Why I don't think children should be taught religion at school

[OfDeath]

A lot of reality is as yet unexplained. However, there is no reason to fill gaps in the understanding of our universe with nonsensical and baseless non-explanations such as "its because god did it". Even worse to say; it's because god did it but only the god of Muslims or of Christians or of Hindus etc.

There are entire schools who teach children religious non-explanations as if they are real alternatives to proven facts like evolution. Even worse than schools, there are countries which have banned the proven scientific explanation of how life has progressed from it's first self replicating instance on earth. Saudi Arabia is one country which has banned children from learning the scientific theory of evolution. In Saudi Arabia, only the 12th grade advanced biology course mentions evolution, where in textbooks it is introduced as a fallacious and blasphemous theory, using the following introduction to the topic: “Nevertheless in the West appeared what is called "the theory of evolution’’ which was derived by the Englishman Charles Darwin, who denied Allah’s creation of humanity, saying that all living things and humans are from a single origin. We do not need to pursue such a theory because we have in the Book of Allah the final say regarding the origin of life, that all living things are Allah’s creation” They are essentially saying "god did it" and then give no explanation for how and they don't allow it to be questioned. In Saudi Arabia, it is also illegal to own a copy of "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, a famous scientist who has written many books demonstrating the irrefutable proof behind the theory evolution in layman's terms. It's even illegal just to be atheist or to renounce Islam there. Proven science is also illegal in the Sudan and even the United States has tried to resist the facts. One state I know of has banned the use of the word "evolution" and replaced it with "gradual change". Why? due to sensitivity regarding their mythology. No other reason.

This denial of facts and indoctrination of children in baseless non-explanations which may not be challenged causes a pernicious state of mind among the indoctrinated where they may become physically violent in trying to defend their unfounded beliefs or even in attempting to please the god they believe exists. They carry this attitude into adulthood and in the worst case scenarios end up causing the deaths of others in the name of their religion and it all stems from the fact that they are taught these benighted fairy tales from a young age and brought up to self identify with them to the point that any challenge to their beliefs is taken as a challenge to themselves.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/06/religious-children-less-altruistic-secular-kids-study

Even here on girls ask guys I encounter victims of parochial indoctrination on a daily basis.These people often try to use arguments which point out gaps in current scientific knowledge as if that is some sort of evidence that "god did it". Or they play mystery cards like "how do you even know you don't exist?" They think existential philosophy over whether or not our senses can truly perceive reality is some kind of proof that god must exist! Anyone can tell that one does not correlate the other. Other common points are "just because you can't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist" and "You can't disprove what you can't prove" and they will use examples like wind being invisible and nobody being able to disprove the nulls of mythology. Where these people fail is on the fact that no proof of somethings' nonexistence isn't a reason to believe it exists! I couldn't disprove Little Red Riding Hood any more than the Bible but not many people would defend it as truth! This is where science and religion differ. So before people chime in with complaints like "science is faith based too" and "science has been proven wrong before" I need to point out that science is malleable in a way religion is not and faith based on imagined myths and faith in scientific results aren't the same. The bible says Adam and Eve were the first people and that god made Adam out of dust and that Eve was made out of one of Adam's ribs. Science disputes this and it does it with factual argument based on evidence. Religion says no because god said so - even though they never even heard god say it.

Children should be taught scientific facts at school and not mythology. They should also be taught how to recognise the difference between fact and mythology. If they want to learn about mythology, it should be done somewhere else and they should be allowed to question it.

Why SHOULD it be that way? Because the alternative is a lie.

[PBandJ_Nerd]

I personally think that with so many options today to learn about religion that I don't understand why we need religion schools (both public and private) as an education system. I only understood what church and religion schools educated people on after one of my sisters told me a bit about her boyfriend and what he was taught. For me, hearing some of it to me just sounded bizarre. Like for example, when they explained "sexual health" of a woman they said when she menstruated she was a "dirty old shoe" without any explanation of what periods really were and why they had them. Other stories I hear are from people on youtube, such as the one purity card thing.

[Mehzmeh]

As a black atheist. I agree with this post. Religion is for people who are scared to stand on their own. And people who are fucking blind ti see there is no god.

[PaganWarrior]

You can't be 100% there is no higher power since you've not died and experienced what comes after. You are like religion... You're so certain on what you belief and don't believe. You're alike in different corners of the fighting ring we call earth.

I, on the other hand aren't religious, but I'm open to the possibility of there Maybe something after all of this.

Couldn't have popped out of thin air for nothing.

[PaganWarrior]

Sorry, my typing is shit. I'm on my phone.

[OfDeath]

@PaganWarrior well you are experiencing reality right now aren't you? That isn't nothing.

[Mehzmeh]

Once you die. You die. There is no other side. It's all propaganda to keep people enslaved. Aka, to make people be sheep and obey.

No way in this round world that a "god" would let its creation be destroyed. Just saying

[PaganWarrior]

If you say so.

