God important to Gillard? You wouldn’t read about it

Mick S says:

07:20am | 23/03/11

What an amazingly original and well reasoned comment,  Must have really exercised the grey matter for that one.

skepdad says:

07:55am | 23/03/11

Quite apart from the issue of Jools being singularly unable to speak an honest word in public, this is really just another shameless beatup by the bible thumpers to push their agenda of institutionalised christianity.

The bible should indeed be studied - as a work of literature.  Schools teach facts.  It is a fact that christianity has a history and persists today.  A fact that it exists among a panoply of similar cults.  A fact that society is influenced by it, positively and negatively.  But not a fact, as far has been determined by evidence, that it is true.

There is quite enough stealth christianity in schools without enshrining it in the national curriculum.

Rosie says:

12:54pm | 23/03/11

Correct Peggy H. I am amazed that we still have people out there who still believe in what comes out of her mouth.

At Question Time she boasted about citing parts of the bible which I found not only unimpressive but offensive for those of us that use parts of the bible of our choice as a guide to how we live our lives. Coming from our PM who bodly announced to the public that she didn’t believe in God was not only hypocritical was but insulting.

It seems the disingenuous leader is on a daily dose of estrogen injection which no doubt is interferring with her hormones believing that she is under societal pressure to fit in doesn’t matter what company she is in. While in the US as our representative she went out of her way to impress Obama. Amongst unionist she behaves in a blokey manner etc A disingenuous leader trying desperately to live up to every Tom, Dick and Harry’s ideals.

Australia needs a leader with a moral compass and ideals that he/she believes is for the betterment of all Australians and this great land.

Just Sayin' says:

01:37pm | 23/03/11

I’m with skepdad.  I’m not a christian who feels betrayed by Julia’s cynical and hypocritical approach to religion, I’m an atheist who feels betrayed by Julia’s cynical and hypocritical approach to religion.  I’ll admit I’ve never been a labor voter, but I thought we might at least get some good progressive social policy out of atheist Gillard.  Alas, it seems atheism is a just one of many grey pant suits she puts on and takes off as she feels.  Would the real Julia Gillard please, please stand up?

acotrel says:

07:58pm | 23/03/11

@Rosie Are you saying that if someone is familiar with the bible,they must therefore believe in your god?  The world seems to be full of control freaks like you! Julia is anything except a hypocrite.  If you want to find one of those, look in a mirror!

Sherb says:

09:21pm | 23/03/11

Rosie,
I don’t see what role at all estrogen plays in this. You are managing to be insulting to women with your comments regarding her decision being caused by ‘estrogen injection’, those atheists who are inclined to try to respect the beliefs of others and I’m sure to many voters.
Julia has tried to form a bridge of understanding between herself, a non-religious person, and the religious population, to show that she recognises the importance of those beliefs. It is something which previous governments, namely the Howard government never did for atheists.
The point of a leader is to find the balance between what the different people in Australia want. While I think everyone disagrees with what Julia is doing at least a little bit, that’s natural, as it is her job to try and balance out the wants and needs of everyone in the nation.

Breach of peace says:

09:36am | 24/03/11

Politicians are mostly all the same,  they say one thing a do another just as you have done Christopher and your hypocritical Liberal party has sickening done as well and will continue to do.  You have no right to throw stones at the mirror of reflection.

Why hasn’t the pious Liberal Party set a national curriculum?  Under Howard, the Exclusive Brethren were given millions of dollars of taxpayer funds to an unbiblical sect that is highly irregular and has been surrounded by secrecy and much controversy for years.  Where was your stance on this sordid issue?  Why should Australian taxpayers pay for an extreme religious sect in funding their schools and false doctrines?

Where is the arms length that is supposed to be between the government and schools?  Religious indoctrination by the right wing religious fundamentalist’s from America through the Parliamentary Breakfast Prayer group, will have a detrimental effect on Australian children and society as a whole.  Howard’s sordid relationship with Bush and the extreme right wing has had a negative effect on Australian society.

I would have no objection to Christian ‘history’ being taught in Australian schools, but would strongly object to any sort of ‘theology’ being systematically distributed amongst children, particularly when it is fundamentally based and narrow-minded.  Who decides what is in the national curriculum? That area is for the churches and the parents consciences to decide outside the parameters of the public education system.  Society has to keep government strictly out of this area.

ZSRenn @hotmail.com says:

09:12am | 23/03/11

It’s not about teaching religion it;s about educatiing our children about our history but here we go again.

Another important discussion hijacked by the those who worship disbelief and those that worship belief.

No wonder this country is going down the toilet!

Sir Ronald Bradnam says:

09:40am | 23/03/11

ZSRenn I would be ecstatic if the cirriculum and sylabus in all schools taught factual based history instead of beliefs and fairy tales, that is something we agree on, fantastic.
Opinion is not hijacking, it is adding to the debate i dont worship disbelief just as I dont worship belief/mighty sky fairy and I dont believe this country is going down the toilet but happy to listen to some examples and debate those if you want to put them up.

JJ says:

12:53pm | 23/03/11

Sir Ron. Could you point some “fairy tales” in the Bible that you can prove incorrect?
The truth is, the Bible is factual and has more evidence of it’s accuracy than any modern day text book.

Tator says:

12:57pm | 23/03/11

SRB,
the teaching of the role of the Christian faiths with the formation of western society is different to the teaching of the theology of the church.  It is not about religion per say, but the effects - good or bad, that religion has had on society.
For example, take the Crusades, take the religion aspect out of it ( Christians wanting to take back the Holy Land) and the students won’t understand it as they have been denied the whole picture, same with the Spanish Inquisition - NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION -  oops my inner Python snuck out, and the role that it had on Europes period of enlightenment which in itself, modified the behaviour of Christian faiths.  If you don’t discuss the religious aspect of what happened, you are not getting the full story.
It isn’t bible bashing at the students but just informing them of what has happened and why it happened.

Rebecca says:

01:26pm | 23/03/11

Religion itself is debatable and that’s why it is not taught in public schools.

It is a FACT that Christianity has played a huge role in western society throughout history.

Another FACT is that students studying history need to know where our modern values came from and what different societies believed in the past, as well as the present.

Just Sayin' says:

02:06pm | 23/03/11

Yep, as Rebecca says, it’s a fact that christianity has played a large role in western society throughout history.  As such, it has a place in the history curriculum and the social studies curriculum.  Under no circumstances should it be allowed anywhere near the science curriculum.

ZSRenn says:

02:40pm | 23/03/11

@ Ronny I’m not going to get into a religious debate with you Ronny because this is not about religion.

It is about those things that have affected who we are as a people. Where we came from where our moral structure came from and where what you might call common sense came from.

You do worship disbelief as you would deny the study of that history to the detriment of our society because of your disbelief. You are a fundamentalist as bad as any.

Your terms of sky fairy ridicule anyone who might hold a different opinion to your own. You then use this ridicule not to speak about the subject of our failing education system but to pump your religion of disbelief.

Who suffers?

Our Children!

malohi says:

04:16pm | 23/03/11

I agree Sir R.
Religion should be out of schools and politics. It is 2011, people do not need to live by superstition and the supernatural.
Do you want your children taught that snakes talk, or that prople survive in whale bellys, or that they will be tormented forever if they don’t believe that a person can walk on water?
Religion is control of the ignorant. It always has been. Wake up.

