This is grotesquely unconstitutional. The people putting this forward would go out of their tiny little minds at the mere suggestion children were to read from the Koran. Our secular government cannot choose one religion over another, and the public schools are a subdivision of government. The religious right NEVER stops trying to force their religion into the public schools. What they are too dim to grasp is that it is a tacit admission of just how weak their claims are that they need to force feed them to children before they've reached the age of reason.
How would they feel if many of the stories that students are required to read are from the Quran, the Jewish version of the Old Testament, the Buddhist Sutras, the Hindu text, and so much more?
There's far more religious writings to look at than just the Bible, you know?
BLASPHEMY! HERESY! DISHPAN HANDS, even! Of course, the bible is the only acceptable holy book to be incorporated into school curricula, according to those people. Hell of it is, I'll pretty much guarantee you they couldn't NAME another such reference.
Personally, I get a kick out of the Mahabharata, myself, and its central story, the Bhagavad Gita ... but that would be verboten, too.
The Vedas of India are alleged to have an oral tradition that dates back as much as 1,500 years before the carpenter of Galilee showed up. Obviously not easily confirmed, if confirmable at all, but even the first written records of Rig Veda date to 300 BCE.
Never mind the bibble. Why is Goldilocks on the mandatory reading list? Do they want to teach the kids that's it's okay to break into somebody's house without a judicial warrant?
Funnily enough I happened to be present when a teacher was using Goldilocks in an English class exercise for little kids, and guess what? The kids had already been informed that Goldilocks was a bad little girl because she stole from the bears and messed with their furniture and all loudly condemned her for it! Then seemed puzzled when I couldn't help but let out a guffaw. (Mind you, when I was their age my mainstay adaptation was the Looney Toons version - Goldimouse and the Three Cats, which ends with Bugs Bunny noting that Goldimouse is now in jail "serving a sentence for breaking in and entering").
It just slays me how often Noah's Ark keeps being repackaged as a cute little story for preschoolers because aw, look at all those happy little animals on their happy little boat! I guess the mere presence of animals means it's automatically for toddlers? Good (and by good I mean bad) lord...
So now Texas thinks it can sneak the bible into its classrooms under the radar, in the form of ancillary commentary on other readings. And they feel as though they need "prayer warriors" to accomplish this subterfuge. One would hope that saying the quiet part out loud would be enough to torpedo this misguided effort. Still, this IS Texas.
I'm glad to hear that Texas citizens are vociferous in their opposition to this action. THEY know it's bogus, even as I suspect those trying to accomplish it know. So let's put a STOP to it.
Am I the only one who thinks "prayer warriors" is a fucking stupid term? I would certainly venture to say it's measurably dumber than "keyboard warriors", which is equally annoying.
Prayer warriors is an oxymoron, anyone who knows the meaning of either words would know they are contradicting each other. Then again, most MAGAS don’t know the meaning of lot of the words they (MAGA) throw around!
eg they think "woke" is a catch-all term for "anything I don't like". The number of thought-terminating clichés that lot throw around do a *very* good job of exposing that they're a cult.
That's because Fox speaks in antonyms, and teaches them it means pretty much the opposite of what the actual definition is. It makes them sound like idiots and impossible to communicate with.
That was the impression I got; that it's meant to imply someone who thinks they're badass while hiding behind a keyboard on the internets. At least "SJW" seems to have been dropped because good fuck did I get completely sick of hearing it.
Yeah, that was another one used as a pejorative, that really wasn't in reality. Along with the dumbest one ever, favored by only the most oblivious of trolls, "identity politics" as if you are supposed to vote for issues meant to make your life worse! I know their voters are too stupid to get that, but still...
Sorry I'm late. Hemant published an hour earlier than normal.
Teach chidren both Adam & Eve and Noah's Ark? That could lead to embarrassing questions about the biblical god's competence and decision-making skills.
It is time to teach Republicans a history lesson. In my husband’s home office he always had a faded thermal copy of the list of multiple faiths and philosophies version of “do unto others what you would want done to you.” We taught our three children this philosophical belief. We never needed a church, school, or youth organization to do that for us. As a matter of fact we would not want them to do that for us.
Virtually every major world religion and numerous philosophical traditions include a version of the Golden Rule. While phrased differently—some as a positive command and others as a negative warning—the core principle of empathetic reciprocity remains constant.
