|
« TAP TO LOG IN
|
Play online chess!
Public (Government controlled) or Private?
« Back to club forum
| |||||||
| From | Message | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 Public (Government controlled) or Private? With the elimination of specific Christian standards to guide our public schools the morality taught our children has been guided by the secular/ humanist ideology now ruling in our Government. They call the educational system “public”, but the conservative/ Christian values held by most of our “public” are blatantly ignored! This policy has made our public schools indoctrination institutions for the secular/ humanist outlook now so prevalent in America. “ In the Humanist Magazine (Jan/Feb, 1983, p. 26), humanist author John Dunphy says: . . . a viable alternative to [Christianity] must be sought. That alternative is humanism. I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level . . . . The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new . . .. the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism . . . . That friends, is a declaration of war. Our children are under attack in the classroom day in and day out, yet many parents do not even know the war has begun! When parents do show concern about this danger, about all they hear from educators is denial and ridicule. Despite the denials, consider the evidence that humanism is indeed the predominant philosophy of modern public education.” www.truthmagazine.com Is the religion of Secular Humanism being taught in public school classrooms? “There are two basic approaches to defining religion: a substantive approach, which focuses on the content of belief; and a functional approach, which focuses on what the belief system does for the individual or community. As James Davison Hunter explains: The substantive model generally delimits religion to the range of traditional theism: Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and so on. The functional model, in contrast, is more inclusive. By defining religion according to its social function, the functional model treats religion largely as synonymous with such terms as cultural system, belief system, meaning system, moral order, ideology, world view and cosmology.[1] “Education is thus a most powerful ally of Humanism, and every American public school is a school of Humanism.” (1) James Davison Hunter, “Religious Freedom and the Challenge of Modern Pluralism,” in Articles of Faith, Articles of Peace: The Religious Liberty Clauses and the American Public Philosophy, James Davison Hunter and Os Guiness, eds. (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1990), p. 58. christiananswers.net |
||||||
|
America's Re-education Camps The other day I was listening to an interview about how the public schools in America are being used as "re-education camps" with an agenda to replace the Judeo/ Christian values once so prominent in our society. This led me to consider if there might be other examples of such "re-education" programs. Indeed, there are! "One of the main components of many of these orientations is diversity, or sensitivity training. Attendance is usually mandatory and often tax-funded. Students will watch films and participate in exercises designed to shake the values they acquired from their culture and families. Two of the most popular diversity-training films are Blue Eyed and Skin Deep." "The 90-minute Blue Eyed documents an experiment conducted by Jane Elliott, a $6,000-a-day sensitivity trainer. In it, a group of 40 people are divided into blue-eyed and brown-eyed people. The former are psychologically brutalized; the latter are psychologically empowered as a lesson in white racism." "Hugh Vasquez's Skin Deep documents a workshop on race. One section of the accompanying study guide — entitled White Privilege — declares that white privilege controls all power in society and that whites must assume their guilt." www.google.com "Hillary Clinton Calls For 'Re-Education Camps' For Americans As NWO Moves One Step Closer To A Boot Stamping On A Human Face...Forever!" allnewspipeline.com |
||||||
|
dmaestro 12-May-18, 14:56 |
Of course right wingers deny it because it’s the underlying theme of their culture war agenda. That’s how Trump “won” despite losing the election. All is fair in war of course including your racist propaganda but we are not going to sit back and just let you win. pjmedia.com |
||||||
|
dmaestro 12-May-18, 19:39 |
Trump correctly saw the racial and cultural divides which exemplify the Republicans and their less educated etnic and race based tribe. As I said your side made it clear you wanted war and a “choice not an echo”. www.conservapedia.com Your side has worked tirelessly since the 1950s on this war. I knew it long ago because I pay attention. I believe you have overreached with Trump. We shall see. |
||||||
|
Criticism and Controversy charges,[40] but the debate continues. According to The New York Times, "there isn't even that much consistency in the same person's scores if the test is taken again".[41] In addition, researchers have recently claimed that results of the IAT might be biased by the participant's lacking cognitive capability to adjust to switching categories, thus biasing results in favor of the first category pairing (e.g. pairing "Asian" with positive stimuli first, instead of pairing "Asian" with negative stimuli first).[42] According to Jesse Singal, some of these issues have been settled in the research literature, but others continue to inspire debate among researchers and lay people alike.[34]" en.m.wikipedia.org << Of course right wingers deny it because it’s the underlying theme of their culture war agenda. That’s how Trump “won” despite losing the election. All is fair in war of course including your racist propaganda but we are not going to sit back and just let you win. >> A very strong and very slanderous statement! Where is your documentation??!! |