DaveinPerth says:

04:30pm | 23/03/11

Sir Ron, There are so many important lessons in the good book, Bible studies should be compulsory. Starting with something to cheer up the Gillard haters for a bit.;

“Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says.” (1 Corinthians 14:34)

To target teenage pregnancy, perhaps….
“But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones…” (Deuteronomy 22:20,21)  ....and….

“One of illegitimate birth shall not enter the congregation of the Lord.” (Deuteronomy 23:2)

I’m sure Fred Nile spends many a sleepless night thinking about the scourge of masterbation….(or researching it on his office PC?)...
“If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched.” (Mark 9:43)

Most of all, there are some strong lessons about the protestant work ethic.
“Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ.” (Ephesians 6:5)
“Slaves, obey your human masters in everything; don’t work only while being watched, in order to please men, but work wholeheartedly, fearing the Lord.” (Colossians 3:22)
“Slaves are to be submissive to their masters in everything, and to be well-pleasing, not talking back .” (Titus 2:9)
“Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel. ” (1 Peter 2:18)

Like I said, important lessons for young and impressionable kiddies.

ZSRenn says:

07:18pm | 23/03/11

@DaveinPerth! That’s right mate just keep sprouting pieces of the Bible myth and legend that suit your cause and to fuck with the fact that we are not teaching our children of our history and where we come from which is important.

Forget the Bible stories of Love and treating each other as you want to be treated which are the strongest messages given and form a big part of our modern thinking.

You just keep pumping your religion of disbelief and not even try to understand what this story is about because to you this is just another opportunity to be able to preach your message of hate and the fundamentalism of your belief in disbelief.

Ryan says:

09:43pm | 23/03/11

@DaveinPerth: why is it that Atheists seem to spend more time reading the bible and living in their own boiling little world of hate than just getting on with their lives and respecting their neighbor enough to let them get on with theirs no matter what they believe.
Dave, perhaps you should focus your efforts on bringing down the Koran and the entire Muslim religion, I mean fairs, fair right? Whats that, too cowardly to even attempt it? Yes I thought that might be the case for a cowardly Atheist. Thank God I am Agnostic, couldn’t stand to be chucked into the same category as you lot.

Alex says:

10:42pm | 23/03/11

@ZSRenn - it’s funny because you’re too stupid to understand what was posted above you.

Making a retort without paying attention to the previous point. Sort of like atheists who like to badmouth The Bible without ever reading it - your opinion should be ignored.

Dave-o says:

11:45pm | 23/03/11

@ZSRenn, so when the bible supports your argument its infallible historical record. But when it doesn’t its myth and legend.

Jefferson would spit chips if he saw how the church had entrenched itself inside the government.

DaveinPerth says:

12:11am | 24/03/11

@ZSRenn -  “Forget the Bible stories of Love and treating each other ..etc..”

I see that you understand that they are STORIES.
Embedding the bible into a curriculum gives it credibility it does not deserve. Same goes for the Tulmud, Qur’an, or any other religious text.

If you want to teach ethics, then teach ethics. If you want to run a primer on religion in Social Studies (or S&E) then a quick lap around 5 or 6 majors is great. A term in lower school at most.

If you want to teach someone about the important bits of the Bible. Then start with “Do unto others.” Then stop. Job done !

Jotun says:

12:16am | 24/03/11

JJ - the earth and the entire universe has been proven to be billions of years old. Moses cannot be proven to ever have existed at all. King Herod never executed a regime of killing new born infants around the time Jesus was supposedly born. No Roman census occurred during Herod’s reign over Judaea. Would you like some more?

DaveinPerth says:

12:19am | 24/03/11

@Ryan - ” why is it that Atheists seem to spend more time reading the bible…..etc”

Maybe it’s because they can read ?

Sir Ronald Bradnam says:

06:04am | 24/03/11

Daveinperth all excellent points well said. As with all followers of jesus they want you to take the bible in a literal manner,,,,,except where it is inconvenient to their beliefs then you are just being a non believer secular atheist.
Ill say it again the world would be a better place without the fairytale of an omnipresent supernatural dictator who lives in the clouds and no one has ever spoken to or seen.

spiritwolf84 says:

06:40am | 07/04/11

OK Dave, judging by the verses you noted, you approve of slavery, homocide, genocide, inequality between the sexes, fear, ‘divine’ persecution, rada rada rada.

Teaching ethics by using slavery as an example is plain ridiculous. Sorry mate, but this is EXACTLY why I walked away from the church ans threw away my bible (and became buddhist instead). I think you should be more open minded.

“Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says.” (1 Corinthians 14:34) - Women should be quiet and submissive… Come on… I would not have the amazing job I have today if I were quiet and submissive.

“But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones…” (Deuteronomy 22:20,21)  - Homocide…

“One of illegitimate birth shall not enter the congregation of the Lord.”  - Newsflash - alot of ‘illegitimate’ born people attend church nowdays, and are accepted into the congregation. Get with the times…

“If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched.” (Mark 9:43) - So basically, if someone does a completely natural thing, they are condemned? You honestly cannot tell me you haven’t done it. I don’t think there is a soul on earth who hasn’t.

“Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ.” (Ephesians 6:5)
“Slaves, obey your human masters in everything; don’t work only while being watched, in order to please men, but work wholeheartedly, fearing the Lord.” (Colossians 3:22)
“Slaves are to be submissive to their masters in everything, and to be well-pleasing, not talking back .” (Titus 2:9)
“Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel. ” (1 Peter 2:18)
- If this is your work ethic, I sure as hell don’t want to work for you, or have you work for me! Work ethic is not about submission and fear, it is about respect and working together, like I do with my managers.

The laws in the bible are so outdated. You buddy, are not a real christian, and I can say that, because I have friends who are, they are tolerant of differences in beliefs, and are the only people I will willingly attend a church with, and even pray (even though I do not believe in a god, after the experiences i’ve had along with so many other people here I feel my lack of belief is justified) even though I study The Tao.

On the education thing, I think R.E should be left at church, although it is not compulsory at my niece’s school. Does anyone else have optional RE at their kid’s school at all? Just curious.

DaveinPerth says:

12:30am | 10/04/11

@spiritwolf84 - Best post EVER ! Laughed till I cried.

Tedd says:

08:32am | 23/03/11

So too the The National Curriculum: A Critique (by the Institute of Public Affairs - a right wing “think tank”) seeks to manipulate.

“For a taste of The National Curriculum: A Critique, read Chris Berg in the Sunday Age, “National Curriculum gets our history badly wrong” and David Daintree in The Australian, “Christianity has role in learning“.

“The book is being launched in Melbourne on the 31st of January by Hon. Christopher Pyne, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training.”

http://westerncivilisation.ipa.org.au/2011/01/the-national-curriculum-a-critique/

JudyG says:

02:21pm | 23/03/11

Acotrel - I have said this for many years that religion is a construct of a very smart person who found out you could rule the masses by fear of the unknown. While I am all for people being able to believe what they want, that is democracy, I will never agree for it to be taught in schools as a religious instruction - as one perspective of history, yes - but not religious instruction. Look what happens in America where the bible bashers have way too much say. Religion and Politics should never mix. Hence my objection to religion being used as excuse to deny same sex couples the right to marry.

