I chose "Optional comparitive religious studies with no focus" Although my school was Catholic they understood that they were attracting religious and non-religious people alike and thus decided to teach us about all religions on an equal basis. I spent as much time learning about Buddhism and Islam as I did about Christianity. The class was called "Kennis van het Geestelijk Leven" (Which translates litterally to "Knowledge of the Spiritual ways of Life" and probably best as "Comparative Religion") We would also discuss the influences of religion on people.
I chose "Optional comparitive religious studies with no focus" too SOme religious studies are good because it explains so much about history and human behaviour... I figure I want a social science perspectives on religious studies and it shouldn't be about instilling bible beliefs in anyone... Oh and I think you need to choose it rather than having it thrust in you face, I had compulsory scripture in my schools and I read a book cos I wasn't interested and only went because I had to.
I was homeschooled and we studied various religious perspectives, but focused mainly on Christianity.
grades 1-5: still-Soviet atheist education. Religion wasn't mentioned at all, except a few negative references (corrupt priests, ignorant shamans, etc.) grade 6: Orthodox Hebrew School. 180 degree turn from intense atheism to intense religious fundamentalism. We're issued standard science books but aren't allowed to read the part about dinosaurs. And we do gym classes in long skirts. grade 7: Conservative Hebrew school (WAY more relaxed). Religious classes are still mandatory, but we have an awesome teacher who adds his own (VERY raunchy) details to the Old Testament Stories. Brave man grades 8-12: public school, religion is limited to a few paragraphs in the "world cultures" class.
I'm not sure if I can answer the poll...my education is mixed between different school systems (British public, American private, international w/ a little american bias and international again with a more british bias- its impossible to be just international without swerving toward the majority enrolled) So British had Religious education though vague and focused christianity. We were taken to church for big celebrations (ie Easter, Christmas, end of year) and had a minister come and speak once a week (wednesdays if you care ) American baisically had nothing. They couldn't really and it wasn't essential as few of us had the same religion (there weren't actually many Americans in the school oddly enough) so we we learn't from one another. International/american was pretty much the same. There was no formal education you just learnt things by default...it may have been brushed upon in other subjects when it related. International/british - we have a class called ITOK (introduction to theory of knowledge) which went into some detail for a month or so and it comes up frequently although the subject isn't religion. It's more life and all that stuff in between, what we think of it and how we react to it, etc. So although religion isn't a main subject I do end up knowing a lot about the various ones simply because the schools I go to are so diverse. I'm not really sure if it comes under one of the poll headings or not
I also chose the optional unfocused one. At my school at the moment, we have a 40min religion class on the religion of our choice every fortnight. It's taught by church volunteers, and doesn't really teach any "comparitive" religion at all. They volunteer teachers give their students lollies. :| Those of us who do not wish to go to "scripture" are lumped in a number of classes (called "non-scripture". rather appropriately) with a bored teacher who would rather be in their staffroom drinking coffee and are told to get some work out and be quiet. Its very unfair. We aren't even allowed to do some discussion of our own because the teacher wants silence! Complete rubbish. For a supposedly secular school its pretty unfair towards the people who aren't religious.
I chose optional comparative religious studies with no focus. It probably fits my high school education best. I only had one course on religion which in my second year of high school. We talked about religion and ideology. There was no focus and honestly they didn't teach us much.
In primary school I don't remember any formal R.E., but we had assemblies which were basically C of E. At secondary school we had comparative religion, which I think was actually very good. For GCSE we were technically allowed to discuss any two religions, but our school chose for us to study Christianity and Islam. After all, in one lesson a week for two years, you can't really cover much more, can you? I loved the debates we had with my teacher. He drove us mad; he was a fundamentalist Christian and he was grossly prejudiced against everyone else. The craziest argument that sticks in my mind was when he said that humans have souls, but animals don't. Grrrrrrrrrrrr. But now I can't help wondering whether he said those things purely to spark debate. If so, he was quite talented!
Comarative religion for us, all the way through secondary school. The focus wasn't mandatory, but clearly, living in the north east of Scotland, we were (to the best of my knowledge) all from a Christian background (even if lapsed in many cases).
You didn't have a "Raised in a cult, no secular shooling, only religious studies" option, if you did, I would have chose that one.
I say none at all. Despite that, my school wasn't the most secular .. at least in the minds of the teachers.
