Jump to content

Religious Exemptions


SithLord

Recommended Posts

So, this may be an old topic, an a bit obvious seeing the way AVEN leans politically, but what do people think about religious exemptions for things? 

 

This is for the relgious and non-religious alike to answer. Because aside from what I consider to be pretty stupid with being allowed to forego vaccines because of supposedly religious reasons, apparently the state of Ohio is thinking about letting kids be scientifically wrong if their religion teaches otherwise? Please let this be a joke. 

I understand not oppressing people or banning religion or whatever, but how will these kids do in college when they attend a Geology 101 course that counters the idea of Noah's flood? Or take Anthropology 101 where they have to learn about evolution? Not to mention all the humnaities like gender studies, psychology, sociology, philosophy, etc. 

 

So in the grand scheme of things, I don't think religion should be used as an excuse to let kids be factually wrong or put in danger. Jahovah's Witness so you're letting your kid die rather than give them blood? Call CPS. Locking your kid in a room for hours if not days because that's the way Scientology treats mental illenss? CPS! 

 

Tax except status I can understand, but would prefer the churchs have to prove they're doing humanitarian things and improving the community, not just taking money and using it for their own selfish reasons. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm religious, but I don't support the idea of allowing people to fail to vaccinate their children for any reason except a genuine medical condition.  And sheltering children from learning about different ideas is just going to make it more difficult for them to function in society later on, when they have to deal with people whose beliefs are different from their own.

As for the evolution question, I can't believe that people still refuse to accept it as a scientific reality.  Just about every major religious group has reconciled with it and accepted the idea of the book of Genesis being a metaphor. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dislike religious exemptions. While I could theoretically find some religious exemptions I agree with, the fact that they 1) usually only apply to a specific religion (for example Amish get out of being drafted, but I would have to prove I am always a pacifist to get the same result) or the 2) allow for incorrect information to cause harm. Particularly more so when children are at stake.

I always love how the same people who make these religious-exemption laws would be the first ones to jump on the 'think of the children' bandwagon for music censorship, anti-LGBT+, or movie ratings, yet see nothing wrong with intellectually-limiting a child.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree- exemptions from things like military service on the basis of religion should also include non-religious personal beliefs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion has been the shackles on humanity forever.  They have a right to be ignorant but not to get it on the rest of us.  If they kept it in their churches/religious schools I would be fine with it.  But more and more they have taken over politicians and laws are being passed forcing all of us to bend to their will.  We are devolving as a nation and that will be our end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion shouldn't be a constraint on the intellect.  If there is a God who created the world, why wouldn't He/She/They want us to understand it as fully as possible?

Link to post
Share on other sites
abandoned-account
2 hours ago, SithGirl said:

would prefer the churchs have to prove they're doing humanitarian things and improving the community, not just taking money and using it for their own selfish reasons. 

 

2 hours ago, Iridium said:

I'm religious, but I don't support the idea of allowing people to fail to vaccinate their children for any reason except a genuine medical condition.  And sheltering children from learning about different ideas is just going to make it more difficult for them to function in society later on, when they have to deal with people whose beliefs are different from their own.

As a Christian I agree with all of this. Trying to over-shelter children in general does much more harm to them than good. They need to know the truth about the world around them, plain and simple. Them not knowing about it isn't going to make it disappear.

One can learn to understand and accept that other people with different ideas do exist in the world, whether or not you believe in said ideas yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would accept answer of the form "scientists believe XYZ" rather than "XYZ is true".  I wan't to be sure students have learned the information but we can't force them to believe what they have learned.  

 

The universe OTOH may quite directly force them to accept a variety of science, sometimes in a very terminal way. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, uhtred said:

I would accept answer of the form "scientists believe XYZ" rather than "XYZ is true".  I wan't to be sure students have learned the information but we can't force them to believe what they have learned. 

I can get behind that. They can remain ignorant in their beliefs as long as they understand that's not what scientists (or facts) say. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a former catholic I don't agree with restricting knowledge for religions reasons. I have met at the (catholic) university great scientists and eclesiasts who managed pretty well the integration of their faith to the modern world. I 'dropped out' of this religion for other personal reasons.

Maybe the people who see science and religion as antagonists are reading the religious texts too literally (lacking historical/political perspective and ignoring metaphors) or mistaking tradition (initially set in place for social or political reasons) with religious dogma.