Ryan says:

06:57pm | 23/03/11

@acotrel : You mean just like the great global warming swindle is being used?

John H says:

11:16am | 24/03/11

Acotrel your comment is one of the most ignorant, baseless and foolish things I have ever read. “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” that’s from the Bible in John 15:13. Jesus Christ’s ultimate example of selflessness in laying down his life not just for his friends but for all of us is the heart of the Bible, and western civilisation’s rise from the ignorance of the Middle Ages is attributable to the Protestant Reformation and the truth that it brought to the world: that we are all individually valued and loved by God, and we should love others as we love ourselves.
This is Christian fundamentalism - don’t confuse it with Islamic fundamentalism, which found another example of its expression in a bombing in Jerusalem a few hours ago.

Wynston Cruso says:

12:31pm | 23/03/11

Err….what?

GlendaSings says:

01:02pm | 23/03/11

Pete, perhaps you don’t have children at school any more, but I can tell you with total certainty that religion IS still taught in government primary schools, because my kid’s school has it. Every Easter there is the two week stint of visitors from various christian churches coming to give religious education. It’s a go-or-opt-out thing - all kids go unless their parents specifically request that they don’t, which creates concerns around stigma for kids who don’t do what ‘everyone else is doing’. Much better would be the opt-in system, where parents could choose for their kids to attend the class, and the other kids do programs about being nice to each other, which is actually quite possible to do without including religion. Better yet, how about we leave the kids learning about other important things, and those parents who want their kids to have religious education take them to church themselves.

ZSRenn says:

09:15am | 23/03/11

Hijack away Actoral!

It’s all you are good at!

Meanwhile we give our children a poor education and you and your fellow worshipers in disbelief or belief don’t give a shit!

All says:

10:23am | 23/03/11

Rudd uses religions and the church for his own political purposes and is worshiped for it. Gillard firstly dismisses religion then praises it as a necessary institution and is lauded. Abbott walks down a street where there is a church and the social media commentators scream to their heavens that the evil Libs are ramming religion down their throats. Balanced reporting? don’t think so.

acotrel says:

10:41am | 23/03/11

The LIberal Party Bible - ‘The Constitution Of Liberty’ by Von Hayek ?  Doesn’t that have something to do woth ‘truth, justice and the American way’?

Grizzle says:

02:07pm | 23/03/11

The one that deletes all refences to helping the poor, the outcast and refugees

Tom says:

02:17pm | 23/03/11

@acetroll, the Labor party bible Alinsky, Trotsky, Hawker and Britton. They would also use malleus maleficarum, if they could con one more term in office from it.

Just Sayin' says:

02:34pm | 23/03/11

Yes Grizzle, Gillard’s Labor is showing an extraordinary amount of compassion towards refugees, isn’t it.

acotrel says:

05:50pm | 23/03/11

‘@Just Sayin’ says:02:34pm | 23/03/11

Yes Grizzle, Gillard’s Labor is showing an extraordinary amount of compassion towards refugees, isn’t it.’

‘Patience is a virtue ?’ - tell that to the guys on Christmas Is.

James1 says:

08:54am | 23/03/11

Perhaps, Knemon.  Even if it were the case, and I am not entirely convinced it is, Christianity and its role in Western history needs to be taught.  How can we expect to understand Irish history, and the reasons behind one-third of Australians being here, without understanding the English reformation and resultant repression and the role of the Catholic Church in resistance to English rule?

Personally, I advocate a warts and all approach to history.  It is not about Western guilt, it is about honesty.  Our kids need to understand the role of Christianity and how it motivated sectarian conflict in Europe, leading to the Treaty of Westphalia and the foundation of the modern nation state - indeed, the foundation of the current world system.  Similarly, the role that religion, and in the Western context, Christianity, played in colonialism is important for understanding the context for many modern countries.  The destructive and constructive role of Christianity in this process can not be ignored.  This would give our children a good understanding of not only the evil that religion has wrought, but also the constructive (and sometimes reconstructive) role it has played in world history.  If you leave out either the “warts” or the “all”, the history curriculum will be incomplete.  History can not be parcelled out and understood in small chunks - we need to give our kids the complete picture.

Samuel says:

09:14am | 23/03/11

Wrong.

It is no coincidince that the enlightenment, scientific method, democracy, industrialisation and the other hallmarks of western civilization emerged in a Christian context. It’s delusional to suggest otherwise.

That’s not to say religions aren’t responsible for some terrible things. But history is history.

PTom says:

10:38am | 23/03/11

@Samuel,
You are aware that many medical tools used today where developed in Arabia before Christ and Allah.

What religion was the American Indian or Ancient Greek? They had democracy before us. If you look at the tribal rules of the First Nation you will be surprised at how much was used to create the US constitution, which was then used to create our constitution.

Economist says:

11:24am | 23/03/11

@ Samuel, it’s chicken and egg stuff. IT wasn’t necessarily because they were Christian that thet were enlightened, scientific in their methods, supported democracy and industrialisation. It’s more likely that people were simply Christian, just as they may have been white etc. High learning came to being as the elite Christian churches at the time wanted to understand the world around them to get closer to God. The problem for them was that it showed no influence.

History without context is meaningless and that’s the problem with the Liberal parties approach. They want it to be facts based rather than contextualised. I have no problem with wanting Christianity expanded in the curriculum, but lets also talk about the context, the elitism, the fact that progressives were persecuted and no real change occurred until traditional conservatives supportedthe progressives, as it is today.

ZSRenn says:

03:10pm | 23/03/11

@ The Economist When I was at school and being taught history. I must have had a great teacher because my Catholic School education told me of the failings in our society, of the Catholic Church and give me the tools to make up my own mind.

I decided that Christianity gave our society most of the time the moral structure that caused us not to go around killing each other at the drop of a hat.

It eventually bought peace to our society and allowed debate on subjects which freed us from feudalism and brought us eventually to the stable government which we now enjoy.

Judging from a lot of posts here today an enjoyment of freedom that we take to much for granted and would hand over to the first charlatan who offered us 3 magic beans for it.

acotrel says:

05:46pm | 23/03/11

@ZRS You must have gone to the same school as my wife.  She also thinks for herself, and as a christian, she ‘walks the talk’, and I love her dearly for it!  I never accept poisonous rhetoric in my life, and that’s something which she seems incapable of producing. Others could learn from her example.

ZSRenn says:

08:05pm | 23/03/11

@ actoral. That is what pisses me off. These fundamentalist atheists are as bad as fundamentalist Christians.

I must be honest and say I don’t really “walk the talk” I am genuinely concerned however about many aspects of the Australian Education System. It is not preparing our youth for the challenges of the future. Male teachers are too scared to work in the profession any more and provide positive role models for children. A teacher can’t even ask a student to pick up a piece of paper little alone educate them. 

Whenever a story like this gets posted it gets taken over by both sides with their equally sickening rhetoric and the real problem which you and I would normally debate. I.e. another Gillard broken promise and the fact that the opposition seems to be offering an Olive branch in this article gets left behind.