I'm not sure if this counts as Sunday School or if Sacharrissa left it out, but I grew up in a Jewish neighborhood, and most of the Jewish children I knew went to a public school where religious subjects were not allowed to be taught, and then after school would spend a few hours in Hebrew School where they would learn about Judaism and the Hebrew language. (I was the exception that I never went to Hebrew school). In the younger grades, we were taught all the different stories of creation (Adam and Eve, turtles on top of turtles, etc.) culminating in a simplified version of evolution. We were never taught that you had to pick one version over the other. We were taught that there might be a theological version of evolution; that you could reconcile the story of creation in Genesis and the idea of one species evolving into another if you think of the "days" in Genesis as referring to long periods of time in Earth's geological history. In the older grades, when we had a more focused science education, then we just studied evolution in a more detailed way. I grew up where it was illegal to teach about religion in a public school, and this rule was enforced very seriously, and I feel a bit uncomfortable, if Maljonic and I have children, about their having to take religious classes, especially since being half-Jewish they will be in a minority, there being hardly any other Jews in York.
I went to Catholic scool from 1 to 8 grades. I really believed everything I was taught until the 6th grade. When I started to read outside of school I realized there was a whole world besides the one I knew. When the terrible hypocrisy of religion became so apparent I realized if I want to find God I would have to search for myself. Needless to say I am still looking. I think the closest I'v come is in the smile of a child or the kind act of a stranger. Hermia, you can tell your teacher for me Animals have souls. It humans I doubt.
Mandatory Bible (or equivalent) studies in secular school Remember this is referring to the system more than forty years ago. From the age of eleven to about fifteen we had compulsory "Divinity" classes once a week, which were given by one of the English grammar teachers - I suspect from his views on contraception that he may have been a Roman Catholic - and for the whole time in that school (up to eighteen) we had the regular morning assembly with a hymn and prayers. The Divinity lessons were purely Christian - no concessions to other faiths - it was simply taught as fact. Science lessons were also taught as fact if evolution came into it. Neither side actually derided the other - it was rather like two hostile cats kept as pets in a flat getting round the situation by each pretending the other did not exist. My personal view is that religion should only be taught in schools as [i:4a8c1dc981]comparitive[/i:4a8c1dc981] religion - basically "These are the different things that different people believe" leaving the students to make up their own minds - no religion should ever be taught as fact.
Mandatory classes in secular school. We started out with stories from the Old Testament in the third grade of elementary school and continued up till the year before graduation year. Everything was very heavily edited. For instance, we were taught Lot's story as "Sodoma and Gomorra were evil cities, only Lot and his family were good, God sent two angels to warn them, they left, but Lot's wife turned to salt" No mention of the attempted rape, child abuse and incest in the rest of the story. Maybe this is why I refuse to have my connection with the divine guided by organised religions. Everything in my religion was made to look fine and dandy, being very pious I looked further in and I was so disgusted by the revisionism that I had the uncontrollable urge to sacrifice to Zeus, just to be annoying.
[quote:4080fc26ce="Pixel"]My personal view is that religion should only be taught in schools as comparitive religion - basically "These are the different things that different people believe" leaving the students to make up their own minds - no religion should ever be taught as fact.[/quote:4080fc26ce] I seem to have had this discussion a lot recently. I agree with you - I say it's the difference between teaching [i:4080fc26ce]about[/i:4080fc26ce] religion, which I think schools should do, and teaching [i:4080fc26ce]religion[/i:4080fc26ce] which I think should be left to parents, churches etc.
[quote:189e91c72d="Saccharissa"]Mandatory classes in secular school. I had the uncontrollable urge to sacrifice to Zeus, just to be annoying.[/quote:189e91c72d] And Zeus goes: "WHOHOOO! First sacrifice in 2,000 years! I was getting hungry there..."
Mandatory Bible (or equivalent) studies in secular school In high school, to be specific. Stories taught fully, and uncut, rape and murder and all. Included studies of literary critics on who really wrote what, comparative notes to other forms of laws and customs in the region at that time, etc etc. Looking back,the class taught the bible as a sort of ancient history class, which was more or less okay, and it applied a sort of slash-and-burn method to kill anything which might even look remotely religious, which wasn't.
Comparitive religious studies with mandatory focus. All my schools were catholic schools. Religious studies were compulsary up until year eleven (16 years old). As we got older, the classes got more theological. The aim of the classes was to give us a religious perspective, not to force religion down our throats.