The oldest recorded versions date back nearly 4,000 years, originating in Ancient Egyptian literature. While the phrase "Golden Rule" was not coined until the 17th century, the concept appears in some of humanity’s earliest surviving texts:
- Ancient Egypt (~2040–1650 BCE): "The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant" states: "Do for one who may do for you, that you may cause him thus to do."
- Vedic India (~3000–600 BCE): The Upanishads note: "Let no man do to another that which would be repugnant to himself."
- Ancient China (~500 BCE): Confucius articulated the negative form in the Analects: "What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others."
- Ancient Greece (~600–500 BCE): Thales advised avoiding actions you would blame others for, a concept later refined by Socrates and Plato.
There are two primary forms of the rule:
- Positive Form: "Do unto others..." (e.g., Leviticus 19:18 and the New Testament).
- Negative Form (Silver Rule): "Do not do unto others..." This version is historically more common and appears in many ancient codes to prohibit harm.
I've always like the version: That which you would not have done to you, do not do to another. Yes, it's a variation on the "Negative Form." I just think it works better.
I have lived by the inverse golden rule: treat others the way they treat you.
This is based on the idea that others are following the golden rule. If they are treating you badly it must mean that they wish to be treated badly and it is incumbent on you to accede to their wishes and treat them badly.
So, explicitly violating the First Amendment, specifically 𝘈𝘣𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘰𝘯 𝘷 𝘚𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘱. They want it to go to SCOTUS so they can get that decision overturned. Next on their list is 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘭 𝘷 𝘝𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘦 and 𝘔𝘤𝘊𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘶𝘮 𝘷 𝘉𝘰𝘢𝘳𝘥, so they can make public schools explicitly Christian indoctrination factories. To clean up this territorial pissing, we might need a floor scrubber instead of just mops.
I hope he shows up. Yesterday, I posted a quote by Hitler and how he felt about atheism (it wasn't good). Today I have one by Himmler and what HE had to say about nonbelievers.
Will he still try to deny the Nazis religious beliefs?
That's what I was waitin' for. That's my cue line...
"We believe in a God Almighty who stands above us; he has created the Earth, the Fatherland, and the Volk, and he has sent us the Fuhrer. Any human being who does not believe in God should be considered arrogant, megalomaniacal and stupid and thus not suited for the SS" -- Heinrich Himmler
Thank goodness he found atheists unfit for the SS. Wonder what Franny would make of THAT?
He would claim that you made it up! I have pointed out the more nastier parts of the Bible to Christians (even using their own bibles), only to be told that someone went and change their Bible by adding those parts! Even if that Bible never left their side! That is the mental gymnastics that they use!
Like I said when I pointed out the nastier parts of the Bible to a Christian; they claim someone must have altered their bibles to add that stuff!
Really, I said; that someone actually snuck into your house and changed the Bible by adding those nasty parts! Or changed the context of the verse. The Christian actually believed that those parts are not in the Bible or the context has been changed!
That is the mental gymnastics that they use to not having to face the horror promoted by that book! Has anyone else ever had to deal with something similar, if so how did you handle it?
I am sorry if I am repeating myself, it is frustrating that we have to detangle their logic to try to understand their crazy worldview!
"Like playing chess with a pigeon, they knock the pieces over, shit on the board, and strut around like they won." I'd credit the author but i don't know who to credit.
Yet Beto, who wasn't even an elected official at the time and AOC even though it was not her district, went and helped his constituents while, he fled to Cancun.
Because it's weak tea, with no leg to stand on, and dependent only on the gullibility of those who have been told that it is a good thing ... but you knew that!
This is grotesquely unconstitutional. The people putting this forward would go out of their tiny little minds at the mere suggestion children were to read from the Koran. Our secular government cannot choose one religion over another, and the public schools are a subdivision of government. The religious right NEVER stops trying to force their religion into the public schools. What they are too dim to grasp is that it is a tacit admission of just how weak their claims are that they need to force feed them to children before they've reached the age of reason.
How would they feel if many of the stories that students are required to read are from the Quran, the Jewish version of the Old Testament, the Buddhist Sutras, the Hindu text, and so much more?
There's far more religious writings to look at than just the Bible, you know?
BLASPHEMY! HERESY! DISHPAN HANDS, even! Of course, the bible is the only acceptable holy book to be incorporated into school curricula, according to those people. Hell of it is, I'll pretty much guarantee you they couldn't NAME another such reference.
Personally, I get a kick out of the Mahabharata, myself, and its central story, the Bhagavad Gita ... but that would be verboten, too.
