The world pulls at us unceasingly. So many years ago, it seems now, but I still remember reading The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine in a high school library. It begins with a profession of faith.
I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life.
I believe the equality of man, and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.
But, lest it should be supposed that I believe many other things in addition to these, I shall, in the progress of this work, declare the things I do not believe, and my reasons for not believing them.
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.
I do not mean by this declaration to condemn those who believe otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to mine. But it is necessary to the happiness of man, that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe.
Thomas Paine was a good man and wise man. He was also a rarity, one of the few Founding Fathers that we can legitimately call a deist. His own writings prove that. As he intended, The Age of Reason provides an explanation of his own religious philosophy and a “logical” refutation of Christianity.
After reading The Age of Reason I began a long period of religious drift and indifference. What drew me back to Christianity? I read and studied the Bible. Bored, I decided to listen to the Bible when I commuted to work. I then discovered to my shame that I was inexcusably ignorant of God’s word.
There are many like Thomas Paine, good and wise and sometimes sadly wrong. There is only one way parents can protect their children from such. They must see to it their children are properly taught.
Proverbs 6:20-23
My son, keep your father’s commands
and do not forsake your mother’s teaching.Bind them upon your heart forever;
fasten them around your neck.When you walk, they will guide you;
when you sleep, they will watch over you;
when you awake, they will speak to you.For these commands are a lamp,
this teaching is a light,
and the corrections of discipline
are the way to life
Where does Paine go wrong in the excerpt you have provided? I’d say he’s spot on.
Would Paine be a part of your plan for the “proper teaching” of children?
Hoobie — I am an admirer of Thomas Paine. Of course, I have no problem with children learning about Paine’s beliefs and his accomplishments. What concerns me is that children parents should also teach their children about the Bible. Because we have put the government in charge of education, children learn only the secular part of our history. Careful Bible study is virtually absent in today’s public schools.
If you study Paine’s writings more closely, you will note that he believed in religious freedom. Because of the threat it poses to religious freedom, Paine clearly would have abhorred the Big Government we have today.
Although the threat seems subtle to those who have grown up with it, putting government in charge of education poses a dangerous threat to religious freedom. The government, at best, teaches only what the majority or an influential minority finds acceptable. Government bureaucrats scrupulously avoid the controversies engendered by the Bible, the Koran, and other religious works. Instead, while engendering secularism in their students, government bureaucrats pass off religious training as a parental responsibility.
Yet there are only so many hours and so many dollars. As we increase the number of hours our children spend in school, and our government saps the taxpayers for every cent it can get, our children’s opportunity to learn about anything the government does not care about (such as about the Bible), becomes less and less.
Your thinking appears to be a bit muddled. You label public schools a threat to religious freedom but appear willing to cede your parental responsiblilities regarding your children’s religious instruction to the same godless public schools. I can already hear the howls of complaint begin over losing control of the contents of the religious curriculum to the bureaucrats. Your child wouldn’t learn only of the Bible and Christianity. No, he would be exposed to a wide variety of ideas, many which would conflict with Christian dogma.
I think the secular public education system is fine the way it is. Parents completely control the religious training of their children though their church and by choosing a private religious education for their student.
Our secular government, including its public schools, which you denigrate has fostered the most freely religious society in existence. Why do you complain?
hoobie — It appears you are making an unfounded judgment about me. Aside from the fact the subject is not pertinent, you do not know which schools I sent my children to. Moreover, such a personal attack is not relevant to the discussion. Don’t you know that a personal attack is merely a weak substitute for reason and logic?
What I argue for is that parents, not government, should have the control of the education of children. Because we insist that our government not be empowered to establish a religion, government makes a poor teacher of children. Without teaching religious values, government schools cannot properly instill values in our children or help them to properly develop their character. Yet we expect our children to spend the majority of their waking hours either in school or engaged in school related activities.
Your last paragraph is factually incorrect. Our secular government did not foster the most freely religious society in existence. The Bible made such possible. Because of their own Christian religious beliefs and the Christian religious values of their fellow citizens, the Founders did not permit the Federal Government to exercise control over religion. Public schools did not exist until well after the Constitution was the accepted law of the land. Even then, public schools did not become wholly secular until the 1960′s when the Supreme Court ruled public prayer in school impermissible.
As it is, our public schools do not promote religious freedom. Because our public schools usurp the right of parents to instruct children, our public school system is in fact an imposition on religious freedom. Look to your own words hoobie: “Your child wouldn’t learn only of the Bible and Christianity. No, he would be exposed to a wide variety of ideas, many which would conflict with Christian dogma.” Why is that so important to you? Why are you so afraid hoobie? Is it because some parents might choose to teach their children something different? Are you in fact afraid of religious freedom?
No, I am not not afraid of religious freedom. I think many devoutly religious people are, though. Consider the pastor who calls Mormonism a cult, or the parents in Charlottesville, after fighting for bible study flyers to go home with students, protest when a non-christian organization sends their flyers home with students, too. Does the Chesterfield County Council, which allows some religions to offers prayers while excluding others, promote religious freedom?. Religious freedom to these folks means freedom to promote their own brand to the exclusion of all others.
All this fighting over which myths are correct. What a waste of time which could be spent learning something real.
I didn’t mean to personally attack you, and did not. I only disagree with your opinion and reasoning.
I stand by my statement that the Founders brilliance and foresight in creating a secular government has allowed religion to flourish in this country free of government interference. Yes, they probably read the Bible. More importantly, they saw first hand how the comingling of religion and government corrupts both institutions. Maybe that concept is in the Bible.
So, again I ask: Why do you complain? Your are free to worship as you see fit and educate your children as you see fit. You can indoctrinate them into any religion that you wish. This is a great country.
