Presents and secularism
Despite the fact that it was his birthday and not mine, Nick bought me a lovely present that arrived today in the post. Its a t-shirt demonstrating through flow-charts the difference between science and faith. I've made that sound much duller than it is. Its actually pretty funny.
Anyway, I wore said shirt as we went out to Nick's birthday dinner tonight and it provoked much discussion from the kids who both wanted to work their way through each flowchart and were very pleased with the "science" one.
Gregory then said somewhat out of the blue "I don't like Christians. Not just because they are so barmy wrong, but also because they make it look like men are superior to women."
I asked what he meant and he said " All the important people in Christianity are men - God, Jesus, all the disciples, all the people who wrote the gospels, John, Joseph. It makes it seem that men do everything and women aren't involved."
Gregory clearly spends quite a bit of time thinking about religion and its consequences - prompted very little by us, but ironically I suspect provoked by the vast amounts of gratuitious religion that he has to put up with at school.
A good evening had by all.
Yes been through that with
Yes been through that with Naomi, School has a lot to answer for even raised it with them not that I got very far
Intresting
Firstly Happy b'day Nick.
Secondly...
I've a list for you (please forgive the spelling) Darwin, Galileo, Da Vichy, Plato, Astoria and Hawkins.
Ummm... All men as well?
Oh and BTW God isn't a "man" as such, he's call he and represented in a male way because of cultral reasion. This of course is also why my list is male.
I'm sure of course you informed Gregory of this rather than "Indroctonate him" into a lie.
"Gregory clearly spends quite a bit of time thinking about religion and its consequences - prompted very little by us, but ironically I suspect provoked by the vast amounts of gratuitious religion that he has to put up with at school."
Thats good. I'm glad he spends a lot of time thinking about things, the questron is of course would you perfer he knows why people belive what they belive or live in ignorance?
Personaly I'm for more religous teaching in schools (including athism), that is teaching about all religons, there basic belifes and at the end a questron and answer sesion.
Learning about religion or religious teaching?
Hi Scott,
The thing we are uncomfortable with is not that our children are being taught about religion - that would be a good thing if it were happening. It's the way that school (not just our particular school, but almost all schools in the UK) assume that Christianity is 'normal' and other religions are 'different'.
It's all to do with the establishment of the Church of England, of course, and the legal requirement for schools to offer "mostly Christian" worship. But it does mean that what little mention non-Christian religions get is in the style of "let's find out about what other people think", but in assemblies they sing Christian hymns, recite Christian prayers and such like. That's not learning about why people believe things, it's being indoctrinated into a lie, as you put it above.
I hadn't really thought about this issue very much before we had children, but I really notice it now, how much subtle religiosity the children are exposed to. I'm against "religious teaching" as you put it, but I'm in favour of more learning about religions. I think the two are actually contradictory.
Of course, God isn't a man. God doesn't exist. But it's significant that some religions have more than one god, and most of those have both male and female deities. Even amongst monotheistic religions, there is often more of a duality to their deities, but Christianity is very rigid in its gender roles. There are, of course, some Christians who recognise this shortcoming in Christianity and try to present some of the female characters in the Bible in a more positive light, but overall women do badly out of Christian texts.
Finally, your list. It's no surprise that many of the famous scientists and rationalists of the last 200 years were men. Living in a patriarchal society they inevitably got both more opportunity to learn / study / work than female contemporaries and also more publicity for their work. Interestingly, most of the ones you identified were also religious, rather than atheists, too.
This page discusses the issue of rationalism / atheism and gender roles, too, and provides some famous women freethinkers, including Mary Wollstonecraft, Annie Besant, George Eliot and Emma Goldman. I'd add Marie Curie to that list.
patriarchal socity not patriarchal Christanity
"Of course, God isn't a man. God doesn't exist."
Yes well, let's agree to disagree on that on. (Thats not backing out of the argument BTW, I happen to think theres enogth evidence to support a materalist God)
"Christianity is very rigid in its gender roles. There are, of course, some Christians who recognise this shortcoming in Christianity and try to present some of the female characters in the Bible in a more positive light, but overall women do badly out of Christian texts."
Umm... intresting, It's not strictly true, the early Christan Church was much more equal, it was only the foundation of Islam in around 700 AD that lead to a patriarchal dominance within Christanity, Basicaly the rise of Islam caused fear within the Catholic Church and so it became more dicatoral (Islam was had more duality then). This ended up leading to the Crusades which in turn turned Islam to a more male dominated stance.
The same can bee seen today when you look at Imperalist Christanity in the US and Islamic extreaminits (*not* fundementalism since that word doesn't mean what people currently think it means and is Impossabul to apply to Islam anyway) they are repeating the same cycle thats been going on since the 8th Century.
"Living in a patriarchal society they inevitably got both more opportunity to learn / study / work than female contemporaries and also more publicity for their work."
Thats the point I was trying to make :D . Christanity it's self isn't the problem the problem is a patriarchal socity.
"Interestingly, most of the ones you identified were also religious, rather than atheists, too." Really? fair enogth, I didn't notice, I just pulled random "people of englintment" (Calling Plato a scientist may be a bit strong) , but then I guess I shouldn't be supprised, until resently religion has played a big part in most peoples lives.
Thanks for the list but it's intresting... it says "Claiming the heritage of atheist thought by ensuring that it is recognised, is part of the process." yet it ncludes people like "Darwin, Charles" who happend to be a minister in the Church of England. I also noticed the list included David Hume all I will say is I don't know him and therefore he can't exist.
That said I agree with you on "religious teaching" (I think our daffinations are different on that, but thats all) and if your in favor of more education about religion you may be intrested in signing my petition on faith tolerance in schools. it reads simply
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to increase religious tolerance within society by firstly preventing schools from aligning themselves to one faith group, since such faith schools are divisive, and requiring all schools to teach lesions in the major faiths (including atheism) cumulating with a question and answer section with a local representative of that faith.
A picture is worth a thousand words
This is what is on the T-shirt. And here is where you can buy it.