[Mehzmeh]

@PaganWarrior I, get the typing on the phone thing. I have big fat fingers. Lol

[PaganWarrior]

Lol yeah, it's a pain in the ass. Makes me look dumb :(

[Mehzmeh]

Yeah, trust me I, know. Lol

[PaganWarrior]

Sorry, my reply before was a bit bleh. I don't mind you and others being atheist, but when I see people like, "God isn't real" and religious people saying, "God is real" just as bad as each other.

There is something.. We just don't know what it is yet until we die.

I can go into the whole why I think that there is something, but it's pointless. I can sit here and type until my fingers drop of of many reasons why, and would any of you believe me? No. So I've accepted that people do as they wish. And as long as you're kind and help others etc, then it does not matter who you believe, or not.

[winterfox10]

Fuck it, I'm just going to ask it: why do you feel that that the "black" part of you being an atheist is important? Do you feel that being black makes you less likely to have a good afterlife or something?

[Mehzmeh]

I truly understand. I usually try not to get in to debates about religion. But I, do get in debates about education. I don't agree religion should be taught in schools. But I also think there should an option. And leave it to the student. Not the parents. And not until they are like 13.

Also, fyi I like your lagatha avatar. Lol

[PaganWarrior]

Lol thanks xD she is beautiful and that character of hers is amazing. Love lagertha.

[Mehzmeh]

No, because people instantly think because I, am black I, am religious. Yes I, grew up like that. But life opened my eyes. Lol

[OfDeath]

One of my favourite nonreligious scientists is black.

[Mehzmeh]

Yeah, she was the reason I, watched Vikings. I love the way she carry herself. And she has that walk!!! Wow!!! And, that she knows marital arts makes, her even more amazing.

[PaganWarrior]

@OfDeath: sorry, missed what you said. That isn't what I'm getting at. We can not come from nothing since power needs to create life, not some random explosion or big giant rock.

[PaganWarrior]

@Mehzmeh agreed xD

[OfDeath]

@PaganWarrior I'm not saying we did or didn't. When I speak of evolution, I refer to evolution on earth. Science hasn't advanced to the point of explaining how the hot big bang happened. It's not as if they aren't working on it though, and there are a few pretty good hypothesis so far.

[PaganWarrior]

@OfDeath they can't work on it, though. To do that, wouldn't they need to be around before the ancient times? Before humanity even began to exist? They'll just make shit up, sound all clever and people will believe them because it's science. The human beings who can't get shit wrong as they're so clever and educated lol.

[OfDeath]

@PaganWarrior If they didn't get anything wrong, they wouldn't be doing science. Science is about testing. It's way more complicated than they could only know if they were there. There are many ways they can probe into the conditions which existed in the distant past. I'm not a physicist or something though so I can't do that kind of science justice by trying to explain even my understanding of it to you.

[PaganWarrior]

@OfDeath Fair point, but I honestly think those who are above everyone else like the government etc, keep us all in the dark about way too many things, and we'll believe them because it's what we are taught, it's what we have grown up to know. We are brainwashed.

[OfDeath]

@PaganWarrior A lot of discoveries have been made due to those conditions though. Just like living organisms, a market needs pressure to improve and evolve and so does science. If the shady governments weren't trying to do unethical shit, we would still be riding around on horses and dying of syphilis. The Chinese used gun powder just to set off fireworks for centuries before they ever thought of using it to fire a bullet and when they did it was because it was them being shot at. Now the Chinese have Nuclear weapons and some of the most advanced computer technology in the world.

[Mehzmeh]

I step away and I, miss a awesome conversation. Lol

[PaganWarrior]

@OhDeath I wouldn't mind the horses... I love those animals xD but yeah I see what your saying. I just know that we are all honestly being lied to. And I won't be like those people who scream, "wake up" because at the end of the day, we do what we want long as we aren't murdering or harming others.

[PaganWarrior]

@Mejzmeh lol sorry xD feel free to join in.

[OfDeath]

@PaganWarrior we do want we want for now. However, ironically we are entering into the next phase of our evolution which won't be evolution at all. It will be intelligent design - by our own hand and then the line between biological and artificial intelligence will start to blur until a new type of people will control us. But that's a while off now so don't worry about it. I do think all of us here now, are one of the last generations of true homo sapiens though.

[PaganWarrior]

@OfDeath more than likely. Its sad to see us allow ourselves to be controlled, though. The world would be so much better and easier if we just stood with other no matter our financial background, colour, or Ethnicity. Just to be there to help when needed, and live life until we can't anymore.

[Vencam]

@PaganWarrior I can't help but step in when reading you say "they need to be around before ancient times" to know what happened. As an astrophysics enthusiast (and I underline enthusiast, I'm no expert) there is an bit of information I think can help you understand how scientists can almost quite literally "look back in time"
As I think we all know, light has a finite speed and distances in space are so massive that light can take a long time to travel between space bodies. Minutes in the Solar System, years to the closest stars, thousand or million of years from the closest galaxies and so on.
So, for instance, when you look at a galaxy that is 1000 light years away, you're looking at the light it emitted 1000 years ago and is only NOW reaching you. Kind of like "looking in the past"! So if you find and look at objects that are BILLIONS of light years away, you can actually see parts of the universe in their state not that long after the Big Bang
This of course is not enough to be sure of what happened even BEFORE what you are looking at jn that moment, but it still helps you understand endlessly more then just looking at how our universe is now, tens of billions of years after the Bang, and try to trace things back from now.
I hope this is not a tedious explanation, I tend to fanboy about this sort of stuff a bit 😅

[PaganWarrior]

@Vencam Thank you lol... Its sounds amazing, but it's still very Confusing. So say scientists do work out how the world began, they can't exactly pinpoint what made this explosion happen, right? Maybe God or Gods set it in motion, but the rest was down to evolution and us, maybe? I just, with personal experiences with things, I feel that we aren't just here to live, love, hate, etc to just die in the end surely. Something powerful needs to create life. I hope lol.

