Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mibby529 · 07-23-2002, 09:13 PM

As I said earlier, there's also a watered-down, overgeneralized version of NDN beliefs as reported by Jesuit missionaries in some schools. But Xians blame Indians.

So there's also the freedom from having your religion spoken of.

07-24-2002, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mac_philo:
The reason American universities are the world's best is because, at least compared to the rest of the world, our universities are not subject to the whims of our leaders.

Would you mind expanding on your knowledge of universities in all other countries of the world and the implication that they are "subject to the whims of...leaders"?

Bokonon · 07-24-2002, 04:41 AM

It seems to me requiring a comparative religion book would be a lot more effective and a lot less controversial. While, yes, Islam is the religion of controversy of the moment, the same people that are ignorant of Islam are also going to be ignorant of Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, etc. Why not tackle all of em at the same time?

LordMoneyG · 07-24-2002, 05:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bokonon:
It seems to me requiring a comparative religion book would be a lot more effective and a lot less controversial. While, yes, Islam is the religion of controversy of the moment, the same people that are ignorant of Islam are also going to be ignorant of Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, etc. Why not tackle all of em at the same time?

A good idea, but UNC hit a related snag last year about a week after the 9/11 tragedy. The Chancellor gave a speech on the steps of South Building (which is the UNC equivalent of the Capitol Building) to the collected mass of students at UNC. I wouldn't be surprised if 80% of the student population met on the quad that day. It was beautiful.

At one point in the presentation, if I remember correctly, a priest who was asked to speak during the ceremony led the masses in prayer. Everyone was expecting the usual "Oh, dear lord, just please..." shtick, but instead, the priest addressed all religions, including the Jewish faith, Buddhists, Muslims, ATHEISTS AND AGNOSTICS (which was amazing), Hindus, Aboriginal-Type faiths, and just about everything else. That, as well, was beautiful.

Well, I'll be damned if a good portion of the student body wasn't pissed. Many were angered that he referred to the Quran during the prayer. Many were mad that the prayer wasn't exclusively Christian. Many Christians were mad for no particular reason.

...I'm not exactly sure where I was going with this, but it's still an interesting story. This is what happened the last time that the school attempted to amalgamate all religions into one topic, even if it was a timely event.

scombrid · 07-24-2002, 09:58 AM

<a href="http://www.familypolicy.net/nc/unc-islam.shtml" target="_blank">article</a>

Quote:

"Today I am ashamed to admit that I am a graduate of UNC," said Moffitt, a resident of High Point, North Carolina, and a member of Carolina's class of 1981. He added, "The entire university system in North Carolina should be ashamed of itself for forcing a religion on students that many will find not only offensive, but totally opposed to their own religious views."

When xtians step on people's religion it's fine. Here, kids aren't being forced to pray. Nobody is proselytizing. Kids are being asked to learn about and discuss Islam and they can't stand it. Should they wonder why people get a little irked when forced to say xtian prayers that they don't believe? The Christian sword cuts one way only.

Perhaps the kids that choose to write the paper instead of reading and discussing the objectionable text will actually learn what the 1st Ammendment means and that it applies across the board. It would be a massive improvement
if the xtians could at least learn and understand the 1st Ammendment.

LordMoneyG · 07-24-2002, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by scombrid:
The World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) recently identified Christians as the most persecuted people in the world in its annual report to the United Nations. According to the WEA more than 200 million people are denied human rights "simply because they are Christians."

Well, ignoring the fact that this so-called "statistic" would be incredibly hard to defend, I also find that a Christian organization calling Christians "the most persecuted people in the world" is probably going to be a little unfairly biased, don't you think?

And, ummm, how about adding "the most persecutING people in the world," hm?

But yes, that article seems to sum up the reactionary Christian arguement quite well.

[ July 24, 2002: Message edited by: LordMoneyG ]

Alonzo Fyfe · 07-24-2002, 10:20 AM

I have no problem with the assignment, and I would not have any problem with it whether it were the Bible, or the Illiad, or, Machiavelli's 'The Prince', or Dawkins' THE SELFISH GENE, or any similar text.

I see no reason to treat any of these texts different from any other.

It is a matter for discussion. It is a relevant part of the real world in which we live. It represents useful knowledge, regardless of whether one agrees or not.

(Indeed, why select a text for this purpose with which everybody agrees. You WANT a text that will get at the core of some basic conflict in the world.)

This subject has relevance in the real world. It is something that real-world decision makers should know something about, and a univeristy is supposed to be churning out the best of the real-world decision makers.

We are dealing with adults here, not children who are likely to misinterpret such a program as an endorsement.