Economist says:

10:38pm | 23/03/11

@ZSRenn just to clarify I wasn’t saying these people weren’t Christians or the ridiculous assertion that all Christians are naive and evil. The point trying to be made was that change occurred with progressive Christians who challenged the establishments views at the time. vut it took a groundswell of support or a strong conservative leader who took the lead for positive outcomes to occur such as abolishing slavery, democracy etc. .

Where I totally disagree with you is your assessment that the youth of today aren’t being prepared for the future. Geez even within the 15 years since I left the education system kids today learn mathematical formulas, computer systems, theories and research ideas, as well as learn the basics that i can’t fathom. My God seriously compare a year 10 student today with one of 20 to 50 years ago and the material covered is mind boggling. I think your being unfair to today’s generation.

Thomas Anderson says:

10:52pm | 23/03/11

Considering that an enormous amount of history is only known today because of Christian scribes, I would say that you are completely wrong and have no idea what you are talking about.

Tony of Poorakistan says:

10:55am | 23/03/11

I agre with your comment and, amazingly, I agree with Chris Pyne for once.

Denying history and the building blocks of what makes Western society demonstrably superior to others, is a level of magnitude worse than denying climate change, which is yet to be proved. 
Why is it that schools are teaching children about Islam (and yes, it is happening in State schools under the banner of multiculturalism), but will not teach them that it is a Christian culture that forms the basis of this great country?

undertow says:

08:58am | 23/03/11

Sorry, you lost me at ‘Agreed fully’.

ZSRenn says:

09:18am | 23/03/11

@ Undertow

Thanks for providing more evidence of our poor education system.

iansand says:

09:48am | 23/03/11

ZSRenn - Do you believe that there is only one history?  Only one true version of any event or series of events?

ZSRenn says:

02:57pm | 23/03/11

@iansand you can easily tell by my posts that I am well travelled and am fully aware that there is more than one record of history. Spanish history tells us that James Cook was a brigand and a pirate. Chinese history predates our own by thousands of years.

When students become historians they then delve into these different writings of history.

But this article is about teaching our children where our moral compass comes from and our sense of self and therefore the history that has been handed down to us over millennia.

The education of what created our thought processes caused the explorers to seek out new lands and even the bad bits where the English sent 13 year old children in to mines or the crusades.

It’s about teaching children that while the rest of the world was sitting on its hands our forefathers were out there creating lands through trial and error where visitors were welcome with stable political systems and with the wealth for any member of society to succeed.

If we do not do this then they will not know the difficult road that was trod to get to where we are and hand it over to something else not so friendly in total ignorance.

But these debates are always swung into arguments between the religion of disbelief and the religion of belief and the real subject matter rarely gets dealt with.

That’s my bitch!

iansand says:

03:43pm | 23/03/11

You are simply saying that your version of history is “correct” and is the one that should be taught.  If you are well travelled you have not learned much.

iansand says:

03:46pm | 23/03/11

Oh.  And the Spanish never regarded Cook as a pirate and a brigand.  In fact the French (with whom the Spanish were allied at the time) issued an order to their navy that Cook was to be left alone.  Perhaps you are thinking of Drake?

ZSRenn says:

07:47pm | 23/03/11

@ iansand Ok you tell me your version of history of how we got our moral values which we as Australians hold so valuable today..

You can’t and you won’t because the version you will tell would be the same as mine.

This whole debate is about teaching where we come from.

Where the base structure of our society came from! They should start with the teachings of Socrates and Plato and the works of the Roman Senate. The teachings of love from Jesus and Martin Luther King which caused us to have the civilized attitude toward each other that we have today. The signing of the Magna Carta, which started our political system and which still, serves us well 900 years later.

It is not about teaching religion but giving our children a respect for the development of the society that we have today. Would you like the PC crowd just have them believe that it happened overnight and not over the millennia that it did develop with all its trial and error. Or perhaps we could teach that it was founded in 1911 just out of the blue and by chance. Maybe we could teach that out of respect for the Aboriginal forefathers we adopted their political system as our own.

Just what version Ian would you teach to tell our youth the importance of what is easily one of the freest and wealthiest nations today?

Re your comment on the Spanish: If they did not think of Cook as a Pirate and a Brigand why did the French find it necessary to issue the order to them?

Pete says:

09:53am | 23/03/11

I agree climate change denier is far more polite a statement than “Climate change is asolute crap”

Ron E Coote says:

10:39am | 23/03/11

Pete, if you’re going to go to the trouble of sticking quotation marks on something you attribute to Abbott, you could at least attempt to be accurate.
Otherwise yours is little but the same thinly disguised deceit offered by Labor in parliament (and out) every day.
What he actually said, was that the argument is crap.
I small detail, but an important one.

Tom says:

01:42pm | 23/03/11

@Pete, not sure about that one.

The word “denier” is put out there by the global warming lot in a calculated attempt to draw an association between holocaust “deniers” and people who are not convinced that the available data supports the kind of steps being advocated at the moment. In doing so, the global warming lot are attempting to vilify their opponents and stifle legitimate debate.

I think such misuse of the holocaust dialog is vile, opportunistic, cheap, insensitive and far worse than the use of the word “crap”.

acotrel says:

10:55am | 23/03/11

@ATM People in grass houses shouldn’t stowe thrones? You’ve either got a short memory or you are still smarting from the time when Juliar made comments about ‘Phoney Tony’!  Oh sorry, it must have been ALL LIES?
Nothing ‘phoney’ about Tony !!!!  OR IS THERE ? ? ?

Against the Man says:

11:18am | 23/03/11

Thanks acotrel, your answer clearly acknowledges that Gillard is not our PM. I mean if you can only defend Juliar by talking about Tony it means he is more important and the one that should truely be PM. Thanks buddy!

acotrel says:

11:03am | 23/03/11

Kevin, that’;s an interesting question.  I believe the reformation was a response to repression, as was the art which arose just before the French Revolution. -Two different responses ultimately?

marley says:

01:26pm | 23/03/11

@Kevin - I don’t think the issue is really one of Christian values.  I think the issue is one of Christian structures.  Can you really understand the Holy Roman Empire as a political entity, without understanding its relationship to the Church?  Charlemagne was, after all, anointed by the Pope and claimed his authority from the Christian God and the Church.  For that matter, most of the subsequent kings and princes who ruled throughout Europe were anointed by a representative of the Church and drew some level of authority from it.  Divine right of kings and all that.  The Crusades most certainly represented a clash of values and territorial ambitions between a Christian Europe and a non-Christian Middle East, with Christian but Middle Eastern Byzantium caught between the two.  And a good part of the later Middle Ages was shaped by the fear of a expansionist Muslim Ottoman Empire.  And the Reformation not only broke the hegemony of a single Church, but also introduced a degree of scepticism and distrust of authority into the west. 

So, to my mind, whether one agrees with the values of Christianity or Islam or any religion at all isn’t relevant.  What matters is that at different times in western history, Christianity and its challengers played pivotal roles in the politics and philosophies of the west.  It’s part of the fabric of our history, for good and ill.  And we shouldn’t pretend otherwise.

(But that doesn’t mean we need to read the Bible, just that we need to know about the role of Christianity and the Churches in the development of our society).