[Vencam]

I'm not much into philosophy, so all I can say about the second part of what you just say is: it could be; personally I just think we're a product of evolution, but the meaning we give to our life is for ourselves to decide
But about the first part pretty much yes its as you said: up to now there is certainty that SOME SORT of massive explosion took place (we can still see the objects in the universe slowly "expanding" from the center of the explosion up to this day) but anything about how the explosion came to be or anything prior is little more then hypothesis, so any assumption is as valid I guess ^^
If you're confused about what I said but still interested, I would be happy to explain any unclear detail, as far as my knowledge permits it ^^

[OfDeath]

@PaganWarrior as we discover more about what we don't know much of, such as quantum particles, we discover different questions. The more questions been answer, the more knowledge we have which we can incorporate into models we make. As computer power increases, we can make more accurate and detailed models. When we find a model which behaves in such a way which spurs a hot big bang from essentially nothing, we then search for real life particles which that model needs. If we find those particles or other pieces of information needed, it can confirm a hypothesis. That's basically how we might discover our earliest origins.

[PaganWarrior]

Science really is a lot to take in lol.. but thank you all of you for trying to explain it all for me. I'm glad we didn't argue about who's right, or wrong. We listened to each other, so thank you.

[zeitgeist057]

@PaganWarrior responding to "some power must create life"... I am not an expert scientist but learning all the time and I would say that I disagree there needs to be some kind of mystical power for life to happen. I am actually in a simple Microbiology college course now and learning about the most basic elements of life. How atoms come together to form molecules, then molecules come together to form organelles, which form cells, which form tissues, to organs, to organisms, to species.
Seeing this progression shows me that there is no need for a "miracle" event to occur. Naturally occurring chemical reactions take place which, step-by-step, account for the formulation of organisms from the basic building blocks of atomic particles.

As for "power", there would be tremendous power in a "Big Bang", of which there is significant evidence gathered throughout the years and analyzed. The expansion of the universe faster than we can track. My theory is that eventually the process will reverse, everything comes back to center, collapses on itself until the pressure is so great another "Big Bang" event flings that unfathomably large mass back out in every direction, and it all starts over again.

[zeitgeist057]

@PaganWarrior re: "... You can't be 100% there is no higher power.." I agree atheists are another religious group, whose belief is "no god". It's not knowledge, but belief, with one less deity than a monotheism.

[Gerdchen]

I think children should be taught religion at school. But not be missionized.
They should be taught about which religions there are, what they teach and so on. Just like history or geography.
They also should be told why religion was important in ancient times (like giving rules to the mostly uneducated people without having to explain them the reasons they wouldn't be able to understand).
Circumcision helps staying healthy in a region where there is not always enough water to wash regularly and thoroughly. Nowadays we should be able to wash ourselves and we also know about the importance to keep our genitals in order.
Eating pork can be dangerous in warm climate because pork becomes spoiled easily when it is kept in the warm. Nowadays we have refrigerators and freezers, so no need to abstain from eating pork anymore.
In ancient times an unmarried woman becoming pregnant was kind of a death sentence unless her family helped her out. So it was good to forbid premarital sex. Nowadays being a single mom is still hard but managable, so no more need to forbid or frown upon premarital sex.
Likewise if a man left his wife (and maybe kids), they would have a very hard time to survive. Therefore forbidding divorce was kind of a safety net for women. Nowadays this is no longer needed as we, as modern communities, have alimony and child support regulations, so it's no longer necessary to ostracize divorce. Nowadays the anti-divorce rules of the religions are rather used to oppress women than to keep them safe as it had been meant in the beginning.
So yes, teach religion but not missionize children.

[OfDeath]

Some of those points could be disputed but I don't disagree with the general point you're making about religion being taught ABOUT in history classes. The Bible could be taught as English literature too since many of our common expressions actually come from the Bible. I just don't think it should be taught as if it is not known to be mythology and certainly not taught as an alternative to science.

[Gerdchen]

" I just don't think it should be taught as if it is not known to be mythology and certainly not taught as an alternative to science."
I fully second that.

