Was on board until I saw the Christian stuff.
Why can't we let children decide if they want to be religious or not? And if they want to be religious, why can't we let them pick their religion?
Makes zero sense to have a school where the idea is that the kids are free, and then force a religion on them!
If you're not interested that's absolutely fine and I respect your choice. But I would like to offer the opportunity for those that are. That's all. I mean no harm.
Because I have the freedom to do that. And most importantly because I am not infringing upon anyone else's rights in doing that. Our school has no compulsory attendance. Again no one is forced into our program if they don't feel that it is the right place for them.
I believe that morality is key. Our founding fathers were very spiritual people. In teaching the history of the founding of our country, it's almost impossible not to discuss spirituality. Benjamin Franklin in the constitutional convention itself, asked the convention to take a break so that they might all have the opportunity for prayer because tensions were becoming high and they were having trouble resolving some issues.
We do not teach heavy religion at our school. That is for individual families and churches to decide what to teach. We only convey the basics. You know, such as the golden rule. We go off of Benjamin Franklin's guidelines as to what beliefs almost all religions share in common and which ones should be taught in school. They're pretty basic. That we're held responsible for our actions in this life and so on. Besides a student can opt out of the religion class with no harm to his or her grades.
Again no one is forced. I don't understand why this is such a big problem. It's almost as if you guys are saying more than just "don't force religion on me," which of course I would never do. It's as if you're saying I don't have the right to teach it in a private school that I open and people come to on a totally volunteer basis. It's not right to try to force you're beliefs on me either and the school I"m trying to build.
Again no one is forced. I don't understand why this is such a big problem. It's almost as if you guys are saying more than just "don't force religion on me," which of course I would never do. It's as if you're saying I don't have the right to teach it in a private school that I open and people come to on a totally volunteer basis. It's not right to try to force you're beliefs on me either and the school I"m trying to build.
There is a small but very vocal group amongst RPFers who hate anything and everything "Christian" and will howl for days at volume setting "11" upon any encounter of the concept, no matter how minor or voluntary.
Most of us have learned to pretty much let them have their one post and ignore it, or otherwise if you try to explain such concepts as "freedom" and "liberty" with regard to Christianity, you will have to deal with being set upon like hyenas and howling banshees.
But don't fret, it's only a minor fraction of the RPF's who seem to think that liberty is for everyone BUT Christians. They just happen to be very vocal. Best practice here is to let them post their rant and ignore it. If you try and actually defend the idea that Christians should have freedom too, then this will go on for weeks, derail the thread, get it sent into Hot Topics, and become entirely counterproductive.
Most of the membership, even those that are not Christians, know that freedom is for all people, and not just "everybody but Christians," so really a defense is unnecessary. Defending the idea will simply ignite the banshee chorus and get you nowhere fast I'm afraid.
ETA: Probably one of the reasons people got upset is because you intend to feature "Christian Principles" in the school, without disclosing that fact up front in the original post seeking support. :shrug: You haven't lost my support, and I understand that this is basically because you actually separate "Christian Principles" from "Christian Doctrine" but some will look on that as having been deceptive. I know better, but they don't.
There is a small but very vocal group amongst RPFers who hate anything and everything "Christian" and will howl for days at volume setting "11" upon any encounter of the concept, no matter how minor or voluntary.
Most of us have learned to pretty much let them have their one post and ignore it, or otherwise if you try to explain such concepts as "freedom" and "liberty" with regard to Christianity, you will have to deal with being set upon like hyenas and howling banshees.
But don't fret, it's only a minor fraction of the RPF's who seem to think that liberty is for everyone BUT Christians. They just happen to be very vocal. Best practice here is to let them post their rant and ignore it. If you try and actually defend the idea that Christians should have freedom too, then this will go on for weeks, derail the thread, get it sent into Hot Topics, and become entirely counterproductive.
Most of the membership, even those that are not Christians, know that freedom is for all people, and not just "everybody but Christians," so really a defense is unnecessary. Defending the idea will simply ignite the banshee chorus and get you nowhere fast I'm afraid.
ETA: Probably one of the reasons people got upset is because you intend to feature "Christian Principles" in the school, without disclosing that fact up front in the original post seeking support. :shrug: You haven't lost my support, and I understand that this is basically because you actually separate "Christian Principles" from "Christian Doctrine" but some will look on that as having been deceptive. I know better, but they don't.
I mean, that whole nasty GROUP of them stinkin' Christians ought to have NO RIGHT to teach children anything in a free society right? After all, if America were truly free, then we would just chuck every stinkin' Christian into the nearest gulag and be done with it! rofl!
Da, Komrade! My support for and defense of individual rights is awfully "collective" whenever it happens to include those awful stinkin' Christians, isn't it?
Your position was that Christian principles should not be taught at a liberty school. That means you are in essence calling Christianity "anti-liberty" which, IMHO, is a pretty intense "slam," especially around these parts.
Your quote:
"Makes zero sense to have a school where the idea is that the kids are free, and then force a religion on them!"
makes Christianity out to be "anti-liberty" which characterization is, well, to pretty much every single member of these forums, an attack.
For myself and many others, Christian principles incorporate the penultimate expression of personal liberty. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a concise statement of the NAP. "You reap what you sow" is an even more concise statement of the concept of blowback.
BUT ZOMG NOOOOO because Christians described the principles first we should just toss them out? No teaching of the NAP? No learning about the concept of blowback?
Or do you object more because they intend to refer to the concepts according to their Christian names... "The Golden Rule" or "The Law of Reaping and Sowing" ? I bet you would object a lot less if instead of "reaping and sowing" they called it "karma."
Why is every philosophy/religious principle OK, but as soon as it's ZOMG CHRISTIAN it has to be shut down, shut up, and basically mischaracterized as the antithesis of liberty?
Those who so desperately oppose Christianity are obviously unable to see what is flowing from their own expression. That's OK, I have seen deeper mysteries than that in my time. For instance, the New Hampshire Republican antiwar vote going to John McCain - it makes about as much sense to me, but I have given up on trying to make people see the lunacy of it. They will either see it, or they won't.
You, likewise, would apparently blow your top if someone taught your child that "you reap what you sow" but were someone to describe the concept of 'karma' to them then that would just be a cool way of learning about other cultures, and a good life's lesson along the way.
This school prefers to call it "reaping and sowing." So what? deal with it. If you don't like it, then don't send your kid there. Problem solved.
