The above image is of ‘Adam Lanza’, who shot dead 27 people at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December.
One reason out of many about his shooting, was given that he was a Satan worshipper, and when he burst into their classrooms, who could these vulnerable, unprotected kids cry out for? Their parents had approved the banning of God out of the classroom, and as for guns—why, they were banned, too. Public schools in Connecticut are “Gun Free Zones.” No guns there to protect the children.
In one column, a writer, an atheist, sneered, *“Where was God?” *Indeed, where was He? He was not there because He was not wanted and America has thrown God and prayer out of the classroom and banished all vestiges of God from public schools. Of course, Adam Lanza knew this. He knew he would be confronted neither with God nor with guns.
that takes me to a daily mail article, but that is not what your copypasta is, LKK pai. zara check kro tey post kro :\
leaving aside this news item and its link, can you please explain why God is not needed in schools. We people of sub-continent know that from earlier known periods its been part of educational institutes ( be it any Madarsa, paatshala, etc). Did that inclusion made our forefathers and us bad human beings?
leaving aside this news item and its link, can you please explain why God is not needed in schools. We people of sub-continent know that from earlier known periods its been part of educational institutes ( be it any Madarsa, paatshala, etc). Did that inclusion made our forefathers and us bad human beings?
the sub-continent's education system was indeed religion-based before the arrival of the brits. this was a major reason why the society was fragmented so easily along religious lines. you wouldn't see muslims sending their kids to study in a hindu religious school, and vice versa. although poor people sometimes did so.
also at this time, the sub-continent lagged behind immensely in scientific knowledge and technology despite being one of the largest economies in the world. the rulers despite being well-educated and well-read were not interested in science. while post-renaissance europe and china, free from religious dictates dominated. this dominance of technology is the single-biggest reason why europe ruled over the world.
and in today's world, if you want to introduce god in school, whose god(s) will you introduce? unless you want to send your kids to a muslims only school or something, this isn't really feasible. and even then, there'll be contradictions.
i'm ok with religious subjects being in school as optional electives, but the way it works in the US - the ones who want god in school basically want bible-based fallacies taught instead of scientific discoveries. no thanks.
LKK pai, you are maadretar and all that. you should know that anything copypasted to start a thread must mention its source. why are you so shy to post the source?
the sub-continent's education system was indeed religion-based before the arrival of the brits. this was a major reason why the society was fragmented so easily along religious lines. you wouldn't see muslims sending their kids to study in a hindu religious school, and vice versa. although poor people sometimes did so.
also at this time, the sub-continent lagged behind immensely in scientific knowledge and technology despite being one of the largest economies in the world. the rulers despite being well-educated and well-read were not interested in science. while post-renaissance europe and china, free from religious dictates dominated. this dominance of technology is the single-biggest reason why europe ruled over the world.
and in today's world, if you want to introduce god in school, whose god(s) will you introduce? unless you want to send your kids to a muslims only school or something, this isn't really feasible. and even then, there'll be contradictions.
i'm ok with religious subjects being in school as optional electives, but the way it works in the US - the ones who want god in school basically want bible-based fallacies taught instead of scientific discoveries. no thanks.
do you think that science could not flourish in sub-continent due to religious involvement in educational institutes. Didn't we have expert people in medicine and surgery fields millenniums ago?
i think religious involvement definitely discourages asking certain questions, going along research paths whose results may look contradictory to what current interpretations of scripture say. the dark ages in europe - copernicus almost got killed for his findings. galileo was hated by the religious. da vinci is still badnaam with crap like illuminati that today even LKK pai keeps flooding around periodically.
expertise in medicine and surgery is something indians like to brag about. truth of the matter is, all cultures where people live close to the land have a good knowledge of medicinal herbs, etc. sushruta’s surgery treatise is impressive for his times, but there is nothing to show he was religious. in fact, i’d think he’d have had to go against religious norms of hindus to study, train and perform most of those procedures.
LKK pai, you are maadretar and all that. you should know that anything copypasted to start a thread must mention its source. why are you so shy to post the source?
Queer pai, multiple links (source) thy isliyeh i posted only 1. Lost track of all other sources. Now what?
The bible have many versions written by many others and may be or may be not there are chances of errors. If anyone or lets say hatter of religions wanna degrade a (any) religion then they will bring those scriptures, precisely speaking present interpretations of those scriptures in such way which will contradict with researches of science reasoning that (1) peoples will found the scripture false (2) people slowly but effectively stop believing in religious teaching, god, angel, demons etc., (3) peoples will never found out who were the actual culprits who presented these scripture (interpretation) falsely and so on. There could be many more un-answered questions and this whole scenario, is not only related to one thing but related with each and every single aspect which related either directly or indirectly.
I read somewhere similar to that the modern science teaches a person that you are god controlling yourself and there is no other god who control you. You explore your thoughts/imaginations which is same like a genie in a bottle, and then you follow that genie (your thoughts/imagination) like a obedient servant to god neglecting what is going around you even can’t see it by their naked eyes and sometime I feel queer pai do the same.
The above phrase could be the answer of why Adam Lanza knew this he would be confronted neither with God nor with guns.
do you think that science could not flourish in sub-continent due to religious involvement in educational institutes. Didn't we have expert people in medicine and surgery fields millenniums ago?
As far as I am aware of, in ancient days, the study of sciences were taught in the same place as religion. I am not sure if they contradicted each other as much as monotheistic religions and science. I haven't heard of ancient indian scientists persecuted because of their research and findings. May be there were, I am not sure. Scientists like Aryabhata were believed to have worked at the university of Nalanda. According to wiki, the curriculum of Nalanda was ...virtually the entire range of world knowledge then available. Courses were drawn from every field of learning, Buddhist and Hindu, sacred and secular, foreign and native. Students studied science, astronomy, medicine, and logic as diligently as they applied themselves to metaphysics, philosophy, Samkhya, Yoga-shastra, the Veda, and the scriptures of Buddhism. They studied foreign philosophy likewise. So looks like religious and secular subjects were taught in the same place. How they reconciled their beliefs, I am not sure. I know a hindu scientist with good scientific standing his the University here in the US who very religious at home. How does he reconcile his faith and his work is that they are separate for him. Difficult to understand but makes sense to that person. It think it was only later that sciences and religion were taught separately in India. But mostly many of Ancient Indian scientists studied both religious and secular subjects.
plz search on google.