Atheists Pressure MI School District to Stop Treating the Birth of Jesus as Fact

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Once again the State religion of Atheistic Secularism is being forced on people.

"The problem with being privileged your whole life is that because you have had that privilege for so long, equality starts to look like oppression." - Mark Caddo

Relevance?

The relevance is that many Christians these days are complaining of oppression because they are not free to impose their religion on others.

Spoiler: religious liberties test

How To Determine If Your Religious Liberty Is Being Threatened In Just 8 Quick Questions
Adapted from How to Determine If Your Religious Liberty Is Being Threatened in Just 10 Quick Questions | HuffPost

Pick "A" or "B" for each question..

1. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am not legally allowed to marry the person I love because of somebody else's religious preferences.
B) Some states refuse to enforce my own particular religious beliefs on marriage on those two guys in line down at the courthouse.

2. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am being forced to use birth control.
B) I am unable to force others to not use birth control.

3. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am not allowed to teach my children the creation stories of our faith at home.
B) Public schools won't permit my faith to inject its creation myths into science classes.

4. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am not allowed to pray privately.
B) I am not allowed to force others to pray the prayers of my faith publicly.

5. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) Being a member of my faith means that I can be bullied without legal recourse.
B) I am no longer allowed to use my faith to bully gay kids with impunity.

6. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am not allowed to purchase, read or possess religious books or material.
B) Others are allowed to have access books, movies and websites that I do not approve of.

7. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) My religious group is not allowed equal protection under the establishment clause.
B) My religious group is not allowed to use public funds, buildings and resources to promote itself

8. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) Another religious group has been declared the official faith of my country.
B) My own religious group is not given status as the official faith of my country.

Scoring key:

If you answered "A" to any question, then perhaps your religious liberty is indeed at stake. You and your faith group have every right to now advocate for equal protection under the law. But just remember this one little constitutional concept: this means you can fight for your equality -- not your superiority.

If you answered "B" to any question, then not only is your religious liberty not at stake, but there is a strong chance that you are oppressing the religious liberties of others. This is the point where I would invite you to refer back to the tenets of your faith, especially the ones about your neighbors.

So, at one time, was alchemy and astrology thought of as science and indoctrinated to the young and impressionable.

Science is a method and the body of knowledge generated by that method, a method based on rational skepticism and empiricism.

Alchemy and astrology are faith based systems, not science, which is why they have to be indoctrinated rather than dispassionately presented as evolution is, and why they have been so sterile.

They eventually grew out of it like they will undoubtedly grow out of the failed metaphysical experimentation of so called evolution.

Evolutionary science is very healthy and, short of a falsifying discovery, here to stay.

What's failed is the religious challenge to it. The ID movement has wasted thousands of man-hours and millions of dollars looking for a god that they have no good reason to believe exists. That's not science. It's pseudoscience. Not surprisingly, it has generated no evidence for an intelligent designer. It's been as sterile a line of pursuit as alchemy and astrology, and for the same reason.

Face the facts while you still can, or is it too late for you as well?

Yes, it's too late for me to ignore the facts. I can no longer engage in faith-based thinking as I could as a child and as a Christian. I need a sound reason to believe anything now, and can't see ever returning to a way of thinking that allows one to believe anything at all or its polar opposite. How can such a method possibly be a path to truth?

One could believe evolutionary science or creationism by that method, which is essentially guessing, but only evolution if one's approach to deciding what is true about the world is reason and evidence based. If you guess wrong, expect reality to contradict you.

That should be a good indicator that the guess is wrong, but only if one notices that the evidence supports the other choice, which is kind of the problem for the faith-based thinker in the first place. He doesn't collect evidence and make decisions based on it, but rather, guesses and then sifts through the evidence looking for support for his guess while ignoring the evidence that suggests that he has guessed incorrectly.

Guess correctly, and it will be smooth sailing. Reality will confirm that you have guessed correctly by being in accord with that guess.

The same applies when guessing about gods. Guess correctly, and there will be no conflicting evidence. Guess incorrectly, and get ready for a lifetime of apologetics explaining why one's god behaves as if it doesn't exist.

Likewise with alchemy and astrology. They were guesses believed by faith, and wrong guesses at that, so naturally, reality didn't cooperate as hoped.

careful, it may be you who must adapt.

Adapt to what? The church has had to adapt many times to advances in science and humanistic ethics, not the other way around.

Or perhaps you were referring to American atheists adapting to theocratic tendencies there. You mentioned money and organization. If so, that's already been taken care of. I don't live in the States. But yes, people living there may need to adapt. They may need to go abroad for abortions, for example.

 

[Kenny]

Um.....are you aware that "public school" is another way of saying "government school"?

If it is a "government school" then indeed we have laid the foundation for a totalitarian government. That is what Communism did.

Thank you for confirming my position.

And no one is saying you have to. All that's going on here is that the government cannot endorse and promote a specific religion. Not that hard to understand.

Who said they were? Because we sing a Christmas song, we are endorsing a religion?

By your reasoning, any law constitutes "totalitarianism". A 20 mph speed limit in a school zone is the government exercising control over my freedom to drive however I want. Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? Well, that's how your argument sounds.

quite funny

 

[Woberts]

Or they are radicals who don't want religious people to have freedom?

Nope, they're not that either.
It's not restricting freedom to ensure that everyone has equal freedom.

 

[Woberts]

If it is a "government school" then indeed we have laid the foundation for a totalitarian government. That is what Communism did.

That is blatantly incorrect. Have fun being ignorant, I guess.
You're obviously going to stay bigoted, so there's nothing I can do there.

 

[Jose Fly]

If it is a "government school" then indeed we have laid the foundation for a totalitarian government. That is what Communism did.

I'm not sure what else to say to that, except that it's utterly and totally bizarre.

