Mary says YES!
Comments
-
Join Date:Posts: 26426
One eyed Jack wrote: »Anyhow, to answer your question, yes, I do believe that many children were abused by adults, and I hope you don't interpret it as a strawman, but rather an expansion on my answer - I still believe that children are abused today by adults and particularly adults in positions of authority, in spite of numerous public information campaigns and media scaremongering and all the rest of it.
So that means you think its ok to say yes when you are in your bedroom when somebody wants you to do something and you are scared and confused about it.
On the basic level its a completely idiotic message to send to any young child, it goes against all other stranger danger and safety campaigns.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »I still believe that children are abused today by adults and particularly adults in positions of authority, in spite of numerous public information campaigns and media scaremongering and all the rest of it.
Then how can the media be scaremongering? Surely it's right that a concerted effort should be made to warn children.
Would you agree that children should be taught not to take lifts from strangers?0 -
frostyjacks wrote: »And there's plenty of rational debate to be had on that topic. But drawing sexual innuendo from a children's textbook is below the belt. You may as well go through nursery rhymes and do the same thing.
You realise humans reproduce sexually ,right?
The 'Mary says Yes!' lesson doesn't explain why God can, without consent, can impregnate Mary. Because she wasn't asked, she was given an ultimatum essentially. Her saying Yes is redundant.
In addition, I've not seen anything that says it's okay to say no when someone tells a girl /woman she's going to have a guys baby.
Time would be better spent teaching about consent rather than a lesson about resigning yourself to having a baby without consenting.
It's a truly thoughtless, and potentially harmful, lesson to teach young children.If you can read this, you're too close!
0 -
Join Date:Posts: 26426
Avatar MIA wrote: »Would you agree that children should be taught not to take lifts from strangers?
Don't be silly,
Kids still get occasionally kidnapped, as such this is 100% proof that all stranger danger campaigns don't work
:rolleyes:0 -
Just say no campaign had NOTHING to do with sex abuse, it was a US anti drug campaign - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Say_No
This suggests you haven't a clue what you are on about.
It can suggest to you what it likes really, I'm becoming less and less bothered by people's choosing to interpret my posts literally and search for anything they can nit pick about rather than discuss the actual issue of child abuse. It's no different than the author of that article has done in suggesting the story is an endorsement of child abuse.There is a underwear campaign alright, only part of which is "no means no" - http://www.nspcc.org.uk/preventing-abuse/keeping-children-safe/underwear-rule/
The message of mary saying yes is the completely opposite to the PANTS campaign after all it ignores "Always remember your body belongs to you"
If the STORY of Mary were taught as fact, then you might have a point about there being conflicting messages being taught to children, but there's quite a distinction between faith formation and campaigns related to the prevention of child abuse and child safety, and to try and compare and contrast the two as if they offer conflicting messages to a child, really is, to borrow from another poster - barrel scraping.
It's the ultimate "won't somebody please think of the children?", because of something the adults find offensive to their sensitivities.Having a scared and confused Mary in relation to her body is deeply, deeply worrying.
It's only a story Cabaal, there's no need to worry, Mary isn't real remember?0 -
Advertisement
-
One eyed Jack wrote: »If the STORY of Mary were taught as fact
Hang on, are you missing theor :rolleyes: smilie?
While some of the bible is now taken as allegorical (try that a few hundred years ago if you wanted to know what your burning flesh smelt like) by some and not to be taken literally (although see Free Presbyterian etc.) I'm pretty sure the whole Jesus being conceived through God's intervention is pretty much considered as, erm, gospel.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 26426
One eyed Jack wrote: »It can suggest to you what it likes really, I'm becoming less and less bothered by people's choosing to interpret my posts literally and search for anything they can nit pick about rather than discuss the actual issue of child abuse. It's no different than the author of that article has done in suggesting the story is an endorsement of child abuse.
If you're going to suggest the nspcc had a just say no campaign when it actually doesn't then its disingenuous to then critisie in relation to this campaign not working.
The reality is you knew right well no such campaign existed but you still decided to go on about how it wasn't successful. Now you've decided to cry about it and claim people are nitpicking because you've been called out on it.
