Should Religious leaders be involved in any form of public school employment

[IndieVisible]

Again: if you're right, then there's no good reason to ban the people. Just ban the behaviour and the people will ban themselves.

We already have that in place.

The Good Reason would be We should be strict in hiring teachers.

You wouldn't want convicted pedophiles as teachers would you? I mean how do we know they have not learned there lesson? We don't, but why take the chance.

Keep religion out of schools and gov. No back door access either!

Just saying, that's my opinion

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

We already have that in place.

And yet ordained clergy still work as teachers without getting themselves fired. This indicates that you were incorrect.

You wouldn't want convicted pedophiles as teachers would you? I mean how do we know they have not learned there lesson? We don't, but why take the chance.

If you want to know what I think of that stupid and insulting analogy, you can look back in the thread and see my response to Axis Mundi when he made it.

 

[IndieVisible]

And yet ordained clergy still work as teachers without getting themselves fired. This indicates that you were incorrect.


If you want to know what I think of that stupid and insulting analogy, you can look back in the thread and see my response to Axis Mundi when he made it.

I don't really care what your response is/was.

 

[AxisMundi]

As you say, it's a poor analogy at best. You have no reason to assume religious people won't follow the law.

Firstly "religious people" are not being discussed here, again. It is professional clergy we speak of.

Second, I've every reason to believe "religious people", or clergy, won't abide by the law where religion is concerned.

Examples abound.

 

[Draka]

I completely abide by the law. AND I'm a good teacher. and I'm really starting to feel very attacked here when no one here who's doing the attacking knows me or how I teach or how I am religiously at all. This IS personal to me. Don't you people realize you are attacking random innocent people who have done nothing to warrant your venom???

 

[IndieVisible]

I completely abide by the law. AND I'm a good teacher. and I'm really starting to feel very attacked here when no one here who's doing the attacking knows me or how I teach or how I am religiously at all. This IS personal to me. Don't you people realize you are attacking random innocent people who have done nothing to warrant your venom???

How can you feel personally attacked? Has any one addressed you personally? The topic here is not you but should ordained religious people be allowed to be teachers. So this may apply to you, big deal. My guess is many threads apply to you in some way, are you offended often or feel personally attacked then too?

No one is attacking any one randomly or personally lol, this is a discussion and on topic. If it offends you don't read any more.

 

[Storm]

Do you throw around the prejudice racist card at every one you disagree with?

Nope, only the bigots.

 

[IndieVisible]

Nope, only the bigots.

Not a problem, as long as I know what to expect.

So any one you disagree with is a racist or bigot, got it lol.

 

[Storm]

Not a problem, as long as I know what to expect.

So any one you disagree with is a racist or bigot, got it lol.

No, but a spade is a spade. You want to deny people employment based on a stereotype, that's bigotry.

 

[IndieVisible]

No, but a spade is a spade. You want to deny people employment based on a stereotype, that's bigotry.

No, I want separation of state and religion. And the schools should be secular. DESPITE my personal belief in God, I don't want religion in the schools. I make no distinction between any of the religions. Stereotype is more on the line of what your applying to me for my stand which is constitutional.

I already said if lawmakers said it's ok and fine for Bishops and Witches to teach our children in public schools I will respect the law. Won't like it, but respect it.

 

[Storm]

No, I want separation of state and religion. And the schools should be secular. DESPITE my personal belief in God, I don't want religion in the schools. I make no distinction between any of the religions.

Neither do I, nor anyone else here. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?

Stereotype is more on the line of what your applying to me for my stand which is constitutional.

1) Your stance is not Constitutional.

2) You need to look up "stereotype." Hint: "you're wrong" is not a stereotype.

I already said if lawmakers said it's ok and fine for Bishops and Witches to teach our children in public schools I will respect the law. Won't like it, but respect it.

Good, because they already have.

 

[Draka]

How can you feel personally attacked? Has any one addressed you personally? The topic here is not you but should ordained religious people be allowed to be teachers. So this may apply to you, big deal. My guess is many threads apply to you in some way, are you offended often or feel personally attacked then too?

No one is attacking any one randomly or personally lol, this is a discussion and on topic. If it offends you don't read any more.

What did I say? You are attacking random innocent people you know nothing about. Comments about how all clergy proselytize, can't separate their religious lives from their occupations, have a conflict of interest, and best yet...can't obey the law. NONE of those apply to me, therefore...all the assumptions are wrong. If one person doesn't fit the stereotype then the stereotype cannot be blanket applied to all. No matter how bad you wish it to be so.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, I want separation of state and religion. And the schools should be secular.

I'll tell you what I told AxisMundi:

One of the fundamental aspects of secularism is not giving special treatment, whether positive or negative, to people on the basis of their religious beliefs or lack thereof. You're talking about excluding people from occupations on the basis of nothing other than their religious affiliation; this runs completely counter to the ideals of secularism.

 

[IndieVisible]

What did I say? You are attacking random innocent people you know nothing about. Comments about how all clergy proselytize, can't separate their religious lives from their occupations, have a conflict of interest, and best yet...can't obey the law. NONE of those apply to me, therefore...all the assumptions are wrong. If one person doesn't fit the stereotype then the stereotype cannot be blanket applied to all. No matter how bad you wish it to be so.

Please show me where I said all? I did say *most* would follow their moral obligation to follow God's law over mans law. I see nothing wrong in taking this extra precaution to safeguard our children from religious fanatics of any flavor. I admit that I don't know for sure that *most* would or would not but I do feel a significant amount would and I see no reason to error in favor of our children and also in favor of fair play to every one. I am not concerned if I hurt the feelings of ordained ministers in this view. I simply do NOT want religion creeping in our schools.

Any way make up your mind, am I randomly attacking people I don't know or personally attacking you? What really has you riled up? I am just voicing my opinion.

 

[Marathon runner]

I have been tutoring since I was 19. I'm 33 now. NOT ONCE has the subject of religion EVER come up in all these years. Just because you say something would happen, based on your obviously limited knowledge, doesn't mean it will happen.

you're tutoring not making opinions about your client and really I don't think you're abusing your clients there's a difference but if you are then , YOU'RE FIRED ! is your reward .Shouldn'nt it be that way for all teachers ...AND RELIGIOUS LEADERS

 

[Storm]

you're tutoring not making opinions about your client and really I don't think you're abusing your clients there's a difference but if you are then , YOU'RE FIRED ! is your reward .Shouldn'nt it be that way for all teachers ...AND RELIGIOUS LEADERS

Of course. No one's arguing that. We're arguing the assumption that religious people automatically abuse people.

 

[IndieVisible]

Of course. No one's arguing that. We're arguing the assumption that religious people automatically abuse people.

I thought we were arguing about ordained religious people?

 

[Storm]

I thought we were arguing about ordained religious people?

Maybe you are, the conversation did drift that way. However, the OP never said whether they were ordained or not. Anyway, I say it makes no difference.

 

[IndieVisible]

Maybe you are, the conversation did drift that way. However, the OP never said whether they were ordained or not. Anyway, I say it makes no difference.

Yea you may be right, maybe no religious people at all would be better then.

 

[Storm]

Yea you may be right, maybe no religious people at all would be better then.