Religious bigotry in seventh grade class room

By the way, Sofia (Lash) is teaching medieval European history. Comments about other nations and other times are really not germane.

I have to ask again. Why doesn't anyone call Setanta on his oh so obvious hypocrisy?

That is a good point Bill. In that regard our society has changed in the last 40 years. Openly disagreeing with the predominate praise Jesus view isn't accepted very well these days. I have moved to the middle of the bible belt though. It's so comfortable to totally accept the dogma, that's one of it's appeals.

True, George, and it gets back to the observation about humans as pack animals. Being a member of the pack is so important and accepting the pack rules is part of that acceptance. When that means shunning or belittling someone outside the pack, it reinforces the role as a member. I think that's a much stronger motivation than any actual belief in the basis for the 'rules'. It doesn't much matter if the pack is organized around an ancient superhero or the color of ones skin or even a football team. So tolerance becomes quite contrary and threatening to the groups that are so important to us.

To some extent this forum is a place that we can openly discuss these issues without fear of rejection by the group, or perhaps this just attracts loners in the first place.

Really? That sounds like religious intolerance to me. Not quite as far as putting everyone in prison maybe, but certainly not supportive. I think maybe there is a line from supportive to intolerant, with financial support being toward the supportive end and prison or death the intolerant end, this certainly moves toward intolerance.

We have some argument with this here with many folks wanting to remove the tax exempt status of the church.

Take a shot. It can be painful.

Believe me it was not accepted well in the 1960s with the home room teachers reading from the King James Bibles every morning at least when I did not hide the bible from one of the teachers.

Madalyn Murray O'Hair where polled as the most hated woman in American at the time and we were lied to that the nation was base on Christianity as all the founding fathers were deeply religion persons.

That was one of the reasons when I found as a young man that neither Paine or Jefferson were Christians and an early congress had declared in a treaty that we where not founded as a Christian nation I were delight.

Why do you take part in this deceptive behavior, Frank(qm) Setanta engages in this devious and dishonest behavior to attempt to steer things away from subjects he doesn`t want to face. Why provide support for that kind of dishonesty.

OK, now I get it. The USSR wasn'r really intolerant of religion for very reasons you outlined;
1. Working for the state bureaucracy for the suppression of religion was a dead end job.
2. Their retaliation againced perceived traitors was much worse than their anti-religious activities.
3. They claimed ownership of all church property, so destroying churches or converting them to museums or facilities promoting atheism was really no anti religious or hostile act at all.
4.They treated everyone else like **** too.

You are merely seizing yet another (somewhat tortured) opportunity for a bout of tiresome historical pedantry. No one claimed the forced relocations of the Ukrainian kulacks was anyhing but a reprisal for their resistence to agrarian collectivization, or their continuing removals (and occasional exterminations) of hostile populations from the Caucosus was anything but a continuation of much earlier policies ( the Circassians, most notably).

However, even here, religion was indeed a factor in the actions you cited. It was a crucial factor in the resistance of the groups in question to Soviet oppression. The USSR was intolerant of resistence in any form to their initial program of creating a new socialist man and a perfect world. A movement that very quickly degenerated to the mere preservation of their power.

Does that correlate to driving an "off-the-road" jeep?

Do people who buy jeeps go off on tangents from the "main road" (i.e., main topic) to any greater predilection than other car owners? And if yes, why? Is it an ego thing to show where one can go? Or, a realization that most "main" roads are boring, and a jeep, and digression, is a suitable measure against ennui?

What would Holmes say about people that buy jeeps?

I read up thru page 4, and since the conversation has veered from students being disruptive in class to another subject all together (American war crimes), forgive me if I repeat advice that may have all ready been provided.

Not every question people ask needs to be answered. In particular, questions of your views on religion, marital status, income, are your parents alive, etc. especially questions of a personal nature from a 12 year old to his/her teacher. We seem to tolerate more violations of privacy and personal space as years go on. First of all, why does this child need to know? I think he is looking for leverage (they all do) it's not unusual, children and everyone else for that matter need to know what the boundaries are. Many years ago, when my first marriage fell apart a woman transferred to my office and sat at the desk next to mine. I didn't dislike her, I just didn't know her very well so when she asked me if I sold my house after the divorce was it because I wanted to or because I had to? For a minute I was flummoxed, why would she need to know? If I answered either one of her possible rationale I would have been uncomfortable.....after half a beat I just told her I couldn't remember. Somehow countering a rude question with an uncomfortable "that's none of your business" was not something that was easy for me to say, telling her I couldn't remember may have been worse, but it ended the conversation. We got along fine after that.

Anyhow, just to avoid reading whatever path the discussion was taking, I skipped ahead. If a question makes you feel uncomfortable, or if it is completely out of context...deflect. Think about this, on one occasion while my husband and I were visiting my brother and his new wife, my brother and I shared a story about attending a Catholic school when we were young and new wife looked at me and asked "why is it you Catholics think your better than everyone else?". Crickets. I had never been asked a question quite like that, and since I'm not the official spokesperson for all other Catholics, I didn't have an answer for her. She didn't read the fine print that mentioned her new husband was also raised catholic. Frankly, I have never defined myself strictly by the faith I was born into and I'm clueless why others think it defines them or me. I think my husband (raised southern baptist) made a joke that moved the conversation in a different direction so I never got back with an official answer.
Bottom line, you don't have to disclose your personal business when it's simply to satisfy someone else's curiosity.

I will admit to getting caught up in it from time to time, but I don't see the benefit of continuing. A man has to know his limitations.

I don't see my role here as keeping Set in line, or anyone else.

Your point is valid.


It identifies which pack, tribe, church one belongs to. It we meet someone in a different pack, we must make sure they know where we stand.

I suppose if you have never been exposed to different cultures you might feel threatened. Since military service is volunteer only, fewer people are exposed. I spent 32 years working for DOD, everybody was from someplace else. My parents grew up in Baltimore, which was a mini-melting pot, so everybody had a grandmother from "the old country" who spoke broken English. People in my generation grew up dining on the best food from around the globe. And all we had to do was visit a friends house for dinner. As far as clans go I identify as Irish but one parent was episcopal and the other catholic. Push comes to shove, I'm an American first.

Well, I don't know if it's obvious (your ability to find the entry for Socians in Wikipedia is hardly noteworthy), but I wouldn't be surprised. As I've admitted before, I can't make head nor tail out of Socinian doctrine. That's why I asked you to explain it. Instead, you directed me to the Wikipedia entry, which I could have done myself. Thanks for nothing.


Why would I back up your claims? Isn't that your job?

You're not doing a very good job of it.

How many cylinders does the new "Huff" have anyway?

I won't be playing your idiotic games, Joe. As you well know, the point is that YOU don't back up YOUR claims.

If you can't get a taxi, you can leave in a huff.
If that's too soon, you can leave in a minute and a huff.
Groucho Marx as Rufus T. Firefly in Duck Soup

I have been in different cultures. Although I haven't lived abroad for years. I have moved from 'yankee land' to the south, its more different than some might think, not the same thing as moving from another country though. I'm not necessarily talking about cultures, although they definitely reflect tribes. Even within cultures there are different clubs and 'packs'. Some people are able to have effective independent thinking while living within those packs, some are not. All I'm saying is that our desires to maintain our membership is a strong motivator that often precludes independent thought. Our dislike for someone in another group is more based on our trying to reinforce our own membership that any real reason to dislike the other person. I was trying to explain the anti-Catholic comment mentioned earlier. You are right, exposure to other cultures does teach one that other's are not always a threat. In my experience, people who have lived outside the US usually are more tolerant.