The Star Tribune reports on an Archdiocese who reduced members of a mandatory assembly at DeLaSalle High School to tears and protest with their disgusting homophobia and anti-adoption propaganda.
From the article:
[Quoting pupil Matt Bliss] "...it started going downhill when they started talking about single parents and adopted kids. They didn't directly say it, but they implied that kids who are adopted or live with single parents are less than kids with two parents of the opposite sex. They implied that a 'normal' family is the best family."
...Bliss was one of several students who stood up to argue with the representatives from the archdiocese. One girl held up a sign that said, "I love my moms."
...A priest and a volunteer couple presented the information. When someone asked a question about two men being able to have a quality, committed relationship, the couple compared their love to bestiality, Bliss said.
..."My friend said, 'You didn't just compare people to animals, did you?'" said [adopted student] Hannah. "I think everyone has a right to their opinion, and I don't judge them on it. But we don't force people to sit down so we can tell them their opinion is wrong."
...They were so upset that the priest and school officials abruptly ended the assembly. Students who were angry were allowed to stay there and talk with the archdiocese volunteers. It was more civil, for a while, but the more questions the presenters tried to answer, the worse it got.
"It was a really awful ending," said Bliss. "It was anger, anger, anger, and then we were done and they left. This is really a bad idea."
These kids are amazing and brave to protest in such a hostile environment. Looks like, even in an American Catholic School, pupils are beginning to be en masse unwilling to put up with being forced to endure institutional bigotry. These are the same students who (assuming they become Catholic) will form the congregations of the next generation, and who will vote on bills to do with marriage and religion in education. With any luck, this signals the beginning of the inevitable end to mainstream Catholic homophobic and anti-adoption (is even that a thing now?) bigotry. At least we can pray it is.
Look at that. You can see fetid cogs in his tiny brain grinding against each other, spraying his cryptoreligious, sub-Victorian horseshit propaganda across the nation's children.
If those unwealthy masses want to learn something, they can damn well learn some family values. Look at them, breeding and scrounging. Single mothers and fags — the buck of every problem in this Broken Britain stops with them. Maybe if we can get their birth rate down they'll stop rioting, get docile and let us keep the money we worked hard to earn, dammit. That's what a conservative government ought to do. Protect the interests of those which make this country great.
Apparently there are no bounds on the lack of respect I have for this corrupt party.
The Guradian's published a Comment is free article by Christian author Charlotte Allen. It's called "Atheists: No God, just whining", with jovial abstract: "Atheists are a tiresome, self-pitying bunch whose primary motivation isn't rationalism but anger". Oh yes, this is already looking like a good one. Well, I read it. And the only thing that struck me was the bizarre irony of someone complaining about whining taking the place of valid argument, by whining in place of valid argument. There are fifteen paragraphs in Charlotte's essay, and I think only one valid point is made throughout. I'm going to reproduce and deconstruct it briefly because, well, because I can. And I think it's interesting that an essay of such meagre calibre has been published in not one but two major newspapers. Let me begin:
I can't stand atheists – but it's not because they don't believe in God. It's because they're crashing bores.
Well we're off to a good start. Allen opens with a short paragraph which really serves as an excellent preview for the rest of the essay — it's a sweeping generalisation, offensively bigoted (try rehashing with "jew" in place of "atheist" and submitting this to The Guardian), contains no argument, and displays a startling lack of self-awareness. Continue reading →
Mr Ahern yesterday defended a fine of up to €100,000 that will be imposed on blasphemers. ... Gardai will now have the power to seize blasphemous material from the home or any other premises used by a person convicted of blasphemy.
Okay, seriously now guys, stop it.
This kind of thing used to be funny. We'd be all "heh, glad I don't live in Saudi Arabia" or "oh, that crazy pope, what'll he get up to next?". But the joke's run its course and it's time to give it up and move along, ok?
Remember, we're trying to build a better world here, and hilarious though pranks like this are, they're getting a little tiresome.
The outbreak of swine flu should be renamed “Mexican” influenza in deference to Muslim and Jewish sensitivities over pork, said an Israeli health official Monday.
Deputy Health Minister Yakov Litzman said the reference to pigs is offensive to both religions and “we should call this Mexican flu and not swine flu,” he told a news conference at a hospital in central Israel.
Nice to see the men of god have their priorities right.
[Sir Alasdair] Macdonald said: "What we're trying to do, and I accept it's difficult, is find a balance between young people having an entitlement to knowledge, facts, information but where schools, particularly schools with a particular faith interest or other disposition, also have a right to put that in context of their particular institution. "
Think about that — a balance between young people having an entitlement to knowledge, and an institution's particular faith interests. This is just so irresponsible.
What a beautifully irony-laced headline from Spiegel Online International.
From the article:
Since 2006, ethics has been a compulsory subject for all high school students in Germany's capital city, while religion is an optional course. The "Pro Reli" campaign wants to change those rules so that pupils would have to choose between ethics and a faith-based religion class. Those classes would be strictly divided along religious lines, with Protestants, Catholics and Muslims being taught separately.
I actually can't believe this. It's like a piece of science fiction.
As the title suggests, this short article is about faith schools, and why they're a really bad idea.
To begin with, I'm going to have to make some assumptions. I don't want to have to argue everything through from first principles, so let me first detail my starting point. I think I'll need just three ideological presuppositions to argue my case. First, pluralism is good. By this I mean that we should have some respect and tolerance for other cultures and opinions. Notice here that I don't mean that all cultures and opinions are equally valid. In fact, this is my second assumption — cultural relativism is bad. By this I mean that no matter how strongly a person or group of people believe something, that doesn't make it true. Some things really are universally and objectively wrong. I'm sure we can all agree that genital mutilation and smacking children are not only wrong, but that people who disagree with us are actually incorrect, by some objective metric. If we don't submit this point, then right from the start anything goes. Rape, murder, anything. If rape is wrong, it's wrong objectively. This second assumption may seem to be in tension with the first, but I don't think it has to be. We can find the point of agreement by saying that everyone's entitled to their opinion, but that we don't have to take them all seriously; though we certainly shouldn't be dogmatic about which ones we do and don't. Finally, I'm going to assume that needless human suffering should be avoided. Hopefully this maxim won't require me to defend it. I should also point out that I'm speaking as a British citizen here, so my knowledge and analysis relate to faith schools as governed by UK law.
I'm basically going to address three things in this essay. I'm going to detail what I think's wrong with faith schools; outline some criticisms. I'm going to try to look at arguments put forward in defence of faith schools, and dismantle them. Then I'll try and come up with some suggestions about what should happen. Continue reading →