||||||
|
Political Alignment Classical Liberalism Social Liberalism Economic Liberalism Radical Centrism en.m.wikipedia.org Of course, you are free to state your views, but as captain of a club who is unashamedly Conservative and Christian, such views are definitely not welcomed nor appreciated here. Not because they are opposite of Conservative and Christian values, but because it is due to these Liberal views/ values that America is now in the midst of the culture war in which we Americans now find ourselves. |
||||||
|
dmaestro 13-May-18, 02:38 |
|
||||||
|
dmeastro . . . You have a very, very bad propensity in trying to confuse religious orthodoxy with American politics. Though one, traditional Christian orthodoxy, led to the other, Conservative/ Christian politics, they are not synonymous. And unlike you, I will provide documentation for my assertions. "Last week, the American Renewal Project hosted a fourteen-minute call with former Speaker Newt Gingrich. He said: "We have had a long run of left-wing, secular, often atheistic rules and regulations imposed on our country. We've had a coalition that grew up in the universities, the newsrooms, in Hollywood, that are really opposed to what everyone on this call believes in. We have begun, I think, to turn the corner in winning the fight and what really is, as Dennis Prager has said, "A cultural civil war. The second American civil war…" The crux of the problem is what Gingrich described as a coalition that's "opposed to what everyone on this call believes in." What we're seeing in America is a collision of two competing worldviews — i.e., religions: Christianity vs. Secularism. Each worldview is inherently expansive and evangelistic. One is true and one is false The ideology that transports its followers into the public square will dominate the Republic. Why? In a democratic republic, where ultimate power rests in its citizens that are entitled to vote, elected representatives wield the power. If Christians stay home, secularists — proponents of 1) taking the life of an unborn child, 2) same-sex intercourse and marriage, and 3) forcing states to open female restrooms, showers, and locker rooms up to men — will impose their agenda. This is Politics 101. The powerless state of the modern Church is what is most puzzling; it may be an eschatological problem. Christians have become skilled at imitating the gentle, turn the other cheek, Jesus. Where is the turn-over-the-tables Jesus, indignant at the assault on liberty by godless secularists? But one thing is clear, there is no fear in the itty-bitty stick that Christians bring to the public square as of Let's make an application. Take Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill. Bothersome is the imprecision in the Department of Justice, and the impression of a double standard for the well connected vs. the average citizen. I quoted last fall a portion of Dinesh D'Souza's speech at Liberty University: The 'big fries' are still at large. The 'big fries' never get caught, in fact, the system doesn't even go after them. Why? Because they run the system. They're too well connected in the system. Then my mind went forward to Bill Clinton having his little rendezvous with Loretta Lynch on the tarmac. It went to Obama signaling to his boy James Comey and signaling over to Lynch, 'Hey, Hillary's my girl. I'm turning over the baton to Hillary. Lay off Hillary. When Hillary became Secretary of State this was a very profitable moment for the Clinton's. Why? Well, you can track it: Bill Clinton's lecture fee went from $150K to $600K — as soon as Hillary became Secretary of State. This is to give a 20-minute speech." STEP 1 - "Now you think that people are paying $600K to hear Bill give you the same rubbish that you can listen for free online? No, they're paying for a speech — it's kind of a bribe. It's kind of a down payment for something that the 'Giver' — and by the way, we're not talking about American 'Givers' only, we're not just talking about Goldman Sachs, we're also talking about foreign entities, foreign governments. The 'Giver' wants something, and so they pay Bill Clinton to speak." STEP 2 — Hillary now delivers the 'something' that the donor wants. So in a very specific case, there were a group of billionaire Indians that wanted Hillary to change her position and support the Indian nuclear deal. Hillary was against it. But once Bill began to be invited to India, and money began flowing his way, Hillary had a change of heart, she switched her position. She supports the Indian nuclear deal. Pastors and pews have begun to reengage in the public square, which is the good news. Gideons and Rahabs are beginning to stand, there is going to be a resurrection! Why? "Five of you shall chase a hundred, and a hundred of you shall put ten thousand to flight…"* David Lane American Renewal Project * Leviticus 26:8 www1.cbn.com |
