I read a post at The American Thinker called The Judeo-Christian Values of America, by Ronald R. Cherry. This type of topic really intrigues me on many levels.
For one thing, I don't profess to be a guru when it comes to American history. I know a little about a lot, but in school in Toronto, my only memories when it comes to the American Revolution, for instance, comes from the required reading I did in Grade 7 or 8 of the fictional novel, Johnny Tremain. I remember he was missing a finger or a bunch of them. Actually, when it came to the history of Canada, I don't remember learning a lot of that either. I remember some stuff about Champlain and Cartier, but that is about it.
Since discovering I am an atheist, I know I've seen the quotes of the Founding Fathers of the US pertaining to God and Christianity, and I didn't think that collectively they had much of a connection to either. So this article motivated me to do some research.
I also don't really get what is meant by Judeo-Christian values. Not to be a smart ass, but I have a problem differentiating overall values of all human beings on this earth, well except for radical Islamics, or really any Fundamentalists who put tend to put their God on a pedestal, where their interpretation of him/her/it controls most of the aspects of their lives.
It seems Cherry, in his article, cherry picked (don't blame me, he really did cherry pick) quotes by the Founding Fathers. I think upon reading more quotes by most of the FF's, one can only conclude that they were deists or agnostics, absolutely tops.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..."
***********************
What about the first part of the Declaration of Independence? It talks about the Laws of Nature, and Nature's God. Nature's God aint no God you'll find in the New Testament and Old Testament. In fact, when you take into account when the DOI was written, the free thinking FF's didn't even have the knowledge of Darwin's theory of evolution. If they did, they probably would have stuck with Laws of Nature. Yeah, we are born free, and have one life to live, and the government should understand it, and so should everyone else, so we have the right to defend ourselves and protect what is ours. What is Judeo-Christian about that?
Cherry goes on in his article how the FF's acknowledged that God gave us life and creativity. Again, they acknowledged that we are naturally born, we have the ability to be creative (they knew not about how we evolved the ability to be creative). It is just God in the Gaps. There was a time when lightning couldn't be explained. If the FF's found America at that time, they would have had the mindset that God was throwing fits when lightning occurred.
You can still read the cherry picked quotes that Cherry put in his article. But watch this video to get a better understanding of what the FF's were really all about when it comes to God and religion:
OK, I am not equipped enough to rip apart his entire article, but I really want to rip apart the last part, when he defines Judeo-Christian values:
1. Our sense of right and wrong and our sense of wisdom come from the use of reason and common sense, but also, and importantly, from the Bible which, by faith was considered by our Founding Fathers to be God's inspired text; and not just from the mind or heart of man. This faith lead to the mottos: "In God We Trust" and "One Nation under God." Our Founding Fathers were believers in the God of the Bible, even if some were not orthodox Christians, and they put that faith into the Declaration of Independence, into our laws, into our national monuments, and into our culture. Faith is a part of American Culture, something Atheists, Secularists, Humanists and those of other religions should acknowledge and accept as historically accurate truth. To remove the results of Biblical Faith from America is to undo what the Founding Fathers have wrought.
************************************
Watch the video Cherry, and tell me again that they were believers in the bible. And another thing, the morals in the bible are just common sense written down by man. No need for it to be God inspired or God's words. It is just common sense, as the FF's do not say worship God, the pretty much just say worship common sense.
2. Truth is Sacred; there can be no liberty or justice, and little happiness without it. Jesus connected truth and liberty when he said "the truth shall make you free." In the Book of Exodus of the Hebrew Bible God describes Himself: "The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth..." In Deuteronomy God is described this way: "He is the Rock, His work is perfect; For all His ways are justice, A God of truth and without injustice." Listen to King David in Psalm 25: "Show me Your ways, O Lord; Teach me your paths. Lead me in Your truth..."; and in Psalm 51: "Behold, You desire truth in the inward parts, And in the hidden part You will make me to know wisdom."
*****************************
Yes truth is sacred. The truth is that evolution is fact, Jesus probably didn't even exist, and the bible you are quoting was edited over and over again and translated in different languages and re edited a few more times. Just man writing a fictional story while putting in a lot of common sense. Truth doesn't need a bible, but it will make you free.....religion won't.
3. Human life is the first gift of God, and it is of infinite value since man is made in the image of God. Judeo-Christian Values have lead to a culture of life in America, not a culture of death. Americans with Judeo-Christian Values will defend innocent God-given life.