[ July 24, 2002: Message edited by: Alonzo Fyfe ]

RogerLeeCooke · 07-24-2002, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LordMoneyG:

Last week, UNC amended its policy to say students who are offended by the book don't have to read it, but they are required to write a one-page paper stating their objections.

``Our long-term goal is to make sure the precedent is affirmed that you cannot force people to take a class about a religious text at a state university,'' said Joe Glover, president of the Family Policy Network, a nonprofit conservative group.
A university spokesman said school officials would not comment on pending litigation.
_________________________________

Whaddya think, Infidels?

- LMG

[ July 23, 2002: Message edited by: LordMoneyG ]

I think the University has wimped out and is setting a dangerous precedent. If the faculty thought students should know something about Islam as part of current events and voted that as part of the required curriculum, then the University should have supported it. Students aren't being required to *believe* in Islam, only to *understand* something about it. What's next, evolution banned again? After all, the creationists have consistently maintained that evolution is just the "religion" of secular humanism.

villainess · 07-26-2002, 09:35 AM

As a purely anecdotal reference point, Cornell for the past two years had all incoming freshmen read _Guns, Germs, and Steel_. This year, the required reading is _Frankenstein_.

As for the issue at hand, I agree that a college student is not a "captive audience" in anything like the way a secondary school student is. Also, it's far from a big secret that many college professors of all viewpoints feel free to bring their opinions to class. To be able to argue against these views without insulting the prof and flunking your class is one of the things you're supposed to learn in college, I believe (maybe it's the standing up to authority part that Christians are really afraid that their kids will learn.) They call it "reasoned debate" and if I can do it with a professor who spends an entire class period citing C. S. Lewis as the greatest philosopher of all time, anyone can do it.

The fact that certain Christians would manage to maintain willful blindness and/or lack of a sense of fair play even in a case with such obvious parallels to their own agenda is sadly not surprising. Frankly, they've gotten to a point where I almost have a sick admiration for the sheer level of gall they can muster.

- the Villainess

07-24-2002, 10:20 AM	#27
Alonzo Fyfe Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: 920B Milo Circle Lafayette, CO Posts: 3,515	I have no problem with the assignment, and I would not have any problem with it whether it were the Bible, or the Illiad, or, Machiavelli's 'The Prince', or Dawkins' THE SELFISH GENE, or any similar text. I see no reason to treat any of these texts different from any other. It is a matter for discussion. It is a relevant part of the real world in which we live. It represents useful knowledge, regardless of whether one agrees or not. (Indeed, why select a text for this purpose with which everybody agrees. You WANT a text that will get at the core of some basic conflict in the world.) This subject has relevance in the real world. It is something that real-world decision makers should know something about, and a univeristy is supposed to be churning out the best of the real-world decision makers. We are dealing with adults here, not children who are likely to misinterpret such a program as an endorsement. [ July 24, 2002: Message edited by: Alonzo Fyfe ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-23-2002, 09:13 PM	#21
mibby529 Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Cali Posts: 170	As I said earlier, there's also a watered-down, overgeneralized version of NDN beliefs as reported by Jesuit missionaries in some schools. But Xians blame Indians. So there's also the freedom from having your religion spoken of.

07-24-2002, 04:41 AM	#23
Bokonon Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Left of the Mississippi Posts: 138	It seems to me requiring a comparative religion book would be a lot more effective and a lot less controversial. While, yes, Islam is the religion of controversy of the moment, the same people that are ignorant of Islam are also going to be ignorant of Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, etc. Why not tackle all of em at the same time?

07-26-2002, 09:35 AM	#29
villainess Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Ithaca, NY Posts: 471	As a purely anecdotal reference point, Cornell for the past two years had all incoming freshmen read _Guns, Germs, and Steel_. This year, the required reading is _Frankenstein_. As for the issue at hand, I agree that a college student is not a "captive audience" in anything like the way a secondary school student is. Also, it's far from a big secret that many college professors of all viewpoints feel free to bring their opinions to class. To be able to argue against these views without insulting the prof and flunking your class is one of the things you're supposed to learn in college, I believe (maybe it's the standing up to authority part that Christians are really afraid that their kids will learn.) They call it "reasoned debate" and if I can do it with a professor who spends an entire class period citing C. S. Lewis as the greatest philosopher of all time, anyone can do it. The fact that certain Christians would manage to maintain willful blindness and/or lack of a sense of fair play even in a case with such obvious parallels to their own agenda is sadly not surprising. Frankly, they've gotten to a point where I almost have a sick admiration for the sheer level of gall they can muster. - the Villainess

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.