Interesting...

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24797483-421,00.html

I uh, am impressed... Take THAT, creationism!

VICTORIAN state primary school students will soon be able to take religious education classes which teach there is no evidence God exists.

The Humanist Society of Victoria has developed a curriculum for primary pupils that the state government accreditation body says it intends to approve, The Sunday Age newspaper reported.

Ohh the Jedis are going to feel this one...





P.S. Woo! Go Victoria!

WONT SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?!??!?!

OH MY SCIENCE!

http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2007/family-guy-cosmos-p1.php

haha awesome. that'd be tops to take a religious education class for athiests or agnostics... it'd be pretty damn funny i rekn. :D

lol suck is creationist fags

what a groundbreaking discussion topic!!

Hey, I had not started a thread in what seems like years, and saw no one else had posted this up....

The future is looking brighter. Any areas in the world where there exists nothing but religious freaks seem like very unpleasant areas. I'm thinking the middle east, and texas.

Things must have changed a lot of primary schools since I was there. I went to a typical public primary school and neither religion nor evolution were ever mentioned.

yeah it is news, so my apologies. i am just so over this goddamn (lol) creationism ID evolution debate. it is totally done to death.

what would be cool as an alternative to typical religious instructions would be a philosophical class based on sub-atomic particle physics... coz that s*** is so wack it's almost at a religious level of believability ;p stuff like the ultimate observer & quantum electron superpositioning... that'd be a class where i'd prolly pay attention for the majority of the time ;p

this is good... very good.

People can believe whatever they want as long as they don't force it on anyone and they don't blow themselves up in my or anyone other than themselves vicinity.

Where's fpot??

VICTORIAN state primary school students will soon be able to take religious education classes which teach there is no evidence God exists.

hmmm... something doesn't seem right there...

last edited by MatchFixer at 17:08:27 16/Dec/08

Well, Buddhism is a religion and there ain't much God in Buddhism. I learned about Buddhism in my religious education classes though.

What the hell is wrong with everyone these days? Back when I was in school if you believed something else you got a note from your parents and were excused from RE, if you were too young to care either way you just sat there colouring in jesus' beard on the black & white photocopied bible thing they give you, or if you were interested you listened to what they had to say.

Either way I say teach kids about god, jesus and all that stuff and also teach them about evolution and let them make up their own damn minds. That or confuse the hell out of them, either way it'll be more amusing to all.

A religion class should teach an overview of all the major religions, with atheism also. Then let the kid figure it out. That is a fair option.

Humanists! f*** me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

hmmm... something doesn't seem right there...

It seems a perfectly apt place to teach Humanism considering how much the two overlap. It's not like there is a Humanist studies class.

Well, Buddhism is a religion and there ain't much God in Buddhism.

It's not a religion in the sense that Christianity is a religion. That kind of religion requires a belief in giant sky fairies.

I enjoyed my grade 11/12 "Study of Religion" class.

For a Catholic school, it had very little Christianity.

Lots of cool s*** about Freud, Buddha and a bunch literal translations from Islamic texts about beating your wife and locking her in the house if she disgraces you.

I had a dream last night with this tough guy giving me s*** so I gave him the smack down, then his hot as a oven thats been turned up full bore for ages girl friend was all over me wanting my Thunder Pole of Hammering, she was only wearing bond undies and had one of those super tight arse's with the mamoth gap between her inner legs, I was like OH MY GOD! So I took a photo real quick making sure to have my forehead near her big lush titties, thats gonna be awesum for QGL then God spoke in a real deep thundery voice said "DAYYYM now I know why you where all like 'OH MY' and s***".

bunch literal translations from Islamic texts about beating your wife and locking her in the house if she disgraces you.

Did they have the similar quotes from the Bible?

This whole time that they have been teaching religion, which kid didn't work out there's no evidence for a god?
Spelling it out for em's just depressing.
You watch, you tell them there's no god and they'll go celibate just to spite you.


last edited by altending at 21:49:12 16/Dec/08

fn wins

from Islamic texts about beating your wife and locking her in the house if she disgraces you.

so you're telling me they didn't teach you jack about religion. Sounds like a bunch of ignorant f***tards where do i sign up?!@!

http://images.projectstripe.com/qgl2.png

nF is intriguing

I enjoyed my grade 11/12 "Study of Religion" class.

indeed..


is this to say that my kids will learn this in highschool? it'd save me some effort on my part

students already have a class for this, it's called science

when i went to primary school there was a non-denominational option, is this not the same thing

Matchfixer, would you rather the article say:

"VICTORIAN state primary school students will soon be able to take spiritual belief education classes which teach there is no evidence God exists" ?

