That is why we are raising half-humans, because “humanism” is only the distorted, mangled remains of what is left after all the Good is taken away. In order to understand ourselves, we must understand our Creator, and we must look at our world through His lense, not our own, subjective, cock-eyed understanding. A teacher or professor who cannot even reference the name of God is no more capable of passing on usable wisdom to his students than a fish in a fishbowl is able to explain to his fellows how to breathe in air.
Half human, half what? Vulcan? That would be cool! Wouldn't the distorted, mangled remains of what is left after all the Good is taken away be evil? Yeah, take away what is good, and at the least you have notgood. Also, apparently one cannot teach mathematics, physics, chemistry, or gym without referencing god. Seriously, you cannot teach that 1 + 1 = 2 without some mention of god somewhere, right? No, wait . . . um . . . apparently, you can, because I just did it.
Admittedly, one cannot teach the history of the human race, literature, art, music, et al. without mentioning religion*- which is why no one tries to. I went to public school. We discussed the religion of the Pilgrims, for example. We discussed the history of the Anglican Church and Catholicism. We discussed various religions as they impacted whatever else we were studying so as to gain understanding of the subject at hand.
What the blog writer means to say is that one cannot pass knowledge to another person without proselytizing one certain brand of Christianity, and that failing to do so renders children less than human. I, and likely you, are less human than she is.
I feel like I've heard that sentiment somewhere before . . .
*It would be impossible to understand Renaissance art without knowing the basics of Christianity, for example. And too much history has been religiously motivated to be able to gain any real understanding without also understanding at least the most basic positions and doctrines of those religions.
I used your "1+1=2" example and posted it to her blog. I gave you no credit.
ReplyDeleteI'm a bastard.
I wonder if my comment will get through...
Well, I can hardly say that I invented basic mathematics. I doubt your comment will get through, and if it does, the reply will involve no less than 3 fallacies and some namecalling.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteYou nailed it. The comment wasn't posted - and I had taken a lot of care to not insult either her or her faith. I basically told her that secular schools CAN'T teach kids about God, because that's the responsibility of the parents.
ReplyDeleteOh well, I followed it up with some chiding about instilling a little more open-mindedness in her children than she'd demonstrated herself.
"Half human, half what?"
ReplyDeletePersonally, I favor half human, half near-indestructible robotic assassin. "I'll be back."
I'd prefer that for myself, but probably not my kids, if only because it would be a little difficult to enforce curfews after that.
ReplyDeleteNonsense! If you include the "You have to do exactly what I say" clause from T2, you're good to go.
ReplyDeleteAnd isn't that what technology is all about - building better children so you don't have to do any parenting?
alright, A) if you make the children half machine, then when they're annoying, can't you just turn them off?
ReplyDeleteand B) what the HELL is the point of having children if you don't want to parent? this is ***NOT*** me being mean to *YOU*, Michael - it's a question i force myself to not articulate at least a dozen times a day...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell, see, having children is all about increasing God's love, you see - children create a Culture of Life, all by themselves, so the more children there are, the happier *everyone* is! Plus, if you raise them in a Proper Christian Environment (note: not actually the same as parenting), you've created more souls for Jesus! As a bonus, you get to show all those other parents how much better you (and your kids) are!
ReplyDeletePardon me. I have to go rinse my tongue, now... with Lye. And possibly hydrochloric acid, just for good measure.
For a more serious answer... I don't know why you'd have kids if you didn't want to actually parent them. I tend to think that in those cases, you'd be much better off *not* having kids. Even for those of us who really enjoy being parents, it's a lot of work - and since the job requires caring for other, helpless human beings, I tend to think that you should only sign up if you're going to do the job well. That's not easy if you don't enjoy the job in the first place.
that matches my views on children and parenting pretty well. i can't have kids, and won't adopt unless a lot of things change. my medical situation, my mental situation [PTSD + kids = HELL for the kids]. possibly my marital situation, as it's getting harder for couples to adopt without it.
ReplyDeleteyears and years and YEARS ago, before my parents split even, my dad and i were on a walk. and i said "i'd have picked you as my daddy, but i didn't get the chance - how *did* you become my dad?"
[erm - this dates it; it had to be 79 or early 80 - in June of 80, my mom pulled out this book "How Babies Are Made" that told all of it. with pics of sperm, even - photographs, or so they looked. also charts and graphs - and sometimes i wonder if i'm the first child ever to have her mouth washed with soap for saying "copulation" to her grandmother?]
he told me he took a test.
the *reason* this gets funny, is that i immediately noted that mommy's must not get the same tests. if they were tested at all. [my mom was scared of me, as well as for me. at 3 i was reading and printing, even my writing was GOOD yet. and had already been in the hospital 3 or so times for 104+ fever and screaming pain that was, eventually, diagnosed as porphyria]