*****************************
Who has a culture of death other than the Fundamentalists? Human life is precious because it our only chance to experience life, it is common sense and you don't need Judeo-Christian values to understand this. Those who believe in an afterlife if anything minimize how special our life is. And life is precious almost in every culture on this planet, with the exception of a few. And what is this image of God stuff. Does God have an ass? Does he have to take at least one dump a day?
4. Our Liberty is a gift from God and stated so in the Declaration of Independence. It is also stated in the New Testament Christian Bible: "Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty." Americans with Judeo-Christian Values will defend their God-given Liberty from tyranny and terror.
*******************************
Again, liberty is common sense, and so is defending ones liberty. Chimps even get it, and they don't have a bible to go by.
5. Human creativity is also a gift from God and is not to be unjustly suppressed by totalitarian, tyrannical or excessively taxing government. The work ethic is an important part of Judeo-Christian Values since honorable work is a reflection of God-given human creativity. Human reason is also a part of God-given human creativity, and it has led to scientific knowledge and technological progress. Reason and science are important aspects of Judeo-Christian Values. Human creativity is central to the pursuit of happiness, but does not guarantee it; totalitarian systems such as Communism or Islamic Sharia Law guarantee utopian happiness, but don't deliver it.
*******************************
I acknowledge we are creative, but it has nothing to do with God or Judeo-Christian values. Reason and creativity has been happening even prior to when chimps and man branched off over 5 million years ago, and the political ideology each human lives within throughout the world may restrict our creativity but doesn't take away creative thoughts, well except for religious Fundamentalists. They may even breed away some of our evolved creativity and reasoning potential.
There really isn't that much different in what a Canadian does daily and an American, in fact probably none at all, but we have a more Socialist government, and pound for pound we are able to be just as creative as Americans.
6. "Establish justice." This is commanded repeatedly in the Hebrew Bible. This is how it has been done in America: Honor Life, Liberty and Creativity. Liberty in practical terms means: Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, no established or state-supported religion, right to bear arms and act in self-defense, uninterrupted elections and the division of powers into its three branches. Where our culture is now headed in the wrong direction, in my opinion, is to provide special rights for certain groups of people. Our Founding Fathers acknowledged these basic rights for all people, and our Civil War enforced it for the American slaves when they were denied their God-given Liberty.
****************************
What the heck is he rambling about here? What special rights does someone in America have over others? Aside from that, every Western country pretty much Establishes Jusice and honours Life, Liberty and Creativity. This isn't an American phenomenon, and it is just an offshoot of secularism not the bible. I'd like to see where the bible states no have a state-supported religion or even imply it. Justice in the bible was all about worshiping the God of that bible above all else.
7. "Hate Evil". This is commanded three times in the Hebrew Bible; this is from the book of Proverbs: "The fear of the Lord is to hate evil." Hear the Prophet Isaiah: "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness...." Americans with Judeo-Christian Values, as opposed to Europeans, still believe in the death penalty for pre-meditated murder, and America is still the nemesis of terrorists and tyrants - see the seal of the state of Virginia.
********************************
I thought he was defining Judeo-Christian values and now he is stating you need to believe in the death penalty if you have these values. America was founded on the death penalty for premeditated murder? What happened to "turn the other cheek." And most American countries were founded on killing pre-meditated murderers as well, in fact, they were founded on killing anyone who got in your way, much like America and every country on this planet. Communist countries kill people for pre-meditated murder as well. Muslim countries too. It isn't a biblical phenomenon or an American one.
8. "Love your neighbor" - commanded in the Hebrew and Christian Bibles. "Love your enemy" - commanded in the New Testament Christian Bible. Generations of Americans, starting with our Founding Fathers, have had to square the values of "Hate Evil" with "Love your enemy." This has been done by hating the evil within the enemies of God-given Life and Liberty, but not hating the evil-doer him/herself.
*********************************
I hate to break it to this guy, but American hate OBL, and most hated Hitler. It is natural to hate those who want to destroy you, or want to destroy innocents. Again this is nothing that has anything to do with Judeo-Christian values, because the OT and NT have a different viewpoint on how to hate, and most people go by the OT way, everywhere on this planet, except for maybe Buddhists. But I don't know any Buddhists, so maybe I shouldn't speak for them.
9. In the Judeo-Christian Value System there is a natural and common-sense balance between compassion and courageous confrontation of evil. This can be seen metaphorically as a natural balance between femininity and masculinity; both good and necessary. The secular culture of Europe and of many in the United States today have unwisely suppressed the masculinity of Judeo-Christian American Culture, and this has put our society out of balance.