James1 says:

08:55am | 23/03/11

Of course, you heretic.

Stu says:

11:12am | 23/03/11

@ Ian Mann. Yes it is. Says Jesus: “O generation of vipers! how can ye, being evil, speak good things?” -Matthew 12:34

James1 says:

08:57am | 23/03/11

I took Mr Pyne as referring to the history of Christianity, rather than teaching the Bible as historical fact.

Richard says:

09:00am | 23/03/11

No, the Bible is clearly a book of mythology.

Shane From Melbourne says:

01:41pm | 23/03/11

The Bible has its moments, but I still think Lord of the Rings is a better work of fiction….

L says:

08:42am | 23/03/11

Holey books ? are they the ones with holes in them?

acotrel says:

11:14am | 23/03/11

Holey Baloney.  I have no interest in believing bullshit.  But I think if I had to vote on them, I’d oppose both euthansaia and abortion.  However I don’t believe either should ever be put to a vote or be part of a political platform.  The law should not intrude other than to cover murder and manslaughter, as it does already.  Birth is the point at which a foetus becomes a person, and I’d never consider using authority over a person on their death bed.

bobw says:

09:49am | 23/03/11

“One can only impart the merest speck.”

This is dead on.  The vast majority of ideological warriors seem not to comprehend just how superficial school-level teaching of history necessarily is.  As such, the “debate” has an air of artificiality.  It’s absurd and simplistic to demand that the curriculum embody some kind of grand narrative that “explains” contemporary Australia.

Snoopy says:

01:32pm | 23/03/11

hey holly, go lightly…
i suppose next thing would be quoting “the Republic” and the leaders right to deceive…
so… where does guile end?

marley says:

01:36pm | 23/03/11

No, it doesn’t make Christianity the cause of the growth of western civilization, but it does make it an influence on that growth, for better or worse.  And certainly, when you start to talk about the political ramifications of things like the Reformation, it’s important to understand the linkage between various versions of Christianity and local political ambition, and the impact those had on governments.  You can’t extricate the religion from the society, and expect to make sense of the latter back through history.

Tedd says:

01:50pm | 23/03/11

Yes, marley, it is more nuanced than ‘cum hoc’ or ‘post hoc’

Just Sayin' says:

03:01pm | 23/03/11

Ted, you speak more latin than my priest.

Markus says:

02:20pm | 23/03/11

I believe you should go back and read your dictionary, specifically the definition of the word ‘link’.
Note: It does not mean ‘cause’

marley says:

02:38pm | 23/03/11

You are making a couple of classic errors.  You are arguing that there was and is a single Christian church, which is of course simply not true.  Perhaps you too should actually read some history - say about the Quakers, for a start. 

As for delays in scientific knowledge, well, perhaps, or perhaps not. Not all the world was Christian, after all, so if it was only the Church standing in the way of science, one would think other cultures and societies would have developed an understanding of things like the laws of thermodynamics, the rotation of the planets around the sun,  the circulation of the blood, the theory of evolution, or designed working internal combustion engines before we did.  But they didn’t.

As the explosion of growth and wealth which occurred in Europe, well that was a direct result of the Industrial Revolution,  which in turn was fuesled by the collapse of the feudal system, the availability of a mobile work force, and of course all that science you claim the church or churches suppressed.  Slavery (which was hardly a Christian invention) had nothing to do with the growth of the west and indeed was being very much phased out even as the west flourished.

I’m not saying that Christianity is responsible for all the gains of western civilization.  But neither is your depiction correct.

LindaM says:

09:42am | 23/03/11

Yep doing exactly what Hawker-Britton tells her to do. No substance, no integrity, just trying to win votes with hoillow meaningless words. There is no “real Julia” or any “old Julia” there’s just “cunning Juliar”.

Andy says:

10:49am | 23/03/11

Trick voters into beleiving that the carbon tax is all about doing our bit for climate change and label people who don’t want a carbon tax with “climate change deniers”. Don’t talk tax, talk about climate change and climate change “deniers”.

HappyCynic says:

10:58am | 23/03/11

I find it quite hilarious that people accuse Gillard of lying as if it’s a bad thing.  She’s a politician, I can’t believe anyone’s naive enough to expect any degree of honesty from any politician.

Without exception I guarantee that every single one of them would lie through their teeth if they think they can get away with it.  There’s no political benefit in telling the truth.  And that applies equally to Greens, Labor, Libs, Nationals, and anyone else I’ve missed.

bobw says:

11:25am | 23/03/11

Gary’s check list -
* compile a daft generic list, throwing in a “Juliar” for good measure
* post it in a thread to which it is irrelevant
* recline in a self-satisfied manner, oblivious to the fact of non-contribution to public debate

LindaM’s check list -
* add a reference to Hawker Britton as though it means something

Moderator’s check list -
* publish fatuous and irrelevant post
* publish posts “agreeing” with it, despite their also being off-topic and useless
* twice decline to publish a comment pointing out that said post is fatuous and irrelevant

Third time lucky, eh?

Economist says:

11:31am | 23/03/11

@ Linda M, yep and the Liberal do exactly what Crosby/Textor says or whoever they listen to now. Face it all politicians are liars and poll driven.

Joel B1 says:

11:37am | 23/03/11

@ HappyCynic
“quite hilarious that people accuse Gillard of lying as if it’s a bad thing”

You’re so right! It’s not a bad thing, obviously politicians have to change with circumstances.

Funny thing but, it takes a total sociopath to then claim a mandate for that change, especially if they went to the election saying something totally different.

Funny that.

Gray Beard says:

11:50am | 23/03/11

bobw
I think he is dash in disguise.
dash loves lists - supplied by One Nation and the Nationals.

Jane says:

12:00pm | 23/03/11

bobw,  why is Gary’s check list fatuous? It looks fairly correct and sensible to me by the way Gillard is acting.
Irrelevant? His list makes the point Gillard is a trickster as you can take from this topic headline “God important to Gillard?” She is obviously being tricky to appeal to the Christian vote. Maybe you should take off your rose coloured glasses.

Luke says:

01:27pm | 23/03/11

I think bobw thinks he’s Harry Jenkins of the Punch.

bobw says:

02:00pm | 23/03/11

@Jane:  “Correct and sensible”?  To a like-minded barrow-pusher, sure.  In the real world, it’s just a generic pile of regurgitated soundbites.

As for relevance - well, call me old fashioned, but I prefer comments that are responsive to the lead article.  Given that the article purports to derive from the authors’ public-spirited concern for the history curriculum, I’m not sure why it should be taken to licence drone-like stock posts about Gillard that fail even to pay lip service to the substantive issue the authors are pressing.

“Maybe you should take off your rose coloured glasses.”  In what connection?

@GB:  You might be onto something there, although I like to think that Dash, as a man of conviction, would have been hanging out with Pauline in Canberra at the relevant time.  Besides, the real Dash would have used more exclamation marks.

@Luke:  To be honest, I don’t even know what that means, but what the hell - ok.  Call me H.

James1 says:

09:30am | 23/03/11

“I don’t know why some people are so afraid of giving our children a greater understanding of the role religion has played.”

