You're kidding right? I've given you multiple counter arguments. If you're not reading the thread, I'm going to have to stop wasting time with it. You are, of course, free to think whatever you want. I simply object to the thought of atheism being some banner for a bunch of oppressive bullshit propogated by anti-theists.

(November 20, 2012 at 9:05 pm)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: And I thought the british self-loathing (if I understand the meaning of the term correctly) was a clichè.

I'd call it self-deprecation rather than self-loathing. Most of us don't actually loathe ourselves. Of course, there's always self-lathing but that's relatively rare nowadays, and self-loaving is unheard of outside of the baking industry.

(November 20, 2012 at 9:32 pm)Shell B Wrote: You're kidding right? I've given you multiple counter arguments. If you're not reading the thread, I'm going to have to stop wasting time with it. You are, of course, free to think whatever you want. I simply object to the thought of atheism being some banner for a bunch of oppressive bullshit propogated by anti-theists.

I have never stated that "atheism should be the banner under which to build some oppressive............ whatever"

You realy dont seem to get my argument.

I (and probably alot of others) distinguish sociaty into different puzzle bits which together form a amazing structure in flux.

One of these puzzle bits is the educational sector.

Who should define what is taught in the educational sector.

I say: humanistic scientists, natural scientists and experts in pedagogics.

I say: What is called "education" should be defined by experts in the field of education . I never stated that atheists should!

I say: people who have no experties on the educational sector, or reject it`s methods because of ideological views - should not be capable of posing as legitemate educators on the same social rank as actual real educators are.

If you dont understand that - I will have to explain it with animal metaphores.

Try explaining it in English. Again, there is either a language gap or you're contradicting yourself a lot in this thread. Perhaps if you explained it in German and I ran it through Google translate. I don't know. All I know is I ain't a ratard and I don't know what the hell your actual stance is.

(November 20, 2012 at 8:30 pm)Shell B Wrote: I can't believe you got two fucking kudos when you were replying to a post that wasn't directed at you.

Since when has that stopped anyone from giving kudos, and since when does it make a difference. Jealous eh?

---

(November 21, 2012 at 12:13 am)Shell B Wrote: Try explaining it in English.

I find his english to be very understandable.

(November 21, 2012 at 12:13 am)Shell B Wrote: Try explaining it in English. Again, there is either a language gap or you're contradicting yourself a lot in this thread. Perhaps if you explained it in German and I ran it through Google translate. I don't know. All I know is I ain't a ratard and I don't know what the hell your actual stance is.

No.
I wrote down before, that if there are contradictions, I would like them to be pointed out to me.

If something is not clear out of my posts, then ask questions.

But I will not, simply because you seem to have some weird fun out of it, write down my opinion for ten thousandst time.

(November 21, 2012 at 1:27 pm)Napoléon Wrote:

(November 20, 2012 at 8:30 pm)Shell B Wrote: I can't believe you got two fucking kudos when you were replying to a post that wasn't directed at you.

Since when has that stopped anyone from giving kudos, and since when does it make a difference. Jealous eh?

Obviously.

Quote:I find his english to be very understandable.

Well then, please explain him being against home schooling in one post then only against homeschooling without a curriculum in the next. Also, I would love to hear your take on how parents should not teach religion in one post and then no, no, no only schools should not teach religion in the next. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt by saying it is an English problem. If you prefer the other option, that's fine.

---

(November 21, 2012 at 2:17 pm)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: But I will not, simply because you seem to have some weird fun out of it, write down my opinion for ten thousandst time.

Are you sure? You have a different opinion every time and I will not, for your amusement, point out the incongruities in your statements here. Re-read your posts. First, you disagree with homeschooling altogether. Then, you change your mind. Second, you disagree with parents teaching children religion. Then, you only disagree with teachers teaching religion. Then, you only disagree with parents teaching certain religions. Then, you only disagree with parents teaching bigotry. Then, you only disagree with idiot parents teaching their kids. It's all there. Read it.

(November 18, 2012 at 2:42 pm)Faith No More Wrote: In America, we seem to value the right to be an idiotic parent over the right of a child to have a proper education.

That is but a small part of the price we are still paying for the faustian bargain made back in the misty, storied colonial days with the religious outcasts of enlightenment Europe.

1.
I disagree that homeschooling has a good effect.

2.
I do think that if it is legal (which it is not here) the curiculum should be provided by a educational institution which provides the curriculum for public schools, or it schould be aproved by that educational institution.

3.
If homeschooling is required due to reasons of illness (and other) there should be (and are) legal exemptions for such cases under the conditions mentioned in point 2.

4.
To let people who are not qualified as educators pose as such, is unproductive and it should be illegal for such to teach as legitemate educators.

5.
Raising a child at home and sending a child to school are two different things.

6.
How a parent raises a child is non of my buisness (as long as there is no violation of the law (sexual abuse, violence and other)

7.
A perant should not be able to replace schooleducation unless under circumstances explained in points 2 and 3.

This was my opinion on homeschooling.
Now I do not deny that maybe under sircumstances I contradicted myself in the previos posts.
But you cant deny that I have posted my opinion, which includes all the things above several times, and you did not provide a counter argument.
The only thing you do is insisting that I contradict myself and that I make grammatical mistakes which make my points ununderstandable.
If that case is true, I would like to see my mistakes so I can correct myself.
Now would you provide a argument countering my opinion, or will you insist on making further useless comments centered arround - commenting on how people phrase their opinion.

I never denied that you posted your opinion. So, now we have a clear outlook of what you believe. So, you do not think you have a right to tell parents what they teach their children? You do not think that teaching religion is child abuse? If yes to both of the above, then we agree. As for homeschooling, we have specific curriculum for children here to that parents have to adhere to. I believe this is the right course of action. What I do not believe is that the government should have a say beyond that, barring actual abuse.