************************************
I thought all men (including women) are created equal. I thought that is part of the foundation bs this guy is spewing. He is trying to differentiate how America differs from Europe? Man dominated everywhere before and when America was founded (not a Judeo-Christian phenomenon), the FF's actually started paving the way to give everyone equality. This dude has serious problems in hypocrisy. He is blaming secularism on women getting equal rights? And trying to say it is a bad thing? So does God want women to vote or doesn't he?
10. From Many, One: e pluribus unum. Ethnicity and race don't matter, but values do matter. We Americans should consider ourselves blessed to live under God-given Liberty in the same melting pot; and we are privileged to pursue happiness through creative work and play, unencumbered by excessive government. Those things that divide us, such as race or ethnicity, can be viewed metaphorically as our various styles; and are not very important. Those things of lesser importance should melt into what is very important and which should unite us: our value of Life, Liberty and Creativity - those rights defined by the Declaration of Independence, and rightly identified as the gifts of God.
***********************************
Again, most of the secular west go by the idea that humans are humans and ethnicity shouldn't be a deterrent as long as everyone respects each other, because we value the social contract and appreciate for the most part that this is my only chance and it is your only chance to live a life. This is secularist, not Judeo-Christian values which preach segregation more than anything else. These are secular values. How were blacks doing during the American Revolution? And what is this Gifts of God nonsense? Rightly identified? Any evidence of God.....oh, never mind.
11. The natural resources of the Earth, including the animals, along with the rest of creation should be honored and well cared for, but also used and enjoyed; and never worshiped.
*********************************
Most countries don't worship animals and resources, and they laugh at anyone who does. Except for the countries that worship cows. Again, this is just humans and our ability to think and reason, it isn't American or biblical.
Whew, long post. I hope I made some sense.
September 18, 2007
September 15, 2007
He May Look Like Norman Bates, But He Gets My Vote By Default
Yep, I have to vote McGuinty. There is no choice. No way can I vote for Tory and his imbecilic plan to fund religious private schools. Aint gonna happen.
But it is pretty cool to look at the resemblance Dalton McGuinty has with Anthony (Norman Bates) Perkins. You can try to guess who is who. The McGuinty/Norman Bates Quiz:
One more thing. Neither of them look gay.
But it is pretty cool to look at the resemblance Dalton McGuinty has with Anthony (Norman Bates) Perkins. You can try to guess who is who. The McGuinty/Norman Bates Quiz:
One more thing. Neither of them look gay.
September 13, 2007
Moron John Tory. I Mean More On John Tory.
The majority of human beings in Western civilization understand and appreciate the separation of church and state. With separation of church and state freedom of religion is at risk, in fact, everyones freedom is at risk.
Any politician who tries to narrow the gap of the separation is doomed in todays world.
It doesn't matter if the candidate is a nice guy, sincere, and preaching fairness. I for one do not believe there is such a beast as a sincere politician.
John Tory, by adding religious school funding to his platform, does not deserve to get even one vote. He especially has no business as a leader. A leader doesn't make such imbecilic decisions. Whoever else was responsible for making this part of a platform should resign and become a Walmart greeter.
Did they not bother reading polls or try to understand the thoughts of the majority of Ontarians?
Lets look back. In a poll back in June, 58% of Canadians supported a merger of Catholic schools into the public school system, with only 29% opposing the idea. 13% did not know.
And there was no one reason to overcome for or against, just the overwhelming majority do not want faith based schools when public schools are available:
Question 2: Why do you feel this way?
Should not be separate/different boards 17.7%
Cost savings 16.7%
Don't know 11.5%
Religion is important 10.4%
One system would create equality 9.4%
Separate schools have better education 8.3%
Discriminates against other religions 6.3%
One would improve education 6.3%
No need for change, system is working well 4.2%
Religion should not play a part in education 3.1%
Public system is better 3.1%
Need alternatives 2.1%
It's the same curriculum anyway 1.0%
***********************************
If given the answers and told to pick one, I would have chose "Religion should not play a part in education" but I obviously agree with a few of the answers.
That poll isn't even about funding Muslim, Jewish, Quaker, etc. schools. So why would Tory the knucklehead even alienate more voters on top of the ones in the above poll?
In a new poll: Ontarians were read the statement, “A group of religious leaders from Ontario representing the Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim and Armenian communities is calling for the funding of all faith-based schools that meet provincial standards with taxpayer’s money. Currently, the Ontario Catholic school system is funded by taxpayers, but not other faith-based schools,” and asked whether they support or oppose extending full funding to faith-based schools.
On this basis, 62% of Ontarians oppose full funding for faith-based schools, including 45% who strongly oppose the plan. Just over one in three (35%) supports the plan, including 14% who strongly support it.