None at all. Here the religion and the state are (or at least they were up until now) very much divided, the remains of the former socializm. The closest we ever came to anything religious was when it was briefly mentioned in History, or a debate or two during our Sociolgy class. So basically, I have no knowledge of religion from my school years. There are 33 different religions and sects registered in Slovenia, but the most prominent one is Chatolicism, so most of the children I went to scool with attended sunday school. Luckily, my mother insisted that it was to be my choice, so they didn't baptize me, and I remain happily agnostic, as I more or less grew to despize the institution of the Church (I mean the Roman-Catholic one). They are trying to institute the teaching of religion back to schools, which has been a hot debate for over 10 years now. The exact type and content as well as the question of it being mandatory are still open to debate, and may well stay that way, as it seems at the moment. This does not, however apply to organized religion, I just intensly dislike the System part of it, if that makes sense to anyone.
I put 'only in church run schools'. I went to a Catholic school till fourth grade, by which point the religions I had heard of were:Christians (which I thought just meant the same as catholic), Judaism, and a vague 'pagan', which meant Greeks, Romans, etc. Not sure when I started to learn of the existence of more faiths, but it must have been during that time period too because my first friend in public school was Hindu, and I can recall being curious about her beliefs but not surprised that they existed. I know I didn't hear about it in class though. We did do some comparative religion in high school, but it was all in the context of world history; most of my education in that light has been from being nosey enough to ask all of my friends about their own faiths.
[quote:6b8a5783b3="Roisindubh"]We did do some comparative religion in high school, but it was all in the context of world history; most of my education in that light has been from being nosey enough to ask all of my friends about their own faiths.[/quote:6b8a5783b3] That probably means you are a lot more knowledgeable than most! Rather than swallowing what a school has told you, you've actually found out the truth from people with different experiences, as well as having a historical base for your knowledge!
I chose none at all, education and ones faith should be separate. That said mention of significant moments in history with comparison on religious motovation for the respective historical events is relevant to education. In primary school and secondary school I experienced very little religious focus in my classes. Aside from a small class in primary school which I took nothing from and discussions in various science courses in secondary school where people would construct impossible arguements about the power of god etc. I never really paid much attention to it. In my tertary studies I have knowledge that there is a chapel somewhere on campus, which I have avoided like most of the university societies on my way to the bar.
[quote:3812ec4720="Pepster"]I chose none at all, education and ones faith should be separate..[/quote:3812ec4720] I think you are saying here how you think it should be, which I don't think is the original poll question - I think that was about how our religious education actually was - how we think it should have been could be a different poll. Since in some countries we are now supposed to be multi-cultural, multi-ethnic etc. (that's excluding France who are doing their usual arrogant thing and assuming everyone who goes to live there will just become French, and Bible-Belt America) it would be a very good idea for comparitive religion to be a compulsory subject in all schools, just so that we can understand other peoples' feelings. I admit I haven't made much effort to remedy the lack of education due to the system when I was at school - I have got the Bible (both Testaments, so that covers two faiths) and the Koran on computer, but I have never looked for books for other faiths - are there holy texts for Buddhism, Shinto, Hindu, Sikh, etc.?
[quote:28e5338678="Pixel"]it would be a very good idea for comparitive religion to be a compulsory subject in all schools, just so that we can understand other peoples' feelings[/quote:28e5338678] Only if this would include learning about atheism, agnosticism, humanism, deism etc.
[quote:62ac7c70e5="Marcia"][quote:62ac7c70e5="Pixel"]it would be a very good idea for comparitive religion to be a compulsory subject in all schools, just so that we can understand other peoples' feelings[/quote:62ac7c70e5] Only if this would include learning about atheism, agnosticism, humanism, deism etc.[/quote:62ac7c70e5] Yes, but those are possibly less important in terms of understanding other people (and I'm an agnostic saying it) - the people who believe in a god (or gods - is this what you mean by "deism", Marcia?) tend to be the ones who have strong views which can be offended.
