California: Judge orders homeschoolers into government education

The government reflects the will of the people.

You, uh, don't know much about pre-war Germany, I am guessing.

No, I wouldn't. That's the difference between myself and the religious, I value human life, and believe that once you're dead, you're dead, so I do not throw death sentences around all willy-nilly. Christianity would be treated as any other mental illness would, in a mental hospital, so once they get out they can be productive members of society. Judges would not be God; they would actually exist.

So, would you throw all the Muslims, Bhuddists, Hindus...all those people in insane asylums too?

You're looking at it the wrong way. Think of it like this: Some forms of hate speech are not protected by free speech. If they are not considered hate speech, they are free speech.

No, you're looking at it wrong. So wrong I don't even know where to begin.

Lets start with "sticks and stones." Remember that part about "words can never hurt you?" I still hold true to that.
 
Well be glad most Christians do not share your totalitarian views. Otherwise we'd band together and ban your viewpoint. ;)

They're already trying; you can see that they're not succeeding by the state of the Federal Marriage Amendment.

A) Straw man. I never said America "is or was Christian". That wasn't a part of my argument and you know it.

You put "Christian America" against "Atheist Soviet Union". What else could you possibly mean?

B) The Soviet Union "is not" (thank God). But it WAS atheist. Denial of God was a requirement for communist party membership and communist party membership was required for full participation in society.

No, it wasn't. There is a difference between banning religion and banning organized religion. The Marxist-Leninist philosophy is that the church hierarchy was dangerous to the working class, and served to stupify the people. I happen to agree. However, in practice, most Russians were Orthodox Catholic, and the Soviets infiltrated and controlled the official Russian Orthodox Church.
 
lol at all you guys arguing with Tdcci. Tdcci is obviously a joke account. I mean how can you seriously argue with one who rants on about teaching tolerance then turn right around and call Christian parents, unaccountable tyrannies...

Because even thoug it is a troll, the arguments it puts forth are indeed the exact same skewed logic presented by the progressive socialists.

You can't really call it a parody for that very reason.
 
You, uh, don't know much about pre-war Germany, I am guessing.

Enlighten me.

So, would you throw all the Muslims, Bhuddists, Hindus...all those people in insane asylums too?

I'm not sure about the Buddhists, they don't have a personal god so they could get away with it. If I were to create this policy, there would be a standardized test, updated if the church updated their views as necessary (and there would be a new Bureaucracy to study the trends of the church)

Lets start with "sticks and stones." Remember that part about "words can never hurt you?" I still hold true to that.

Words can hurt me, and words can hurt others.
 
I'm OK with a Judge (maybe federal since I don't trust the bible belt states) deciding whether or not a parent is qualified to homeschool their kid. One of these qualifications should be a principled lack of extreme religious beliefs. We have to ask ourself this: Do we want a generation of honest, hardworking citizens or a generation of suicide bombers?

Interesting response there, Tdcci. Does this mean that you don't trust Dr. Paul, Mrs. Paul, or their 5 children? All Christians.
 
No, it wasn't. There is a difference between banning religion and banning organized religion. The Marxist-Leninist philosophy is that the church hierarchy was dangerous to the working class, and served to stupify the people. I happen to agree. However, in practice, most Russians were Orthodox Catholic, and the Soviets infiltrated and controlled the official Russian Orthodox Church.

What's your source on that? Marx in particular believed that religion was an opiate for the masses. It helped divery the people’s attention away from real source of oppression, which was the State, and thereby kept ruling class in power.

It's a tool for oppression by the State.
 
It's a mixed bag. Public Schooling I like, Income Tax not so much, but I can see the rationale behind both.

That's why I asked you which parts you disagreed with. I'm guessing you're actually more Communist than libertarian.
 
I said "religious", not Christian. I was specifically referring to Muslims, as you should know. Christians have a different approach to government. For an analogy, let us examine how communism (theocracy) spreads. Trotskyites (Muslims) advocate revolution and an overthrow of the government. Christians (Leninists) advocate taking over the government from within (as they did with the Republican party). Same outcome (death and destruction), different strategy.

You think all Trotskyites are Muslims? Surely you don't believe that. Christians are not Leninists, either.

Where are you getting your information from? :rolleyes:
 
You think all Trotskyites are Muslims? Surely you don't believe that. Christians are not Leninists, either.

Where are you getting your information from? :rolleyes:

That's the best question I've seen yet in this whole thread! I'm getting ready to make a case that that public schools are somehow responsible!

Communism = theocracy?
 
It's a mixed bag. Public Schooling I like, Income Tax not so much, but I can see the rationale behind both.

You like public schooling? May I ask you why? Do you realize that turning our children over to the government to train is akin to sending them to indoctrination centers? Why would you want to hand this control over to big government?

Also, what problem do you have with home schooling and do you agree that government should dictate to parents how their children are "educated"?
 
Marx in particular believed that religion was an opiate for the masses.

He didn't say that to mean religion was a bad thing, as you might think since opium is illegal now. Full quote:

Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man—state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d'honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.
Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opiate of the people
The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

It helped divery the people’s attention away from real source of oppression, which was the State, and thereby kept ruling class in power.

It's a tool for oppression by the State.

Organized religion, anyway. It was also a threat to the state (see: Islamic Revolution in Iran) so it was logical that the Soviets would suppress it.
 
You like public schooling? May I ask you why? Do you realize that turning our children over to the government to train is akin to sending them to indoctrination centers? Why would you want to hand this control over to big government?

Public schooling is not big government, it is local government.

Also, what problem do you have with home schooling and do you agree that government should dictate to parents how their children are "educated"?

Homeschooling in and of itself is not a problem, the kind of homeschooling in the article in the original post is the problem.
 
He didn't say that to mean religion was a bad thing, as you might think since opium is illegal now.

Wow. This is the most disjointed conversation I've had since everybody left Usenet.

I'm just scratching my head, going "WTF?"


Organized religion, anyway. It was also a threat to the state (see: Islamic Revolution in Iran) so it was logical that the Soviets would suppress it.

You mean, control it. Use it to surpress people. For the greater good. Right?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tdcci
Christian Parents are unaccountable tyrannies.

Here is my orginal post:


Interesting thread.....

Tdcci, out of curiosity, what happened to you to make you so hostile toward Christianity? The vitriol in your posts indicates that there is emotion attached to your blanket statements about it [Christianity].


My guess is, I'm deliberately being ignored......and if I'm right, then your silence speaks volumes. It speaks to the fact that your argument is fallacious because it is based solely on your own personal experiences with Christianity and not on facts and logic as you claim.

That is tantamount to a woman who has been raped, hating ALL men for it, and accusing ALL men of being rapists.
 
Back
Top