Who said they were? Because we sing a Christmas song, we are endorsing a religion?

Look at the broader context of the issue. It's not just the songs.

quite funny

I agree. Your arguments are both ridiculous and hilarious.

 

[Kenny]

Nope, they're not that either.
It's not restricting freedom to ensure that everyone has equal freedom.

IYHO

 

[Kenny]

That is blatantly incorrect. Have fun being ignorant, I guess.
You're obviously going to stay bigoted, so there's nothing I can do there.

That was quite a blatantly bigoted and incorrect statement.

 

[Kenny]

I'm not sure what else to say to that, except that it's utterly and totally bizarre.

Sometime the obvious goes beyond one's head.

 

[Jose Fly]

Sometime the obvious goes beyond one's head.

And sometimes one has to call things as they are. In this case, the notion that a public school system constitutes "totalitarianism" is simply absurd.

 

[Kenny]

And sometimes one has to call things as they are. In this case, the notion that a public school system constitutes "totalitarianism" is simply absurd.

You called it "government school"... are you doing the backstroke?

 

[Skwim]

If you actually want to be consistent, just abolish all public celebration of Christmas entirely.

All Christians have to do is keep it out of where it doesn't belong. And unless one is an utter dufus it should be all that difficult. Should it?

That’s how messed up the world is, you can be sacked for telling kids Santa is a fake, or censured for telling them Jesus is real. Where is the consistency?

Context dear danieldemol. Context.

Once again the State religion of Atheistic Secularism is being forced on people.

Secularism is the default position.

Not even the majority of atheists think that Jesus is a myth.

Yeah, I agree. That was going overboard a bit.

If you want to actually be consistent, then include all the other religion's myths as part of the celebration.

Yeah, wouldn't that be practical.

Hasnt christianity at least partually been hijacked by a cult? A bit like heresy became reality and thus what actually is heresy is no longer recognized?

And what cult would that be?

Maybe public schools should just avoid all cultural references/celebrations and get down to reading, 'riting and 'rithmetic.

All they have to do is avoid those things that are against the law. Simple as that.

That's hilarious. You complain about evolution being taught in science class, but when it's noted that evolution is taught in science class.....because it's science.....you wave that away as "irrelevant"?

What exactly are we supposed to teach in science class, if not science?

I believe it's called creation science. The only science worthy of our time.

​

This is totally stupid. The historical consensus is that Jesus was a real historical person.

Where's your proof? And please don't hold up your Bible.


.

 

[Jose Fly]

You called it "government school"... are you doing the backstroke?

???????? "Public school" and "government school" are the same thing. Sheesh.......

 

[Jose Fly]

All Christians have to do is keep it out of where it doesn't belong. And unless one is an utter dufus it should be all that difficult. Should it?

It is if they've been able to use the public school system to promote their religion for a very long time. Once that privilege starts to be taken away, they see it as oppression/discrimination, etc.

So yeah, it is difficult for them. It's still the right thing to do though.

 

[Father Heathen]

Within the context of what you said, it was.

"For a very long time, Christians have been able to use the public school system to evangelize students. Those days are rapidly coming to an end."

This is a "PUBLIC" school. You don't check out your religious beliefs when you enter a public school. For it to "come to an end" makes it a totalitarian position - dictionary.com

1. exercising control over the freedom, will, or thought of others; authoritarian; autocratic.

No, you cannot use the government's time and money to evangelize. How would you feel if Islam was being taught as truth to students in public school?
Government employees when on the job represent the government, and the government in turn represents all citizens. Nobody is being denied their beliefs. They're only being denied the use of the government to impose those beliefs upon others.

 

[ecco]

Ms. Cobb has reportedly told students in class that “Jesus is the reason we have Christmas.”… Ms. Cobb also reportedly told students in class that “Jesus is real.”

Ms. Cobb is obviously ignorant of history. She should, therefore, be fired.
Ms. Cobb is obviously if Constitutional law. She should, therefore, be fired.

 

[ecco]

The historical consensus is that Jesus was a real historical person.

Can you provide some evidence to support that assertion?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Can you provide some evidence to support that assertion?

"Virtually all New Testament scholars and Near East historians, applying the standard criteria of historical investigation, find that the historicity of Jesus is effectively certain[2][nb 1][nb 2][nb 3][nb 4][nb 5] although they differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the gospels.[nb 6][9][nb 7][11]:168–173 While scholars have criticized Jesus scholarship for religious bias and lack of methodological soundness,[nb 8] with very few exceptions such critics generally do support the historicity of Jesus and reject the Christ myth theory that Jesus never existed.[13][nb 9][15][16][17]"

Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia

The idea that Jesus never existed is a fringe theory.

 

[stvdv]

Once again the State religion of Atheistic Secularism is being forced on people.

Some call it God others Karma, but it works. For 2000 years Christians forced Christianity onto Atheists and now karma (atheists) bites them 0n the butt.

Too bad though, I do like Christmas. I hope people learn from this and just stop bugging/evangelizing. If not, God will use Karma over and over to teach.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Once again the State religion of Atheistic Secularism is being forced on people.

False. People are still free to attend the most bigoted and insular church of their choice-- every Sunday, Wednesday and Friday Night too.

Public school is mandatory. Church attendance is not.

That's rather a distinct difference. But seriously I doubt you'll comprehend why...

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Not even the majority of atheists think that Jesus is a myth. Only conspiracy theorists think He never existed. Everyone else just differs on whether or not He is God incarnate..

I think he's a myth. So do all the latest, most modern scholars, studying the archaeology of the Middle East. So do the majority of scholars that are not brainwashed by Xian Tradition.

The fact that there is not one single document, statue, stone-carving that mentions "jesus" during his alleged life?

Is all the proof I need that he's 100% myth.