Utterly pathetic,If the STORY of Mary were taught as fact, then you might have a point about there being conflicting messages being taught to children, but there's quite a distinction between faith formation and campaigns related to the prevention of child abuse and child safety, and to try and compare and contrast the two as if they offer conflicting messages to a child, really is, to borrow from another poster - barrel scraping.
errr, in catholic schools the story of Mary is thought as fact. So there's no "if" about it.
According to the religious class it did actually happen, after all a large part of the Catholic church's setup is based on Mary actually existing. The Catholic Church do not for one second suggest Mary might have existed....she did exist in their eye's and the eye's of Catholic schools.It's only a story Cabaal, there's no need to worry, Mary isn't real remember?
Indeed, it is only a story...a story that sends a very stupid message.
You're being disingenuous again by claiming schools teach that she didn't actually exist,
The fact that schools teach Mary as fact and teach that it was ok for her to say yes even though she was scared and confused sends an extremely worrying message to young children. In the children's eye's (based on what they are told in class) Mary is as real as them.0 -
Avatar MIA wrote: »Then how can the media be scaremongering? Surely it's right that a concerted effort should be made to warn children.
I don't think children are any more likely or unlikely to be abused or be able to protect themselves from abuse on the basis of reading or not reading this story.Would you agree that children should be taught not to take lifts from strangers?
No I wouldn't. I think what we teach our children has to be far more nuanced than that. I try and teach my child to use his best judgement in situations like that where if he is ever lost and so on, that he wouldn't be afraid to walk up to a stranger and ask could they borrow their phone to call me.
Football, hurling, rugby matches, scouts, I've never vetted every single adult who has come in contact with my child. I don't feel any particular need to do that. His friends may be his best buddies, but that doesn't mean their parents and I have to become best buddies.
How many more questions are there before you make your point?0 -
frostyjacks wrote: »And there's plenty of rational debate to be had on that topic. But drawing sexual innuendo from a children's textbook is below the belt. You may as well go through nursery rhymes and do the same thing.
It's about a teenaged girl getting impregnated. How can that not be sexual?
What I see in this is 'If someone tells you that it's what God wants then you should do it, even if you're confused and afraid'. Or do you think that child abusers would never say 'God wants us to do this. You're like Mary, so you have to be brave and say yes like her'. Because cult leaders already can and do use crap like that to coerce vulnerable women and girls into sex.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »How many more questions are there before you make your point?
You've answered enough for me to realise asking more would be pointless...One eyed Jack wrote: »
No I wouldn't.
And then you went on with another strawman.
It's going to be a cold winter, leave some fodder for farmers to feed their livestock.0 -
Advertisement
-
One eyed Jack wrote: »I don't think children are any more likely or unlikely to be abused or be able to protect themselves from abuse on the basis of reading or not reading this story.
No I wouldn't. I I think what we teach our children has to be far more nuanced than that. I try and teach my child to use his best judgement in situations like that where if he is ever lost and so on, that he wouldn't be afraid to walk up to a stranger and ask could they borrow their phone to call me.
Football, hurling, rugby matches, scouts, I've never vetted every single adult who has come in contact with my child. I don't feel any particular need to do that. His friends may be his best buddies, but that doesn't mean their parents and I have to become best buddies.
How many more questions are there before you make your point?
Mine certainly wouldn't have been - on the rare occasions at that age where they might find themselves without an adult who was already known to them, (if they ever got lost in a crowd, mainly) I always told them to look preferably for someone in authority, with a uniform for example : because those people are more likely to have been vetted - not by me personally, but then that's neither necessary nor possible.
I simply don't believe that you just allowed your six year old to be in situations where he not only knew no adults but may have had to walk up to random strangers and ask them for favours. I genuinely do not believe that a careful parent would show that level of negligence towards their child's safety.
So either you are (IMO) unfit to be a parent or you are still desperately inventing excuses to make this "Mary said yes!" business into unexceptionable. I suspect strongly that it's the latter.
EDIT:
I'm also deeply puzzled by what you think the "nuance" in the message you taught them was : mine was that no matter how trusted someone appeared to be, whether by me or by the children or by "authority", if what the person was asking the child to do made them feel uncomfortable, then they were to trust their own feelings about the situation and didn't have to obey - and that they should never be afraid to talk to us about it before doing anything that worried them.