It's just stating that because they clearly wouldn't be teaching it in maths or english class, they'd want it to be clear to your avg joe that there might be an option to the traditional 'religion' classes taught in primary schools these days.

I think it's awesome. I remember when I went to public primary school and we had a 'religion' class. I never have/will believe in the s*** so all i did (as early as kindergarten in nsw) was run around jumping off desks/not listening & doing random s***. I felt bad for the lebanese kid in the class who had his own religion but was too scared to do anything but take in the propaganda fearing some sort of retribution.

(imo) The sooner the world is rid of religion the better. But yes everyone has been through this conversation many times before so /meh

Woohoo! What do I win Jim??
Is that a big bag of apples and bananas Jim or you just happy to see me ;)

shrivelled figs and a nobbly parsnip

This is awesome, Im really happy about this. Finally a curriculum that teaches the better aspects of religion like morality and ethics and empathy. Im all for kids being taught some fundamentals to get them through and make them better people, without getting consfused and bogged down in all the god and ghost bulls***.

Also, props to humanists for getting this in. Why would you teach your children that you are subject to the whims of an invisible man when you could teach them that you have personal control over your actions and your life.

Yey for humanists!

PS - I also enjoyed highschool religion classes, because studies of religion was exactly that, looking at world religions and drawing comparisons etc.
Having said that though, nothing will turn you off god and religion like going through the catholic education system.

Or reading eu4ia's posts.

Having said that though, nothing will turn you off god and religion like going through the catholic education system.

12 years of it did the same to me. Great schools though!

I went to Catholic schools (4 of them) for all my education and our religious studies barely covered Christianity. The focus was on other religions and cultures of the world outside of the Christians.

Finally a curriculum that teaches the better aspects of religion like morality and ethics and empathy. Im all for kids being taught some fundamentals to get them through and make them better people, without getting consfused and bogged down in all the god and ghost bulls***.

Me too - but they shouldn't be taught as "religion". People shouldn't grow up thinking morality and ethics and empathy can only come from a religious background.

People shouldn't grow up thinking morality and ethics and empathy can only come from a religious background.

My role-models for morality and ethics are a select few Catholic Priests. *sarcasm*

Me too - but they shouldn't be taught as "religion". People shouldn't grow up thinking morality and ethics and empathy can only come from a religious background.

Well they don't necessarily only come from religion, but pretty much all of the worlds laws, rules, ethics etc grew out of religion. I don't know if I misunderstood what you said, but I agree if you meant they shouldn't be teaching "god does not exist" as a religious point of view.

40 posts and no 'just teach the kids theology in primary school' requests?


we teach them other languages at that age...

What the hell is wrong with everyone these days? Back when I was in school if you believed something else you got a note from your parents and were excused from RE, if you were too young to care either way you just sat there colouring in jesus' beard on the black & white photocopied bible thing they give you, or if you were interested you listened to what they had to say.



Yea that was how it was for me in primary school. If you didn't want to take part, your parents gave a note and you went somewhere else. I don't really remember anything about the classes anyway. I don't really agree with schools teaching that there is no God either. Any religious education I had was at church when I was little because my parents took me there. When I was old enough to decide that it wasn't something I was interested in I stopped going.

minxy protip, when you want to quote someone type < quote > and < / quote > around the text you want to quote (no spaces obviously)

last edited by paveway at 10:51:50 18/Dec/08

Yah I know how to quote. Just couldn't be bothered.

didn't get taught any religion s*** at my primary, still they did try to take us to church like 3x which i bailed on. Not a fan of religion.

Not a fan of religion

and i'm sure religion ain't a fan of you too.

Prepare to be sacrificed, tomorrow.

Me too - but they shouldn't be taught as "religion". People shouldn't grow up thinking morality and ethics and empathy can only come from a religious background.

If you consider that Religious Education is the education of Religious Philosophy then Humanism has every right to be taught in that class. In fact, you'd be wrong to neglect it.

People can believe whatever they want as long as they don't force it on anyone and they don't blow themselves up in my or anyone other than themselves vicinity.

WELL SAID !!! :)

One God.

I watching Carnivale again at the moment.

So much religion.