1 hour ago, SithGirl said:

This is for the relgious and non-religious alike to answer. Because aside from what I consider to be pretty stupid with being allowed to forego vaccines because of supposedly religious reasons, apparently the state of Ohio is thinking about letting kids be scientifically wrong if their religion teaches otherwise? Please let this be a joke. 

I understand not oppressing people or banning religion or whatever, but how will these kids do in college when they attend a Geology 101 course that counters the idea of Noah's flood? Or take Anthropology 101 where they have to learn about evolution? Not to mention all the humnaities like gender studies, psychology, sociology, philosophy, etc. 

Just...'facepalm'. One should be able to learn about other religions without automatically joining them.

 

Concerning religious signs in public, I'm not against them except when they pose a risk for security (like the niqab in airports).

 

Concerning religious exemptions for medical acts I would ban them for minors and in public health campaigns. I have the same opinion over the people who refuse vaccines for 'scientifical' reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, uniQChick said:

Here some help for those Christian students that want to go through college or university and stay faithful to God:

The Creation Survival Guide

Lol I'm enjoying this read. I hope it gets better. Wish I had popcorn.

 

God I wish that had actual stuff from the book. I'd love to read how it seeks to defend creationism. I wonder if it takes a Bible-literal stance in believing in a Young Earth, of if that's just too out there to defend. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SithGirl said:

Lol I'm enjoying this read. I hope it gets better. Wish I had popcorn.

Check the Articles section after you done. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everyone should be exempt from things like the draft, but yeah I don’t think people should get special treatment for being religious. If that law in Ohio passes then I won’t be surprised when kids who fail their science tests just start saying “Well according to my religion that’s the right answer”. Come to think of it something like that would have come in handy in my Chemistry class in 11th grade.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gloomy said:

If that law in Ohio passes then I won’t be surprised when kids who fail their science tests just start saying “Well according to my religion that’s the right answer”. Come to think of it something like that would have come in handy in my Chemistry class in 11th grade.

If I said I was a jedi, and that I believed the force moved all things, would that prevent me from having to learn physics?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, uniQChick said:

Check the Articles section after you done. :)

Quote

Actually, I and many of my colleagues are Ph.D. scientists who don’t believe the earth is much older than 6,000 years. So arguments from authority such as “scientists believe in an ancient earth” just don’t work on us, and neither should they work on anyone else.

Without knowing what article you refer to, it’s hard to comment. But one of my colleagues, also a Ph.D. scientist, wrote 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe.

From an article about if scientists have proven an old earth. Can I just say, that I laughed out loud that he doesn't say what the PhDs are in? I had to click on his article link to get his qualifications, and he doesn't do anything to bolster his unnamed sources. Apparently the author has a BS and PhD in Chemistry, so I'm curious why he believes in a young earth. Pretty sure he'd know about all the different tests proving how old rocks are. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
brbdogsonfire
54 minutes ago, SithGirl said:

If I said I was a jedi, and that I believed the force moved all things, would that prevent me from having to learn physics?

It is unlawful for the american government to means test a religion. Which means the government cannot decide what is and is not a religion so...yes you could.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In biology class my teacher actually wrote in her university paper that not evolution did not happen it was god and got the biggest and fattest fail in her life. She had to learn that she was in a science class and religion held no part in it. So she also teaches at a very religious school and she reminds everyone every single time whether its an essay or exam that if we dont agree with a topic we should never ever use religious reasons in a science subject. You either agree or use scientific facts for it. Otherwise you will fail.

 

I get people love religion but it just does not fit in certain areas of life like science or taking an oath on a bible in the court of law and things like that. 

 

If a bunch of  18 years old can live with science and religion together in their life so can everyone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SithGirl said:

If I said I was a jedi, and that I believed the force moved all things, would that prevent me from having to learn physics?

Technically you're not wrong.  "an object in motion stays in motion".

Link to post
Share on other sites
dancingeologist

I generally think people should be able to do what they want as long as they are not endangering the health and safety of others.  This means I'm against religious exemptions for things like vaccinations, and providing medical treatment to your kids because that endangers the health and safety of others. But if you want to pull your kid out of school or science class you are just making your kid ignorant and I think you should have the freedom to do so.  People should fail classes if they don't comply with learning the material being taught regardless of the reason, but I'm not against dropping out of school for religious reasons.  Similarly if you want to wear a religious symbol or put one up on your property as long as it's not going to fall on your neighbor, I'm all for having the freedom to do what you want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A quote from a article that SithGirl mentioned:

"But one of my colleagues, also a Ph.D. scientist, wrote 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe."

