are aware that it teaches those are the things we AREN'T supposed to do.....

those who haven't read it haven't grasped that part yet......

Abraham married his half-sister.

omigorsh...we should burn down the Vatican.....quote me the verse in the Bible that says "thou shalt marry your half sister".........(assuming for the sake of argument, that what you've just posted is true and not just more bullshit).......

You don't even know Sarai was Abram's half-sister?
Seriously?
This is the first you have heard of this?
You just flushed your credibility!

 

[PostmodernProph]

Abraham married his half-sister.

omigorsh...we should burn down the Vatican.....quote me the verse in the Bible that says "thou shalt marry your half sister".........(assuming for the sake of argument, that what you've just posted is true and not just more bullshit).......

You don't even know Sarai was Abram's half-sister?
Seriously?
This is the first you have heard of this?
You just flushed your credibility!

gosh, and that's so high up on the list of "important things to learn from the Bible" too.....I can hardly believe I didn't know it.....

now that you've mastered that, why don't you memorize all the verses that tell us how many horses King Solomon had in his stables.......because I'm pretty sure that one of the things the Bible teaches about morality is "Thou shall have lots of horses".....

 

[thebrucebeat]

omigorsh...we should burn down the Vatican.....quote me the verse in the Bible that says "thou shalt marry your half sister".........(assuming for the sake of argument, that what you've just posted is true and not just more bullshit).......

You don't even know Sarai was Abram's half-sister?
Seriously?
This is the first you have heard of this?
You just flushed your credibility!

gosh, and that's so high up on the list of "important things to learn from the Bible" too.....I can hardly believe I didn't know it.....

I'm flabbergasted.
Oh, well.
It's just your scriptures. Why have a passing familiarity with them, right?

 

[PostmodernProph]

You don't even know Sarai was Abram's half-sister?
Seriously?
This is the first you have heard of this?
You just flushed your credibility!

gosh, and that's so high up on the list of "important things to learn from the Bible" too.....I can hardly believe I didn't know it.....

I'm flabbergasted.
Oh, we'll.
It's just your scriptures. Why have a passing familiarity with them, right?

lol......I think I understand why you hate religion......you were raised to pay attention to the stupid things and ignore what's important......I expect its why you became an atheist......you were consumed by the quest for idiocy.....

 

[thebrucebeat]

gosh, and that's so high up on the list of "important things to learn from the Bible" too.....I can hardly believe I didn't know it.....

I'm flabbergasted.
Oh, we'll.
It's just your scriptures. Why have a passing familiarity with them, right?

lol......I think I understand why you hate religion......you were raised to pay attention to the stupid things and ignore what's important......I expect its why you became an atheist......you were consumed by the quest for idiocy.....

You can attack me personally, but it won't cover up who has read the bible and who hasn't.
You are ignorant of your own faith tradition.
Don't blame me for that.
It's safe to assume you will NEVER make the case in the future that in order to interpret scripture properly one must understand it thoroughly and study it carefully and in context, etc., etc.
As long as you generally understand what someone told you to believe regarding what's in it. That'll be close enough.

 

[thebrucebeat]

The bible is loaded with rape, incest, murder and the christian religion is based on infanticide.

those that have read the Bible are aware that it teaches those are the things we AREN'T supposed to do.....

those who haven't read it haven't grasped that part yet......

Now we know you are one of the ones who haven't read it.

 

[amrchaos]

I did not know that my question would cause such a reaction in people that no one would read my opinion.

The opinion is a flat "yes" we could.

The idea is to take out the laws and commandments that
1) Does not reflect the god of the religion
2)Include laws/rules that are both "modern" and non-oppressive as for instance "do not steal" could be a rule but "stoning adulterers"
3) These laws/rules do not have to be phrased as commandments. For instance, it could be phrased as slogans like telling the student to practice "Good thoughts. Good Deeds. Good words"(I forgot where tht comes from)

In other words, what I am saying is that not all the moral themes that are derived from religion are bad. In fact there are some good and simple ideas that can be savaged from different religions.

By the way, I just realized I didn't fully elaborate the idea in the op. Sorry about that. I guess that could be part of the source of misunderstanding here as well.

 

[Hollie]

I did not know that my question would cause such a reaction in people that no one would read my opinion.