That is all.

what would be totally cool would be a religio class on rastafari ! jah bless ! i n i bin babylon too long. i-man serve selassie i continually. no matter what the weak heart say. and i know that i & i is like a tree, plant by the river of water, and not even the dog that piss against the wall of babylon shall escape this judgment. for i & i know that all of the youth shall witness the day that babylon shall fall!

One God.

too right
and it's name is The Human Ego

Humanism teaches respect for human life and I'm all for it. Religion provides excuses for people to go extremist.

All the religion bashing is interesting.

I actually disagree with "humanism" being taught in "religion" humanism is not a religion not even in the most vaguists of senses, its organised atheism ie. anti-religion. It'd be like running a class on being a vegetarian and then getting them to eat meat.
I think ethics and morales is a class that should be taught, howver I also think relious ed should be more study of religion. Which is more a study of history and culture then indoctrinating kids about invisible friends.

Can anyone point me to agnostic, humanist or athiest charities ? The only one I can think of is red cross. And given that it also has the red cresent in a number of muslim countries I get the feeling that there is some religious sentament involved.

Religious groups run most of them vinnies, blue nurses, salvos, or the groups express a religious point of view eg. world vision, street swags.

Cos while they may (or may not) have invisible friends they seem to be doing more for "humanity" then apathetic agnostics like me.

^ In all of my 'studies of religion' classes at highschool, Humanism was taught right along side catholicism and judaism and islam.

there plenty of areligious organisations doing charity work. they are called "governments" and "taxypayers".

I've never even heard of humanism until this thread, but it looks vaguely like the principles that I myself follow, which I call "Don't be a jerk-ism"

there plenty of areligious organisations doing charity work. they are called "governments" and "taxypayers"

Yeah beacuse paying tax is a choice and we all do it because it makes us good people allowing us to feel good about ourselves.

Dick

last edited by MatchFixer at 15:19:05 18/Dec/08

hey the governments do their bit (which is far more than the charities do) to provide the social safety net.

if charity if about making yourself feel good, then that's awesome. the outcome for me is to ensure people have a safety net, not about feeling good about myself.

Can anyone point me to agnostic, humanist or athiest charities ?

Amnesty International, Doctors Without Borders, Freedom From Hunger, Mercy Corps, Oxfam.

No you make it sound like taxpayers are paying 'charity' out of their own good will, and that's not the case because that's what giving charity is about.

Give anyone here the chance to not pay tax and they will not pay it, they dont give a s*** as long as there's more money in their pockets.


last edited by MatchFixer at 17:28:05 18/Dec/08

Charities add to the social safety net, but the overall objective of the social safety net is a humanist one i.e. respect in our fellow humans.

The notion of charity is a religious one that our beliefs are defined by our actions.

Social welfare is not charity but it has a far larger impact on the well-being of our fellow humans, so the ultimate objective of charity is then the spiritual effect on the donor?

last edited by infi at 17:30:28 18/Dec/08

a typical charity is probably far more efficient than government anyway.

pfft charities are for the rich to dodge tax & increase thier smugness... as if they are ever about caring for your fellow man... that's crazytalk.

a typical charity is probably far more efficient than government anyway.

o rly? i would rate them on par.

Governments are not charities.

Charities have volunteers, and work off voluntary donations. At best they can knock on your door.

Governments have public servants, and work off compulsory taxes. And if you don't pay they can lock you up.

Same goals (sometimes, when not handing out bonuses to single mums for new xboxes), totally different systems. It'd be like saying democracy was the same as communists.

Tho I did think of another non-religious "charity". Surf Life savers. Tho in some places there are paid life guards eg. the Gold Coast has them as well as the volunteers.

Still what are these humanists actually doing to achieve their supposed goals ?

I actually disagree with "humanism" being taught in "religion" humanism is not a religion not even in the most vaguists of senses, its organised atheism ie. anti-religion

Again, if you consider Religious Education, the education of Religious Philosophy then Humanism has every right to be there. That is if you want a rounded education. Hell, so should Atheism and Agnosticism.

It'd be like running a class on being a vegetarian and then getting them to eat meat.

No. To use the analogy of stupid you introduced into the thread. It would be more like teaching a class on how to be a vegetarian and telling them the disadvantages of being a vegetarian, and what they need to do to combat that.

I think ethics and morales is a class that should be taught, howver I also think relious ed should be more study of religion.

The problem is that to have a well rounded education in Religious Philosophies you need to be taught from all angles.

Can anyone point me to agnostic, humanist or athiest charities ?

First: Are you suggesting that the only people who do good things in the world, or at least donate money to charities, are people who subscribe to a Theological Philosophy?