 

Yeah, like someone who was actually a PhD would have "wrote 101 evidences".   Ye gods.  

 

Anyone who believes they should be able to keep their children from being vaccinated for dangerous diseases should be fined for doing so.  In my Washington State, there's now a law that if a child isn't vaccinated, the child won't be accepted into school.  That protects other children.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I support it for some things and not for others. I guess the line in the sand is will it effect others. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Iridium said:

Religion shouldn't be a constraint on the intellect.  If there is a God who created the world, why wouldn't He/She/They want us to understand it as fully as possible?

 

2 hours ago, ben8884 said:

I support it for some things and not for others. I guess the line in the sand is will it effect others. 

It is that tree of knowledge thing.  He did not want Adam and Eve getting all smart and all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Nick2 said:

Religion has been the shackles on humanity forever.  They have a right to be ignorant but not to get it on the rest of us.  If they kept it in their churches/religious schools I would be fine with it.  But more and more they have taken over politicians and laws are being passed forcing all of us to bend to their will.  We are devolving as a nation and that will be our end.

Why are religious schools fine? As a matter of fact, I would extend that to homeschool since I do not believe education method is relevant to one's socialization and education. Why would religious teachings be fine?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, R_1 said:

Why are religious schools fine? As a matter of fact, I would extend that to homeschool since I do not believe education method is relevant to one's socialization and education. Why would religious teachings be fine?

Because that is part of our constitution.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Calligraphette_Coe
22 hours ago, SithGirl said:

So, this may be an old topic, an a bit obvious seeing the way AVEN leans politically, but what do people think about religious exemptions for things? 

 

This is for the relgious and non-religious alike to answer. Because aside from what I consider to be pretty stupid with being allowed to forego vaccines because of supposedly religious reasons, apparently the state of Ohio is thinking about letting kids be scientifically wrong if their religion teaches otherwise? Please let this be a joke. 

I understand not oppressing people or banning religion or whatever, but how will these kids do in college when they attend a Geology 101 course that counters the idea of Noah's flood? Or take Anthropology 101 where they have to learn about evolution? Not to mention all the humnaities like gender studies, psychology, sociology, philosophy, etc. 

 

So in the grand scheme of things, I don't think religion should be used as an excuse to let kids be factually wrong or put in danger. Jahovah's Witness so you're letting your kid die rather than give them blood? Call CPS. Locking your kid in a room for hours if not days because that's the way Scientology treats mental illenss? CPS! 

 

Tax except status I can understand, but would prefer the churchs have to prove they're doing humanitarian things and improving the community, not just taking money and using it for their own selfish reasons. 

As with most situations like this, you have to prove harm will result if this is allowed. In the case of vaccines and blood transfusions, it's a no-brainer. In the case of science, were I arguing against someone like Jay Sekulow of the Religious Right in the SCOTUS, the first point I would make is that the Bible of one major religion says that Pi is divinely ordained to be 3.

 

Can you imagine what would happen if an engineer were allowed to use this in calculations because 'my religion says so'?

 

This is all an inane game, anyway, to make points with the religious right constitutency, and then scream "LEGISLATING FROM THE BENCH!!!!" when it's overturned on appeal and/or ruled Unconsitutional. 

 

And can you just IMAGINE what would happen if someone insisted on the Theory of Evolution being given equal time in Church?

 

They completely forget what happened when the King of England was also head of the Church.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Nick2 said:

Because that is part of our constitution.

No, it isn't.  The amendment regarding religion simply says that the government can't establish a religion.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am torn on this. I've seen a lot of religious propaganda designed to take advantage of the mailability of young minds, intentionally or not, and that saddens me. I don't think faith should have a foundation laid by cartoon characters and official looking textbooks disregarding any contention to the factuality they are presenting...but on the other hand I am a big  proponent of having the opportunity to get things wrong.

 

and beyond that I think that public education already doesn't do a lot to prepare us for our adult lives, such as explaining how to derive truth outside of the scientific method (hint it's still the scientific method) or teaching us how to foster and support communities

 

education isn't easy and especially in this for profit society we just can't afford to put lights on this runway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...