NOT DISHPAN HANDS!!!!
Yes, yes, YES! The Horror of the Ages! The Bane of Kitchen Workers EVERYWHERE! DISHPAN HANDS! [Dah, dah, DAAAAAAAAH!!!]
Jawohl!
Ja, SICHER!
"the Jewish version of the Old Testament, the Buddhist Sutras, the Hindu text"
You missed out the Confucian analects. This, and your examples, all have a version of the golden rule.
All predating Christianity by several thousand years.
The Vedas of India are alleged to have an oral tradition that dates back as much as 1,500 years before the carpenter of Galilee showed up. Obviously not easily confirmed, if confirmable at all, but even the first written records of Rig Veda date to 300 BCE.
A fact they need beaten over the head with every time they try this effluent!
The 𝐾𝑎𝑚𝑎 𝑆𝑢𝑡𝑟𝑟𝑎?
I think I can visualize their reaction: https://c.tenor.com/n8isnUTpIp0AAAAC/tenor.gif
What would public schoolkids make of Lot drunkenly impregnating both his previously-virgin daughters?
Christian family values but don't say gay.
♫In the name of the family values we must ask whose family♫ - Lou Reed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjUr9URGd_M&list=RDJjUr9URGd_M&start_radio=1
"Teacher, were Moab and Ammon Lot's daughter's brothers or sons?"
Yes.
https://tenor.com/view/beavis-and-butthead-butthead-hey-baby-hey-there-gif-15790110
They don’t plan to let the kiddies read those nasty bits. Nosiree, Bob!
Sadly some are already aware of that practice.
Never mind the bibble. Why is Goldilocks on the mandatory reading list? Do they want to teach the kids that's it's okay to break into somebody's house without a judicial warrant?
Good catch!!
Funnily enough I happened to be present when a teacher was using Goldilocks in an English class exercise for little kids, and guess what? The kids had already been informed that Goldilocks was a bad little girl because she stole from the bears and messed with their furniture and all loudly condemned her for it! Then seemed puzzled when I couldn't help but let out a guffaw. (Mind you, when I was their age my mainstay adaptation was the Looney Toons version - Goldimouse and the Three Cats, which ends with Bugs Bunny noting that Goldimouse is now in jail "serving a sentence for breaking in and entering").
“Noah’s Ark” and “Adam & Eve”
Kids gotta learn about incest and genocide somehow.
It just slays me how often Noah's Ark keeps being repackaged as a cute little story for preschoolers because aw, look at all those happy little animals on their happy little boat! I guess the mere presence of animals means it's automatically for toddlers? Good (and by good I mean bad) lord...
So now Texas thinks it can sneak the bible into its classrooms under the radar, in the form of ancillary commentary on other readings. And they feel as though they need "prayer warriors" to accomplish this subterfuge. One would hope that saying the quiet part out loud would be enough to torpedo this misguided effort. Still, this IS Texas.
I'm glad to hear that Texas citizens are vociferous in their opposition to this action. THEY know it's bogus, even as I suspect those trying to accomplish it know. So let's put a STOP to it.
Am I the only one who thinks "prayer warriors" is a fucking stupid term? I would certainly venture to say it's measurably dumber than "keyboard warriors", which is equally annoying.
Prayer warriors is an oxymoron, anyone who knows the meaning of either words would know they are contradicting each other. Then again, most MAGAS don’t know the meaning of lot of the words they (MAGA) throw around!
eg they think "woke" is a catch-all term for "anything I don't like". The number of thought-terminating clichés that lot throw around do a *very* good job of exposing that they're a cult.
That's because Fox speaks in antonyms, and teaches them it means pretty much the opposite of what the actual definition is. It makes them sound like idiots and impossible to communicate with.
You are not. Although I think "keyboard warriors" is a perjorative.
That was the impression I got; that it's meant to imply someone who thinks they're badass while hiding behind a keyboard on the internets. At least "SJW" seems to have been dropped because good fuck did I get completely sick of hearing it.
Yeah, that was another one used as a pejorative, that really wasn't in reality. Along with the dumbest one ever, favored by only the most oblivious of trolls, "identity politics" as if you are supposed to vote for issues meant to make your life worse! I know their voters are too stupid to get that, but still...
That is its intended use, yes. Implying they hide behind their keyboard.
No, you are not, it reeks of the crusades, and mental illness.
