Common misconceptions about Christianity.

[sapphi_snake]

richardhutnik said:

sapphi_snake said:

richardhutnik said:

sapphi_snake said:

 

The fact that you think sex ed teaches kids that they aren't able to abstain from sex shows how little you understand sex ed in the first place. Then again you probably have some twisted views regarding sex so I shouldn't be surprised.

Don't presume what I have or don't have, based upon stereotypical thinking.  I put this issue in the case of parental rights, and explain WHY you get the flak.  I fully understand the base biological function of sex is to extend a species and is wired to be pleasurable in the body, so that the species will continue to procreate.  Beyond this are other elements needed for the raising of offspring, to create bonding between partners, so they provide guardians over the offspring so they grow up.  This is beneficial to the species surviving, and having healthy future generations.  And if you think this is twisted, then I am not sure what basic biology books you are reading.

In regards to sex education, there is the basics of the biological side.  But human beings are more than just biological beings, and to discuss sex is to involve the entire social aspect to, and also to look to take into account what can or will happen.  You do inform about STDs, and you also can inform about protection.  In this, a parent can get concerned that a school isn't conveying enough the wishes of the parents the kids abstain until they are old enough to be able to be providers for childrens, and are established.  Because you drag religious parents who feel that their kids need to abstain and are able to, into a system that doesn't believe this, they will impose their values on others.

Again you fail to understand what sex ed is about. What people learn in sex ed is information that will be usefull throughout they're entire lives (yes, the overwhelming majority of people will eventually have sex and they won't magically know about safe sex either). Abstinence only programs do nothing more than spread lies and misinformation. If religious parents want ignorant clueless children that have a negative view of sex than fine, but they should not drag down other people's children.

When will people get that their religious "values" (I use this term loosesly) are private and have no place in the public sphere?

No set of values stays only in private areas.  Every value a person has shapes their worldview and causes an impact on what they want.  The idea of truth, value of science, compassion for the needy, freedom, character, integrity, and so on are all things that are needed in the public sphere to be discussed because it shapes everything regarding the nature of laws, and whether or not laws are even needed.  It is also important to know the meaning of religion, before you say that.  Religion is meant to be that which one is anchored to, and it shapes everything about a person.  Unless you want the public sphere to consist of absolutely no values, barring the exchange of goods and services in a marketplace, how then is it going to remain private?

Consider the case of the poor in a nation vs the right to own property.  What if there is a desire to help the poor, but insufficient funds are being voluntarily donated to do this, and the poor remain?  If the public sphere has no values, then how can you justify there either be a right to private property, or end up using coersive taxes to take money from people with it, and help the poor?  The private values do have an impact in this area. 

Ok, I can detect you put "values" in quotes, because you consider the values of religious people either dangerous or a complete waste of time, so thus, stick them in quotes.  Values such as loving God, avoiding sin, and raising one's childern in a way that is seen as honoring God, wouldn't be important to you, but they are to the parents of religious kids.  Well, here is the kicker.  Unless you don't believe parents ultimately are responsible for their kids being raised right, but it belongs to the state, you are going to deal with parents who want to teach their kids stuff you disagree with and which could be counterproductive in your eyes.  Well, because you would value parental rights, then you have to put up with this.  The only way to NOT have this is to enable people to have proper fund to raise their kids and enable them to be able to be taught wherever, outside of public school systems, so they don't push abstinence.  Get the parents and their kids out of the school system, and you will be able to avoid what you want to.  But so long as the parents are forced to have their kids in the school system, you will get them arguing about this.

The values present in the public sphere should be based on ration, debate and consesnsus, not on irrational religious beliefs. Forcing anyone to follow values and mores based on religious beliefs is undermining their right to religious freedom.

As for parents being responsible for their children being raised right, you went by the premise that I agree with such a thing. However I don't think parents can be trusted with such a task (This abstinecne only nonsense that creates ignorant kids that have a negative view about sex is a perfect example of why parents can't betrusted to raise their children right). This is an unfortunate compromise as (curently) there's no better alternative. Hopefully this pesky impediment will eventually be rectified.