[Lionman95]

reality is just your point of view or the world you live. Being a Christian doesn´t mean you deny facts. It doesn´t mean that you have to believe in a flat earth or something like that. How do you that wind exists if it is unvisible? You can see the reaction of trees bending but you can´t see wind. Have you ever seen air? We know it´s there but we can´t see it. If you look around in your room I bet there are least 3 other voices in the room that you can if switch on a radio. There are things nobody has seen yet and still we assume it´s like common sense or conscience. How do you something Richard Dawkins tells you is true? He could lie to you as well. You just find his arguments more trust worthy. We live in a world where everybody has his or her opinion. We want to share it and tell it to people. You say people just get indoctrinated in religious households, but how do you know? Indoctrination could be also forbidding children and people to talk about religion, about life or something else just because you want to save them from possible hurt. Watch for instance "Family Captain" he´s also indoctrinating his children in some kind. People say you can have morality without a deity which might be true, but I haven´t seen it yet in any atheistic country. The Bible has brought ideas for which you don´t need a God anymore such as a loving a person just for his or her being as she is. The idea that a person should have a dignity is original biblical idea as far as I know you can´t find that in any other Ancient culture. There are copies of a scripture from the Bible than from other Ancient authors like Plato, Aristotles or Cicero.

[OfDeath]

Wind and air are not technically invisible. They are only invisible to the our eyes which are only able to see part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Air and wind are detectable in more ways than looking at trees bending. You see, in science, we have tools which allow us to detect and see things we cannot see with our eyes. Things which are physically there. Radio waves are also not invisible. Radio waves are a type of light and those waves are physical, measurable and detectable. So measurable and detectable that we can control it to such an extent that we can have radio stations on different frequencies of it. I know Richard Dawkins isn't lying because his claims are testable. I can physically test his claims or I can see actual evidence of it in the real world. He is a scientist who doesn't claim imaginary fairies exist. I cannot test for imaginary fairies. Morality does not come from the Bible and it is obvious that secular countries have more rational societies than theocratic countries. There are no stonings or beheadings for breaking imaginary rules that people made up that they think an imaginary entity which they also made up would want. Morality is an epiphenomenon on human evolution. We needed to have morals and treat people with dignity and respect in order the function in large groups. We have certainly improved our moral compass since the bible. If someone lived their life literally on the word of the bible, they would be a horrible person by today's standards.

[Lionman95]

You mean societies like China, Communist Russia or Cuba are better societies. Morality isn't a part of evolution because it stops the evolving and power of the strong to succeed. Would you say that there is Evil in the world.

[OfDeath]

China is a communist country. They claim to be atheist but they actually follow communism as if it is a religion. They don't have freedom of thought at all. This is a common claim religious people make. Atheism is not the reason China is bad. The reason is their oppressive, autocratic government. Morality is a different kind of evolution. It did evolve in a genetic way at first but it came to a point where it started to evolve in a memetic way. It has evolved since our hunter-gatherer past and since Roman times and even since the 1960s. You yourself even with your religious beliefs would be appalled at some of the things your Christian ancestors considered to be moral.
I think evil exists in the same memetic type of way and what we think of as evil changes with the generations. There are things which anyone should consider evil or unethical such as making someone suffer without justification. You don't need any type of religious scripture to understand that and it's because religion holds no monopoly on morality and did not invent it.

[Lionman95]

I know what Christian have done and are doing that is bad. Because as a Christian, even today people excuse there wrong doing with " it´s God will that I do so", look for instance at all those TV preachers owning so much money. I must admit I started the conversation wrong because I don´t want to argue or attack in your world view. I consider theocratic countries also as bad. The point I actually wanted to make, you can people about religion without indoctrinating them. Because there are some countries in Europe such as Germany where I´m from you can choose Religion or ethics, which is more like philosophy or morality. You need to take one of them, but you can choose which one.

[WadeDanielSmith2]

Childrne should not be taught "anti-relgion" either.

they should be taught a Logic class and a Moral Philosophy class, and they should be shown the concept of the "Greatest Conceivable Being" and they shold be shown the Cosmological Argument and the Moral Argument and the Ontological Argument.

Thos are not "reigious" concepts, they are Philosophical concepts based on Objective Reason.

They have a RIGHT to know both sides of the Creation vs Random crap argument, and forced Atheism is just as bad as any false religion. This is why the Democratic party in the United States is turning more and more atheist, and supports Abortion up to the due date now. Joe Biden claims to be a Catholic, but Orthodox Christianity has opposed abortion for the past 2000 years, while Biden supports abortion through the due date now, just like hilary clinton.

Children should be taught to the value of human life, including the unborn child; Othewise our civilization is no differen tthan the NAZI party in Germany. During the Nuremberg Trials, one of the crimes the NAZIs were executed for was INfanticide, and we have killed more unborn babies in the United states than 2.5 times as many as all the victims of the Nazi's in WWII COMBINED, and to be clear the NAZIs killed 50 milliion peoiple all together in WWII, but the United States has killed more like 120 million unborn babies since Roe v Wade. Why? Because three entire generations have been taught WRONG moral philosophy since then.

[OfDeath]

Not teaching creation myths as science is not teaching atheism. If they want to learn about mythology, it's there in history class. If they want to believe mythology, they can go to church. Nobody is stopping them.
Not teaching creation myths also doesn't correlate to ignoring the value of human life. Morals didn't come from religion. The nazi comparison is completely misguided. Nazism was an ideology just like a religion. Both are bad when enforced.

