Good question. As for getting a decent education, I think this is too wide ranging a statement. Like all categories of schools, private schools also come in all flavors, including bad/incompetent. I mention this because my step-father, early in his career as a teacher, worked at a private Catholic school. It's resources were terribly limited despite being a "private" school (which everyone always assumes means the school is wealthy I think). So from that POV I would argue that no, Catholic schools are definitely not the only place to get a decent education. I think it is better to say that GOOD schools will give a good education (I know, silly statement) and then ask yourself, "what sort of educational experience do I want my child to have?" In this way I'm not a defender of religious schools, per se. I believe in religious education, but the overall schooling experience must be quality and I'd prefer a quality secular school over a poor religious one and vice versa. (I think I just spent a paragraph saying, "no" ti the second part of your question. Sorry, I tend to be verbose.) About the first part of your question: I've never heard the Church referred to as the only authentic gateway to personal freedom, but perhaps this is my own personal ignorance about the subject. Can you give me some context? I'd like to understand some more and maybe I can give a good answer. As an aside, I'm not as observant as I'd like to be but much more than I was growing up. I was raised in a totally no religious environment that had a fairly negative attitude toward organized religion. However, when I became a professor of history and started to understand the context of so many historical religious issues it gave me a much greater appreciation for religion. This often surprises my students given that we assume, often correctly, that religion has been badly abused. However, I think we will find as time goes on that as we supplant religions with other ideologies that those ideologies will be just as abused as the religions that preceded them. OTOH, I'm not sure they are capable of doing some of the good that came from religion. I can explain further if you'd like, but I'll hold off for fear I've already written more than perhaps you wanted.
Well, I wasn't really asking you to chime in on the merits of those statements, but I appreciate that you have and I like your take on them I was more interested in your thoughts about someone who makes such bald proclamations about HIS OWN religion and its supremacy in relation to all those others. I find that a fairly lamentable occurrence myself. Bordering on frightening. I mean, you yourself have managed to describe the benefits of your religious immersion without sounding like some jackass rooting for the home team.
I live down the street from Don Bosco Prep--one of the premier sports powerhouses in the area and often the country. Finest facilities and resources. The academics are a joke and everyone who goes there admits it. I've had teammates of my son in our public HS who have gone there and come back tell me what a completely different and tougher academic program our HS is as compared to Bosco. It's just some BS that UnTruth has been spewing in this thread. There is no context, it's probably on some talking points memo he got from his Church elders. _
it's an authentic gateway to getting bent over against your will..................(without the decency of vaseline either because vaseline is the devil's product)
What a shock you would like Dawkins; Like you he never was able to actually see the full logical reach to his arguments and just like you he cut them short where they conveniently fit his argument. but no need to understand your own argument when all he has to do to maintain credibility is appeal to people who don't understand them either but will parrot them just the same. You can't be an atheist and advocate for evolution and then dismiss the fact that by doing so you are forced to accept that the belief in God is actually just an evolved psychological mechanism that must have served a purpose for it to have developed in the first place. But that wouldn't allow him to just rant and rave that it was the equivalent of a disease, which he never validated, but then if you already are a fan you don't need such a statement to have merit to believe it to begin with. Just like Dawkins you merely repeat your same schtick and try to apply it to every argument, even when it doesn't fit, because you haven't thought out the full logical reaches of your arguments either. When your kids hear discussions about the possibility of alien life, do they just look to you confused because since there is no scientific basis to conclude alien life exists you certainly would never introduce the concept to them to explore and consider on their own to form their own conclusions. At least we still have a resident troll who will just repeat his same arguments, ignore every challenge to those positions, and still declare he has won the debate so we won't miss junc too much.
I realize that my comparison is not ideal. Of course religion must include a reference to "supernatural" entity, a powerful figure whose existence is taken as a given self-evident truth with no requirement of physical proof. Communism didn't have such central figure. However if your broaden definition just a little to include similar central concept, it fits nicely. If you want to argue that this broadening makes key difference and is truly the demarcation line between "religion" and "ideology" - so be it. In the strictest terms you'd be correct. I however am not a believer and so to me God is a concept just as much as Communism. This is why I'm calling Communism a religion: I'm not upgrading "ideology" to the status of "religion". I'm downgrading religion to believing in a concept. And yes, by this logic some of the modern concepts qualify to be called a religion. The best example IMO is global warming movement. Believing in something that is not strictly proven is a form of worshiping around an unproven concept.