The opinion is a flat "yes" we could.

The idea is to take out the laws and commandments that
1) Does not reflect the god of the religion
2)Include laws/rules that are both "modern" and non-oppressive as for instance "do not steal" could be a rule but "stoning adulterers"
3) These laws/rules do not have to be phrased as commandments. For instance, it could be phrased as slogans like telling the student to practice "Good thoughts. Good Deeds. Good words"(I forgot where tht comes from)

In other words, what I am saying is that not all the moral themes that are derived from religion are bad. In fact there are some good and simple ideas that can be savaged from different religions.

By the way, I just realized I didn't fully elaborate the idea in the op. Sorry about that. I guess that could be part of the source of misunderstanding here as well.

Your proposal suggests that the religions need to be carved up, edited and/or re-written to remove the nastier elements.

You really can't separate the ideoogy from actions of the adherents. Christianity, like all religions, has been an obstacle to social enlightment. It has been used, since the days of the Spanish Conquistadors, to conquer contrary social as well as religious thought through oppression. Thus, Jews have been oppressed by Christians - And more than once. All of Europe was oppressed during the "Dark Ages". American immigrants, such as the Pilgrims came to the US to escape oppression by Christianity. Women were oppressed at the "Salem witch trials". Blacks were oppressed by the "Christian" Klu Klux Klan.

Protestants oppress Catholics in Ireland. Give a Christian access to a radio microphone and he'll preach as much oppression as any other religion. Religion is naturally oppressive and Christianity is no different when used by political leaders. It's because of this that America had to separate Church from State, or the State would have become oppressive.

 

[PostmodernProph]

I'm flabbergasted.
Oh, we'll.
It's just your scriptures. Why have a passing familiarity with them, right?

lol......I think I understand why you hate religion......you were raised to pay attention to the stupid things and ignore what's important......I expect its why you became an atheist......you were consumed by the quest for idiocy.....

You can attack me personally, but it won't cover up who has read the bible and who hasn't.
You are ignorant of your own faith tradition.

lol....this may come as a surprise to you, bruce......there isn't anything in the faith tradition of Christianity about Abraham being married to a half sister......I have to confess, I'm puzzled about anyone who committed enough time to examining the text to mine that bit of coal in an effort to attack a religion......tell me a little bit about the guy who thinks its important that anyone knows who Sarah's parents were?......

 

[PostmodernProph]

The bible is loaded with rape, incest, murder and the christian religion is based on infanticide.

those that have read the Bible are aware that it teaches those are the things we AREN'T supposed to do.....

those who haven't read it haven't grasped that part yet......

Now we know you are one of the ones who haven't read it.

okay, I got a good night's sleep as you suggested.....I have to say, after a refreshing rest....you still sound like a fucking idiot......what do Sarah's parents have to do with anything?.....

 

[thebrucebeat]

those that have read the Bible are aware that it teaches those are the things we AREN'T supposed to do.....

those who haven't read it haven't grasped that part yet......

Now we know you are one of the ones who haven't read it.

okay, I got a good night's sleep as you suggested.....I have to say, after a refreshing rest....you still sound like a fucking idiot......what do Sarah's parents have to do with anything?.....

They have to do with your basic lack of bible literacy.

 

[editec]

Morality existed long before religion.

Morality in some shape or form exists whenever two sentient beings get along.

No GOD is needed for morality to take shape.

The needs of the society define their moral values.

 

[thebrucebeat]

lol......I think I understand why you hate religion......you were raised to pay attention to the stupid things and ignore what's important......I expect its why you became an atheist......you were consumed by the quest for idiocy.....

You can attack me personally, but it won't cover up who has read the bible and who hasn't.
You are ignorant of your own faith tradition.

lol....this may come as a surprise to you, bruce......there isn't anything in the faith tradition of Christianity about Abraham being married to a half sister......I have to confess, I'm puzzled about anyone who committed enough time to examining the text to mine that bit of coal in an effort to attack a religion......tell me a little bit about the guy who thinks its important that anyone knows who Sarah's parents were?......