[WadeDanielSmith2]

Re-read what I said. I never said anyone should be taught "Mythology" nor any false religious concept.

I said they should be taught the Philosophical argument for a "Greatest Conceivable Being", that's not religion, that is pure Logic.

[OfDeath]

That isn't logic. I can point out areas where it falls down. One would be that it is a top down explanation of reality whereas everything ever observed has been bottom up. Another example is that it isn't the greatest conceivable being anyway. In quite a childish manner, the argument for that is "infinity plus one" just because it is a logic break in itself doesn't mean it isn't conceivable. Another example of that would be another god that God couldn't know existed and so on and so on forever. The strongest one is that God is an illogical argument when its own existence nullifies it's necessity. If you went by pure philosophy and never looked for real evidence, that is basically the god argument buried since it applies to any situation you can imagine putting god in.
God is a fictional character from religion. There is nothing in reality to suggest it's existence so you wouldn't assume it. You would do the opposite and reject it just like you would reject invisible fairies.

[ak3096]

I agree with your statement that religion should not be taught in school and it should be the parents job to impart that knowledge.
In the first paragraph, you included Christians, muslims and Hindus into the same category.
Christians and muslims are both Abrahmic religions which defies the theory of evolution whereas Hindus believe in evolution from the very beginning.

I think that as the science is evolving the religion is not. Some practices that were necessary 1000 years ago doesn't need to exist in 21st century. I believe the texts in the books should be read with a deeper meaning and also been seen with lens of science.

A person shouldn't be rigid in his thinking as no one thought before Edison that a light bulb could be thing. Even Edison didn't have any idea that AC current can exist, he was really stubborn on the concept of DC current.

I studied in a school where I was taught about the culture and history of my country.

The parents should have an open mind (most important) to accept what is good and what is bad in their religion because they are the one who pass it on to the next generation.

Religion gives you morality. Science doesn't.

I think
Islam: Autocratic
Christianity: Semi democratic
Hinduism: Democratic

[OfDeath]

Religion doesn't always give you morality. Philosophy can do much better than religion when it comes to morality and science can hypothesize how morality began.

[Mishan97]

I agree. I would say I’m spiritual not religious, but in my opinion religion is a personal journey which requires introspection. Teaching religion to kids who are too young to think critically and philosophically is nothing short of brainwashing. Parents can choose to teach religion at home if it is important to them but science should be taught at school regardless because it is essential to a well rounded education. Religion should be taught in a historical context. For example, it should be taught but in the framework to how it has affected history; the crusades, Islamic empires, Christian reformation, etc. These are all influential historical events which we must learn about. But like you said, biblical stories shouldn’t be taught as if they are historical fact. Nor should Jewish, Islamic, hindu, etc stories be taught as historical fact either. It’s up to the learners discretion on whether or not they choose to believe in these things and should not be forced to believe them.

[OfDeath]

Yes this is the point I'm making. I may have left out that religion is extremely relevant in history class and even in English literature but I had meant to include that. I should probably update it.

[jshm2]

You've used a lot of words to say nothing, kid.

Religion (regardless of how you spin it) is something 80% of the world follows, and is an integral part of many cultures.

Therefore, even if you think it is a second language being taught that you will never use, the school has a duty to prepare the child for engaging with it, and people. who do.

The "lie" is what dimwits like you are believing, that it's something that can be ignored and it will will disappear. It's not some half baked theory, kid.

[OfDeath]

I should point out that I'm not against teaching about religion in history class. It has no place in the science classroom though. Teaching creation myths in the science classroom is no different than teaching an episode of Xena warrior princess as fact.

[Syrian_survivor]

I'm Muslim and I'm pretty devout but I kinda agree, nobody likes religious studies in our schools, they're tedious, pointless, and only do more harm than good.

I remember in my senior year I was about to say blasphemic shit just because religious studies was such a time-wasting subject and I could've studied other important subjects like math or science instead, I hated every part of it and none of it was any helpful to anyone.

I don't think such subjects should be completely removed, but I think they require a much different approach.

[Syrian_survivor]

And about the origin of life thing, it really doesn't matter, nobody can confirm what happened millions of years ago.

Even if we agree that all humans came from one creature, where did that creature come from? How did it even exist? Where did it exist and how did the place he existed in existed in the first place? 🤣

This is why I think it's just pointless to dive into it.

[OfDeath]

Even if none of those questions could be answered (and part of some of those questions are being answered by current science) you definitely wouldn't just assume "god did it".

[Syrian_survivor]

You definitely wouldn't assume science or logic did it either
Or aliens
Or anything else
Until we have actual evidence and proof of it all that answer all our questions

It's a huge headache

[OfDeath]

Except obviously for science which can and has been proven beyond doubt. Things like evolution.

[Syrian_survivor]

Evolution is proven of course, but how far does it go? Where did it start from? How was the concept of evolution itself even concieved or started?

Science has some answers but it doesn't have all of them, religion doesn't either, but it gives a hint as to how it all started and who created it, some people choose to believe it, some people don't, neither side is right and neither side is stupid for having that belief, because facts aren't there to argue about, yet at least.