If it is done properly, I really do not see what we have to lose.  It is not about teaching kids that god is real or anything like that.  It is more about teaching kids what god’s followers have done over the centuries, both good and bad, that have so significantly shaped the modern world, both for better and for worse.  How can anyone reasonably object to that?  Again, it is about being honest with our kids.  Why teach them the dreamtime legends and Aboriginal history, which have no bearing on the current state of the world, but leave out the Thirty Years War and the Treaty of Westphalia?  Or the Council of Trent and the events leading up to it?  Of the rule of Henry VIII?

The mind boggles.

Stu says:

11:22am | 23/03/11

@True Believer: “You don’t know Him, you prefer your narrow little world, but please do not assume you know all there is to know because the fact is, you don’t.”

Facts require evidence and verification. On that basis you don’t know Jesus existed or that god exists. I don’t know who you were directing your post at, but I haven’t seen any evidence of anyone posting that they “know all there is to know”.

True Believer says:

12:34pm | 23/03/11

@Stu

Here you are with the classic atheistic bleat. 

I know Him because I asked to know Him - you want to “prove” Him - well mate I got news for li’l ole you. :0) He does not fit in something tiny enough for you to “examine”  to get your little “facts.”  Your “facts” are shifting sand, but it takes courage to admit there may be things you just cannot “prove.” 

You are captive to your “facts” I am free in Him.  I was captive once oh boy are you in for a bigggggggg, suprise, “seek and you shall find” - refuse to look and you remain blind to the greater picture. Your God-given choice.

Atheists, when they make comments such as you have about Jesus and His Father indicate they think they know all there is to know. If they didn’t they would be open to the fact that they just might be, and actually are, very mistaken.

You think you can say to me I do not know whether Jesus or His Father existed. I can assure you They did, they do, and long after you and I leave these bodies behind They still will be.  I not only know They exist, I know them personally.

I know that is beyond your current comprehension, but all it demonstrates is the limited knowledge you have of all there is and your inability/unwillingness to admit there is much you have yet to discover about being a person. I wish you well.

HappyCynic says:

01:20pm | 23/03/11

@True Believer

I find your arrogance demeaning to G-d.  You claim that you know Him but how can you possibly know Him if He “does not fit in to something tiny enough for you to examine” (aka your brain)?  You reduce your understanding of G-d to your own narrow little world as well, so be careful how you insult those who choose to believe differently lest some call you out on your hypocrisy.

Live and let live.  You don’t have to like it, you don’t have to understand it, but it isn’t your problem to solve, it’s between G-d and the individual in question.  Butt out and let them sort it out for themselves.

Stu says:

02:04pm | 23/03/11

@ True Believer:
“I know Him because I asked to know Him”
That’s not evidence of knowledge of anything.
“refuse to look…”
What evidence do you have that I have refused to look at anything?
“Atheists, when they make comments such as you have about Jesus and His Father indicate they think they know all there is to know.”
How does it indicate that I think I know everything? For the record, I don’t think that at all.
“If they didn’t they would be open to the fact that they just might be…mistaken”
I freely admit that I may be mistaken. It’s just that it’s highly unlikely based on what we actually know about history and the universe.
“...whether Jesus or His Father existed. I can assure you They did, they do…”
I cannot accept assertions from someone on the web about the existence or not of anything, so you can assure me all you like. What I know however, is that there is no credible evidence for the existence of god or that the biblical Jesus existed as a historical figure. Happy to be proved wrong or accept credible evidence to the contrary.

Stu says:

02:10pm | 23/03/11

@HappyCynic:
“...so be careful how you insult those who choose to believe differently lest some call you out on your hypocrisy.”

TB would have you think that I respond to her posts because I want to attack her beliefs and Christians in general, but calling her out on her hypocrisy is exactly my motive, as you say. It was provoked initially by her demanding other people “prove” their beliefs while denying the need do the same herself. Cheers.

Elphaba says:

02:33pm | 23/03/11

@Stu, admirably said.  But honestly, she comes on here looking for a fight.  Nothing more.  If you ignore her, she’ll go away.

Just Sayin' says:

02:56pm | 23/03/11

@ True Believer

You have interesting views.  Unfortunately, to any of the big three mono-theisms, they are clearly heresy.  See you in hell.

True Believer says:

03:01pm | 23/03/11

@Happy Cynic

You miss the point, I do not know the Lord intellectually - by His grace and nothing of me I know Him because my spirit is alive to Him.

It is not about head knowledge it is about one’s spirit being brought to life.  Jesus said if we wanted to enter the Kingdom of God we must be born-again - not of the flesh, but of the spirit.  Before I gave my life to Him my spirit too was dead within me.

I am not arrogant and I am not a hypocrite. I keep telling you the Truth, you just do not want to accept it. I hope and pray one day, as I did, you will awaken spiritually then you too can know as you are truly known (and loved) by Him.

I would be a hypocrite if I sat back and let people believe He is does not exist, when I know He does and I know they too can know Him if they ask with an honest heart.  Man often judges the exterior God searches the heart.

@Stu

I cannot help you my friend, you want a little “god” you can fit in a box - the Lord of all cannot be constrained and examined by man or science. 

You either want to know Him or you don’t. Your choice. I for many years didn’t know Him then I came to know Him.  He came to bring life - I am ever so glad I accepted His free gift.  I appreciate your dilemna, you want to try to get to know Him with your intellect. C.S. Lewis too struggled with that and wrote an excellent book which I can recommend. 

However, it is not about the intelledt it is about the human spirit being united with the Holy Spirit of the Living God.  That is a matter of the heart and will, not the intellect.  It is a gift given when we humble ourselve and get rid of pride, when we put aside self-righteousness and accept His Righteousness.  Then we can know Him and His great love for His creation.  It is simple, it is not complicated.

Theologians and denominations sometimes have made it unnecessarily complicated. Jesus came with a simple message of life, hope and truth.  If it has been misused that is the work of man not God.

Once one is complete in Him, then one can use one’s intellect in harmony with Him, rather than in rebellion as unbelievers do. I know that because I too was once an unbeliever/atheist.

Stu says:

03:10pm | 23/03/11

@ Elphaba:
I’ve thought the same thing - and you’re probably right about ignoring her. On the the other hand, at least there is record of someone taking her to task. Steeley Dan did/does a much better job than I.

Elphaba says:

03:35pm | 23/03/11

@Stu, clearly she has nothing else of value to talk about, because this is ALL she talks about.

Stu says:

03:53pm | 23/03/11

@ True Believer: “I am not arrogant and I am not a hypocrite. I keep telling you the Truth, you just do not want to accept it.”
To tell someone that you know the truth, provide no evidence for it, and assert that they should accept your version of the truth simply because you say so, is arrogance in its purest form. It is also hypocritical for you to demand evidence from others about their “knowledge” about god, gods or the supernatural while asserting that you are not required to provide the same evidence for the “knowledge” you have asserted here.

True Believer says:

07:39pm | 23/03/11

@Elphaba

Now that is hypocrisy at its best - “she comes on here to fight” - so the other side of that is that atheists/unbelievers come with good will to promote harmonious relationships??? I think not.  Anyway, don’t hold your breath waiting for me to go away.

Perhaps you would prefer it to be a place where only Christian bashers, God deniers and their ilk hang out?  Bit of exclusivism there surely?  Thought atheists were all about tolerance??