[quote:b8b741b987="Pixel"][quote:b8b741b987="Marcia"][quote:b8b741b987="Pixel"]it would be a very good idea for comparitive religion to be a compulsory subject in all schools, just so that we can understand other peoples' feelings[/quote:b8b741b987] Only if this would include learning about atheism, agnosticism, humanism, deism etc.[/quote:b8b741b987] Yes, but those are possibly less important in terms of understanding other people (and I'm an agnostic saying it) - the people who believe in a god (or gods - is this what you mean by "deism", Marcia?) tend to be the ones who have strong views which can be offended.[/quote:b8b741b987] I think what you believe, or don't believe, is always important. I've known Atheists who have enourmously strong views. Same for humanists, although they tend to go for "live and let live"...
[quote:e2c4655943="Tephlon"][quote:e2c4655943="Pixel"][quote:e2c4655943="Marcia"][quote:e2c4655943="Pixel"]it would be a very good idea for comparitive religion to be a compulsory subject in all schools, just so that we can understand other peoples' feelings[/quote:e2c4655943] Only if this would include learning about atheism, agnosticism, humanism, deism etc.[/quote:e2c4655943] Yes, but those are possibly less important in terms of understanding other people (and I'm an agnostic saying it) - the people who believe in a god (or gods - is this what you mean by "deism", Marcia?) tend to be the ones who have strong views which can be offended.[/quote:e2c4655943] I think what you believe, or don't believe, is always important. I've known Atheists who have enourmously strong views. Same for humanists, although they tend to go for "live and let live"... [/quote:e2c4655943] Atheists can have strong views, but they are not likely to be offended by religious views, they will just regard them as mistaken, misguided or simply foolish - agnostics (who can be defined as atheists without the courage of their convictions) are similar - I'm not sure how humanists differ from atheists/agnostics - but it is the people who have religious beliefs involving one or more gods/goddesses (let's keep the field really open) and therefore possibly religion-governed practices/restrictions who are most likely to be offended by other people who do not know the appropriate etiquette.
no religious education taught at any of my schools - which were state schools... just the usual non-denominational prayers at Easter & end of year assembleys. I can vaguely remember my primary school attempting to give us bible lessons but think that only lasted a couple of weeks (or maybe I only lasted a couple of weeks - I can distinctly remember being told off for reading during the lesson... a common fault of mine). Religion doesn't play a huge part in my family's life - my father was a lapsed, non-practising Catholic, my mother a Baptist with JW leanings; my eldest brother is a lip service Catholic (only in as much as it takes to get his kids into a catholic school), and my other brother a lip-service Anglican. My sister and I are Pagans... and thats what we are not what we do. Life is too damn short to start worrying over the after-life if there is one... time for that is once one is dead (and remains dead.... been there, done that, got the tee-shirt).
While religion was not officially part of the curriculum in any of the schools I attended we could take release time classes on Wednesday mornings. I don't know what the kids who didn't take those classes did, because I was pretty religious as a kid, and I always chose to walk to a church and enjoyed the Bible studies. I don't remember any comparative religion classes but some where along the way I learned that there are many religions, I think it was a pretty common thing for our teachers to let us express our views but we were taught why there is a separation of Church and State. We put on Christmas pageants and classrooms could have seasonal and holiday decorations, as long as they weren't too religious(lambs and eggs ok, lambs of God and crosses not ok, green shamrocks and leprechauns ok St. Patrick chasing away snakes not ok), but it seemed to always bring up discussions about what could be done and what couldn't be done, and I guess that was good. Pre-game ceremonies and graduation ceremonies would include a short prayer or two, but the ministers in town took turns saying the prayers, we sang Latin hymns in choir but the words were not translated for us. We also sang a few hymns in English and Christmas carols. I would guess a few people would have liked to have more religious emphasis for the kids in school, but just as many would have wanted less. I was never for public prayer in school, I even would have chosen not to say the pledge of allegience( it always included "under God" when I said it), but I prayed all the time privately. The Vietnam war was going on all through elementary and middle school and some of my teachers had been in country or had taught guys that hadn't come home and they didn't much like us to ignore the pledge, we could have freedom of speech when we were graduated. I have always had a love/hate thing towards organized religion, I love the beauty of the churches and the music, the fact that good decent people can give their lives to the service of God because they can have a salary provided by a church, but I hate the politics that come with groups of people. The hypocrisy is incredible, the ignorance is astounding and I just haven't found a church that would hold all my personal beliefs. I hope one day I'll find a church I could be comfortable with and whose people can be comfortable with me. One thing that the community I live in did give me was the proof that people who hold differing faiths can live in peace. There are probably twenty different varieties of churches in this area and I have never heard of any one kind attacking any other kind.