Every major party has close to identical stats when it comes to those who oppose and more importantly strongly oppose Tory's plan:
Among party supporters, opposition to faith based funding is as high among PC supporters (60% opposed, including 43% strongly) as among Liberal voters (60% opposed, including 46% strongly). NDP voters (68% opposed, including 49% strongly) and Green voters (67% opposed, including 55% strongly) are even more fixed in their opposition to faith-based school funding.
The majority of Ontarians still want to do away with Catholic school funding as well, though the numbers are slightly different from the June survey:
Ontarians were given three options: merge the Catholic and public school systems into a single publicly funded system; keep everything as it is, continuing funding for Catholic schools but not other faith-based schools; or, extend funding to faith-based schools. On this basis, a majority of Ontarians (53%) say the Catholic and public systems should be merged into a single school system. One in four (23%) say the status quo – of funding Catholic, but not other faith-based schools—should prevail, while one in five (21%) believe that funding should be extended to all faith-based schools in the province.
A Muslim writer tried to make a case for Tory's plan in the Globe and Mail by saying he had a second rate education in a Muslim school that his parents paid top dollar for. The comments to the article completely tell the story of the collective Ontario mindset.
Meanwhile, Tory knows he screwed up real bad, and he now has no chance of winning:
John Tory says the buck stops at the top, and he will take full responsibility if his party goes down to defeat Oct. 10 over his policy on funding for religious schools.
"I have had lots of leadership positions and you know that that's where the buck stops and you have to accept accountability," Tory said at a campaign stop at London's Covent Garden Market, when asked if he'd personally be accountable for the policy......"I am the leader, so I am accountable for all the things that happen, good and bad and I accept that as part of the leadership responsibility, and I always have," Tory said.
********************************
Tory should never have become Conservative leader. It is the year 2007. When a party elects a leader they expect the leader to have a chance of winning, if not what is the point? To lose? Especially when you had a good chance of winning, if you kept your "bright" idea to try to swing ethnic voters at the expense of losing your secular vote (that you obviously didn't think about at all).
One thing that is being talked about privately (McGuinty won't mention it or else he could lose the Islam vote) is the idea of publicly funding Muslim schools, especially when taking into consideration the low income Muslim population that can't afford private Muslim schools. Yes, rightly or wrongly (probably rightly), there is tremendous concern that bad ass teenage Muslim kids would serve Canada better if they were in public schools hopefully becoming more tolerant and less likely to be recruited by friends of Omar, for example.
Another biggie is the fact that the retired or near retired people, who now have adult children, equate the spending of public funds on separate schools as misappropriated spending and totally unnecessary. And these people do turn up come voting day.
THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY MEMBERS SHOULD BE COMPLETELY PISSED OFF AT TORY RIGHT NOW WHETHER THEY ARE FOR OR AGAINST FUNDING RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS. HE IS WASTING CAMPAIGN DOLLARS EVERY DAY FROM HERE ON IN IF THE INTENTION OF THOSE CAMPAIGN DOLLARS WERE TO WIN THE ELECTION.
*************************************
Again, this isn't about whether creationism vs. evolution is taught, it is the whole idea of public tax dollars going to where creationism is taught (not just as a comparative studies course) and what will be the future affect of this as far as a multitude of different faithed schools springing up and the probable implications that more segregation will be the outcome. Regarding creation vs. evolution, here is what John Tory really said:
This is the impression I have of John Tory if he were to teach evolution in an Ontario classroom:
Any politician who tries to narrow the gap of the separation is doomed in todays world.
It doesn't matter if the candidate is a nice guy, sincere, and preaching fairness. I for one do not believe there is such a beast as a sincere politician.
John Tory, by adding religious school funding to his platform, does not deserve to get even one vote. He especially has no business as a leader. A leader doesn't make such imbecilic decisions. Whoever else was responsible for making this part of a platform should resign and become a Walmart greeter.
Did they not bother reading polls or try to understand the thoughts of the majority of Ontarians?
Lets look back. In a poll back in June, 58% of Canadians supported a merger of Catholic schools into the public school system, with only 29% opposing the idea. 13% did not know.
And there was no one reason to overcome for or against, just the overwhelming majority do not want faith based schools when public schools are available:
Question 2: Why do you feel this way?
Should not be separate/different boards 17.7%
Cost savings 16.7%
Don't know 11.5%
Religion is important 10.4%
One system would create equality 9.4%
Separate schools have better education 8.3%
Discriminates against other religions 6.3%
One would improve education 6.3%
No need for change, system is working well 4.2%
Religion should not play a part in education 3.1%
Public system is better 3.1%
Need alternatives 2.1%
It's the same curriculum anyway 1.0%
***********************************
If given the answers and told to pick one, I would have chose "Religion should not play a part in education" but I obviously agree with a few of the answers.