||||||
|
Let us be Honest Here . . . Along with this amending of my stance I have come to discern another phenomena which I have been ignorant/ blind in taking into consideration. My inability to come to terms with the fact that Americans are becoming more secular, and have chosen to distant themselves away from those conservative/ Christian values which I champion has, as dmaestro observes, made ME A FLASH POINT for controversy. “Americans becoming more secular” medium.com This is a stunning revelation for me, and something which I will require some time to digest and reflect on before further posts. In the interim, I apologize to all club members, especially I apologize to dmaestro. This club will not be built of personal whms or fancies of my choosing. Regardless of the reality which I may find troublesome, truth will be honored here. |
||||||
|
dmaestro 13-May-18, 11:40 |
Growing Secularism in public affairs is the case in basically all modern western countries. I don’t think culture war with its compulsion or self righteous judgement is the solution for this time. People are born for their times. Young evangelicals are adopting a different approach more suited for the coming times. IMO. |
||||||
|
dmaestro 13-May-18, 11:56 |
I don’t think young evangelicals are becoming leftist or hedonist but I believe they have a better sense of the corruption of political hypocrisy and how live in this time and to share God’s love for their time and generation. www.biblestudytools.com |
||||||
|
How do they “share God’s love for their time and generation.”? Look, I understand that as a minority among the majority of secularists, Christians are seen as probably intrusive and “out of touch”, even. Especially, if very many of them take the stance I had. Which was to say that secularists were taking a wrong path, judging them for their beliefs and for their choices. I ask what today's evangelicals believe because maybe the problem isn't in what evangelicals believe so much as that they are not being taught enough about living as salt and light in the world. And instead are compromising their beliefs for the sake of not being labled “intolerant” or “unaccommodating” or “unaccepting”. You, know, those buzz word phrases about “inclusiveness” and such. My understanding of Christianity and living according to the doctrines passed to us by our church fathers means understanding how not to compromise our morals and values in spite of the apparent acceptance of so many questionable and gray area practices which do not honor our Savior. Have “being all things to all people” (1 Corinthians 9:19 – 23) mean that we compromise? Another article titled “Amid Evangelical Decline; Growing Split Between Young Christians and Church Elders” I read this - “The number of white evangelical Protestants fell from about 23 percent of the US population in 2006 to 17 percent in 2016, and only 11 percent are under 30, according to a survey of more than 100,000 Americans. For a variety of reasons, fewer and fewer Americans now have a grasp of the fundamentals of orthodox, biblical teachings, says Mr. Walker, director of policy studies for the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. Like many who keep attuned to the country’s religious landscape, he notes, too, the dramatic rise of the so-called “nones,” especially among the young, who may believe in God, but have begun to refuse to identify with a particular religious group. www.csmonitor.com This indicates to me that the Church has failed in “passing the torch” and younger evangelicals are not being properly equipped in face the world. |
||||||
|
What is this about? What "specific Christian standards?" Last time I checked, schools still taught the little tykes not to lie, cheat, or steal. Standards too many self proclaimed Christians now seem to embrace--lying about birth control (no, nature does NOT have a way of preventing rape pregnancy, Mr Akin!), lying about secular humanism, lying about Planned Parenthood, or those phony pregnancy crisis centers set up to lie to young women. While I have not seen Christians advocate stealing or cheating, they certainly ignore the stealing and cheating of our current CIC. So what, pray tell, specific "Christian standards" are being eliminated from our cherished public schools? |
||||||
|
Identifying With Specific Religion |
||||||
|
Dmaestro "I don’t think young evangelicals are becoming leftist or hedonist but I believe they have a better sense of the corruption of political hypocrisy and how [to] live in this time and to share God’s love for their time and generation." While I do not know many young evangelicals, I do get the same sense. They are rejecting the hypocrisy embraced by the moral majority crowd of Robertson and Falwell. These two thought Christianity could not be corrupted by politics. They are so wrong. Jesus spoke against the very thing they sought to do. The Pharisees were the enemies of Jesus, not his friends. Yet Robertson and Falwell were ideological Pharisees, through and through. |
||||||
|
