To think schools shouldn't teach religion as absolute fact?

[PoesyCherish]

DSD is 6 and is learning about Christianity in school. They're teaching her Jesus is the Son of God rather than "some people believe he is". Everything about the religion is taught as fact. They've also failed to mention anything about any other religion.

AIBU to think they shouldn't be teaching it as absolute fact? How are children supposed to be understanding and tolerant of other people's beliefs if they're taught one world view as fact?

[JudgeRudy]

@Pengggwn

How did you get your child into a Catholic school without agreeing to support its Catholic ethos? Or have you just changed your mind?

I'm not sure she's actually said either way whether she supports the ethos. I'd say it most likely surprised her that any faith school teaches their religion as absolute facts.
I don't know anyone well who follows a faith but wouldn't a Catholic say I BELIEVE XYand Z rather than I KNOW?
I'd guess most couples believe their love will last but they don't know. Even those who say there's no doubt for them surely accept that's faith, not knowing.

[echt]

ZOMBIE THREAD

[CantankerousCamel]

Absolutely. If they had the agency to do so.

Which is the big thing for me, many people don’t have agency to leave various sects and religions. All the middle class MN catholics do though.

[MeyMary]

I'm not talking about my choices. I'm genuinely interested in your reasoning and opinions.

So, to once again use the example you mentioned:

Would an in your opinion respectable choice mean to not frequent and/or support a mosque that supports stoning (or torturing, burning - to use your examples)?

Would an in your opinion respectable choice mean that a Muslim would need to leave a sect if religious leaders of said sect supported or condoned the attrocities you mentioned?

[CantankerousCamel]

I am not ‘asking’ anyone to do anything. I am stating I have absolutely no respect for people who do.

So yes, if you expect me to respect your choices, don’t use those choices to fund abuse.

[MeyMary]

My question isn't about feigning ignorance.

And actually it’s like asking a Muslim who supports a sect of Islam who believe in stoning, torturing and burning people to worship at a mosque where those things aren’t funded and supported.

Would you ask them to not worship in a mosque that supports stoning (or torturing, burning - to use your examples)?

Would you ask them to not belong to/support a sect who has religious leaders who support or condone these attrocities?

[CantankerousCamel]

Irrelevant.

EVERYONE knows what the Catholic Church did. Everyone.

Particularly those well educated enough to be ranting on MN about their right to be Catholics.

You cannot feign ignorance, everyone know.

[MeyMary]

Hm. To use your Muslim example.

Do you have the standard of "not supported in this mosque" (as far as worshippers know) or "not supported by other mosques or religious leaders from that sect" (as far as people belonging to that sect know)?

[SoapOnARoap]

Wholeheartedly agree with you OP

[CantankerousCamel]

And actually it’s like asking a Muslim who supports a sect of Islam who believe in stoning, torturing and burning people to worship at a mosque where those things aren’t funded and supported.

[CantankerousCamel]

No, I’m asking anyone, anywhere, not to fund peadophiles.

And that to be the absolute benchmark of ‘shit you do today’

[PoesyCherish]

But @Cantankerous you're effectively asking a follower of Islam to instead follow Christianity or a Jew to follow Islam. If the only basis is that it's the same God, then what's the problem with instead of sending your Muslim child to a Muslim school, you instead send them to a CofE school. After all, they are both Abrahamic Gods.

[CantankerousCamel]

So if you have to stand in a church who prefer their hats less pointy, aren’t quite so full on about everything from masturbation to child molestation being part of the same ‘sin’ and don’t call victims of assault ‘temptations of the flesh’ then so be it, if it means you’re not funding abuse

[CantankerousCamel]

I base this ‘relief’ on literally NOTHING being more important than not giving your money to child rapists

[MeyMary]

I don't think anybody is asking you to respect the religion in itself.

But would you tell (just an example) orthodox Christians to just become... a unitarian universalist? Or support the CofE? (There are huge issues in regards to human rights in orthodox Christianity as well.)

Or a Mormon that any other branch of Christianity would do as well?

It seems to me like you're just not able or willing to understand the role (or the problem) of faith.

Why do you believe that faiths (as long as there's the same God) are just interchangeable? What do you base this relief on?

And those key differences are worth supporting and paying money to men who rape children

I was actually talking about doctrine, the head of the church, the role of said head, liturgy, the very nature of God etc.