That poll isn't even about funding Muslim, Jewish, Quaker, etc. schools. So why would Tory the knucklehead even alienate more voters on top of the ones in the above poll?
In a new poll: Ontarians were read the statement, “A group of religious leaders from Ontario representing the Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim and Armenian communities is calling for the funding of all faith-based schools that meet provincial standards with taxpayer’s money. Currently, the Ontario Catholic school system is funded by taxpayers, but not other faith-based schools,” and asked whether they support or oppose extending full funding to faith-based schools.
On this basis, 62% of Ontarians oppose full funding for faith-based schools, including 45% who strongly oppose the plan. Just over one in three (35%) supports the plan, including 14% who strongly support it.
Every major party has close to identical stats when it comes to those who oppose and more importantly strongly oppose Tory's plan:
Among party supporters, opposition to faith based funding is as high among PC supporters (60% opposed, including 43% strongly) as among Liberal voters (60% opposed, including 46% strongly). NDP voters (68% opposed, including 49% strongly) and Green voters (67% opposed, including 55% strongly) are even more fixed in their opposition to faith-based school funding.
The majority of Ontarians still want to do away with Catholic school funding as well, though the numbers are slightly different from the June survey:
Ontarians were given three options: merge the Catholic and public school systems into a single publicly funded system; keep everything as it is, continuing funding for Catholic schools but not other faith-based schools; or, extend funding to faith-based schools. On this basis, a majority of Ontarians (53%) say the Catholic and public systems should be merged into a single school system. One in four (23%) say the status quo – of funding Catholic, but not other faith-based schools—should prevail, while one in five (21%) believe that funding should be extended to all faith-based schools in the province.
A Muslim writer tried to make a case for Tory's plan in the Globe and Mail by saying he had a second rate education in a Muslim school that his parents paid top dollar for. The comments to the article completely tell the story of the collective Ontario mindset.
Meanwhile, Tory knows he screwed up real bad, and he now has no chance of winning:
John Tory says the buck stops at the top, and he will take full responsibility if his party goes down to defeat Oct. 10 over his policy on funding for religious schools.
"I have had lots of leadership positions and you know that that's where the buck stops and you have to accept accountability," Tory said at a campaign stop at London's Covent Garden Market, when asked if he'd personally be accountable for the policy......"I am the leader, so I am accountable for all the things that happen, good and bad and I accept that as part of the leadership responsibility, and I always have," Tory said.
********************************
Tory should never have become Conservative leader. It is the year 2007. When a party elects a leader they expect the leader to have a chance of winning, if not what is the point? To lose? Especially when you had a good chance of winning, if you kept your "bright" idea to try to swing ethnic voters at the expense of losing your secular vote (that you obviously didn't think about at all).
One thing that is being talked about privately (McGuinty won't mention it or else he could lose the Islam vote) is the idea of publicly funding Muslim schools, especially when taking into consideration the low income Muslim population that can't afford private Muslim schools. Yes, rightly or wrongly (probably rightly), there is tremendous concern that bad ass teenage Muslim kids would serve Canada better if they were in public schools hopefully becoming more tolerant and less likely to be recruited by friends of Omar, for example.
Another biggie is the fact that the retired or near retired people, who now have adult children, equate the spending of public funds on separate schools as misappropriated spending and totally unnecessary. And these people do turn up come voting day.
THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY MEMBERS SHOULD BE COMPLETELY PISSED OFF AT TORY RIGHT NOW WHETHER THEY ARE FOR OR AGAINST FUNDING RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS. HE IS WASTING CAMPAIGN DOLLARS EVERY DAY FROM HERE ON IN IF THE INTENTION OF THOSE CAMPAIGN DOLLARS WERE TO WIN THE ELECTION.
*************************************
Again, this isn't about whether creationism vs. evolution is taught, it is the whole idea of public tax dollars going to where creationism is taught (not just as a comparative studies course) and what will be the future affect of this as far as a multitude of different faithed schools springing up and the probable implications that more segregation will be the outcome. Regarding creation vs. evolution, here is what John Tory really said:
This is the impression I have of John Tory if he were to teach evolution in an Ontario classroom:
September 11, 2007
Retired Ontario Principal On Tory's Plan To Publicly Fund Faith Based Schools
The following is an e-mail I received regarding John Tory's imbecilic plan to fund faith based schools in Ontario. I happened to ask the retired high school principal for his opinion of this idiocy:
About the "fairness" issue that I'm sure Tory will use in debates, I came across this comment at A Step To The Right:
Again, if Tory is seeking fairness he needs to put a stop to all religious school funding.