lord_shiva. . . (looking for Christian standards . . .) We know you have an issue with Christian standards and morals, I get that. I will allow your views to be posted, but, again, you better provide DOCUMENTATION OR POSTS WILL BE DELETED. Also, help those who read your posts by explaining certain abbreviations which may not be universally known/ understood. Why should we do all the homework? CIC?(Second Warning) What specific Christian standards are being eliminated? Well, as I see it, a general lack of respect for authority and for conservative values, again, generally speaking. Back when I went to school we were not allowed to speak unless given permission and then only with a respectful attitude, or we would be disciplined by the teachers or the principle. Students had a healthy fear of not displeasing our teachers. More to the point they had our respect for them as adults, generally speaking. Up to and through the fourth grade when I was about nine years old my teacher still had the authority to use a ruler on my open hands if she deemed it appropriate. That would never happen today. In the eight grade, when I was 14 years old our core teacher was authorized to keep the whole class after school so we could “practice” going to the lunch room quietly. Imagine that in todays schools? At that same school the graphic arts teachers would ask boys who misbehaved/ disrespected him to assume “the thinking position”. The boy would be asked to get down on the floor on his hands and knees. They would then put their knees on their palms and forehead on the floor and “think” about their reason for being there. We kids went to school to learn or we were expelled. Period. Now days we have instead . . . “Who Killed School Discipline? Court decisions and federal laws have turned principals into psychobabbling bureaucrats.” www.city-journal.org “Education Beyond the Three R's: It's Time to Teach Ethics in the Public Schools “ Children today are growing up in an environment of moral decay. They are confronted with evil influence on every hand. Their music and video heroes purvey a constant diet of drugs, sex and violence. Even in their schools children face drug abuse, sexual immorality and negative peer pressure. By the fourth grade one out of every four school children in America will have been pressured to use marijuana or alcohol. Teenage sexual activity has increased 66 percent in the last two decades and teen suicide has skyrocketed 250 percent in that same time period. An NBC television recently challenged America to "See Dick and Jane Lie, Cheat and Steal," a sobering look at the moral and ethical crisis among America's youth. What does the future hold for our children? For America? Where will our children, the leaders of tomorrow, learn their moral and ethical values? Can it be in our public schools which have all but abdicated responsibility for training in morality, character and ethics? The state department of education in one mid-western state has gone so far as to publish a statement claiming that "it is not within the purview of public education to propagate moral values." Many teachers today do not believe it is their responsibility to teach morals and values to students and even those who would like to do so believe that such is prohibited by law. Many are unable to articulate a consistent set of values or they are products of the colleges of the 1960s and 1970s which were strongly influenced by a philosophy of "do your own thing" and "situational ethics." Educational, political and business leaders alike are decrying the public school's attitude toward the teaching of ethics and values. Spencer Kagan, professor of education at the University of California, Riverside, says that one of the major problems facing the American educational system today is its failure to socialize students toward pro-social values and behaviors such as respect and care for others. And former Secretary of Education William Bennett asserts that "in our haste to offend no one and satisfy all, we have swept the teaching of values we all share right out of the classroom." As much as public education strives to be value neutral it cannot be. As David T. Kearns, head of Xerox Corporation, said in a speech to the Economic Club of Detroit, "Anyone who thinks its possible to have a value-neutral education is dead wrong. Everything is not relative. Exclude values from the schools, and you teach that values are not important." www.truthmagazine.com Students' Broken Moral Compasses The pressures of national academic standards have pushed character education out of the classroom. www.theatlantic.com |
||||||
|
lord_shiva. . . Equipping Young People . . . “Teaching Ethical Thinking in Every Christian Classroom” In a culture of moral relativism it is critical that Christian school students need to be taught ethical standards as the Bible teaches them. As the public education system has systematically removed a Christian philosophy of education since the 1960s1, a few analysts have decried the apparently valueless instruction (and students) that have followed.2 More than one critic, many of them secular, has argued that amorality or moral relativism cannot produce a truly humane or desirable (or even functioning) culture. A few educators have provided resources to those who want to teach values or ethics in a religiously neutral environment.3 Even though our society pretends to believe that there are no absolutes, no one really lives that way; the most aggressive moral relativist will insist on getting the correct change when he purchases something, and the most radical public educator will directly condemn, with moral language, those who disagree with him even as he proclaims that there are no moral absolutes. 