Sorry I'm late. Hemant published an hour earlier than normal.
Teach chidren both Adam & Eve and Noah's Ark? That could lead to embarrassing questions about the biblical god's competence and decision-making skills.
True, but teaching kids that modern humanity is the product of 5,000 years of incest would probably explain a lot to the kids about living in Texas.
And why there are 2 creation stories… Poor old Lilith is getting short shrift…
Where does the bible say that Adam’s “shrift” was short?
https://ibb.co/Gf4p2kjD
🤣🤣🤣
She always does, misogynists wrote the bible, except for Ruth who I think was implied to be a lesbian, at least that is how I read it.
The same thumbnail as yesterday threw me off.
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/d4/1a/98/d41a9803e496ca371fc45bb4375d168a.jpg
It is time to teach Republicans a history lesson. In my husband’s home office he always had a faded thermal copy of the list of multiple faiths and philosophies version of “do unto others what you would want done to you.” We taught our three children this philosophical belief. We never needed a church, school, or youth organization to do that for us. As a matter of fact we would not want them to do that for us.
Virtually every major world religion and numerous philosophical traditions include a version of the Golden Rule. While phrased differently—some as a positive command and others as a negative warning—the core principle of empathetic reciprocity remains constant.
The oldest recorded versions date back nearly 4,000 years, originating in Ancient Egyptian literature. While the phrase "Golden Rule" was not coined until the 17th century, the concept appears in some of humanity’s earliest surviving texts:
- Ancient Egypt (~2040–1650 BCE): "The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant" states: "Do for one who may do for you, that you may cause him thus to do."
- Vedic India (~3000–600 BCE): The Upanishads note: "Let no man do to another that which would be repugnant to himself."
- Ancient China (~500 BCE): Confucius articulated the negative form in the Analects: "What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others."
- Ancient Greece (~600–500 BCE): Thales advised avoiding actions you would blame others for, a concept later refined by Socrates and Plato.
There are two primary forms of the rule:
- Positive Form: "Do unto others..." (e.g., Leviticus 19:18 and the New Testament).
- Negative Form (Silver Rule): "Do not do unto others..." This version is historically more common and appears in many ancient codes to prohibit harm.
This is similar to the one we had in our home: https://uufhnc.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Golden-Rules-Marc-Mullinax-Presentation-8.20.17.pdf
Sometimes given more concise form as the Bronze Rule: "Don't be a dick."
There's a lot to be said for those four words ... and a whole lot of people who could stand to learn what they mean.
Joan, I love that. Thank you, you made me smile and laugh. Can you send me a thought each day to make me laugh. Peace and Resistance!
Sharon, I do a "Quote of the Day" over at atheistuniverse.ning.com. You're welcome to stop by any old time.
I've always like the version: That which you would not have done to you, do not do to another. Yes, it's a variation on the "Negative Form." I just think it works better.
My $0.02 worth.
I have lived by the inverse golden rule: treat others the way they treat you.
This is based on the idea that others are following the golden rule. If they are treating you badly it must mean that they wish to be treated badly and it is incumbent on you to accede to their wishes and treat them badly.
*nods, thoughtfully*
I like that form.
My own version is slightly different: do not do unto others as they do not wish to be done unto.
This form means that your morality can’t be based solely on what you think.
I like that form. I will add it to my list.
Let's face it, the only Golden Rule that lot really care about is the one Jafar presented in Disney's Aladdin: He who has the gold makes the rules.
𝑇ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑏𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑊𝑜𝑟𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑜𝑑 𝑏𝑎𝑐𝑘 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑎 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑓𝑢𝑙 𝑤𝑎𝑦 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑡 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑠.
So, explicitly violating the First Amendment, specifically 𝘈𝘣𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘰𝘯 𝘷 𝘚𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘱. They want it to go to SCOTUS so they can get that decision overturned. Next on their list is 𝘌𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘭 𝘷 𝘝𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘦 and 𝘔𝘤𝘊𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘶𝘮 𝘷 𝘉𝘰𝘢𝘳𝘥, so they can make public schools explicitly Christian indoctrination factories. To clean up this territorial pissing, we might need a floor scrubber instead of just mops.
This latest maneuver by Christian lawmakers is the camel sticking his nose and head further into the tent.
The camel better be careful. The occupant of the tent may decide he likes his privacy more than he likes the camel.
More like the camels ass, it's not subtle enough to be the nose.