UPDATE
I received another email from the retired principal:
"Whatever happened to our democratic tradition re the separation of Church and State? Methinks we should consider reminding our provincial politicians of America's original national motto, e pluribus unum, which was apparently plagiarized from an ancient recipe for salad dressing.
Anyway, e pluribus unum means "out of many, one", and amidst the current controversy re multi-faith educational funding it would mean that in a multicultural society, people in general would be best served by putting aside their religious differences, and mixing with others to form one harmonious public educational system -- a true cultural melting pot based on secularism rather than faith."
Also, it seems that a book burning moderator over at Blogging Tories didn't like the way the discussion having to do with John Tory and his ridiculous education platform was going so they closed the thread. Why not let it close because of lack of interest? What babies. The truth is that I was being ganged up on by creationists/theist/anti-evolutionists and decided to defend myself, which is completely related to the topic at hand because I'm giving legit reasons why it is baseless to put faith in the school system.
I started another thread on Blogging Tories here.
It does irk me when idiotic theists invent new definitions for words like "religious."
"Funding for Catholic education in Ontario was guaranteed by the 1867 BNA Act up to the end of high school which back then was grade 10. The extension for the remaining years of high school was the last piece of legislation passed by the Davis government as part of a commitment made by Bill Davis to Cardinal Carter of Toronto. Ironically, it was Bill Davis who advised Tory to extend the funding to other faiths.
The discriminatory part of this Tory proposal is that it does not include extension to non-religious groups who also want an independent private school status -- these include such groups from Montessori to Upper Canada College, even though they are currently inspected by education officers from the Ministry and have to conform to Ministry guidelines.
Methinks Tory was ill-advised on this matter and will certainly not get my vote. Multiculturalism through educational and religious diversity is not only divisive but very expensive. In a nutshell, we can't afford to operate different systems that not only duplicate building costs and administrative personnel, but may well dilute educational programs into bird courses. For example, religion is offered by the RC system as an OAC for university admission. The marks in this course have traditionally been very high and can be used by Catholic students to gain bursaries and scholarships at the expense of students in the public school system.
Unfair -- you bet. Every whacko in the Christian community from Baptists to Creationists will want to get on this educational bandwagon, let alone the different sects of Islam. This proposal exposes Tory and his clowns for what they really are -- opportunistic political nags who are trying to win an electoral horse race by feeding the public horse shit."
About the "fairness" issue that I'm sure Tory will use in debates, I came across this comment at A Step To The Right:
John Heder said,
September 11, 2007 at 9:04 am
"This thread has degenerated into a atheist/believer sideshow, let’s get back to the real issue of publicly funded faith based education. As a teacher there is an issue in this morass that stands apart from the ethical dilemmas of the general public supporting an education that is based on religious precepts.
When I graduated 10 years ago from teacher’s college I started to scan the education ads in the Globe and Mail. The vast majority of ads had the footer “We are an equal opportunity employer”, and EVERY government of Ontario position had that rider. However…upon closer inspection, every Catholic position required the applicant to provide a pastoral letter endorsing that the candidate was a practicing Catholic. Yes, in the 21st century, in Canada, in a publicly funded institution, you can still bar an applicant because of their faith.
Imagine any other publicly funded position that was open only to members of a certain faith, or political party, or sexual orientation. It sounds absurd, but under the current model of faith based schools it is not only acceptable, but somehow defensible. Somehow the Charter of Rights and Freedoms seems to have been forgotten in this specific case.
If schools remain privately funded, these hiring practices, while reprehensible, are understandable. However once an institution accepts public money it should be accountable to the general public for its ethical and legal stance on non-discriminatory hiring practices.
I am happily employed as a teacher, and have no desire to work in the Catholic system or any other faith based school for that matter. I am, however, concerned for recent graduates who may find themselves barred from teaching mathematics, history, or any other non-religious course in a Catholic school just because of the unhappy fact they weren’t born into a Catholic family.
Before we jump into extending funding to all other possible religions, I think that this very important issue must be addressed."
Again, if Tory is seeking fairness he needs to put a stop to all religious school funding.
UPDATE
I received another email from the retired principal:
"Whatever happened to our democratic tradition re the separation of Church and State? Methinks we should consider reminding our provincial politicians of America's original national motto, e pluribus unum, which was apparently plagiarized from an ancient recipe for salad dressing.
