• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Oklahoma, K12 and a "Religion Department"

Stephen3141

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2023
1,425
552
70
Southwest
✟107,695.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private

A number of articles appeared about this event. The articles are pretty vague
about their purpose (supposedly to boose religious liberty and patriotism),
or even to which level of education this mandate would apply (I am guessing K12).

My guess is that this mandate is trying to respond to Protestant Fundamentalists
who have (religious?) problems with the hard sciences, the age of the earth and
universe, formal logic, the historical study of Christian theology, and other topics.

My point is that it were better that the K12 schools would focus on primary subjects
that someone with ANY religious beliefs could take, such as

-- Formal Logic
-- Moral Theory
-- History
-- Epistemology
-- Concepts in the Consitution

that could be taught the same way, to all students.


I say this because those who are trying to stamp out "woke" behavior,
often do not have the intellectual background to present why they dislike
certain behaviors, other than "it is not the way we live". And, in America,
before the Supreme Court, we do not argue that a behavior should be
eliminated in our culture because "we don't like it". We must make a case that
it is unconstitutional, or criminal (according to the fair rule of law, or
would damage the Constitutional rights of citizens, etc. We do not work
to eliminate a behavior in America, because my group doesn't like that".

I think that the anti-woke groups in America are badly mixing up their
own personal religious subculture, with what OUGHT to be the moral-ethical (ME)
model that is enforced all over America based on the Consitution and the fair
rule of law. The result is imposing a type of religion on Americans, and it it not
particularly even historical Christianity.

There are anti-wokists, who would even object to me writing this.
---------- ----------

May I suggest that K12 educators need to get down to teaching basic
(historical) related topics, such as

Epistemology.

Moral Theory

Formal Logic
(Unapologetically, because no one is writing about the relations between
formal logic and religious beliefs...)

Note that "wokism" (I have no idea how to define this,becasue most users
of the slang phrase do not define it)would be addressed under the topic of
Formal Logic, under Sound and Unsound arguments.

Mostly in America, Formal Logic is only taught with regard to producing VALID
logical arguments. If you take a college course in Symbolic Logic, it is the
principles leading to logically VALID arguments that are being taught. This is
the "20 Rules of Inference and Quantification Rules", which are the grounding
of mathematics and the hard sciences.
---------- ----------

Soundness in a logical proof, involves using "sound" definitions and rules, in
the Assumptions part of a logical proof. "Soundness" means that the definitions
match "our shared reality". That is, if we do not get serious about teaching K12
students about concepts relating to "our shared reality", then they will continue
on in their life believing that whatever the think reality is, is what it is. And most
of these worldviews are incompatible with Constitutional concepts, and the fair rule
of law in America. This is not particularly a "religious" topic.
---------- -----------

Unfortunately, many in America who are "anti-woke" are anti-intellectual.
They do not accept the logical foundations of the hard sciences.
They do not accept the scientific foundation of the health sciences.
They are badly read in history.
They could not describe the difference to you, between Mathematical Logic,
Biological Logic, Logic in Chemistry, or Christian Logic.

Unfortunately, those who are anti-intellectual often do not see themselves
as anti-intellectual. What they are trying to impose on all students, is a
form of their own parochial religion. Often what they impose, is not even
historical Christianity.

You cannot have someone who is anti-intellectual, and a Christian.
You cannot have someone who is anti-intellectual, and a patriot.

This is a complicated problem in America, and the "anti-woke" crowds
in America, are not really addressing it.
 
Last edited:

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
11,867
9,923
65
Martinez
✟1,230,348.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

A number of articles appeared about this event. The articles are pretty vague
about their purpose (supposedly to boose religious liberty and patriotism),
or even to which level of education this mandate would apply (I am guessing K12).

My guess is that this mandate is trying to respond to Protestant Fundamentalists
who have (religious?) problems with the hard sciences, the age of the earth and
universe, formal logic, the historical study of Christian theology, and other topics.

My point is that it were better that the K12 schools would focus on primary subjects
that someone with ANY religious beliefs could take, such as

-- Formal Logic
-- Moral Theory
-- History
-- Epistemology
-- Concepts in the Consitution

that could be taught the same way, to all students.


I say this because those who are trying to stamp out "woke" behavior,
often do not have the intellectual background to present why they dislike
certain behaviors, other than "it is not the way we live". And, in America,
before the Supreme Court, we do not argue that a behavior should be
eliminated in our culture because "we don't like it". We must make a case that
it is unconstitutional, or criminal (according to the fair rule of law, or
would damage the Constitutional rights of citizens, etc. We do not work
to eliminate a behavior in America, because my group doesn't like that".