Deism is the religious view shared by Voltaire, Thomas Paine, and a good portion of the founding fathers of the US, including Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Quincy Adams, and Benjamin Franklin. The primary believe is that there is a god, but that he (or it) does not interfere with the material world on a personal level. It rejects the bible as a book of fables and myths.
Humanists believe that human beings can and should use science and reason to solve their problems, rather than rely on supernatural forces. They are often atheistic or agnostic, though it's not a requirement. An agnostic is not an atheist who lacks conviction. An agnostic is someone who understands that there are some questions that can't be answered. In terms of what should be taught in school, only teaching about beliefs that include the existence of a personal God is exclusionary, the same as only teaching about Catholicism is exclusionary.
All these beliefs deserve equal treatment. There is no justification for a focus on traditional religion. The level of offense you take depends on the person, not on the subject. I am agnostic and I am completely open to religion. I like to hear people talk about what and why they believe. My brother is an atheist and he's the opposite. He calls religious education poisonous and rebels against anything associated with the traditional faiths. I know he would be offended if atheism wasn't covered. A good example of why education needs to be flexible.
I feel that teaching comparitive religion has a dual purpose - showing all the options including atheism, agnosticism, humanism etc., allowing students to make their own minds up, but also to give an understanding of other beliefs to avoid inadvertantly giving offence.
[quote:4469fb5268="Pixel"][quote:4469fb5268="Pepster"]I chose none at all, education and ones faith should be separate..[/quote:4469fb5268] I think you are saying here how you think it should be, which I don't think is the original poll question - I think that was about how our religious education actually was - how we think it should have been could be a different poll. [/quote:4469fb5268] Read the rest of my post pixel. It satisfies both my opinion and my religious education.
[quote:353d30fbb8="Hermia"][quote:353d30fbb8="Roisindubh"]We did do some comparative religion in high school, but it was all in the context of world history; most of my education in that light has been from being nosey enough to ask all of my friends about their own faiths.[/quote:353d30fbb8] That probably means you are a lot more knowledgeable than most! Rather than swallowing what a school has told you, you've actually found out the truth from people with different experiences, as well as having a historical base for your knowledge![/quote:353d30fbb8] I don't know if I quite deserve the praise, Hermia. For many years, I basically did believe whatever I was taught in school or Religious education. Anything I disagreed with I kept to myself- only recently have I questioned my faith as a part of my identity. One thing I must say though, having had a religious education, I am very grateful for it for the understanding of some of the role faith plays in peoples' lives. My classmates who'd only been in public school completely ignored it as a factor in anything. For instance, studying Columbus and the conquistadores, or the Crusades- people like to forget that for some, the prospect of glory or money is not the only motivation to do great things-sometimes terrible ones.
[quote:36048d337c="Pepster"][quote:36048d337c="Pixel"][quote:36048d337c="Pepster"]I chose none at all, education and ones faith should be separate..[/quote:36048d337c] I think you are saying here how you think it should be, which I don't think is the original poll question - I think that was about how our religious education actually was - how we think it should have been could be a different poll. [/quote:36048d337c] Read the rest of my post pixel. It satisfies both my opinion and my religious education.[/quote:36048d337c] On re-reading, I can see that I may have misunderstood your first sentence in that post - were you saying that you chose not to have any religious education by not paying attention/avoiding the chapel? I originally read it that you were saying you had chosen the option "None at all" in the poll, which didn't seem to quite fit with the minimal level of attempted religious education you mentioned later in your post - or am I being too literal? .
[quote:4875356e7e="roisindubh211"][One thing I must say though, having had a religious education, I am very grateful for it for the understanding of some of the role faith plays in peoples' lives. My classmates who'd only been in public school completely ignored it as a factor in anything. For instance, studying Columbus and the conquistadores, or the Crusades- people like to forget that for some, the prospect of glory or money is not the only motivation to do great things-sometimes terrible ones.[/quote:4875356e7e] That kind of thing wasn't excluding from my secular education. For example, learning about the colonists who came to America seeking religious freedom, or learning about the Spanish Inquisition. These were considered part of history. By the way, in Brooklyn people also often equate the words Catholic and Christian.
