12 32

It's speech that should be protected just as much as Christian prayers, right?

JonnaBononna 7 June 28

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.




It better!


Yes, but it's not going to happen in any of the batshit crazy states.

How to cause a riot in any batshit crazy state: start the school day with any pupil offering a thankful prayer to Satan.


As a high school biology teacher I frequently drew a sharp distinction between science and religion, i.e. that the former is built on objective, reproducible, and independently verifiable evidence, while the latter is not. The curriculum included a broad range of sub-disciplines within biology, including ecology, evolution, genetics, molecular biology, anatomy, physiology, cytology, cell division, cellular energy, and biochemistry. The underlying theme, the "connective tissue" that brought it all together was darwinian evolution, which I folded into every instructional unit, if not every lesson. There was overt pushback by some students, who would sometimes claim that God was the Creator, or it was God's will, or some such nonsense. I always welcomed such comments because they gave me yet another opportunity to wheel out more evidence and challenge anyone else to do the same for the religious argument. Students often tried to get me to state outright what my beliefs were. They would ask, "Don't you believe in God?" My reply was always the same: "They pay me to teach you science, not my beliefs." This disappointed those who wanted to see me paint myself into a corner. They could never get me to say anything that I could not defend as a legitimate part of a science curriculum. Some churchy parents were so frustrated by my teaching their students Darwin's theory that they had their kids pulled from the class. Others turned other methods, including encouraging their students to disrupt class. This made a challenging job even more difficult, but I felt it had to be done my way. In fact, I would often tell myself that this job is not worth doing without executing a full-court press against the kind of flabby thinking typified by religious belief. Over time I was moderately successful; I did reach a few people. But in addition to teaching many facts which some students found objectionable (that humans are animals; that we are products of evolution; that we share ancestors with hedgehogs, fish, salamanders, worms, and bacteria; that the atoms making up our bodies have been recycled many times through the biosphere, and have been incorporated into many other organisms that lived and died before us; that we are all destined to die, and there is no evidence that we go to "a better place;" that we depend on a healthy biosphere for our continued existence; that our current fossil-fuel dependent way of life is putting the students and their future children's and grandchildren's and, in fact, our entire species' existence in grave danger, etc. etc.), I and my colleagues had to deal with a rising tide of general dissatisfaction with economic and social conditions as well as proliferation of increasingly sophisticated personal communication devices. So-called "smart" cell phones can be put to all kinds of illicit uses (e.g. cheating on tests), and many students would rather be referred to the Assistant Principal than give up the phone for an hour or two. Of course it did not help that many APs are as useless as the tits on a boar when it comes to disciplining students. And lets face it: some parents are raising pets, not children. The concept of discipline is completely foreign to them. Happily, I was able to retire from teaching just as the pandemic was ramping up. Looking back, my timing was perfect. But I cannot feel satisfied. I hate to say it, but the US educational system has failed miserably at teaching critical thinking. Witness the zeal with which so many dolts buy into wacko conspiracy theories. Don't get me started. πŸ˜‚


Note that I did say "SHOULD BE"


Good luck with that!

And with keeping your job.... In theocratic America, only Christians and Catholics have rights and freedom of expression, other viewpoints, including Muslims and non-believers, don't....

@TomMcGiverin but they would now, after the SCOTUS decision, have grounds for a lawsuit. If nothing else, it would show the world that there is no religious freedom here.

@JonnaBononna Lawsuits take time and money that most ordinary working people don't have, and few lawyers are willing to take those cases, when there is little money to be won if they are successful. And with the way the courts are now packed, even at lower levels, with conservatives, the odds of winning are slim..

@TomMcGiverin you know the ACLU or some such would take that case

@TomMcGiverin that coach didn't finance his suit. Some right wing organization took that case

@JonnaBononna I know, but unfortunately, plaintiffs on the left don't have nearly the same kind of funding and lawyers to litigate free speech cases.

@JonnaBononna The budget of the ACLU is a drop in the bucket compared to what the religious right and conservatives have on their side. The right has lots of rich donors with very deep pockets. The left does not.

@TomMcGiverin Godly, tax-free money, of course!

@LucyLoohoo Of course, do they have any other kids, at least in their eyes? They would never admit that it was ill-gotten gains or stolen from gullible victims..


If Mary and Jesus were real people then Joseph was the father. The bible gives his genealogy with that intent in mind. If you examine ancient writings of that time you will find other god men or godlike creatures all being born from a virgin. In fact, most of us know that things like this are not true. LOL There is also no mention of Joseph finding Mary hanging around Roman soldiers. πŸ™‚


Not in states like Florida and Oklahoma where making a kid uncomfortable about their beliefs no matter how crazy, or their race or gender gets you a long walk off a short plank out the door.


In this fictional story, it would seem more likely that Joseph was the father. The authors of Matthew and Luke go to great lengths to trace Jesus’ supposed genealogy back to David, beginning with his father, Joseph.

Those lineages are different. Both can't be Joseph's

@JonnaBononna indeed! But the point is that both authors attempted to trace the genealogy of Jesus to the β€œhouse of David” from his father, Joseph.

The Bible has gone through several rounds of translation. From Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English, German, French, etc. In one of those early translations, I think it was the Hebrew, Mary was described with a word that means "young woman." And apparently that word was translated as "virgin." And it's been downhill ever since. πŸ˜‚


By all means!


When actual history is probably stranger than the fairytale religious deceitful dogma pushed for the last two thousand years!!!

I would not go that far.


And the Jeapordy answer is, " I'll take NO, for $500, Alex"...

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:674177
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.