I think that the anti-woke groups in America are badly mixing up their
own personal religious subculture, with what OUGHT to be the moral-ethical (ME)
model that is enforced all over America based on the Consitution and the fair
rule of law. The result is imposing a type of religion on Americans, and it it not
particularly even historical Christianity.

There are anti-wokists, who would even object to me writing this.
---------- ----------

May I suggest that K12 educators need to get down to teaching basic
(historical) related topics, such as

Epistemology.

Moral Theory

Formal Logic
(Unapologetically, because no one is writing about the relations between
formal logic and religious beliefs...)

Note that "wokism" (I have no idea how to define this,becasue most users
of the slang phrase do not define it)would be addressed under the topic of
Formal Logic, under Sound and Unsound arguments.

Mostly in America, Formal Logic is only taught with regard to producing VALID
logical arguments. If you take a college course in Symbolic Logic, it is the
principles leading to logically VALID arguments that are being taught. This is
the "20 Rules of Inference and Quantification Rules", which are the grounding
of mathematics and the hard sciences.
---------- ----------

Soundness in a logical proof, involves using "sound" definitions and rules, in
the Assumptions part of a logical proof. "Soundness" means that the definitions
match "our shared reality". That is, if we do not get serious about teaching K12
students about concepts relating to "our shared reality", then they will continue
on in their life believing that whatever the think reality is, is what it is. And most
of these worldviews are incompatible with Constitutional concepts, and the fair rule
of law in America. This is not particularly a "religious" topic.
---------- -----------

Unfortunately, many in America who are "anti-woke" are anti-intellectual.
They do not accept the logical foundations of the hard sciences.
They do not accept the scientific foundation of the health sciences.
They are badly read in history.
They could not describe the difference to you, between Mathematical Logic,
Biological Logic, Logic in Chemistry, or Christian Logic.

Unfortunately, those who are anti-intellectual often do not see themselves
as anti-intellectual. What they are trying to impose on all students, is a
form of their own parochial religion. Often what they impose, is not even
historical Christianity.

You cannot have someone who is anti-intellectual, and a Christian.
You cannot have someone who is anti-intellectual, and a patriot.

This is a complicated problem in America, and the "anti-woke" crowds
in America, are not really addressing it.
The Woke movement has been erroneously defined by some as anti- Christian. This couldn't be further from truth.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: john23237
Upvote 0

public hermit

social troglodyte
Site Supporter
Aug 20, 2019
12,670
13,519
East Coast
✟1,064,189.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Christians should not submit their conscience to the legalism of secular constitutions.

Should they submit their consciences to the legalism of a particular Christian institution?
 
Upvote 0

public hermit

social troglodyte
Site Supporter
Aug 20, 2019
12,670
13,519
East Coast
✟1,064,189.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
This is a complicated problem in America, and the "anti-woke" crowds
in America, are not really addressing it.

To be fair, the right is just mimicking a tendency that is also prevalent on the left. When I was in undergrad in the mid-2000s, I could see that there was a shifting tendency toward addressing the passions of people instead of their reason. The sentiment was that the issues were too important to dally with reason. Plus, reason was beginning to be seen more as a product of colonialism than something by which to guide us.

Of course, folks on the right don't often think that deeply about things. They just toe the line and react. In reacting, they too often mimic what they hate because they are not very creative, politically speaking. Originality and change are almost heresy for those who see tradition as the ideal.

I agree that your suggested topics would be good for our citizens. I doubt it would come off in that way. If anything, these people would want those things taught through a dogmatic lens, which would be counterproductive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

Stephen3141

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2023
1,425
552
70
Southwest
✟107,695.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private

Note that Bonnie Kristian, a writer for Christianity Today, thinks that the decision
of the Texas board of education to introduce (some) biblical into the Texas K12
curriculum, is pretty innocuous.

Texas offers "Christian" teaching about the Bible, in optional courses, and
what is offered is more "the Bible as literature". I have no problem with
this product being offered, in this way.

My objection to introducing religious courses into a secular K12 curriculum,
is that (as the world turns) material from other religions may be introduced,
AND state legislatures may decide to make these courses mandatory.

Even presenting the Bible as literature, may present one very parochial interpretation
of the bible, such as the young-earthers (who heavily deny the soundness of
the hard sciences). A curriculum of the Bible as literature, produced by conspiracy
theory believers, may present interpretations of the Bible that are not academically
respectable.

But, as Bonnie Kristian has mentioned, the current product that Texas is
offering, seems to be pretty mundane and inoffensive.
 
Upvote 0