[quote:47e4de8f39="Marcia"][quote:47e4de8f39="roisindubh211"][One thing I must say though, having had a religious education, I am very grateful for it for the understanding of some of the role faith plays in peoples' lives. My classmates who'd only been in public school completely ignored it as a factor in anything. For instance, studying Columbus and the conquistadores, or the Crusades- people like to forget that for some, the prospect of glory or money is not the only motivation to do great things-sometimes terrible ones.[/quote:47e4de8f39] That kind of thing wasn't excluding from my secular education. For example, learning about the colonists who came to America seeking religious freedom, or learning about the Spanish Inquisition. These were considered part of history. By the way, in Brooklyn people also often equate the words Catholic and Christian.[/quote:47e4de8f39] I think that what Roisin was saying is that, at that time, there were no other Christians besides Catholics in her belief. If you were a Christian, you were Catholic.
Incidentally. I've met some people who were surprised that Catholics consider themselves Christians. And, in Catholic school (elementary), I had religion classes and mandatory mass. In public school (late elementary-early middle) there was nothing but history classes. And at Girard (middle through high school graduation) no religion classes but a bi weekly chapel service (on Wednesdays) that wasn't technically Christian. Talked about God, but not Jesus. During winter time we sang a Hanukah song once.... THis reminds me, it's time to listen to Trans Siberian Orchestra again...
[quote:4587d92baf="Brad"]Incidentally. I've met some people who were surprised that Catholics consider themselves Christians.[/quote:4587d92baf] My partner once told me about someone he'd known at school who was of a non-Christian religion. He couldn't remember which religion, so I asked him to describe it to me. It turned out he was talking about a Catholic! I found that quite funny, but I can see why he thought that way.
[quote:b42e3a25e5="Pixel"]On re-reading, I can see that I may have misunderstood your first sentence in that post - were you saying that you chose not to have any religious education by not paying attention/avoiding the chapel? I originally read it that you were saying you had chosen the option "None at all" in the poll, which didn't seem to quite fit with the minimal level of attempted religious education you mentioned later in your post - or am I being too literal?[/quote:b42e3a25e5] You are being to literal, my religious education in organised education has been next to nothing*. It also fits my opinion, students are in school to learn not be faithed up. I need to put a correction in aswell, I did not pay attention to the fools who did there "If god is so powerful" arguements in highschool, I did pay attention to the primary school very limited religious education (I believe I got gold stars) I just took nothing from it. Further on avoiding the uni chapel, I also mention avoiding all other uni related societies (aside from the bar), I am at uni as a student first (research student now). *[i:b42e3a25e5] I have looked into various doomsday, war in heaven, inquisition, etc. in religious sources, mostly for thermic value.[/i:b42e3a25e5]
[quote:318514919d="Bradthewonderllama"][quote:318514919d="Marcia"][quote:318514919d="roisindubh211"][One thing I must say though, having had a religious education, I am very grateful for it for the understanding of some of the role faith plays in peoples' lives. My classmates who'd only been in public school completely ignored it as a factor in anything. For instance, studying Columbus and the conquistadores, or the Crusades- people like to forget that for some, the prospect of glory or money is not the only motivation to do great things-sometimes terrible ones.[/quote:318514919d] That kind of thing wasn't excluding from my secular education. For example, learning about the colonists who came to America seeking religious freedom, or learning about the Spanish Inquisition. These were considered part of history. By the way, in Brooklyn people also often equate the words Catholic and Christian.[/quote:318514919d] I think that what Roisin was saying is that, at that time, there were no other Christians besides Catholics in her belief. If you were a Christian, you were Catholic.[/quote:318514919d] Nope. I was just unaware of their existence- hadn't talked about it in class, though there were non-Catholic students in my school. I just assumed they belonged to the only other religion I'd ever heard of, Judaism. And the first time I met someone who was non- Catholic and Christian, she was also surprised. "You just said you were Catholic, why are you saying Christian now?" Two fairly ignorant ten year olds I guess. Its funny to look back on. I remember going home and asking my mom about it, who told me not to feel bad because when [i:318514919d]she[/i:318514919d] was my age and in Catholic school, she thought people were either "Catholics" or "publics". Also, on the motivations thing- it wasn't left out of the curriculum by any means, its just that I was the only student who seemed to take it seriously. Everyone else was of the opinion that religious motivation was purely a cover up for ulterior motives. Dunno what they thought of the Pilgrims; most just contented themselves with Puritan jokes. edited for a point I forgot before.
