Are you a christian? Are you muslim? No, what about jewish, buddhist, or hindu? Or are you another one of the countless religions that have consumed the earth since the dawn of time? How is your spirtuality expressed? I hope that most of you can answer these questions to some degree because spirtuality is part of the human life. Here's a different series of questions.
Can you name the four gospels? Can you name the four noble truths? Can you recall a name of scripture from the Hindu religion? Do you know why Muslims terrorist feel noble about what they are doing?
The answer of most, uh uh...well.
In America the majority of people are Christian. But if you are, how well do you really know your religion? Can you quote the bible in more than one reference, or name the first book of the bible? Maybe it is just me but it all seems a little hypocritical when the majority, not all, of americans claim to be christian but rarely know what being Christian means.
It is a sad day when one of the most religious nation on earth(90% of people in america say that they believe in a god of some kind or practice a non-god religion) can't answer simple religious questions. So that is the problem I am presenting, lack of religious knowledge about Adidam through Zen Buddhism. (Hint...that's every religion recognized by the United States of America) Now for a solution.
Do I think you need to know about every religion known to man. Nope. But our world is becoming more and more "flat" as Thomas Friedman says or Globalized for people who haven't heard of the book. Today what muslims are doing in Saudi Arabia effects Joe Blow in Kentucky. Did you know that the first five religions I mentioned were the top 5 in the world...could you have listed those five without help from me. Did you just scroll back up to look at the religions again....bet you did.
So what do I think needs to be done about America's religious illiteracy? Take it back to the schools. Not violating the separation of church and state for those on the far left. Electives offered to high schoolers about RELIGIOUS education. Not christian or muslim education. RELIGIOUS education. A class about the 5 main religions in the world. Analysis of each one, break down of the basics of those people's beliefs. Ask yourself if you had a class like this in high school. According to the Gallup poll only 9% of high schools offer ANY type of religious course...even those fundamentalist christians in the south don't teach in schools. But of course we can't just say here is a class teach it, it needs to be built with a strong base. The classes need to be taught by well educated teachers. Atheist or agnostics would probably best suited for the job becuase they would show no bias towards one religion over the other. I think that with a strong base and a couple of very dedicated people to attempt something like this it would be a large sucess.
What do you think? Does this sound like an interesting proposal? Let me know what you believe. Before you go, no matter what religion you are please answer this question. Where was Jesus born?
Did you say jerusalem? Becaus if you did you just joined 54% of Americans who don't know where Jesus was born. Schocking isn't it.
Have a nice day.
T
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
"How is your spirtuality expressed?"
Through listening to music, my drawings, other people, just life itself (yes I know it sounds cheesy)
"A class about the 5 main religions in the world. Analysis of each one, break down of the basics of those people's beliefs. Ask yourself if you had a class like this in high school"
Thats a great idea, just to learn abou it. I'm not religious but I find the history interesting. But I doubt it, I mean I dont think people want that unless its mainly their religion. Can you imagine schools in the bible belt teaching about Islam or Satanism, I'd like to think yes but in reality no. But someday it is entirely possible. :)
-------------------------------------------------------
The Pledge of Allegiance does not end with "Hail Satan"
Poking a dead raccoon is not research
Spitwads are not free speech
Hillbillies are people too
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/npsm18
I don't know about other schools, but our World Studies class offered to students in 10th grade history covered the basics of those religions. I do agree though, we need more education on the religions of our world. I believe that if we had that there would be less intolerance toward other people and nations and I dont think we would have such a large misunderstanding about eachother.
I'm a Pagan. Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea.
I express my spirituality through everything, music, art, writing, even watching a movie that inspires me. Most often simply observing nature is what makes me feel most "spiritual"(that word can be interpreted so many different ways).
I have to agree with npsm 18. I don't think most people would want to learn about religions other than their own, which I can understand. I know enough about the top five religions but I really wouldn't be interested in taking a class on them. It's a good idea but I don't think it would be successful.
Also, if these classes were taught, eventually people with less popular faiths would want to be included.
"Atheist or agnostics would probably best suited for the job becuase they would show no bias towards one religion over the other."
I don't necessarily think so. I think any person, religious or not would teach with a bias for the religion that most closely resembles their own philosophy.
________________________________________________________________________
Denken. Nicht lesen.
"I have to agree with npsm 18. I don't think most people would want to learn about religions other than their own, which I can understand"
Sadly, I think you are right. Most of the religious people I know fall into this catagory. That is why they assume that Agnostics and Atheists know nothing about their religion. They judge people by their own standards. I would have killed for a class like the one mentioned in this blog. I have always been fascinated by religion, but then again I'm not religious.