[OfDeath]

Religion doesn't give a hint at anything. For a hint you need some kind of actual reason to think it's plausible. Nothing observed in reality suggests religious creation stories are plausible. Evolution is proven. What isn't exactly proven is abiogenesis but it has reasons to suggest it is plausible such as known chemical combinations which produce protocells. That's WAY more than what religion provides and they are discovering more about it all the time.

[Syrian_survivor]

I'm talking about the origin of everything and how it all started from scratch, that's what religion hints about, not evolution or something scientific and such, it doesn't go there I think.

I'm a man of science and yes I am kinda caught up on what you're talking about, it is intruiging and very interesting, I'd love to see how far science can go and if they can find a logical way to explain how the universe was even created, backed up by facts and evidence.
But until then, I'll stick with what my religion tells me about that, some people choose to be atheists and believe nothing at all, some others are scientists and are actively working to find out more and seek answers, some others are conspiracy theorists making up stories as to how it all started, and honestly none of those people are in the wrong, it's a wild west when it comes to that cuz there's no kind of basis to stand on.

[OfDeath]

What makes you think camel herders from over 2000 years ago would know how the universe started? Religion hints at nothing. These religious stories are nothing other than mythology. It's no different from believing in leprechauns or hobgoblins or something.

[Syrian_survivor]

You don't have to agree with this, but please do respect it like I respect your beliefs.

I'm a Muslim by choice, and although I don't agree with some points and think they're extreme, it fit the most with my personal beliefs about how things should be, getting deeper into it I found out that my religion actually predicted so much of what's happening today so accurately.
Ignoring all the hate my religion gets from literally everywhere and having a deeper unbiased look at it makes me have faith in it, and with most things in it almost aligning with my beliefs, I will also believe how it described the start of everything.

[OfDeath]

What did it predict?

[Syrian_survivor]

Here's a list
yaqeeninstitute.org/.../

Though not all of them are interesting or so important, some are too old and have undocumented events mentioned, so I'd recommend reading 1, 3, 5, 12, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28

Sorry if it's too long but you asked me haha
Feel free to read the others though, I just thought these ones were the most relevant, and I some of them I don't fully buy or believe, but some parts of them are interesting, accurate, and believable.

So have fun reading haha

[OfDeath]

I've seen that before. Most of these are coincidental,
obvious anyway, wishful thinking which came through, educated guessing or vaguely accurate but not really. None of them are anything which would require "divine" knowledge. Christians do this kind of thing too. I can see how it could be the sort of thing which would serve as a kind of confirmation for people who really want to believe it but when you actually scrutinise it, it isn't really anything special. When you take into account the sheer fallacy of some of the myths like Muhammad splitting the moon and flying on a winged horse and stuff and the fact that it never gives any hint of knowledge beyond that of 7th century understanding of science, it's still incredulous.

[Syrian_survivor]

When you compare it with any false predictions, yes, you can say someone kept guessing different things, some of them happened and some of them didn't, that does disqualify them as predictions and does categorize them as guesses or coincidences.

But here, it's all coming from one source, Islam, and no predictions it made proved to be false just yet, so you can see where I'm coming from.

And mythology aside, nobody can confirm if that happened or didn't happen, there's no present proof of them happening, so I don't focus on those, they don't serve anything and are just told stories or whatever, and they're not even meant to be scientific, they're called miracles for a reason.

And hey, if you look at Islam's rules, while they are very strict and extreme, they would make the perfect society in my opinion, but of course people are not perfect like points 12 and 22 said and they will inevitably stray, so to have such a set of rules that works so well until the inevitable flaws of humans strikes in sounds pretty impossible for a couple of nomads to make up in my opinion, you might not agree with Islamic rules being perfect for many reasons and I understand that, I used to think the same till I found and figured out reasonable explanations so feel free to ask.

[OfDeath]

Ok... Lots of those predictions have been proven false. There is a whole page dedicated to pointing them out. I obviously don't agree with islamic rules being perfect. To state that islamic laws are perfect is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. That is a seriously pernicious way of thinking. The list trivial of things not allowed in Islam is too long to try and list here and the way it treats women is nowhere near equal let alone perfect.

[AllieOops]

Do you have any clue that things started going down hill after religion/prayer was taken out of the schools and out of Christmas? The US has been blessed because it was a haven for the Jew and because the US supported Israel. If that stops God will withdraw his blessing and America, which is going downhill toward the bottom faster than greased lightning on a Slip & Slide with a tail wind. You think things can't get any worse? Just wait a bit and you will see that they can. The US was built on people who fled England to practice their religion with freedom. Now as it stands if you want to teach religion is school you have to cover every religion, not just Christianity so it's pretty much become a done and moot deal where you can't teach it. But that doesn't keep alternative life styles from being taught in some schools. I guess the devil is winning this battle.

[Tamera952]

Absolutely! And the founders of the United States felt the SAME WAY, and for the SAME REASONS. The separation of church from the secular business of running a government is essential to its success. There are 1,000 examples of the bad shit that happens when a theocracy runs the show. And as far as teaching in schools, It's so dangerous, essentially cultivating ignorance.