[quote:b9cc246ea1="roisindubh211"][quote:b9cc246ea1="Bradthewonderllama"][quote:b9cc246ea1="Marcia"][quote:b9cc246ea1="roisindubh211"][One thing I must say though, having had a religious education, I am very grateful for it for the understanding of some of the role faith plays in peoples' lives. My classmates who'd only been in public school completely ignored it as a factor in anything. For instance, studying Columbus and the conquistadores, or the Crusades- people like to forget that for some, the prospect of glory or money is not the only motivation to do great things-sometimes terrible ones.[/quote:b9cc246ea1] That kind of thing wasn't excluding from my secular education. For example, learning about the colonists who came to America seeking religious freedom, or learning about the Spanish Inquisition. These were considered part of history. By the way, in Brooklyn people also often equate the words Catholic and Christian.[/quote:b9cc246ea1] I think that what Roisin was saying is that, at that time, there were no other Christians besides Catholics in her belief. If you were a Christian, you were Catholic.[/quote:b9cc246ea1] Nope. I was just unaware of their existence- hadn't talked about it in class, though there were non-Catholic students in my school. I just assumed they belonged to the only other religion I'd ever heard of, Judaism. And the first time I met someone who was non- Catholic and Christian, she was also surprised. "You just said you were Catholic, why are you saying Christian now?" Two fairly ignorant ten year olds I guess. Its funny to look back on. I remember going home and asking my mom about it, who told me not to feel bad because when [i:b9cc246ea1]she[/i:b9cc246ea1] was my age and in Catholic school, she thought people were either "Catholics" or "publics". Also, on the motivations thing- it wasn't left out of the curriculum by any means, its just that I was the only student who seemed to take it seriously. Everyone else was of the opinion that religious motivation was purely a cover up for ulterior motives. Dunno what they thought of the Pilgrims; most just contented themselves with Puritan jokes. edited for a point I forgot before.[/quote:b9cc246ea1] Er, Exactly.
What do you mean by ' exactly' ? You make it sound like I believed everyone who was Christian was part of Catholicism, even if they belonged to a different Church. What I'm saying is that I didn't know there [i:6da5371690]were[/i:6da5371690] any other churches. It was ignorance, not a philosophy.
[quote:cd446fae09="Pepster"][quote:cd446fae09="Pixel"]On re-reading, I can see that I may have misunderstood your first sentence in that post - were you saying that you chose not to have any religious education by not paying attention/avoiding the chapel? I originally read it that you were saying you had chosen the option "None at all" in the poll, which didn't seem to quite fit with the minimal level of attempted religious education you mentioned later in your post - or am I being too literal?[/quote:cd446fae09] You are being to literal, my religious education in organised education has been next to nothing*. [/quote:cd446fae09] OK - it's just that I would not equate "None at all" with "Next to nothing" - as a programmer (especially one who was in banking software for the last seven years) and as a theatre lighting technician (where "blackout" can sometimes mean "enough light for the actors to get safely offstage and/or the stagehands to change the scenery") I am used to a little more precision. [quote:cd446fae09="Pepster"]It also fits my opinion, students are in school to learn not be faithed up.[/quote:cd446fae09] Here I agree with you - remember I mentioned earlier that when I was at school, we were taught Christianity as fact (admittedly 40+ years ago, but this was not a church school - it was a standard government run and funded grammar school) - this should not happen, but [i:cd446fae09]comparitive[/i:cd446fae09] religion being taught does mean that students who would otherwise be likely to only know about their parents' religious beliefs would learn about other choices - and that goes both ways - students from religious families could learn about atheism/agnosticism etc. (I'm not going to type the whole list each time), but also students from atheist/agnostic etc. families could learn about the god-oriented beliefs. [quote:cd446fae09="Pepster"]I need to put a correction in aswell, I did not pay attention to the fools who did there "If god is so powerful" arguements in highschool, [/quote:cd446fae09] Those arguments never lead anywhere anyway - you end up trying to use logic against dogma - so you made the right choice ignoring them. [quote:cd446fae09="Pepster"] I did pay attention to the primary school very limited religious education (I believe I got gold stars) I just took nothing from it. [/quote:cd446fae09] You were obviously very perceptive from an early age - you seem to have understood how to "work the system" while rejecting what amounts to brainwashing. [quote:cd446fae09="Pepster"] Further on avoiding the uni chapel, I also mention avoiding all other uni related societies (aside from the bar), I am at uni as a student first (research student now). [/quote:cd446fae09] But if you're not avoiding the bar (well I wouldn't either!) then you're not avoiding [i:cd446fae09]all[/i:cd446fae09] extracurricular activities, so avoiding the chapel is a particular decision, not a general one. [quote:cd446fae09="Pepster"] *[i:cd446fae09] I have looked into various doomsday, war in heaven, inquisition, etc. in religious sources, mostly for thermic value.[/i:cd446fae09][/quote:cd446fae09] I do the same from time to time - the Internet is a wonderful thing - it's amazing what you can find.