Anyway, e pluribus unum means "out of many, one", and amidst the current controversy re multi-faith educational funding it would mean that in a multicultural society, people in general would be best served by putting aside their religious differences, and mixing with others to form one harmonious public educational system -- a true cultural melting pot based on secularism rather than faith."
Also, it seems that a book burning moderator over at Blogging Tories didn't like the way the discussion having to do with John Tory and his ridiculous education platform was going so they closed the thread. Why not let it close because of lack of interest? What babies. The truth is that I was being ganged up on by creationists/theist/anti-evolutionists and decided to defend myself, which is completely related to the topic at hand because I'm giving legit reasons why it is baseless to put faith in the school system.
I started another thread on Blogging Tories here.
It does irk me when idiotic theists invent new definitions for words like "religious."
September 9, 2007
Ontario Won't Take A Step Back Into The Dark Ages
If John Tory doesn't drop the proposal to fund religious schools with tax dollars very soon, he might as well drop out of the election for Ontario Premier.
There is no spin that will satisfy the thinking Ontario voter on this one. Here are the spins put on by Conservative die-hards:
Catholic schools get funded so to be "fair" all religious schools should be funded
The reason that Catholic schools are funded is because of a deal done by the founders of our country. It has nothing to do with fairness, but is in fact a political deal that I imagine could only get changed if it came down to a vote by the people. The fairness angle was already defeated by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1994. H/T The Fifth Column
Public funding of anything religious is just plain ridiculous. Where would it stop? Mormonism? Scientology? The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Evolution is just a theory, there is nothing wrong with funding schools that teach alternative theories as long as those theories aren't taught in science class
"Evolutionary biology is a strong and vigorous field of science. A theoretical framework that encompasses several basic mechanisms is consistent with the patterns seen in nature; and there is abundant evidence demonstrating the action of these mechanisms as well as their contributions to nature. Hence, evolution is both a theory and a set of established facts that the theory explains."
"For scientists, evolutionary theory deals with how evolution occurs, not whether it occurs — this is an important distinction lost upon creationists."
As far as "other theories" go, that is what church and home is for. There is no reason to fund the brainwashing of children. Parents have plenty of ways to brainwash their child without having schools do it for them. Religious history can be taught in school (I even found Henry the 8th's divorce case to be interesting). Religious dogma has no business in school.
By funding religious schools it will force those schools to follow the Ontario curriculum
There is plenty of leeway when it comes to following the Ontario curriculum and having loads of time to teach nonsense and intolerance as well. When did Catholics stop teaching kids that Jews killed Jesus in class? They still teach that condoms are bad and that gays are sinners don't they?
So they have to teach evolution in science class. That doesn't mean that they can't attempt to ridicule evolution in other classes (this is what churches and wilfully ignorant parents are for, not publicly funded schools).
There are only 53,000 students who are in non-Catholic religious schools in Ontario today
Yes, that is today. But what about tomorrow? If a Jewish family, or Muslim family, or Baptist family, or Mormon family, etc. has a choice between a local public school or a local school that is the same as their household religion, how are those numbers not going to explode? Build it and they will come. When Bill Davis took a step back into the middle ages and funded Catholic high schools in 1985, more schools were built very quickly and filled. This will create a new Ontario, one that embraces segregation and intolerance.
Wouldn't you rather Muslims, for example, have to follow the Ontario curriculum than do their own thing in privately funded schools?
Again, has I explained above, by publicly funding Muslim schools, more Muslim, if not the majority of Muslims in Ontario, will wind up going to Muslim schools. This is a recipe for disaster. Here is a post at Beaman's World that illustrates what the expected outcome will be. Yes, homegrown terrorism in Britain has been funded by the public.
Collectively, Muslims tend to be very passive when it comes to radical leadership. This opens the door for the bad guys to infiltrate and take over. We don't need any bad ass Muslim teens in Ontario who have been brainwashed by Taleban trained leaders who preach hatred of the West.
There are 33 Muslim schools in Ontario right now. Do we want 250 of them that are completely full?
This will create competition and competition will create better teachers
No, this isn't about competition that will create better education. The only competition here is for parents to decide if they want their child to be taught religious dogma and superstitions during part of the school day while being segregated from children with other beliefs, or if they want their child to be taught facts and real theories (ones that can be falsified).
Ontario isn't Turkey or the USA. Stockwell Day's nonsensical beliefs humiliated the Conservatives previously. The majority of Ontarians can see through this bs proposal made by Tory, at least the Ontarians who came through the public system can.
If I had my way, I would take away funding from Catholic schools (at least have a vote for it). And I wouldn't even allow any religious school to have accredited status unless they followed the Ontario curriculum. And I wouldn't fund them a dime.