@Just Sayin’

If that is your purpose for living to end up in hell I am sorry to disappoint you, but I will not be there.  If you do it is because you have chosen that. You might not be so flippant when you arrive there.

@Stu

You remind me of a small puppy going round in circles chasing its tail - only to find when it grabs hold of it it hurts! :0) 

I think I will just leave you up to your little game and relieve you of having to contemplate the deeper things of being human.  You and Steely can go round and round together getting nowhere, hurting no one but yourselves in the exercise. Take care now.

Stu says:

08:54am | 24/03/11

@ True Believer: And you remind me of a person who uses an incongruous analogy about a puppy to avoid focusing on the substance of a discussion.

True Believer says:

10:59am | 24/03/11

@Stu

It is ironic that Elphaba accuses me of “coming here to fight: - you are like a terrier puppy.  If you had this much tenacity and were a believer and empowered by God what a mighty person you would be.

The “substance” is - God - (Father, Son, Jesus and Holy Spirit - Triune God )- there is no greater substance in the universe. You don’t want to know Him. Your choice. He longs to know you more, but you choose to reject Him - go argue with Him, I have done my part by telling you the Truth.

True Believer says:

12:52pm | 24/03/11

@Elphaba

Unbelievers/atheists seem obsessed with “religion” whatever they mean by that. You will never find me talking about “religion,” it is man-made I am not interested in it and it grieves me that institutional churches, instead of serving God, sometimes serve man and they hurt people and give them a very false impression of what it is to be a believer. Jesus is not religions, His Father is not religious, I am not religious.  Why then are you unbelievers so hung up on it/????

I tell you about the Lord because that is probably the most important decision you will make this side of death - whether to accept Him or reject Him. Afterwards you may find it is too late to change your mind.

I do sometimes contribute to other blogs on Punch, for instance I sent posts on the facts about marihuana the other day as I have seen first hand the damage it can and does do.

I even tried to pass on a Aus Govt site on the dangers of dope but it was blocked by the Punch site and that made me wonder why.  Two of my posts were never published. Is there a bias on Punch - I don’t know, but sometimes it sure looks like it to me.

Stu says:

01:27pm | 24/03/11

@ True Believer: “If you had this much tenacity and were a believer and empowered by God what a mighty person you would be.” No I wouldn’t, I’d be one of those scum-of-the-earth preachers who announce that deadly bushfires are the result of god punishing Australia for a liberal attitude to gay people. Or someone who states that they believe in god and Jesus, attends church and who also claims not to be religious.

True Believer says:

05:57pm | 24/03/11

@Stu
You said, ” No I wouldn’t, I’d be one of those scum-of-the-earth preachers who announce that deadly bushfires are the result of god punishing Australia for a liberal attitude to gay people.”

I cannot speak for those preachers you speak of, I do not know them, nor would I listen to such nonsense. They offended you, they would also offend me.  If they knew the Lord they would also know that He is not the author of destruction and tragedy. 

Stu you make the error of looking at the behaviour of a few men and judging the Lord. He knows these pretenders well. He said of them, “they are wolves in sheep’s clothing” - of such he said when they come to Him saying they did things in His Name He will say, “Away from me I never knew you.”

I do not believe the Lord hates gays, nor do I.  Christians are not called to hate people.  Jesus came to bring Love, not hate, Truth, not lies.

You also say,“Or someone who states that they believe in god and Jesus, attends church and who also claims not to be religious.”

I am not sure who you are speaking of here.  Also I am not sure what you mean by “religious” - it seems to be thrown around in blogs here to cast aspersions on all Christians, whether they be those who know the Lord, those who know about the Lord and those who pretend - surely a gross generalisation?

Denominations are made up of people, often with rules and perceptions made up by man - they are not the Lord and the Lord is not them.  In every denomination there are true believers - the “church” is not a denomination, or a building. It is the body of true believers across the world wherever they may be, wherever they may worship in a mud hut or a cathedral.  Not perfect by any means, but forgiven and trying to love and serve the Lord as He calls them to.

Religion which is man-made is not something I personally subscribe to.

You look for the bad in Christians. I have learned over the years that if you look for the bad you will find it, but in doing so you can miss our on finding the gold.

Stu says:

08:46am | 25/03/11

@Elphaba: I’m taking your good advice.

True Believer says:

01:53pm | 25/03/11

@Stu

Hooray for that. :0) Have a good weekend.

Narc says:

02:51pm | 23/03/11

^^^ Kids, this is why you shouldn’t do drugs.

Jarc says:

05:40pm | 23/03/11

@Narc, I’m never meant to confuse you or your goats, but I hope this helps…

oh, and sweety stop shouting shift(666), there may be NZ’ers present.
is that Rascist?... it wasn’t meant to be.

The story of the Good Samaratin however… rascist?
The story of the Tasmanian Devil… rare.
The story of the Good Australian… ...

the Pine is a colloquial for the reserves’ bench.
Colloquial means informal/slang.

Carrion makes me imagine buzzards(vultures) and low budget British Comedies, both of which remind me of Parliamentary Question Time.

Moses is Hebrew for water.
Water going up hill defies the law of gravity.
Thus the irony of deci-mating the rules.
You OK on the deci- prefix? (Y/N)
Arrack is Balinese Rice wine.
This should not be confused with Arak which means condensed, and has more of a liquorice tang.
the letters L, M, N are staff, water, snake… there’s that trick explained.
J’esus means I have consumed… well done on the pick up
J’edi means I will consume… oh yes the irony. (episode1-ObeyOne”...”)
The Bounty is a Balinese night club, dynamite is a tall cocktail, the cannon ball is more spherical, Arc Like.
the Iroquoi were members of “League of Peace and Power” and were blamed for the boat Mel Gibson & Heath Ledger boat burnt at the start of the American War of Independence.
The Ted Commandments were written by TISM.
TISM stands for This Is Serious Mum
Osama means Lion, Laben means White.

Dick Smith stores in the 1980’s, where filled with products marked made in Taiwan; that were excellent and brought me a lot of joy when I played with Toys, a bit like now.
Saul mean small.

Ed Hicks painted the Peaceable Kingdom, Isiah Chapter 11, verse 6…
http://www2.gol.com/users/quakers/Hicks_Peaceable_Kingdom.htm
Bill Hicks was/ is a legend.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q95kX_EP2Nk

Hand relates to manus, take that how you may.

Jerry Wasere stands for “Jerry was here”
relates to
1. Germaine, which I am lead to believe means friendly.
2. Jerry from Conspiracy Theory
3. Jerry Stand Up by Something for Kate
4. Jerry Garcia, Casey Jones

Bill and Ted
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrGWooNDPiE

Narc says:

06:14pm | 23/03/11

I rest my case.

stephen says:

01:38pm | 23/03/11

No3..The Vatican issued a Decree 4 weeks ago that The Catholic Church is now to know that the death and crucifixion of Christ was not at the hand(s) of Judas or his agents.( And if Jesus is ‘fictitious’, how does anti-semitism arise ?)
And as for the rest of your stuff, when you eat your brekkie weeties, don’t read the box.