You are ridiculous, the Bible forbids all of those things. The Bible is all about love of God, and love of neighbor (especially the New Testament). You can't take things out of context and make up your own interpretation. That's what people who criticize the Bible do; they fail to understand the culture at the time the Bible was written, so their interpretations are way off. You need to learn about the Bible before you make these ridiculous comments!
Excellent post, and a lot of facts in there. So don't be surprise if it gets ignored by the closed-minded church-haters on here.
Another excellent post; intelligent, informed, well-thought-out, fair, and rational. Sure to be countered by the anti-religion knucklehead bozos on here who continue to just spew their own made up nonsense, in big bold text to try to hammer us into submission, along with empty, insulting photoshopped google images made by some 13 year old kid in his parents' basement. Really, are there any smart, educated atheists out there, ANY, who can contribute something meaningful to the discussion??? I guess since they really have no logical, rational argument to stand on, they have to resort to childish insults and made up nonsense.
Wait a minute. Aew is an orthodox Jew who teaches history. But we know from Truth that if you study history, you must realize the Catholic Church is the only true faith. How can they be in agreement with one another?
Do parents have a plan for what they would like their children to do? For example, go to college, get a good job, etc. But as they grow up, kids become free to make their own choices. Especially when they reach legal age, their parents cannot force them to do anything. But they still love them, and try to influence and guide them to make good choices. So it is with God, the perfect parent. He created us with a certain personality, certain talents, interests, etc, and He would like us to make the best use of those gifts. But He gives us the freedom to make our own choices.
So you talk about the religion going back a thousand plus years but when I refer to the bible from that period I am ridiculous? It was in the bible, that is a fact. The church big wigs just discussed it amongst themselves and said, "Did you read this shit? It is fucking insane, we will never get another convert if they think we are this insane, better change the book" How do you interpret "If it accepts these and opens its gates to you, all the people inside will owe you forced labour and work for you. But if it refuses peace and gives battle, you must besiege it. God having handed it over to you, you will put the whole male population to the sword." any differently than the way most sensible people would? Read the whole freaking chapter and it doesn't change the meaning of those sentences.
Again, it helps to think of God as our Father (or parent). When kids ask their parents for something, they are not calling their parents "morons" or challenging their plan for them. They are simply acknowledging their parents' authority and asking for their approval or permission. Sometimes their parents say yes, and sometimes they say no. Same with God...sometimes He answers our prayers by saying "yes", and sometimes he says "no". So when somebody thinks that God "ignored their prayers" they simply received a "no" as the answer. God has our best interests in mind; sometimes what we think we want is not what will really make us happy. Also, sometimes God wants us to work it out for ourselves, rather than do it for us, just like a good parent. But God likes us to acknowledge His presence and "talk" to Him in prayer.
Exactly, that's an excellent point. And I'll admit, even the Catholic Church has been infected with misguided people at times. That's why the Church has continually reformed itself periodically throughout its history. The USA is the greatest country on earth, there's no debate there, and its proven by the fact that people continue to flock to the U.S. in droves; people immigrate to the U.S. in large number from all corners of the world. We have by far the most immigrants of any country, and it's not even close. So the proof is in the pudding. Just like the Catholic Church has more members than any other religious group worldwide, and has stood the test of time, its core doctrines unchanged since Christ. But like the Church, the U.S. has had periods of abuse in its history: slavery, segregation, discrimination against women and minorities, etc. But slavery was abolished, the civil rights movement led to the equal rights that women and minorities have today (at least in the law; you can argue whether or not racism is still a significant reality, for example). As you pointed out, all institutions are run by human beings, and so susceptible to corruption from time to time. Religion, in spite of all of the great things that it does in the world, sadly is no exception.
