Religion

[I'm With Stupid]

Actually, as a retired RE teacher, I can testify to the fact that most of my ex-colleagues that I worked with in a variety of schools during my lengthy career were either atheists or agnostics who became teachers because they were (like myself) simply fascinated by the subject. It really isn’t boring at degree level and I opted for it over Psychology in my second year at university because my own professors and lecturers were so inspirational.

Andrew Rawlinson was one of them. He was big mates with Syd Barrett and Roger Waters out of Pink Floyd. If you watch this clip for long enough he talks about getting 'rusticated' from Cambridge for getting into a fight outside a pub and the effects of injecting yourself with a substance (think it was heroin) as far as inducing a mystical experience is concerned. There's also a great anecdote about Elvis towards the end. Top bloke in other words.



Some RE teachers (like my former Head of Department) had Philosophy degrees, a subject which naturally lends itself to open-ended sceptical enquiry and does not discourage awkward questions from being asked in the classroom. And the subject itself became more like Philosophy at both GCSE and A Level in the late 90’s until that complete and utter spectacularly uninformed **** of a person Michael Gove introduced his unnecessary curriculum reforms that took effect in 2016. As a consequence, in the case of RE (or RS as it is more appropriately described these days), the subject became comparable to Theology again. I got out shortly afterwards because I could financially afford to do so and didn’t want to to teach a boring old load of complete and utter fucking shite (about God in three persons and similarly facile bollocks).

Having said all that, you could be right. RE is a subject that still almost certainly attracts evangelicals and those with a religiously informed agenda. Maybe I just got lucky in avoiding them.

Nice to see Gove didn't just fuck up the English syllabus.

 

[ZenHalfTimeCrock]

Nice to see Gove didn't just fuck up the English syllabus.

Gove is such an arsehole. He was also responsible for a lot of expensive older teachers getting shunted out of the profession early on the spurious grounds that they were no longer up to the job, when the real agenda was to save money.

I was fortunate to avoid that but he is still someone that I might need to be restrained from physically attacking if I ever met them in real life.

 

[Marklr]

Actually, as a retired RE teacher, I can testify to the fact that most of my ex-colleagues that I worked with in a variety of schools during my lengthy career were either atheists or agnostics who became teachers because they were (like myself) simply fascinated by the subject. It really isn’t boring at degree level and I opted for it over Psychology in my second year at university because my own professors and lecturers were so inspirational.

Andrew Rawlinson was one of them. He was big mates with Syd Barrett and Roger Waters out of Pink Floyd. If you watch this clip for long enough he talks about getting rusticated from Cambridge for getting into a fight outside a pub and the effects of injecting yourself with heroin as far as inducing a mystical experience are concerned. There's also a great anecdote about Elvis towards the end. Top bloke in other words.




It is also worth mentioning that some RE teachers (like my former Head of Department) had Philosophy degrees, a subject which naturally lends itself to open-ended sceptical enquiry and does not discourage awkward questions from being asked in the classroom. And the subject itself became more like Philosophy at both GCSE and A Level in the late 90’s until that complete and utter spectacularly uninformed **** of a person Michael Gove introduced his unnecessary curriculum reforms that took effect in 2016. As a consequence, in the case of RE (or RS as it is more appropriately described these days), the subject became comparable to Theology again. I got out shortly afterwards because I could financially afford to do so and didn’t want to teach a boring old load of complete and utter fucking shite (about God in three persons and similarly facile bollocks).

Having said all that, you could be right. RE is a subject that still almost certainly attracts evangelicals and those with a religiously informed agenda. Maybe I just got lucky in avoiding them.

Paladin 's dad was my RE teacher in high school back in the late 70s.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Gove is such an arsehole. He was also responsible for a lot of expensive older teachers getting shunted out of the profession early on the spurious grounds that they were no longer up to the job, when the real agenda was to save money.

I was fortunate to avoid that but he is still someone that I might need to be restrained from physically attacking if I ever met them in real life.

I follow a lot of teachers on Twitter and some of the horror stories in one thread the other day were ridiculous. Someone told a story about the headteacher giving them detailed feedback on an online lesson they dropped in on, basically completely pulling their lesson to pieces and accusing them of being a shit teacher. Only they hadn't realised that the lesson was being recorded and the teacher could prove that they only came into the lesson for 45 seconds in the middle of a silent exam question activity.

I've got a friend who's doing the PGCE now and she's already had to ask for a new placement because of bullying. She's got about 10 years experience in language teaching so she won't take any shit. I imagine most of the trainee teachers they get will just take it. I considered doing mine, but the idea of teaching under a Tory government didn't appeal. Not that the private education industry is any better.

 

[ZenHalfTimeCrock]

I follow a lot of teachers on Twitter and some of the horror stories in one thread the other day were ridiculous. Someone told a story about the headteacher giving them detailed feedback on an online lesson they dropped in on, basically completely pulling their lesson to pieces and accusing them of being a shit teacher. Only they hadn't realised that the lesson was being recorded and the teacher could prove that they only came into the lesson for 45 seconds in the middle of a silent exam question activity.