I don't see why parents, Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, etc. need to brainwash their children in school. It is completely selfish. If they feel that strongly about their beliefs, take them to their place of worship as much as possible and teach their nonsense at home as well (sure, it is a form of child abuse, but what do you expect from insecure zealots). Most who attend post secondary school wind up in public colleges and universities anyway. Religious schools are just a way to segregate and control a child when they are too young to know better or make up their own mind.
There is no spin that will satisfy the thinking Ontario voter on this one. Here are the spins put on by Conservative die-hards:
Catholic schools get funded so to be "fair" all religious schools should be funded
The reason that Catholic schools are funded is because of a deal done by the founders of our country. It has nothing to do with fairness, but is in fact a political deal that I imagine could only get changed if it came down to a vote by the people. The fairness angle was already defeated by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1994. H/T The Fifth Column
Public funding of anything religious is just plain ridiculous. Where would it stop? Mormonism? Scientology? The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Evolution is just a theory, there is nothing wrong with funding schools that teach alternative theories as long as those theories aren't taught in science class
"Evolutionary biology is a strong and vigorous field of science. A theoretical framework that encompasses several basic mechanisms is consistent with the patterns seen in nature; and there is abundant evidence demonstrating the action of these mechanisms as well as their contributions to nature. Hence, evolution is both a theory and a set of established facts that the theory explains."
"For scientists, evolutionary theory deals with how evolution occurs, not whether it occurs — this is an important distinction lost upon creationists."
As far as "other theories" go, that is what church and home is for. There is no reason to fund the brainwashing of children. Parents have plenty of ways to brainwash their child without having schools do it for them. Religious history can be taught in school (I even found Henry the 8th's divorce case to be interesting). Religious dogma has no business in school.
By funding religious schools it will force those schools to follow the Ontario curriculum
There is plenty of leeway when it comes to following the Ontario curriculum and having loads of time to teach nonsense and intolerance as well. When did Catholics stop teaching kids that Jews killed Jesus in class? They still teach that condoms are bad and that gays are sinners don't they?
So they have to teach evolution in science class. That doesn't mean that they can't attempt to ridicule evolution in other classes (this is what churches and wilfully ignorant parents are for, not publicly funded schools).
There are only 53,000 students who are in non-Catholic religious schools in Ontario today
Yes, that is today. But what about tomorrow? If a Jewish family, or Muslim family, or Baptist family, or Mormon family, etc. has a choice between a local public school or a local school that is the same as their household religion, how are those numbers not going to explode? Build it and they will come. When Bill Davis took a step back into the middle ages and funded Catholic high schools in 1985, more schools were built very quickly and filled. This will create a new Ontario, one that embraces segregation and intolerance.
Wouldn't you rather Muslims, for example, have to follow the Ontario curriculum than do their own thing in privately funded schools?
Again, has I explained above, by publicly funding Muslim schools, more Muslim, if not the majority of Muslims in Ontario, will wind up going to Muslim schools. This is a recipe for disaster. Here is a post at Beaman's World that illustrates what the expected outcome will be. Yes, homegrown terrorism in Britain has been funded by the public.
Collectively, Muslims tend to be very passive when it comes to radical leadership. This opens the door for the bad guys to infiltrate and take over. We don't need any bad ass Muslim teens in Ontario who have been brainwashed by Taleban trained leaders who preach hatred of the West.
There are 33 Muslim schools in Ontario right now. Do we want 250 of them that are completely full?
This will create competition and competition will create better teachers
No, this isn't about competition that will create better education. The only competition here is for parents to decide if they want their child to be taught religious dogma and superstitions during part of the school day while being segregated from children with other beliefs, or if they want their child to be taught facts and real theories (ones that can be falsified).
Ontario isn't Turkey or the USA. Stockwell Day's nonsensical beliefs humiliated the Conservatives previously. The majority of Ontarians can see through this bs proposal made by Tory, at least the Ontarians who came through the public system can.
If I had my way, I would take away funding from Catholic schools (at least have a vote for it). And I wouldn't even allow any religious school to have accredited status unless they followed the Ontario curriculum. And I wouldn't fund them a dime.
I don't see why parents, Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, etc. need to brainwash their children in school. It is completely selfish. If they feel that strongly about their beliefs, take them to their place of worship as much as possible and teach their nonsense at home as well (sure, it is a form of child abuse, but what do you expect from insecure zealots). Most who attend post secondary school wind up in public colleges and universities anyway. Religious schools are just a way to segregate and control a child when they are too young to know better or make up their own mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)