Putting God back into schools.

[Ninurta]

Religious history is still history, and as such, it still has something to teach. If it is not "history", then it is fable or mythology, and there again religious fables and myths from all cultures are still taught in schools with lessons to impart, fable or not. You can still take course in, for example, greek Mythology, and those myths have lessons to be learned.

I could concede that a deity is not required to provide that anchor if you could inform me what IS required to provide it. SOMETHING has to anchor it to provide a common reference point and prevent random moral directions at odds with one another, so what do you think that something would be in the absence of religion?

.

I guess here's a good example: do unto others...

Is it religious? I mean, it's written in every book for every religion correct? Yet, nothing to do with God. Nothing to do with a diety, and it doesn't require a God to make sense and be put into practice daily. Sure, I learned about it in Sunday School, but I am positive God as preached doesn't exist (my opinion) and yet I still live by that. 

The history versus religious history is just a continuation of me not clarifying what I meant. I would prefer my kids learn about the horrible things committed in the name of (insert gods name here). They need to so they can see how horrible it has been for our species. Do unto others. It's not complicated, not hard, and most certainly not religious.

As far as I know, that precept is only found in the Christian Bible. I know it is not in the Qur'an, but can't say whether it is in Hindu or Buddhist teachings. The closest thing that Wicca has to it, so far as I know, is the Witch's Rede, which states "An' it harm not others, do what thou wilt". So it appears to me to be rooted in Christian teachings, but I'm open to correction if I'm wrong. There are plenty or religions I know nothing about, and it may be that it can be found in one or more of them as well.

Now, there is some reason you live by a Christian teaching without being a Christian, There is some reason you hold fast to that precept while rejecting it's source. I myself am not a Christian, either - at least I don't know of any Christians that would claim me as one. None in the modern world, anyhow.

I agree with you on the point of teaching the evil done in religions' name - by all means, kids should learn the bad along with the good in regards to religions. Christianity has a lot of good to teach, but there are a lot of bad examples from it that should not be forgotten, either. Things like the Inquisition, the Genocide of the Huguenots by the Catholics, the genocide of the Waldensians, the genocide and enslavement of the Mexican and South American natives by the Catholics, the persecution of the Protestants... there is a long list, and it should by no means be ignored in history lessons touching upon religions. Negative examples have every bit as much to teach as positive examples - they teach folks what NOT to do and try to blame it on their god!

Islam is another religion that has a lot of negative examples good for teaching moments - the annihilation of the Quraysh tribe, the sack of Mecca, forced conversions on pain of death everywhere Islam went... it just has a lot of bad examples as well. BUT it has good to teach, too.

But just like kids should learn the bad points, they should also learn the good ones. Else their world view is tilted, skewed, incomplete, and therefore useless and invalid. It's lop-sided to only learn one facet of a subject to the exclusion of the rest of it, whether a positive or a negative side of the subject. Both lead to a skewed view.

All things in balance - and blind rejection of religion altogether is a bit one-sided, and lacks balance, every bit as much as blind acceptance of it does, in my opinion. Both stances are rooted in a type of "faith" rather than objective fact and education.

.