Hoobie — I accept your denial that you did not intend insult. Nonetheless, you retort disingenuously. First you list a litany of supposed intolerances. Then you insist I should ignore a far greater intolerance, one that actually is an imposition on religious freedom.
When a pastor calls Mormonism a cult, that does not infringe upon the religious freedom of Mormons; it merely irritates Mormons — and probably not much more than calling all religions “myths”. Without govenment-run schools, we would have no arguments over which flyers school children bring home with them. Which religion the Chesterfield County Council chooses for prayer in its chamber is at worse, merely an annoyance. This is a prayer the Council imposes only upon itself. As a practical matter, the Council cannot choose all religions at once.
What is of far more consequence is who chooses how children are educated. When the government taxes us and then offers a “free” education only to those who choose government-run schools, that is blatant coercion. Just because secularists such as yourself are happy with this coercion does not change the fact it is coercion. It just means that you are getting your way; people have less opportunity to worry about their “myths”.
Remember the Constitution? The first amendment says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. The 14th Amendment says: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
When state governments impose secularism on children, they impose a religious belief, a belief that religion is unimportant. That, sir, is what the 14th Amendment prohibits, abridging the religious freedom of citizens to worship freely and pass on their beliefs, what you call myths, to their children.
I don’t see how the public schools infringe on anyone’s right to worship freely or pass on beliefs. Anyone seeking a religious based education can find it in any number of affiliated schools. We choose how our children are educated. Public schools are one alternative available to (all of) us. Are you or your family restricted in any way from choosing any aspect of how you practice your religion or educate your children?
I take it you would be in favor of dismantling the public school system, due to the lack of a religious focus. Secularism is not a religion, BTW. Secularism is not an absence of faith, it the the belief that is not a part of a system of government. A system that has served this country well. Fortunately for all Americans, religious or not, your beliefs are well outside of the mainstream of thought.
Hoobie — To defend the indefensible, you are throwing up a pathetic smokescreen.
Imagine being taxed $10,000 every year. Regardless of your circumstances, you have no choice to except to pay this tax. Imagine that every four years the government gives you a “free” brand spanking new Yugo. Nonetheless, because you can still buy a car in the private market, nobody is infringing on your rights, right?
Of course, the Democratic Party would have a fix for this terrible problem. They would increase the tax to $40,000 a year, give you a “free” 500 square foot apartment, and throw in “free” medical care. Wonderful, right?
Why stop there? There are also your utilities, your household appliances, your food, clothing…. Tax, tax, tax — 100 percent tax, and then everything can be free.
If you are willing to swallow a “free” education, why not buy off on the entire socialist “solution” hook, line and sinker? What restrictions? So long as you can still buy everything in the private market, they are no restrictions, right?
Citizen — You are comparing apples to oranges. We as a nation long ago reached the consensus that public education was worthy of our tax dollars. The benefits of such a system accrue to those actively in the system and the society at large.
Now fringe characters like yourself are trying to tear down the system. You are not clear in your own mind as to the basis of your dissatisfaction. Is it based in religion or economics? You’ve failed to make your case on religious terms, so now you recast your complaints in economic ones. All I’m hearing is for you is “I don’t want t pay for my fair share”. Do you own a home in a desirable school district? Then you have benefitted economically from the current system.
“Defend the indefensible” and “pathetic smokescreen”. You can’t even decide what the basis of your argument is.
hoobie — You are back to attacking my motives again.
Consider that our system of government was once a fringe alternative. How do you think the King and his loyalists felt about those rebelous patriots? I imagine their words sounded much like yours.
The basis of freedom is private property.
We have a right to own ourselves.
We have a right to own property and exchange property with others.
We have a right to control how we choose to labor and to exchange goods for our labor.
The government’s role is to protect our rights, including our right to own private property. When the role of government is not limited to protecting our rights, then government itself becomes a threat to our rights.
In this case, the threat to religious liberty IS ECONOMIC. Instead of merely assisting poor parents in the education of children, we have constructed a system whereby the government owns and operates virtually all educational institutions. This is absurd overkill. For reasons you cannot defend, we use socialist institutions to educate children to live in a democratic society. Why?
Using the power to tax, the government coerces people to participate in its institutions. The government taxes us through the gazoo and then offers us a “free” education. That is transparent economic coercion. An alternative educational choice is not “free”. Anyone who makes an alterative educational choice pays twice. When there are obvious alternatives that would satisfy the need to educate poor children (subsidies), what need justifies forcing anyone to make such a choice?
FALL OF THE HOMOGENEOUS AMERICAN PUBLIC SCHOOL – RISE OF THE HETEROGENEOUS AMERICAN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
When the America was more culturally monolithic, it worked fine: rich and poor of all ethnic backgrounds getting the same academic, patriotic, and moral education. Now with pervasive academic failure, moral depravity, and subversive political correctness; it is long overdue for a thorough reformation; such cultural perversity always contains the seeds of its own destruction.
Competition that will break the strangle hold of the Hate-America Liberals and the self-serving Teacher’s Union in form of tax supported charter schools, vouchers, secular and religious private schools is blooming.
The choice between cultural assimilation and cultural discrimination has been made; and now there is no turning back. Evolution by variation and parental selection for the survival of fittest has started.
“Evolution by variation and parental selection for the survival of fittest has started.” That is an odd way to put it. However, it does point out an interesting irony. Generally, the folks who place their faith in the Theory of Evolution seem to have the most difficulty accepting a competitive free market or a marketplace of ideas. These people to often want the government to run everything. On the other hand, the folks who believe the Biblical story of creation is the literal truth seem to have far less trouble with a free market or a marketplace of ideas. Those people would rather the government mind its business and stay out of theirs.