1This trend was given its greatest impetus by the infamous Supreme Court decision in Engel v. Vitale (1962) in which the Court ruled 6-1 (2 justices did not participate) that a nondenominational prayer composed by school authorities in New York State was unconstitutional even though participation was voluntary. In an earlier decision (McCollum v. Board of Education District 71 [1948]) the Court had ruled (8-1) that voluntary religious classes held on school property in Champaign, Illinois, were unconstitutional. 2Perhaps the most graphic illustration of the problem was the attack on Columbine High School near Denver, Colorado, in 1999. Two disaffected students killed 12 fellow students and 1 teacher (as well as themselves) in a shooting rampage. 3See, for example, the work of Anthony Tiatorio, a longtime teacher in the Massachusetts public school system, at www.ethicsineducation.com; the National Character Education Center at www.ethicsusa.com www.bjupress.com “Christian Ethics and Culture” The development of ethical student leadership Ethical leadership is the critical appropriation and embodiment of moral traditions that have shaped the character and shared meanings of a people (an ethos). In fact, ethical leadership does not emerge from a historical vacuum, but arises from particular traditions. Ethical leaders speak authoritatively and act responsibly with the aim of serving the collective good. They are, therefore, leaders whose characters have been shaped by the wisdom, habits, and practices of particular traditions, yet they tend to be identified with a specific cultural ethos and narrative. Finally, ethical leadership asks the question of values in reference to ultimate concern (Fluker 2009, 33). Figure 1 depicts the model upon which this definition of ethical leadership is based. The central triangle incorporates three dynamically interrelated dimensions of human existence: self, social, and spiritual. In the dimension of the self, or the personal, the concern is with questions of identity and purpose: Who am I? What do I want? What do I propose to do and become? The social or public dimension involves the relationship with the other: To whom and what am I ultimately accountable? The spiritual addresses the human need for a sense of ultimacy, excellence, and hope with reference to the great mystery of being: Who am I? What do I want? What do I propose to do and become? Who is the other? How am I to respond to the actions of the other upon me? This latter dimension should not be narrowly identified with religion, although religious experience can be vital resource in one’s spiritual quest. For this third dimension, I am more interested in answering the questions of identity and purpose in respect to how emerging leaders perceive their own quests for meaning in relation to the demands of the other, which raises germinal questions of recognition, respect, and reverence as well as questions of courage, justice, and compassion. Figure 1. Ethical Ethical Leadership: Defining Virtures, Values, and Virtuosities of Character, Civility, and Community www.aacu.org |
||||||
|
DM |
||||||
|
I'm Uncertain But we have all heard the lies that abortion causes an increase in breast cancer risk. Here is the truth: www.cancer.org Oh, and you are quoting BOB JONES UNIVERSITY tripe? That isn't a legitimate source. Why don't you quote Sesame Street? I would at least nod my head in approval that your source was legit. Many public schools, as I noted, teach basic moral principles. "Morality, in addition to raw academics, plays an important role in society." www.teachhub.com Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said “Intelligence plus character – that is the goal of true education.” Dr. King also compared education without morals to a “Ship without a compass.” "There are a number of formal ethics and character programs available to assist schools and communities with the moral development of their youth." So I ask, IHS, if we are NOT teaching morality in our public schools, why do we have such a number of formal ethics and character programs for assisting schools with moral development? |
||||||
|
Documentation on Hamstringing Students www.tolerance.org How the religious right undermines education, eroding chances for success of students in the modern world: blog.smu.edu I am compelled to ponder, if analytical thinking erodes religious faith, does religion undermine analytical thinking skills? articles.latimes.com Plus, one more link on public school success with teaching morality, this one in liberal New York. Unfortunately, the CIC (Commander-in-Chief) had already graduated before moral instruction was incorporated into the curriculum. He remains an example of failure for successful adoption of moral instruction. www.nytimes.com |
||||||
|
Specific Documentation . . . in no way equips any young person to face the world, but instead creates an environment by which they may hide from it. >>, says lord_shiva. To back up his assertions . . .nada. And lord_shiva asserts, "Last time I checked, schools still taught the little tykes not to lie, cheat, or steal." As far as I can tell kids are only taught moral relativism. Which means they are taught nada! |
||||||
|