You would probably find that those most interested in attending such classes would be Agnostics and Atheists. Which is why they would need to be introduced very early, so children can avail of the education before they end up believing something blindly as a result of mental conditioning. If you teach a kid from an early age, right through to adulthood to just say no to other religions, then they never learn to question. That's what these classes would do, they would teach kids to question.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
I agree with you completely on this. I have always maintained that there should be an unbiased general religious awareness module compulsory for all students. I would further this by adding a module on persuasive technique to this religious education. I think it is important for kids to learn what persuasion is, how it works, and how it can be applied to religious practices. Basically, I believe kids need to be afforded the knowledge and the tools they will need to make up their own minds unhindered by ignorance and agenda. Unbiased religious education is the only way to combat the mental conditioning employed by religious organisations upon young pliable minds in the home and community.
The big problem would probably arise from deeply religious parents, who would often not want their child exposed to an unbiased eduction in multiple religious disiplines. Also many clerics and church leaders would be against it. I am Agnostic, so if I had a child attending such a class I would want that and Atheism covered as part of the curriculum also.
When religious people complain about the seperation of church and state, what they mean is they object to not having the right to run schools exclusively under there religious guidelines. Explaining different religions in depth in an unbiased manner would be worse for these people than keeping religion seperate entirely.
Imagine if little Johnny came home Agnostic after being exposed to several religions all at the same time. Then just imagine his parents' horror at not being able to understand his reasoning because they were not afforded the same level of religious education as him.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
"Imagine if little Johnny came home Agnostic after being exposed to several religions all at the same time. Then just imagine his parents' horror at not being able to understand his reasoning because they were not afforded the same level of religious education as him."
I'd think it was funny, but then again I have a weird sense of humour :)
-------------------------------------------------------
The Pledge of Allegiance does not end with "Hail Satan"
Poking a dead raccoon is not research
Spitwads are not free speech
Hillbillies are people too
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/npsm18
I'd think it was hilarious too, until his folks ordered an exorcism and burnt the teacher as a witch.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
Can you name the four apostles?
There were 12 apostles. There are four gospels, and they are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. No, I don't know who the 12 apostles are. I can name probably more than half of the ten commandments, and a handful of other commandments. I know more about Judaism than I know about Christianity.
A class about the 5 main religions in the world. Analysis of each one, break down of the basics of those people's beliefs. Ask yourself if you had a class like this in high school.
No, but my geography class in college was something like that. Problem was, we spent like 2 classes on Judaism, about 1/2 a class period on Christianity, and a whole 10 minutes on Islam. We didn't cover Hinduism or Buddhism. What's more, a lot of the information he gave on Judaism was wrong, and doesn't really cover what gentiles need to know about devout Jews. My friend from high school probably knows more, just because we had a few Jews in our class.
The classes need to be taught by well educated teachers. Atheist or agnostics would probably best suited for the job becuase they would show no bias towards one religion over the other.
I'm not sure an atheist would be the best suited... I'm not sure any person of any given religion (or lack thereof) will have an advantage in teaching the class. A non-Jew might not understand a lot of the nuisances of Judaism, such as why electricity cannot be used from Friday at sundown til Saturday an hour after sundown. These can be taught, certainly, but understanding may not come. Same reason that a non-Muslim might not understand the importance of wearing a headscarf, or a non-Christian might not understand communion.
I think that perhaps we need to teach religious tolerance in that as well. Teach students things that would be important when working with people of other faiths, such as not scheduling a lunch meeting during Ramadan, or a meeting on Yom Kippur. That would include the basic beliefs and whatnot, and help with interaction with other religious persons.
For anyone that cares: http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2007-03-07-teaching-religion-cover_N.htm
~C
Visit my blog.
"I think that perhaps we need to teach religious tolerance in that as well."
I think if kids are properly educated they will have the tools to decide for themselves what should and should not be tolerated.
I also strongly believe that a religion should be extended no greater amount of tolerance than any secular group. In other words if a particuliar religion, or faction of it, demonstrates ideology which is backward, it should be contested in the same manner anything would be. If it is okay to vocally criticize groups like the KKK, Nazis, or whatever, then it is only reasonable that the same critical evaluation should be extended to religious beliefs, without people pulling the 'religious intolerance' card.
I like to smoke weed, is it tolerated? No. I can be arrested for it, and plenty of people would rat me up to the police if they knew I was sitting next door to them with a few ounces of MJ. Their intolerance is unreasonable as far as I'm concerned, I'm not harming anybody. Yet if somebody stands up on TV and says that Marijuana use should not be tolerated, is there media hysteria about that public figure's intolerant nature? Nope.
Yet if a public figure stands up and says anything remotely critical of a religion, all hell breaks loose. They are suddenly intolerant monsters, shame on them, how dare they, etc etc.
Fuck this automatic religious tolerance bullshit, earn it that's what I say.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
Ok, perhaps tolerance wasn't the word I was looking for. Perhaps just... understanding of certain beliefs. As I said in my initial response, it's not right for a group to schedule a lunch meeting during Ramadan or Yom Kippur. There's nothing WRONG with those beliefs by any standards, and it's common respect to not disrespect those beliefs.
Now, if we're talking about circumcision, that's another story. Some people see it as completely barbaric in all contexts, some see it as only barbaric in females, and others don't see it as barbaric at all. Perhaps that should be examined more closely than simply fasting for a day.