[PaganWarrior]

I agree... Let them decide after school if they want to believe in God or Gods. They shouldn't force it down us.

I went to a Christian school so r. e was bound to be a subject. But we should have still had the right to choose if we wanted to attend that damn class every week.

I was so bored out of mind when they went on and on about the bible, and sins.

[Bratsondanielle]

Religion should be illegal in any school in any form. I don't care. We don't teach boogeymen or tooth fairy either so y should we teach the invisible man above the cloud?

[OfDeath]

It is relevant to certain historical events but I feel the same sentiment.

[purplepoppy]

Religion should be taught as in how It has influenced history and even current politics but it shouldn't be sold as a valid alternative to science.

[Mishan97]

Completely agree!

[EmmaMary]

They seriously need to ban teaching this fucking religious crap once and for all.

[sensible27]

Although I do sort of agree with the god of gaps argument I don't really see anyone actually reading this here and changing their minds (or I would guess not) so sort of a dead effort I'd say.

[OfDeath]

10 people already PM'd me to say how this has changed their mind on religion.

[Cryptic-Game]

Why would children need to be taught that since they can learn it on their own?

Bill Nye even told Ken Ham that it is okay to teach religion but not in science classes.

Actually religion is taught in school. The religion of evolution is taught.

[OfDeath]

I did mean that it just shouldn't be taught in science class. When I wrote "if they want to learn mythology, they can do it somewhere else" or whatever but says, I haven't reread the take, I meant somewhere other than science class. That's why I pointed out the islamic example of mentioning the quran in biology class as if it trounces all else.
It should be taught about in history class but the distinction between the facts and mythology need to be made. For example, religion had a big influence on historical events but it doesn't mean the details of it are true. Some of the details need to be explained to show why different religions fought.
Evolution isn't a religion. Nobody performs evolutionist rituals, evolution is just a theory which after heavy scrutiny, has turned out to actually be true.

[Cryptic-Game]

You are only assuming that a certain religion is wrong is your reasoning that you don't want it taught. I'm not for religion either. I'm for spirituality.

What if that religion happened to be the truth? Then failure to teach it would be detrimental as we wouldn't be learning something that was an unknown fact. There may be many undiscovered facts.

Remember that DNA was one of them. DNA was an undiscovered fact. Even 1 day before we knew DNA existed, it still did. You act like things can only be facts once we are aware that it is a fact. Heaven and Hell may be undiscovered facts. We don't know yet and may never know. It doesn't mean something is fiction until we prove it to be a fact.

What if I played your game in reversal and said all things are facts until proven to be fiction? You'd find me insane. Yet, you get to assert that things are fiction until we prove they are fact.

Even Alex O'Connor of Cosmic Skeptic, a self claimed atheist' on YouTube said that the atheist who claims there is no God also has the burden of proof to meet their claim. His main goal is to critique religion and no to critique beliefs and not to prove no God exists.

[OfDeath]

What I'm doing is not assuming it is right. Alex O'Connor is an epistemological nihilist. He doesn't believe knowledge exists. He is also wrong. People who claim there isn't a god are doing it based on observation and not only observation with their eyes. God existing is already a claim. It is perfectly rational to hold the position that it doesn't exist until such time as verifiable evidence is produced showing it does. So the burden of proof solely rests with those making the claim of god. If someone tells you leprechauns exist, you wouldn't accept what they are saying as truth and you definitely wouldn't tell defenseless children they exist just because you can't prove they aren't real other than pointing out a leprechaun has never been detected in any way. The same goes for god. You don't just assume "god did it" when you don't yet have an answer for something. You would no sooner suggest "the great buffalo spirt" of Native American mythology did it.
Children need to be taught facts and the ability to be able to distinguish fact from fiction. It's true to say that the idea of God comes from human mythology and has no basis whatsoever in science.

[Cryptic-Game]

No. If you make the claim that God doesn't exist, you have the burden of prove to verify that it is the truth. If you can't disprove a negative like you tend to say a lot, then you don't get to accept that negative as it may not be true.

Who cares if he is a nihilist? It doesn't necessarily mean he is wrong. No. He thinks we can't be certain if knowledge exists. That's not same as not thinking knowledge exists.

I'm getting tired of your leprechauns and God analogy. The subject is God, not leprechauns. This is a wimpy move in a debate to use. You focus on the subject matter and not on other subject matter.

Any claim made is a position you must show to be correct. Otherwise, it is absurd to hold it. I can prove my claim that all knows God exists. You can't prove my claim to be wrong.

Also, not showing something to be wrong is not asserting the opposite is true. It only means you can't have knowledge it is true.

I don't use the God did it as a default. I show why all other potential solutions can't be true. You also can't rule God out unless you prove God can't be the answer. So the burden is just as much on you as it would be on me.

[Cryptic-Game]

You can't assume science is the only method in finding truth. Science can't prove love exists.