I've got a friend who's doing the PGCE now and she's already had to ask for a new placement because of bullying. She's got about 10 years experience in language teaching so she won't take any shit. I imagine most of the trainee teachers they get will just take it. I considered doing mine, but the idea of teaching under a Tory government didn't appeal. Not that the private education industry is any better.

The Times Educational Supplement used to have a now defunct forum.

There was one section (‘Workplace Dilemmas’) that was replete with horror stories about teachers being treated in a similar manner.

The majority were older staff and therefore cost more. Their lessons were observed and they were deemed no longer fit for purpose to save money.

Younger teachers are more compliant and cheaper. They can be worked into the ground and it doesn’t matter if they leave after a few years.

The effect of this is that schools often lack experienced staff that are truly able to teach to A level standard.

 

[ZenHalfTimeCrock]

Tbf the Bible does have some good old fashioned, no nonsense laws to follow:

View attachment 29570

Those images look like they are the work of Robert Crumb, a superb artist in my view.

But there’s also a Lego version of the Er and Onan story which unfortunately I can’t post an image from at the moment as I am on my phone.

Suffice it to say that the site in question is The Brick Testament and it doesn’t take that much imagination to picture how sperm might be depicted in Lego.

But anyway, here’s a link:

The Brick Testament

 

[Deleted member 77198]

Tbf the Bible does have some good old fashioned, no nonsense laws to follow:

View attachment 29570

Did he wipe his knob on the curtains on the way out?

 

[paulsimpson]

That’s absolute bollocks and does a disservice to the mod team. I denigrate all religions equally with an emphasis on all 3 Abrahamic piles of bollocks and I’ve never received so much as a warning for attacking the religion itself.

Islam (which I what I assume you’re referring to) doesn’t get any special treatment. They’re all as irrational, contradictory and non sensical as each other.

You must also remember that it’s only 4-500 years ago that people were burned at the stake as heretics for criticising that lovely, warm bundle of sweetness and light that is Christianity.

John Hus was burned at the stake for criticising the Catholic Church at the time not Christianity.
Atheism has no basis for obective morality. Because of its huge influence in culture over the last 30 -40 years it is one of the main reasons there is a murdering regime all over the world that kills pre born babies in the womb. Sweetness and light?

 

[paulsimpson]

Tbf the Bible does have some good old fashioned, no nonsense laws to follow:

View attachment 29570

In patriarchal societies of the ancient near East, the uninterrupted passing on of land and property from father to son was very important. Mosaic local levirate marriage: if a married man died childless, his brother (or another family member) had to marry the widow and sire a son who could inherit the dead man’s property. His wrong is not his withdrawal which is not mastubation. It was his greedy, selfish refusal to sire a son on behalf of his brother. Onan was of the tribe of Judah, kingly tribe ,tribe of the Messiah. In fact, Tamar, the woman wronged by Onan, is listed in the genealogy of Christ (Matthew 1:3). There's a vested interest in Tamar’s children and Judah’s grandchildren.

 

[paulsimpson]

Just the same old shit. Find a problem, insert a god into it and claim you've solved it. You have offered literally zero evidence for the existence of any god, and certainly not the Biblical one. You could put literally any metaphysical being into your tautological argument and it would be the same. The only reason you choose the biblical god is because you're a Christian.

You then present a strawman view of what an atheist believes, when the only thing that defines an atheist is what they don't believe. There is absolutely nothing in atheism that states that only material or physical things exist. The difference between me and you is that you seem to believe that immaterial things can only come from God, whereas I believe that immaterial things can be the product of material things. Language isn't material, for example, but it quite clearly a product of our brain processes when combined with those of other people. Or do you use God synonymously with language too like you do logic? Were the rules of language handed down by God too, and if so, why has that changed (I hesitate to say evolved) so much over time?

Insert the god of atheist naturalist evolution as the myth of nothing created everything- the universe popped into being uncaused.

So on Materialist atheism do you think I have a mind or you have one ? Make sure you know the difference between a mind and brain . It makes sense to say my brain is 5' 10" off the floor but no sense saying my mind is 5' 10" of the floor . Is what you think in your mind boiled down to what takes place in your brain ? That's what the Materialist has to show. Is it possible for a scientist to open the head and do a procedure on the brain and predict what I will do ? He ought be able to see YOUR thoughts if they're solely physical ie brain.
So looking at electrons and molecules and synapses has nothing to do with what is conceptual content being transmitted over those synapses . Mind reduces to brain on naturalist atheism .
If they believe that then they've no reason to believe anything in their heads . All talk is reduced to electrochemical responses in their brain & you couldn't base any decisions on those because there would be no authority ie a mind to direct the thought process.