Specific Documentation Hermitages, cloisters, "be ye in the world, not 'of' the world," all are methods of avoiding 'real' life. Following web site lists religious retreats for Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other dominant religious faiths. www.retreatsonline.com How about one teeny suggestion, IHS? You provide documentation when you want, or when requested, and I will do the same. Otherwise if you state something obvious, like 2+2 = 4, and I agree, I won't demand that you back up your assertion. Does that seem fair? www.quora.com www.askamathematician.com math.stackexchange.com www.thescienceforum.com [The link above references Landau's "Foundations of Analysis," Rudin's "Principles of Mathematical Analysis," the Zermelo Fraenkel axioms, and in the middle is a lovely bit of mathemagical wizardry by Heinsbergrelatz invoking typographical number theory I first ran across in Hoffstadter's, "Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal, Golden Braid."] The above is pretty weak, being that the assertion truly is not well established in any of the links provided. I can elaborate further if desired. |
||||||
|
Reason for Supplication I'm not buying a new iPad simply because Apple refuses to support perfectly functional hardware that is just a little bit old. Documentation: Version 5.1.1 (9B206) Model MC824LL |
||||||
|
Assertions So I take it you either ignore the links provided or dismiss them out of hand. Why request documentation you're going to overlook anyway? And why provide documentation from illegitimate sources? I ask for your source on students being instructed in moral relativism (and there is nothing wrong with that--morality IS relative, not absolute*1,*2), and you are likely going to post some bogus nonsense religious web site that makes up its facts as it goes along. How is THAT legitimate? *1 www.philosophersmag.com 7497/3 = 2499, 7497 is NOT prime (objectively demonstrated). *2 bigthink.com |
||||||
|
Relative Morality If I leave students’ relativism unchallenged and ask “Was the Holocaust evil and immoral?” many students will say “No.” “Was slavery evil and immoral?” I ask. Students often respond, “No. At the time people thought it was moral; society said it was moral, so it was moral.” Students enter my classroom believing nothing is truly good or evil and that moral beliefs are the result of what society says. Their moral nihilism can be seen when they write good and evil with scare quotes—i.e., “good” and “evil”—and when they demonstrate their desire to tolerate any evil imaginable as long as it is practiced in another culture. Teachers are apparently so worried that moral disagreements will lead to conflicts that they teach that “everyone is entitled to their opinion.” Well-meaning liberal teachers think they are thereby promoting “tolerance,” but they are actually unintentionally producing moral nihilism in their students, leaving them with the moral compass of a psychopath." www.jamesgmartin.center The above is a perfect example of the moral relativism which my 8th grade core teacher taught his class. If you can be honest I would suggest that you, also, were taught the same. "Moral Relativism and the Crisis of Contemporary Education" As a life-long teacher, I might also be granted indulgence if I grumble about how little my college students actually know compared to what I learned. And although there is as much justice as exaggeration in these observations, the thing that never ceases to amaze me is how morally stunted and ethically underdeveloped our students are, how utterly unable to make even obvious moral distinctions, and how completely uninterested in differentiating between virtue and vice. www.thenewamerican.com |
||||||
|
James G. Martin Center The Martin Center's commentaries and research papers have called for budget cuts to the UNC system and for increasing faculty teaching loads and eliminating teaching reductions for administrators. The Center's director of research, George Leef, has argued for cuts in funding for the university system generally, and to eliminate the public subsidies for the state's scholarly press (the University of North Carolina Press), terming it a "boondoggle". In its broadest aim, the Center has argued for "renewal of the university", advocating the creation of privately funded academic centers, which, in their view, would offer balance to academic courses. So this organization is tainted by a morally bankrupt conservative philosophy. That does mean they are wrong on this issue, which would be an argument ad hominem, but it does cast a pall of suspicion. I would post the link here but cannot copy more than one object to the clipboard at a time. Key Wiki and the center name into Google, it should come up on top. |
||||||
|
That does mean they are wrong on this issue, which would be an argument ad hominem, but it does cast a pall of suspicion. >> How does. UNC's decision to have a change in internal budget policies make the Martin Center "morally bankrupt"?!! Run that by me again, please? And the second you start directing your argument against me (ad hominem), you'll be out on your ( blank) from this club. And where has suspicion been cast?! Certainly not against the points I've made. Look, the evidence for our society embracing moral relativism is everywhere. You can see it by the fruit it has bore. Show me some links where in our society men and women are behaving morally responsibly and I'll show you men and women abiding by conservative Christian ethics which were taught to them. Don't bother providing that link. You've already related its contents. They have no bearing on this discussion. |
