Creation Museum

Inside my flippancy was a real question--are you taxed to support the religious establishment?

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Inside my flippancy was a real question--are you taxed to support the religious establishment?

Quote:

These office holders and officers [e.g. government ministers and whips, the Leader and Chief Whip of the main opposition party, and two Chairmen of Committees], together with the Law Lords, receive salaries. All other members of the House of Lords are unpaid, but they are entitled to reimbursement of their expenses, within maximum limits for each day on which they attend the House [*]. The Clerk of the Parliaments, a role like that of a chief executive, is head of the administration. The Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod has ceremonial and royal duties and is in charge of security, access and domestic matters.

source: House of Lordes

* see here

0 Replies

OK, Walter, but you're too focused on the House of Lard . . . i am asking if yer average Sassanach in the street is taxed to support the religious establishment, not simply to feed arguably useless mouths in Westminister.

0 Replies

In Germany: yes (we got church taxes) for the Catholics, Evangelicals (Protestants) and Jews.

In England (and the UK in totaliter) I donn't think that the church(es) receive any direct direct government (tax) support.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Inside my flippancy was a real question--are you taxed to support the religious establishment?

I guess the answer has to be yes, but not excessively. Most members of the house of lords are not paid, except attendance allowance, expenses, free ermine, travel cards subsidised eating drinking and cavorting around the west end ........oh dear getting carried away again...

The lords who are officials i.e. acting for the govt or opposition in the second chamber are paid out of public funds. The Bishops and assorted clerics who are there because they are looking after Gods interests, are not paid directly just free communion wine and a biscuit....oh really I dont know. Ask Walter he knows everything about this country,

...and has already answered. Smile

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Quote:
You are correct. It is their right. And it shouln't be. What about the rights of the child?

.........The only thing that we can do is have the expectation that many of these children will see through the falsity of this museum, and question it as they mature. You may very well see young people who enter college, totally confused by the dichotomy of learning what science says, and comparing it to what they have been taught as kids.

.........

Hi Phoenix,

I would love to introduce you to a high school senior who emailed me her ACT score a few weeks ago. I think I have mentioned this before.

She has been homeschooled from the beginning -- reading independently at age 4, never had a standardized test in her life till the ACT.

She wanted to enroll in a Christian college and so she took the test, scoring 35 out of 36 on the science portion on the first take and 36 out of 36 on the second take, two months later.

She is a creationist (this is the position that was emphasized in her home), and understands the evolutionary position as well. Her parents who taught her are both high school grads.

For you to pretend that young people must believe in only evolution just as you believe it, or they 'will not understand science' shows a complete disconnect with reality.

Maybe you should get out more and meet folks who think differently than you do.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Any law enforcement, legal professionals, social workers etc care to enlighten us as to what the likely legal consequences of such an action might be?

I'm a social worker myself, studied law and worked with 'leagal agencies'.

I wonder if you know that e.g. even today in some countries asylum seekers, refugees etc live with more than 10 people in just one room.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

real life wrote:

Any law enforcement, legal professionals, social workers etc care to enlighten us as to what the likely legal consequences of such an action might be?

I'm a social worker myself, studied law and worked with 'leagal agencies'.

I wonder if you know that e.g. even today in some countries asylum seekers, refugees etc live with more than 10 people in just one room.

So, in Germany no legal consequences for this?

I'm not a social worker or lawyer but I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the legal consequences here could be quite different from where you are. Adults having sex in front of children is not considered normal here.

And yes I have worked with groups of refugees who have come here and live with many people in a small apartment.

0 Replies

I'm not saying that it is normal - we usually have more than one room for families.

When I grew up - in grandparents house, 26 rooms, my mother and her sister live there alone nowadays - my parents just occupied two rooms for a couple of years. (Refugee families from the east were housed in the others.)
ALL family life happened there.

Nowadays - here I'm referring to a study made by theDepartment for Special Pedagogics at the Evangelical University of Applied Sciences Darmstadt in 1999/2000 - 40% of parents look during daytime for situations to make intimate love, when their children are not present. About 92% close their sleeping rooms when doing so at night.

0 Replies

real life- I applaud the youngster who did so well on her ACT scores. The problem is that you cannot generalize the understanding of students who were taught conflicting concepts by pointing out one young person who did well in a science test.

It would have been far more informative if you had cited a study which compared the scores on the science part of the ACT between home schoolers, children who went to Christian schools that taught creationism, and students in public schools.

0 Replies

My grandmother went to a private Christian highschool at about 1916: got really good results in 'biology including evolution'; grandfather went to a private liberal-business orientated highschool at around 1900: got excellent marks for his work on evolution. :wink:

0 Replies

We've been down this silly road with "real life" before in another thread. Even were one to demonstrate that private schools do better than public schools, private schools can select their student body, while public schools have to take all students; private schools can choose the best course materials and texts (with the obvious exception of foisting creationism off as science), while public school text and course material selection is a minefield of political rectitude (from right and left) special interests.

Comparing private school scores to public school scores is apples to oranges. You will find, however, that "real life" is more than happy to constantly peddle the same drivel not only from one thread to another, but reapeatedly in a single thread, because there will always be the possibility of some sucker who has not been cozened by his fairy tales.

0 Replies

Well, such is real life.

0 Replies

B!tch, ain't it ?

0 Replies

Did I ever tell you that I was famous for my bends, btw? (In the navy, at least.)

0 Replies

I never agree with children of Oz ...

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

real life- I applaud the youngster who did so well on her ACT scores. The problem is that you cannot generalize the understanding of students who were taught conflicting concepts by pointing out one young person who did well in a science test.

It would have been far more informative if you had cited a study which compared the scores on the science part of the ACT between home schoolers, children who went to Christian schools that taught creationism, and students in public schools.

I was not generalizing the performance of one student into the performance of all. I was simply countering your generalization, (which was based on.....well , no evidence at all...) that the teaching of creation could lead to confusion in science.

0 Replies

Quote:

I was simply countering your generalization, (which was based on.....well , no evidence at all...) that the teaching of creation could lead to confusion in science.

real life- I don't believe that anyone who thinks would come to the conclusion that a youngster being taught two very different accounts of the creation of the world might become a bit confused. I don't need any evidence for that. If I were totally naive about science, and someone told me that the earth was 6,000 years old, and someone else told me that the earth was 4.5 billion years old, I think that I would be more than a little confused.

0 Replies

Well, I went to school and was taught science. I was also taught from the bible. I am not confused.

0 Replies

A contention subject to debate.

0 Replies

Creation Museum

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know