[CantankerousCamel]

I'm not sure what gave you this idea, tbh... The Catholic saints, the catechism, the hierarchy etc are uniquely Catholic. I mean, there's also orthodox Christianity but whether that is more ethical according to a most modern / secular perspectives is imo doubtable... And there are still some key differences.

And those key differences are worth supporting and paying money to men who rape children?

No, sorry. No respect for that.

[MeyMary]

But worshipping the same God isn't just want what Abrahamic faiths are about

[MeyMary]

You have people who are educated enough to know that there are other ways of praying to the same god

I'm not sure what gave you this idea, tbh... The Catholic saints, the catechism, the hierarchy etc are uniquely Catholic. I mean, there's also orthodox Christianity but whether that is more ethical according to a most modern / secular perspectives is imo doubtable... And there are still some key differences.

It's a bit like telling an Orthodox Jew to abandon Orthodoxy because Reform Judaism is still Judaism / worships the same God.
Or an evangelical Christian that they could just become Catholic...

But worshipping the same God isn't just want Abrahamic faiths are about. I mean, Islam, Judaism and non-trinitarian Christianity worship the same God. But these faiths are not just interchangeable.

It may seem this way to nonbelievers / atheists but I suspect that most people in their respective faiths wouldn't agree...

[CantankerousCamel]

Mey

I can understand that. But I think Catholicism takes it to the extreme. You have people who are educated enough to know that there are other ways of praying to the same god, who are still choosing to stand with and fund a church which has stated it has used that money to move and support peadophiles while they keep raping children.

It would be exactly the same as someone in this country seeing the atrocities committed by certain Muslim sects abroad and yet stating proudly that they fund those people and send their children to schools owned by them. People would rightly be appalled by that. I am equally appalled by people funding Catholicism or utilising catholic schools.

[MeyMary]

CantankerousCamel

I can unfortunately think of less "sects" (=mainstream religions like Catholicism...) that don't have issues in regards to gender equality. Which is and has obviously been a huge issue for women.

Particularly the abrahamic religions and most of their denominations/branches...

don't you know they don't need hard labour because it's all woman's fault and why should men be punished for woman eating the apple hmm

I know. Even though Adam was also punished and also ate from the apple.

[CantankerousCamel]

Actually I CAN group all Catholics together. Everyone knows what they directly fund. I don’t have to give any respect to them anymore than I do sects of any other religion that abuse and oppression women, children and the poor.

[PoesyCherish]

Thankfully @Gin96 the conversation was purely hypothetical. I'd have been a lot more fuming if I was pregnant or ttc at the time!

Ahh but @MeyMary don't you know they don't need hard labour because it's all woman's fault and why should men be punished for woman eating the apple It does make sense what you've said. I don't think logic or rational arguments even remotely comes to it for people like my ex.

[Gin96]

Oh poor you op. Men are such pricks if they had to give birth the human race would not exist

[MeyMary]

I personally always thought that the idea of women still being punished for the original sin (and therefore not being allowed to
receive painkillers or other assistance meant to decrease the possible pain and damage) makes no sense from a Christian or Catholic perspective...

It seems like pure misogyny tbh. Or do these people argue that they (as men) also need hard labour and need to work the ground?
And what about the punishment of death, if Jesus is the source of eternal life? They don't seem to doubt that part.


And the bible does not exclude women from the atonement / the ransom paid for sin
and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood--to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished (New International Version, Rom:24 - 3:25)

We are all justified / just like we were all the reason for Christ's passion.

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! John 1:29


And the sin of the world would surely include the original sin? And the world would also include humans who happen to be women?


As for the Catholic church :

CCC 605 At the end of the parable of the lost sheep Jesus recalled that God's love excludes no one: "So it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish." He affirms that he came "to give his life as a ransom for many"; this last term is not restrictive, but contrasts the whole of humanity with the unique person of the redeemer who hands himself over to save us. The Church, following the apostles, teaches that Christ died for all men without exception: "There is not, never has been, and never will be a single human being for whom Christ did not suffer."

Unless they want to make the argument that the whole of humanity does not include women/people with periods?

I hope this makes sense in English (and I just picked the first Englisch bible translation I found, you may obviously have a different preference)...