||||||
|
America's Moral Meltdown A May 2000 Gallup Poll revealed that 77 percent of Americans believe America's moral values are growing worse ("Morality Ratings the Worst in Five Years," The Gallup Organization, May 25, 2006). Yet more than 80 percent of Americans consider themselves personally religious. Last year, Gallup reported: "Fifty-five percent [of Americans] say religion is 'very important' to them, and another 28 percent say 'fairly important'" ("Faith Accompanies Most Americans Through Life," May 31, 2005). From its beginning, the United States has found its core values in the pages of the Bible. British historian Paul Johnson explained: "Hence, though the Constitution and the Bill of Rights made no provision for a state church—quite the contrary—there was an implied and unchallenged understanding that America was a religious country, that the republic was religious not necessarily in its forms but in its bones, that it was inconceivable that it could have come into existence, or could continue and flourish, without an overriding religious sentiment pervading every nook and cranny of its society. This religious sentiment was based on the Scriptures and the Decalogue, was embodied in the moral consensus of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and manifested itself in countless forms of mainly Christian worship" ("God and the Americans," Commentary, January 1995, p. 31). At its foundation, the U.S. based its values "on the Scriptures and the Decalogue"—the Bible and the Ten Commandments. More than 200 years later, is the nation still living by biblical values? Historically, marriage and the family have been the building blocks of society. When men and women transgress the Ten Commandments—when they practice adultery and unfaithfulness in their marriages—the family unit suffers. Ancient Rome at first emphasized strong families, but historians have documented Rome's declining emphasis on morality, and how that decline affected Roman society. In his book, Ancient Education and Today, E. B. Castle wrote, "Added to this initial cause of family disruption [the increasing absence of traveling businessmen from their families] was the consequent easy attitude to the marriage tie, the increasing frequency of divorce, and the growing freedom and laxity in women's morals, all of which ended in a loosening of the old family unity in which the best in Roman character had its roots" (p. 119). www.tomorrowsworld.org |
||||||
|
Moral Relativism You do raise an excellent point. We are aware that evangelical Christians in particular supported a man for president who boasted of moral turpitude, has concealed his tax returns to hide details of potentially criminal wrong doing, and appears to be engaged in all manner of outright bribery in addition to unquestioned emoluments. Your argument for America's moral decline is indeed on a solid footing. Documentation: www.sfgate.com I am sorely compelled to concede this point, though I am not at all confident it is connected to moral relativism. On second thought, is it evangelical Christianity's embrace of moral relativism that encourages people to not only overlook President Trump's glaring faults, but to outright deny he has any? They blame his problems on deep state machination instead of personal foible. www.politico.eu I also ran across this utterly insane bit... goqnotes.com I had a better link, but lost it because I am constructing this reply in notes, an arduous undertaking on the iPad. |
||||||
|
America Becoming Rome Traveling businessmen seducing porn stars at golf tournaments... And evangelical Christians unwavering support for national leaders engaged in "adultery and unfaithfulness in their marriages..." You do raise excellent points. I am becoming more and more persuaded to your point of view. The decline of our nation does parallel the fall of ancient Rome. Ronald Reagan was our first ever divorced president, and adored by the evangelical community. There is no evidence he cheated on his first wife, however. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, five presidents later the Christian community embraces a man who cheated on his first spouse with his second, on his second with his third, and while his third wife was nursing his fifth child, carried on with porn stars, Playboy Bunnies, an Apprentice employee, while boasting on the Access Hollywood tape of attempting to seduce a married woman, adding adultery on top of fornication. Your case for the rapid decline of our nation could not be on a more solid footing, though our blessed President Trump's core base of support stems more from evangelical churches than from graduates of public universities (among whom he fared poorly). www.nytimes.com If as you claim "moral relativism" is taught in our public schools, the greater exposure offered in our universities appears to provide a defense against the very decline you observe. "It’s clear from the exit polls that for white voters, every bit of extra education meant less support for Trump. That is, it wasn’t just a matter of attending college or getting a degree. While much has been made of the college and non-college divide (which is stark), Trump actually won whites who earned only a bachelor’s degree by a fairly wide margin." fivethirtyeight.com |
||||||
| |||||||