[OfDeath]

It's just a mystery card. If knowledge didn't exist, you wouldn't be able to use passwords or follow road rules (or religious laws). The leprechaun argument just demonstrates the ball park you are in when you talk about god. The ball park of imaginary things. What's wimpy is to claim god is somehow less imaginary than a leprechaun but have no proof of that assertion. They are equally imaginary. I'm not sure if they have equal reasons to be disbelieved. A leprechaun like creature may exist on another planet somewhere but one which lives at the end of a rainbow with a pot of gold is equally unlikely to exist as god and nobody seriously believes in them which is the point. Nobody should seriously believe in god either.
The burden of proof doesn't rest with the person pointing out that nobody has ever discovered any evidence for god. It rests with the person saying god exists. This brings the leprechaun argument back again. You can't prove leprechauns exist but you wouldn't stubbornly insist that they must until proven that they don't when you know you can't prove or disprove a null.
So far, science has actually been the only method which works to find truth.

[OfDeath]

Love actually does have a rational, scientific explanation. We can observe that a baby loves her mother and a mother loves her baby. If the baby didn't love her mother, it might be frightened, run away and die and of a mother didn't love her baby she might reject it or kill it. In each case where there is no love between a mother and her baby, death is more likely and genes are not passed on. So natural selection has selected love and all animals which have evolved to have to protect their young in order for them to survive have evolved to love. In this case (and this includes humans) we even know what love is. In a sexual context, it is Estrogen and testosterone, in both men and women. In Attraction which includes nurturing , it is driven by adrenaline, dopamine, and serotonin—the same chemicals that are released by exciting, novel experiences. That is the scientific proof of love.

[Cryptic-Game]

The burden of proof also rests on the person claiming God doesn't exist too.

I've already proven why God and leprechauns don't share equal potential imaginary status. Also, even if leprechauns did exist, they don't impact our lives but God existing would as it could potentially decide our afterlife.

[OfDeath]

Where there is no evidence, the onus to prove something only rests with the person making the positive claim. A lack of evidence for the positive claim validates a negative position. Leprechauns are imaginary and so is god. They share equal imaginary status because each one comes from human imagination equally. An imaginary wizard who might conjure up a storm which would rain on you is equally as imaginary as an imaginary fat guy who never leaves his house or interacts with anyone. The same goes for god and leprechauns and leprechauns could still kill you if they existed anyway thus impacting your life but that is besides the point.

[winterfox10]

Thankfully, most people are not being taught religious creation stories over science. I think most of that religious teaching should be elective learning.


Why do so many people think evolution and creationism need to be at odds?

[sensible27]

Because they are.

[winterfox10]

I would argue that it’s up to where you draw the line for the hypothetical deity’s involvement, but I’m sure that’s more conversation than is appropriate right now

[OfDeath]

Evolution is not how life started, it's about how life evolved. Abiogenesis is how life started on earth. It is pretty solid but not like evolution. They are still experimenting with different chemical combinations and working out the right ingredients. However, I can tell you that around this time last year, scientists at the Hebrew University in Israel (of all places) successfully triggered living protocells from nonliving materials under the conditions in which they believe life could have started on the early earth.

[winterfox10]

Really? I would love to read that article. Can you send it over to me?

[OfDeath]

www.sciencedaily.com/.../191104112437.htm

[winterfox10]

Thank you. The stuff I've read in the past has suggested that the conditions favorable to making the amino proteins bind together were unlikely to have happened on early Earth. I will give this a read.

[OddBeMe]

I think they should be taught all religions. Faith’s nemesis is knowledge.

[OfDeath]

That's a good point actually. In history class of course. Or maybe even a whole elective subject dedicated to mythology.

[OddBeMe]

Yes, learn Yahweh and Zeus at once and see how many believe in either.

[Mystery1010]

I think that kids should be taught about religion but not in a way where their forced to belive it but in a way where they learn about others religion and how to respect them since it is hurtful when someone says another's beliefs are stupid.
All kids should be taught science tho and since that's how we progress as a species.

[humanearth]

What if they are going to a Catholic or Lithuanian or some other religious school.

Religion was part of the learning staple.

I personally see nothing wrong with it.

[OfDeath]

Is Lithuanian a religion?

[humanearth]

Damn spell autocorrect

[humanearth]

I didn't even catch it

[OfDeath]

I know you meant Lutheran schools. But to answer your question, I don't think a school should have a religion. Schools should be for teaching the sciences, numeracy, geometry and literacy as well as physical education. The skills needed to function in society. If they want to learn mythology, there are history classes for that. If they want to literally believe mythology, there are churches.

[humanearth]

Religious schools base their while education system off of religion.

So when you go to a Catholic school you also taught the Catholic religion along with Reading, Writing, Math, Civics, and the rest.

[OfDeath]

Yeah that's wrong.

[humanearth]

How is it wrong. People have the right to teach their kids how they see fit.

And if they want religion to be taught. Then so be it.

Also religious colleges to. That's fine that's your against it. But let others have there choice

[oddwaffle]

You shouldn't teach kids stuff that aren't real.

If one school teaches Buddhism and the other teaches Christianity then at least one of them is wrong. You shouldn't teach kids that.