The poet Thomas Grey said: "Where ignorance is bliss, ‘Tis folly to be wise." He was wrong; for to believe that is to let faith overcome reason. Knowledge is the light of our life; and to be without it is to live in a world of darkness and fear. We are all as much as we know, and the wise the more so. To subordinate knowledge for something so flimsy as faith is a fool’s paradise.
In the context of his Poem...he was stating much the same position you have.
"To each his sufferings: all are men,
Condemn'd alike to groan—
The tender for another's pain,
Th' unfeeling for his own.
Yet, ah! why should they know their fate,
Since sorrow never comes too late,
And happiness too swiftly flies?
Thought would destroy their Paradise.
No more;—where ignorance is bliss,
'Tis folly to be wise."
As it is poetry, it cannot be wrong...but the sentiment is , in my opinion, Spot On. Though this is a very small snippet of the work, it basically states those who cannot handle the truth, are better off ignoring it.
"To each his sufferings: all are men,
Condemn'd alike to groan—
The tender for another's pain,
Th' unfeeling for his own.
Yet, ah! why should they know their fate,
Since sorrow never comes too late,
And happiness too swiftly flies?
Thought would destroy their Paradise.
No more;—where ignorance is bliss,
'Tis folly to be wise."
As it is poetry, it cannot be wrong...but the sentiment is , in my opinion, Spot On. Though this is a very small snippet of the work, it basically states those who cannot handle the truth, are better off ignoring it.
my frustration didn't get the better of me. The bold faced all caps was just to get your attention. Debating with you, it seems some times you think of me as a fundamentalist, mainly bringing up only one version of biblical creation. I may believe in God, I may have common ground with some fundamentalists, but it is only a tiny bit. It really aggravates me when people pick apart a spiritual text in my opinion really not meant to be picked apart to use spiritual metaphor to support an argument against its authenticity.
For that matter to use it to forward their opinion of "what God wants", I never post Bible quotes (thank goodness) because it isn't valuable to cherry pick meaning.
I really am completely disgusted when people claim religion starts war, that is like blaming Islam for Iraq, it want a religion, but a culture. my disgust isn't because people blame religion but they completely obliterate truth to further their own agenda against religion. If you want to criticize religion there are plenty of ways to do so without murdering history.
I certainly agree, when discussing evolution belief should not be involved, unless it is believed that this gap in knowledge is because of this. Leave spirituality in spiritual places.
I was not typing clearly, I just fail to see the jump from no life to life, at one point that had to occur and I find it difficult to accept that it just happened. In the heat of the moment I said something that wasn't true.
I must ask what made you post this? Do you think I ignore the truth? I have stated over and over and over how history and science don't really interfere with beliefs, not because I deny reality but because belief fits outside the scope of fact.
It seems that this is aimed at me. As well as Nemo's but of poetry.
Honestly I could be mistaken, but it was you and myp insisting that there is no room go beliefs due to facts, the facts we have only raise more questions for me.
You are mistaken. The post had nothing to do with you....relax.
As for insisting there is no room for belief....I would prefer you refrain from claiming I have stated something that I did not, simply because you interpret it that way. I have clearly stated my preference for Factual Data, but that does not equate to dismissing beliefs.
Last edited:
The colloquy between Pilate and Jesus [ref. Matt 27:11; Mark 15:2; Luke 23:3, and John 18:33-38 (KJV)], where Christ’s answer to the accusations against him is either oblique or nonresponsive [ref. Matt 27:12-14; Mark 15:3-5 (KJV)], is an example of when silence may not be used as evidence of guilt. Pilate’s statement "What is truth?" [ref. John: 18:38 (KJV)] may be viewed in the context of the proceedings as a rhetorical question, but it is nevertheless a telling one. "Then said Pilate to the chief priests and [to] the people, I find no fault in this man." [ref. Luke 23:4 (KJV)]. The truth, if any, that can be adduced from the accounts of the gospels is that Christ (if he existed) was not a god, the King of the Jews, or the prophesied Messiah, but only a man.
Yes..it is always interesting to watch the fluid nature of debate, where one thought expressed becomes a new tangent of discussion. But, to point out where this particular tangent began:
David
Congressional Leader
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Port St. Lucie
Posts: 3,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by tecoyah
Religion, in this context is already included in school...as it is a part of world history. I understood the thread to be discussing something long the lines of a religious studies class.
As in....first period Math
second period civics
third period religious studies
I would consider this a waste of time and resources.
Well, I'll be. :redface: The wired thing is that was just a passing comment. That's like mentioning the UK and suddenly finding yourself in a American Revolution discussion. I'm not sure why clax and myp decided to run with it. I think that was the last on topic post in this thread.
If the topic isn't about evolution over creation any other religious institution isn't able to teach within public schools, I really don't think creation belongs in it, aside from a cursory mention in history class.
Start with Engle v. Vitale, a court case in 1962 that was effective in removing religion from public school.this case centered on prayer.
There is no religion in pubic schools in the usa. I think the only people who think there should be are evangelical lunatics.
I think as a culture study it would be interesting to learn about the mechanics that make the different religions of the world different, but that was a college course, public schools couldn't offer such a class due to the aftermath of that 1962 case.
So what are we talking about here? Just undo supreme court ruling and regress? No, I disagree, only a fool wouldn't.
I don't think anybody in their right mind would support religion operating public schools. I have a14 year old gay child in my care, hi support his expression, if religion got a hold of him they would want to brain wash and reprogram him. I know because church people in my former church suggested I put him in exodus.
Thus is backwards and regressive. Where I believe religion has a place and a propose it isn'tin schools at all.
Studying a culture is studying a religion, unless it is an agnostic culture.
I don't think a specific religion or religious belief should be taught, no. Not at all.
I think religions should be taught more along the lines of how they teach Greek mythology. Students still learn about gods and beliefs of various people, but they aren't taught those beliefs as facts. Having optional classes in high school and college is a great to expose students to various religions without teaching them as though they're scientific facts that need to be believed.
I think religions should be taught more along the lines of how they teach Greek mythology. Students still learn about gods and beliefs of various people, but they aren't taught those beliefs as facts. Having optional classes in high school and college is a great to expose students to various religions without teaching them as though they're scientific facts that need to be believed.
Having religion taught in public schools is a violation of the principle of separation of church and state. Besides that some of what is taught as religion is subjective and not everyone would agree on the course content - especially when it comes to Islam, which is notorious for preaching false information in classes and textbooks.
You blame them for being hateful, racist, and manipulative. Ironically, that is exactly what you are for stereotyping as you do and bringing up your political religious agenda in every post regardless of whether it is the topic at hand.
FALSE! It IS the topic. Religion (if one considers Islam to be one) being taaught in schools. As for stereotyping ? In the post you responded to, I couldn't provide a link because I had less than 10 posts. Now that I have over 10 posts, I'll provide the well-researched sources that I would have posted before. As for my agenda, I call it as I see it - which is why I am registered as an Independent. And I'll challenge anyone to disprove anything I say.
http://www.meforum.org/559/islam-and-the-textbooks
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/39311...ates-pro-islamic-bias-textbooks/#.UNOubVKlNrA
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/history/texas-adopts-controversial-isl.html
PS - I don't mention Islam in every one of my posts. I just posted about a dozen, and half of them have nothing to do with Islam. In fact, in one of them (about the "fiscal cliff") I agreed with tecoyah.
Last edited:
Similar threads