This isn't a subtlety in the Abram story. It comes up repeatedly.
The question is why have you not committed any time to actually reading the scriptures?
I'm not attacking the faith with this.
I am pointing out your ignorance of the scriptures you claim fidelity to.
This information isn't something that needs to be mined for. It is OT101

 

[Avatar4321]

Religion has nothing to do with morality.

Indeed, some/many/most/all religions teach morals that are repugnant to most people. The bible is loaded with rape, incest, murder and the christian religion is based on infanticide.

Morals should be taught in spite of religion.

like honesty, compassionate service to your fellow man etc.

I know you find honesty repugnant from your post there. Infanticide really?

 

[Avatar4321]

Morality only exists if there is a right and a wrong, good and evil. And there can only be a good and evil if someone or something has delineated somethings as good and somethings as evil.

You could argue natural law rather than religion. But even natural law presupposed someone has written the laws that are natural.

 

[Hollie]

Morality only exists if there is a right and a wrong, good and evil. And there can only be a good and evil if someone or something has delineated somethings as good and somethings as evil.

You could argue natural law rather than religion. But even natural law presupposed someone has written the laws that are natural.

Ummm, sorry. But no, there is nothing in nature that implies "someone" has written the laws that are natural.

The assertion makes no sense. You are presupposing that this "someone" is you god(s) and that would mean that the natural world was constructed by the supernatural. There are no indications of supernatural underpinnings anywhere in the universe.

I have to advise that I’m disappointed in how often these kinds of comments appear. The various and competing holy texts are not a pathway to science and I really, really, really cringe at the suggestion that any of them be viewed as a part of a science curriculum. But it's true that those who already wish to restrain knowledge for reasons of pride or willful miscalculation often grasp upon their holy books hoping to do precisely that.

The fault doesn't lie with the holy book, but with the reader.

2,000 years may not be long enough to extinguish the errors and false assumptions of spiritual claims to gods and supernaturalism, but it's hopeless for anyone looking to expand the boundaries of scientific knowledge to propose that science is lagging behind the bibles, korans, whatever.

What I've seen consistently in thread after thread with this kind of attitude is the false claim of the holy text illuminating science when it's actually the other way around. The interpretations are filled with apologetics for lack of scientific vocabulary in a 2,000-year-old spiritual work. Well, duh! Yeah. I think these types of arguments do more harm than good by feeding the ignorance of those who are satisfied with their own lack of training outside religious studies.

The false claims of inerrancy and prophesy are ridiculously easy to debunk, and having debunked the "science" in a spiritual work, the "spiritual" truths get washed out like a baby with the bathwater. Every time I see a religionist arguing against something as clear as, well, the ascendency of scientific knowledge vs. superstition and falsehood, it makes me question the agenda of the religionist.

Neither the natural world nor "gods" are defined in any differentiable, testable fashion in the bibles. I've seen the resident apologists take really spectacular liberties with allegorical interpretations of their holy text in this thread and others, while entirely dodging the fundamental problem that no demonstrably accurate version of the scripture is available.

 

[HUGGY]

One wonders how any semblance of a society could have possibly existed at all before the jews and later christianity listening to the hubris of the religists when discussing morality.

It seems that the only major theme to prechristian society that was immoral was how pervasive slavery of conquered enemies was taken for granted.

What other moral criteria was lacking before the advent of today's major religions?

Hearing the christians tell it one would believe that theft, rape, murder or any of the usual suspects would have been the order of the day.

Were there no rules pre judeo-christian influence?

Was EVERY aggreived victim waiting for an emperor's decree for satisfaction?

I have to admit a lack of knowledge in the specifics of the day in and day out workings of pre monotheistic god driven societies but seriously...

Comon sense demands that moral codes did exist with penalties for bad behavior in early societies.

Did those with more possessions have better access to justice? Sure. Is it much different today?

Slavery still exists today.. It was rampent in the western world up until just a scant 200 years ago even in this bastion of democracy.

So where or when exactly did the religists need be turned to for human morality?

Seems to me the religists have had plenty of time to get the morality ship righted and sailing in the forefront of human activity.

I for one won't be looking to religion to lead the way in moral teaching in schools with or without the interpretation of the U S Constitution.

The religists have their plate full just cleaning up all of the lies ingrained in their foundational documents before they can look at anyone eye to eye on the subject of morality.