~C
Visit my blog.
Read the news.
I think a big part of the problem is just that people want to believe in something but they're too lazy to do any research to back up their beliefs. In religion as in politics, people just pick a group that looks like a winner and then stick to it without doing any research, simply because they're lazy.
It's the American way!
(if you can't see the fnords they won't eat you)
But i took the lazier way out and chose that i dont believe in religion so that people dont question me at all.
I jsut say i beleive that there is a god and keep it moving.
Conformity is the jailor of freedom and the enemy of growth!~JFK
...is an oxymoron.
percivale
-------------------------
"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." ~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp July 30, 1816
you know i think that people wound understand their own religion more if they didn't spend so much time watching faux noise, and using phase that faux noise use, like far left.
if you actually spend time reading the bible, instead of listening to and using faux noise talking point to describle anyone who don't agree with you as far left, you might actually accomplish something.
also, why did you use the faux noise talking point, "far left," if by far left means that being tolerant of other people religion and not picking one religion over another and respecting the bill of right along with civil liberties, than count me in it.
i am so surprise that people would still be ignorant enough to spend more time using faux noise talking point such as far left instead of reading the bible.
i think a lot of the reason why people are so ignorant about the bible is that they spend too much time using faux noise talking point such as "far left," to describle anyone who isn't a bush ass licker, and care more about what is going on in people sexual life than reading the bible.
i believe if they would stop using faux noise talking point, such as "far left, " turn off the faux noise, and read their bible instead of spending their free time trying to pass laws that would try to control other people sex lives, and pervent civil iberties from people who are born with a different sexual orientation, they might learn a lot.
you use faux noise talking point yet you demean athesis and agnostic by phase them in a disrespectable way.
most of the people here don't even know that the iraqi parliment are going to pass the hydrogen law which would give 70% of their oil field to the american oil industries, that bush let osama bin laden go at tora bora, and that 15 million people who protest before the invasion of iraq knew that there was no wmd in iraq, and said that it is about oil was demonize.
if people are that ignorant about their own government, what makes you think that teaching religion in the public school will accomplish something.
if those that are in charge of the church spend more time teaching and encourage reading of the bible instead of protecting the the robber baron and get their pocket full of cash, while trying to pass law to control people sex lives along with pro robber baron laws, than people might not be so ignorant.
you wounder why people are so ignorant today, take a look at the church would support the oil industries war in iraq, the robber baron, and trying to control other people sex lives just becasue they donate to the the church and support wedge issues.
can anyone name the oil company that is going to get part of the oil feild in iraq, or name all the president of the united states, sing national athem, or the plege of alligence.
Yeah i have no idea what your comment was about. i'm so lost with the faux noise(no idea what that means) i don't know who you are talking to. you agree with me then yell at me or something...i'm lost, anyone care to help me find myself.
Have a Nice Day.
T
Relgious Education is a good thing, I know that in my churches the youth have sunday school. Actually, the majority of the school we have in my city have religious education.
I propose the problem is not the lack of religious--education--but the quality of it. Many of the people who teach relgious education to youth are volunteers. They are not paid, and do not have regulated cirriculum. I can safely say that all of the people I have had sunday school with probably were not prepared, trained, and were not enlightened about the material themselves. Most of the class consisted of "what do you think the meaning of this is?".
Again, I believe the problem is the not the lack of religous education, but the insufficent quality of it.
TCho
I think you missed the point. We weren't talking about religious education in YOUR religion, but of ALL religions (or at least the major ones). Sunday school classes are focused on teaching children/teens/adults about a specific lesson in the Bible each week, not about the beliefs of other religions. That is the purpose of them, after all... to teach more about the Bible/Christianity. I'm sure synagogues and mosques do the same sort of thing, though it may be with a slightly different structure (since Jews go to shul on Friday night and Saturday, when all they can really do is read, not write, in theory, at least).
~C
Visit my blog: www.progressiveu.org/blog/mvenus929
Read the news: www.progressiveu.org/news
I don't think you missed the point. Even though people who teach youth about religion are well-intended, they are, like you said, not prepared. The idea that a person can know God(Christian god) without reading AND understanding the bible is ludacris to me. And the same goes for other religions, we need to mix those fundamentalist basic/traditions with a 21st century twist. What I mean is people need to understand their own religions first(through Sunday school) and be offered the mixed class in public school. or that is just what i think.
Have a Nice Day.
T
I think it's a great idea to offer religious electives even in non-religious schools. When I was in h.s. I would have loved that, and I would have loved to learn about other religions even though I'm a Christian. Now in college I try to take advantage of that, I took a class on Buddhism last sem. and inadvertently am learning about other religions like Muslim, due to majoring in political science. I wrote an article about students' opinions on prayer in school in h.s. which the state paper I wrote for would not print, then like a year later all the adult columnists were writing crazy about it. So I think society has been slow to jump on the issue of religion in schools or not, but they're warming up, and I think as it becomes more of a public issue, people will actually consider the idea you mentioned, more seriously.