Where’s yesterday’s troll? I want to learn how this is anti-Christian
Just you mentioning it is clearly persecuting christians.
😂
Oh, dear, naughty, naughty! 🤣🤣🤣
I can hear the screams of my Christian neighbours as the above comment causes them to suffer endless torment and pain and also wet their pants.
I hope he shows up. Yesterday, I posted a quote by Hitler and how he felt about atheism (it wasn't good). Today I have one by Himmler and what HE had to say about nonbelievers.
Will he still try to deny the Nazis religious beliefs?
Aw, c'mon, post it anyway.
That's what I was waitin' for. That's my cue line...
"We believe in a God Almighty who stands above us; he has created the Earth, the Fatherland, and the Volk, and he has sent us the Fuhrer. Any human being who does not believe in God should be considered arrogant, megalomaniacal and stupid and thus not suited for the SS" -- Heinrich Himmler
Thank goodness he found atheists unfit for the SS. Wonder what Franny would make of THAT?
He would claim that you made it up! I have pointed out the more nastier parts of the Bible to Christians (even using their own bibles), only to be told that someone went and change their Bible by adding those parts! Even if that Bible never left their side! That is the mental gymnastics that they use!
Xtians should be careful about falsely claiming that others "make things up." 😃
Like I said when I pointed out the nastier parts of the Bible to a Christian; they claim someone must have altered their bibles to add that stuff!
Really, I said; that someone actually snuck into your house and changed the Bible by adding those nasty parts! Or changed the context of the verse. The Christian actually believed that those parts are not in the Bible or the context has been changed!
That is the mental gymnastics that they use to not having to face the horror promoted by that book! Has anyone else ever had to deal with something similar, if so how did you handle it?
I am sorry if I am repeating myself, it is frustrating that we have to detangle their logic to try to understand their crazy worldview!
Fucking hell, the last time I heard of someone making claims of that sort it was because they had extremely severe paranoid schizophrenia...
That is why I was wary, and was prepared to defend myself at moment notice!
Damn, that is delusional on a whole new, indoctrinated, reality-denying level.
Damn! Never heard that one before. [cut - paste!] Thanks!
Fuck, I mean if they didn't get that the belt buckles said Got Mitt uns, they are too stupid to even play with.
It doesn't include the whole bible.
At least you have an answer. Francisco was extremely tedious because he was nothing but assertion.
I forgot to include a link that doesn't say what I think it says.
Too busy crying to his trio of imaginary friends to come here for this tread!
I saw upthread that you asked the same question 2 hours ago.
No worries, great minds think alike!😇
"Where’s yesterday’s troll?"
Back where he came from, crowing about his victory over the no-nothing atheists.
"Like playing chess with a pigeon, they knock the pieces over, shit on the board, and strut around like they won." I'd credit the author but i don't know who to credit.
I missed another fanatic? Damn they are so silly.
Hey Texas. How is your power grid doing?
You don’t need it. you have jesus.
They don't even have Ted Cruz whenever there's an emergency. And yet they keep returning him to the Senate. Very illustrative of the Texan mindset.
Everything is bigger in Texas, especially the GODDAMM FUCKING STUPIDITY!
Yet Beto, who wasn't even an elected official at the time and AOC even though it was not her district, went and helped his constituents while, he fled to Cancun.
If Christianity is so good, why does it need to be forced on children who can't refuse? Why does it need the power of the State to spread?
Even their Jesus never tried to impose his way on Gentiles/nonbelievers. Do xtians think they know better than their own savior?
Silly question.
Well, that was woke Jeebus… not new and improved rethuglican Jeebus - now with lemon-freshened borax, I presume.
The omniscient saviour who thought that the Noachic flood was real:
"As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man.
For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark.
And they were oblivious until the flood came and swept them all away. "
Matthew 24:37-39
Because it's weak tea, with no leg to stand on, and dependent only on the gullibility of those who have been told that it is a good thing ... but you knew that!
Maybe they could require The Song of Solomon as sex education.
"Teacher, what does her lover's emissions were like that of horses mean?"
The bible doesn't even qualify as literature. It's the Dollar General Harlequin equivalent of 'literature.'
Trashy novels are usually at least entertaining; the Bible could be marketed as a prescription sleep aid.
I am sure that the passages they will choose are simple morality tales like Ezekiel 23.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel%2023&version=NIV
That’s a good way to turn off young people. A great road to atheism.
𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑑, 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐵𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑝𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑚 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑.
-- Isaac Asimov