Second: How about the Cancer Council? How about the foundation that Bill Gates set up with the single largest donation in history? How about the sheer amount of science that is done in Universities by Atheists, Agnostics, Ignostics? It doesn't matter how many non-theistic charities there are it's entirely irrelevant for this discussion.



last edited by typo at 00:48:56 19/Dec/08

Typo, shouldn't you be chatting to shad and not posting posts here ?

The subject is called religious education ... humanism is not a religion.
Apart from the fact the actual humanist society can't seem to get around calling themselves athiests (and despite their lofty goals and not doing f*** all).

how is humanism not a religion?

religion
Noun
1. belief in or worship of a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny
2. any formal expression of such belief: the Christian religion
3. Chiefly RC Church the way of life entered upon by monks and nuns: to enter religion [Latin religio]

Colins dictionary...

The key part
"supernatural power or powers considered to be divine"

wiki

A religion is a of way of life based on tenets (or a belief system) about the ultimate power.

Key part .. the ultimate power.

Comes from the latin base religio

religio: fear of god

And humanists

Humanists reject any notion of the supernatural, and therefore reject the idea that our lives are presided over by any supernatural force or "god", and that our ethics and standards of behavior are "handed down" to us by "divine authority".

source

Therefor by their own definition they the polar opposite to a religion.

*edit*
A religious form of humanism would be jainists (thats a very loose comparison). ie. they don't believe in gods, but they do believe in souls, divity (and hell) and kharmas.

I don't have any issue with them having a say. But make the subject "Study of Ethics and Beliefs" or "Morals and ethics" and give it a real sylabus. The RE I did at several state primary schools was a mish mash videos and invisible friends.

last edited by Obes at 08:43:49 19/Dec/08

Obes, somehow i don't think you should've gone to answering his question to those lengths, as a typical response will be something like "no you are still wrong".

The subject is called religious education ... humanism is not a religion.

Humanism is a religious philosophy

Apart from the fact the actual humanist society can't seem to get around calling themselves athiests

Your powers are failing old man.

@nF:how is humanism not a religion?

Humanism isn't a religion, it is however a philosophy that deals with religion.

no, it's not a religious philosophy

The subject is called religious education ... humanism is not a religion.

Abstinence isn't sex, but sex education still covers it.

is humanism a religion on google yields this page which pretty definitively answers the question by the power of INTERNET DEMOCRAZY

Jesus people still think that if they go search for a definition on the internet for a word and copy paste it will support their arguments? People are _still_ that stupid?

Damn.

no, it's not a religious philosophy

It's a philosophy that covers much of the same ground as theological philosophies, and in many ways offers a different point of view on the same topics.

Abstinence isn't sex, but sex education still covers it.

Well it is. Why ? because sex leads to child birth and STDs both of which can be prevented via various methods including adstinence.

A better example would be teaching alchemy or creationism in science.

Jesus people still think that if they go search for a definition on the internet for a word and copy paste it will support their arguments? People are _still_ that stupid?

No fpot, people are now so stupid that they randomly change the meanings of words or use them inappropriately because they never actually learnt what they meant and are too lazy to find out what they mean by themselves.

Humanism is a religious philosophy

No, catholacism, christianity, islam, janism, taoism, hiduism are religious and or theistic philosophies.
Humanism is a philosophy, but it atheistic or irreligious.

It's a philosophy that covers much of the same ground as theological philosophies, and in many ways offers a different point of view on the same topics.

while that may be true or partially true, it doesn't mean that humanism can even vaguely be defined as a religious philosophy.

A better example would be teaching alchemy or creationism in science.

That's a rubbish example. Science is a science and Alchemy and Creationism are disproven pseudo-sciences.

However, Religious Education is the study of Religious Philosophy, non Non-Theistic Philosophies that, through Reasoned Logic, counter Theistic Philosophies have as much right to be there as only Theistic ones.

To put it into little kid examples for you Obes: If asking "what if God exists", we should also ask "what if God doesn't". Actually if you really want to get into Philosophy, we should also "what is meant by God".

while that may be true or partially true, it doesn't mean that humanism can even vaguely be defined as a religious philosophy.

That might be true if you didn't understand philosophy.

Nah typo you just need to know english.

That might be true if you didn't understand philosophy.

It's definitely true if you do, and might also be if you don't, and definitely might be if you think you do, but don't really

i don't see how humanism being a "religious philosophy" makes it any less a religion.

imo, if buddism is a religion then so is humanism.