Chuck Norris Roundhouse Kicks Separation Of Church And State

Run time: 01:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pnFg0Sp2Xw   Posted on YouTube: September 06, 2006 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: November 23, 2007 By DU Member: 951-Riverside Views on DU: 1426

 
...why chuck?? :( :cry:

how many marriages has he had? :puke: :puke:

Who's Bible?

What about us Free Thinkers who don't want our kids brainwashed by your bible Curriculum??

Dumbass....

A huge portion of Western culture is based on knowing something about the Bible. It's inescapable for that reason.

However, it's the history part that bugs me, and you and I both know that "history and literature" isn't the reason these nutcases want the Bible taught in school. A close examination of the curriculum AND the lesson plans should be available to anyone who wants it.

The Book of Mormon, Greek Myths, Aeneid, Books of Zoaster, Book of Mani, etc...

You know, all the fairy tales that make up religion.

A degree of Bible literacy is necessary to understand a great chunk of Western culture and history.

Most schools I know DO teach Greek myths for the same reason.

However, the other books aren't necessary to acquire a working knowledge of Western culture. You might dip into the Koran when discussing the Crusades, and the Book of Mormon when discussing the settling of Western America.

But I stress that this is only so far as it enhances a real understanding of the issues and themes of Western history and culture. The problem is teaching the Bible itself as history, or teaching it as a moral guide for the students. That's when you're violating the Establishment Clause.

Is Western culture the only culture worth learning about? How about Native American culture too?

Anyway the point is moot. Culture is off the table until we get rid of No Child Left Behind. Then we might get some Civics and Economics in school.

--IMM

Thank you for making that assumption about me, but I protest myself innocent of such a thought.

I don't think I said anything about you. I was reacting to that omission in your post.

But you got me thinking. I'm wondering if any part of those religious text are necessary to understanding history. We treat Greek classics as literature, not religion. All those others are similarly literary works. Whatever influence religion itself has on history could be summed up in a paragraph or two. History itself is outside those works.

--IMM

Constantine and the Council of Nicea, Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation, the Catholic/Protestant split in England. You're right that most references to the Bible or other religious works could be handled in a paragraph or two, and sides shouldn't be taken at all in those debates.

Maybe you could help me out here, but it seems that there is nothing in history that depends on anything the bible says. It's a matter of whether people agree on what it says, or an interpretation of what it says, and that should tell you something.

It's similar to what is happening today. What the bible actually says is not germane to the political differences which are in play. Whether indulgences can be for sale requires no understanding of biblical text, rather it's a function of the politics of that day.

The best one could do, I think, is use the literature as a clue to the thinking of a time. In that sense, I think each of the mythologies is relevant as a key to the human psyche.

--IMM

They may be the only three in Western Civ history, but they are three. The Protestant Reformation was aboutmore than indulgences. Luther's doctrine of salvation by faith, his basis for rejecting indulgences, was even more important to his break from the Catholic Church. In England, the doctrine of divorce clashed with the political needs of Henry VIII. The continued struggle between Catholic and Protestant monarchs there justifies a quick look at the differences between the two groups.

And a brief mention of the Christological debate at the heart of the Council of Nicea would be in order. The Council allowed Constantine to empower a new state religion indebted to his grace. The way he forced a unification here was important to the empire and the church.

When politics and religion mix in history, the religious side is worth speaking about. This can be done without violating the Establishment Clause.

These were political disputes. Studying the bible would not clarify anything about Henry's divorce. It was a power dispute between him and the Pope. There's no biblical answer to any of this except I'll admit that it is useful in context to know what they were pretending to argue about. They may as well have been arguing about whether Snow White lived with six dwarfs or seven dwarfs.

Notice that you have made these points without referencing scripture. Reading it does not clarify in the least whether salvation is obtained by faith or by deeds, or whether salvation even exists.

--IMM

But that's just me.

Personally the sooner we can rid Western Culture of Christianity, the better.

I so thank you for your input. Why is it the religious right feels that they have a monopoly on religion? I'm all for freedom of religion...ALL RELIGIONS!

However,
Our fore fathers really worked hard to keep religion and politics separate!

Their teacher happened to be Jewish. It was quite interesting. I'm Unitarian. The course was fine. I'm sure it wouldn't always be so good.

For example, I've seen a sample worksheet passed out in one of the "less good" classes. It was a collection of quotations from famous people throughout history talking about what a good book the Bible was, and how it was the basis of morality, etc. That's an establishment of religion.

But comparing the creation stories in Genesis to Paradise Lost in a high school English classroom? Or comparing the legend of Heracles to the stories of Samson in a creative writing class? That's establishing critical thinking skills.

can withstand the fury of the Chuck.

There are only weak spots in society that Chuck Norris allows to exist so that the terrorists might enter and Chuck Norris more quickly lay the smackdown upon them.

If the churches want to feed at the public trough, they're going to have to pay their taxes like everybody else.

To quote Chuck - "Our forefathers founded this country on biblical principles, and they never intended the Bible to be removed from our schools."

Some news for you Chuck - Strictly speaking, our forefathers never intended for there to BE schools. The word "School" doesn't appear in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.

Forget the separation of church and state issue (which is pretty clear, by the way). If you claim to be basing your conclusions on the thoughts of the founding fathers, you'd want to get rid of schools altogether.

Why is your wife there Chucky?