[quote:c53bda2c21="roisindubh211"]What do you mean by ' exactly' ? You make it sound like I believed everyone who was Christian was part of Catholicism, even if they belonged to a different Church. What I'm saying is that I didn't know there [i:c53bda2c21]were[/i:c53bda2c21] any other churches. It was ignorance, not a philosophy.[/quote:c53bda2c21] Then I must have misspoken. For I meant what you said. That there were no other Christians besides Catholics in your belief. Christian=Catholic.
[quote:83cdd96c05="roisindubh211"]Nope. I was just unaware of their existence- hadn't talked about it in class, though there were non-Catholic students in my school. I just assumed they belonged to the only other religion I'd ever heard of, Judaism. And the first time I met someone who was non- Catholic and Christian, she was also surprised. "You just said you were Catholic, why are you saying Christian now?" Two fairly ignorant ten year olds I guess. Its funny to look back on. I remember going home and asking my mom about it, who told me not to [/quote:83cdd96c05] My experience was similar. I think I may have read or heard the word Protestant some time, but everyone I knew was either Jewish or Catholic (or had one Jewish and one Catholic parent). So if you said you were Christian, I assumed you were Catholic. (There was a Lutheran church nearby, it said so on the sign, I have no idea who went to it. When I was younger, maybe I thought Lutheran was a type of Catholic?) I know adults who use the words Christian and Catholic interchangeably.
[quote:c166da7ae3="Pixel"][quote:c166da7ae3="Pepster"][quote:c166da7ae3="Pixel"]On re-reading, I can see that I may have misunderstood your first sentence in that post - were you saying that you chose not to have any religious education by not paying attention/avoiding the chapel? I originally read it that you were saying you had chosen the option "None at all" in the poll, which didn't seem to quite fit with the minimal level of attempted religious education you mentioned later in your post - or am I being too literal?[/quote:c166da7ae3] You are being to literal, my religious education in organised education has been next to nothing*. [/quote:c166da7ae3] OK - it's just that I would not equate "None at all" with "Next to nothing" - as a programmer (especially one who was in banking software for the last seven years) and as a theatre lighting technician (where "blackout" can sometimes mean "enough light for the actors to get safely offstage and/or the stagehands to change the scenery") I am used to a little more precision.[/quote:c166da7ae3] Pixel it was my education. if anyone I should know, now go be pedantic on someone else you horrible little man.
[quote:d64c6eb811="Marcia"][quote:d64c6eb811="roisindubh211"]Nope. I was just unaware of their existence- hadn't talked about it in class, though there were non-Catholic students in my school. I just assumed they belonged to the only other religion I'd ever heard of, Judaism. And the first time I met someone who was non- Catholic and Christian, she was also surprised. "You just said you were Catholic, why are you saying Christian now?" Two fairly ignorant ten year olds I guess. Its funny to look back on. I remember going home and asking my mom about it, who told me not to [/quote:d64c6eb811] My experience was similar. I think I may have read or heard the word Protestant some time, but everyone I knew was either Jewish or Catholic (or had one Jewish and one Catholic parent). So if you said you were Christian, I assumed you were Catholic. (There was a Lutheran church nearby, it said so on the sign, I have no idea who went to it. When I was younger, maybe I thought Lutheran was a type of Catholic?) I know adults who use the words Christian and Catholic interchangeably.[/quote:d64c6eb811] Yeah; I think the problem (at least for us confused little 'uns) is that you can be Christian but not Catholic, but not the other way round, so many protestants (especially in "Born Again" type churches) say 'Christian' to differentiate themselves from Catholicism; so peopel outside of either will assume they're completely different things... I've found many peopel have somewhat funny misconceptions about other faiths/denominations. Small children tend to have the most amusing ones though.