Barry says:

01:59pm | 23/03/11

@ P. Darvio
4.  Anybody with an actual knowledge of the history of WW2 wouldn’t bother trying to claim Hitler was a Christian.  Was he an atheist?  Probably not, but was he a Christin?  Mein Kampf did contain references about Christianity, but the more logical, and more intelligent opinion taken by actual scholars is that Hitler was playing the political field, he needed more than just one side of the community to complete his master plan.  This would explain why he makes positive and negative references to Christianity.  I mean really though who needs to think rationally?  Let us just blame Francis Galton for the whole thing it’s all his fault!
5.  Trained in the genocidal methos of the Book of Revelations??  Oh yeah that book that like most Biblical scholars consider to be allegory.  Who cares if he trained to be a priest for 4 years?  It means nothing, you could go and train to be a priest if you really wanted too.  It would be more reasonable to pin Stalin’s behaviour on his atheism than any religion.  I would do neither though as I’m not a fool.  It should also be noted Stalin closed the churches then opened them again in an attempt some scholars say to get the Christians on side again for the war effort.  Similar to the theory about Hitler.
6. Pol Pot studied at a Buddhist monastery first so we should blame them not Catholics.  Sound like a dumb argument?  Yeah it is.  Regardless, going to any school doesn’t excuse or give reason for your behavior.  If I went to a secular school, and then went an murdered someone, you wouldn’t say IT WAZ DA SECULER SKOOL THAT DON IT.  No, you wouldn’t because it’s a dumb unverified argument.
No. 8 and 9 you can have those ones.
9. Ahhh yes now I love this one.  When you say destroyed every single indigenous culture do you take into account the negative things which the Christian missionaries got rid of?  Because as someone whose actually studied international cultural heritage at a university level at a secular institution, it’s quite an eye opener for most people, to hear Indigenous tribal men stating that before the mean nasty missionaries came we used to murder, and steal and rape women from other tribes, and make live sacrifices to our gods.  Now we just sing and worship God, and this was on a secular documentary not a Christian one.  You know if you ever go to Fiji for a holiday you might want to thank the Christians for allowing you to enter the country with out fear of being murdered, but yeah damn you Christians for destroying the murderous and war-stricken cultures of Indigenous people.  Those women deserved the way they were being treated!
10.  You know what I’m not Catholic you can have that one too.

P. Darvio says:

03:02pm | 23/03/11

Quote: No3..The Vatican issued a Decree 4 weeks ago that The Catholic Church is now to know that the death and crucifixion of Christ was not at the hand(s) of Judas or his agents

Wrong!!

The Pope ONLY rejected the idea of collective Jewish guilt for Jesus Christ’s death but still blames individual Jews. Please go study what was actually said and what I actually said!!

iansand says:

03:06pm | 23/03/11

Stephen - Than the Lord that this has been fixed.  Please ignore the last 2,000 years.

P. Darvio says:

03:12pm | 23/03/11

Quote: You know if you ever go to Fiji for a holiday you might want to thank the Christians for allowing you to enter the country with out fear of being murdered, but yeah damn you Christians for destroying the murderous and war-stricken cultures of Indigenous people.  Those women deserved the way they were being treated!

http://www.statsfiji.gov.fj/otherstats/Crime.htm

http://www.un.org/womenwatch/ianwge/taskforces/vaw/Fiji_VAW_Assessment_2008.pdf

“Cultural, ethnic and religious fundamentalism is on the rise in Fiji. This promotes conservative ideas and negative myths about women and their rights. Some traditional leaders, such as chiefs, religious leaders and community leaders, are reinforcing the view that women’s roles should be restricted to the realm of domesticity.”

Doesn’t look like a very safe place to me – but then again it’s a so-called Christian Country – so it must be safe and a paradise for women…..m’mm funny the United Nations has a different opinion on what religion is doing to Women in Fiji….

stephen says:

03:21pm | 23/03/11

I’m not Catholic.
And I don’t agree with that Decree.
Furthermore, that Decree and imperious
‘crime’, means nothing to me.

marley says:

06:43pm | 23/03/11

P. Darvio - perhaps you might care to extend your reading just a bit further, and find out how the Russians treated the Muslim Tatars under Stalin.  Or how the post-Shah Iranian regime has treated Baha’is.  Go back further, to Mughul India, and look at the mosques built on the ruins of Hindu temples. Or, more recently, the destruction of mosques to restore those Hindu temples.  For that matter, take a look at the Aya Sofia in Istanbul - not much left there to remind one of its centuries of Christian heritage. 

And if you want to discuss the rights of women, take a look at the frontier of Pakistan, or Afghanistan under the Taliban, or Saudi Arabia today.

The issue isn’t any particular religion, or indeed religion in general - it’s power. And, as we all know, power corrupts.  And it doesn’t matter a damn whether the power rests with a priest or imam or commissar or village headman.

Anthony says:

02:33pm | 23/03/11

Well said please explain,Pynes hail mary (sorry had to say it) attempt at stopping the rot was pretty pathetic,nice to see him named by Jenkins in QT,a little slap on the ass for the child.

Just Sayin' says:

02:45pm | 23/03/11

Good call TracyH, we can add Krudd to the list too.  Mind you, Kevin Rudd is just as guilty, having called Chris Pyne the “Member for Skirt” in parliament.  Childish name calling and homophobia rolled into one pathetic insult from our deposed PM.

stephen says:

02:25pm | 23/03/11

Sort of. The Ancient Greeks only gave democracy to middle-class men with hair-cuts ; women, children, (the ones who were not already sitting on their lap) and the elderley and a myriad of slaves were not included in the ‘dream’. The Greeks did do something for Maths, though, but History tells us our development is cumulative and generally steady i.e. that the Romans, Arabs especially, Turks, Portuguese (hello Frank C.!) and even white-man had a hand.
Greeks were good at fighting. Still are, but first they gotta pay their bills.

James In Footscray says:

10:46pm | 23/03/11

You’re quite right Stephen! It was a bit glib. For sure, there have been many influences on the development of European culture. And I would even gladly admit Christianity has had a very positive influence on Western art. But I’m not (as clearly you’re not) convinced Western culture somehow ‘comes from the Bible’.

Just Sayin' says:

06:18pm | 23/03/11

Pathetic insults based on someone’s personal appearance are irrelevant to our modern secular democracy.  I wouldn’t expect an idiot to understand that.

marley says:

06:45pm | 23/03/11

It may be - but it’s not irrelevant to how our society came to be.  That’s the point.

marley says:

08:03pm | 23/03/11

Okey dokey - no mention of Christianity in schools.

So, if we don’t mention Christianity, do we skip discussion of the Crusades?  Or the imposition of Persian Muslim rule on Hindu India, with all the repercussions right into this century?  Do we ignore the art of Michelangelo and Raphael?  The music of Bach and Vivaldi?  Do we bowdlerize Shakespeare and eliminate Dante’s Inferno and Milton’s Paradise Lost from the study of literature? 

You don’t have to be a believer in any religion to know that some religions have played a pivotal role in the development of various societies.  And whether we agree or not with the precepts of Christianity or Islam or Buddhism or any other religion, it is important that our kids understand something about them, their role in the histories of the societies they have helped shape, and their on-going importance to some of those societies today.  If you think you can understand India without knowing something about Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam, you are mistaken.