It's the negation of that essential nuance that worries me in this business.Reem Alsalem UNSR Violence Against Women and Girls
@UNSRVAW"Very concerned about these statements by the IOC at Paris2024 There are multiple international treaties and national constitutions that specifically refer to
#women
and their fundamental rights to equality and non-discrimination, so the world has a pretty good idea of what women -and men for that matter- are. Also, how can one assess whether fairness and justice has been reached if we do not know who we are being fair and just to?"
0 -
If you're going to suggest the nspcc had a just say no campaign when it actually doesn't then its disingenuous to then critisie in relation to this campaign not working.
The reality is you knew right well no such campaign existed but you still decided to go on about how it wasn't successful. Now you've decided to cry about it and claim people are nitpicking because you've been called out on it.
Utterly pathetic,
Spectacularly missing the irony there yourself in claiming that I'm crying about something and criticising something and being disingenuous, when religious ideas are regularly ripped the piss out of on here, to the point where I've often wondered am I dealing with six year olds, because my experience of some six year olds is that they are more than capable of telling adults to go fcuk themselves.
What's utterly pathetic is using the issue of child abuse to score points against an ideology you just don't like. It's really that simple.errr, in catholic schools the story of Mary is thought as fact. So there's no "if" about it.
It isn't, and it never was, and that IS a fact, rather than what you're trying to claim is a fact.According to the religious class it did actually happen, after all a large part of the Catholic church's setup is based on Mary actually existing. The Catholic Church do not for one second suggest Mary might have existed....she did exist in their eye's and the eye's of Catholic schools.
But in YOUR eyes Cabaal, did any of these things exist?
If your answer is no, then cool beans, you have nothing to worry about. I'll worry about my own child and his education rather than let you speak for me or my child in trying to use children and child abuse to object to something you just don't like.Indeed, it is only a story...a story that sends a very stupid message.
You're being disingenuous again by claiming schools teach that she didn't actually exist,
Oh for goodness sake, I'm being disingenuous because I'm struggling to take this particular objection seriously, because I know it's less about preventing child abuse, and more about some people's objections to religion in schools.
I don't like the idea of religious ethos State schools, but for anyone to use child abuse in furthering their agenda, I'll quickly tell them to fcuk right off tbh.The fact that schools teach Mary as fact and teach that it was ok for her to say yes even though she was scared and confused sends an extremely worrying message to young children. In the children's eye's (based on what they are told in class) Mary is as real as them.
Sure she is Cabaal. Sure she is. The most worrying part of that whole article is the fact that people like the author think the way they do - paedophiles, paedophiles everywhere.
Didn't Brass Eye do a spoof about this crap a few years back?0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »I get that you can never be too sure and all, but we can go a little above the basics if you want, I'm not going to be an arse-hole if I believe you have a genuine question and a genuine reason for asking, rather than a lot of the piss ripping of people who are religious that goes on around here a lot of the time.
Anyhow, to answer your question, yes, I do believe that many children were abused by adults, and I hope you don't interpret it as a strawman, but rather an expansion on my answer - I still believe that children are abused today by adults and particularly adults in positions of authority, in spite of numerous public information campaigns and media scaremongering and all the rest of it.
This is A&A! Its how we respond to the mind-boggling nonsense that our government insists can be imposed on us by a foreign power. If you want a discussion on how this beautiful mystery is being taught so sensitively to children maybe you would be happier in the Christianity forum?0 -
Whats also creepy is the section of our community who are prepared to be offended by anything that look salacious to their (dirty) adult minds and transfer this to children who are still innocent.
They also have little faith in the ability of parents to pass over proper values to their children, believing they can be contaminated by fairy tales of religion. For a child that age Mary is just as valid as Cinderalla and Santa Claus. Don't worry; When you're six Hansel and Gretel trumps the Immaculate Conception any day.
This 'battle' is not about child abuse. Its about atheism and anti clericalism. Fair enough to fight those battles, but leave the kids out of it.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Fair enough to fight those battles, but leave the kids out of it.
Have you read any of the messages on here as to why the way this is being taught is inappropriate? Clue, for years children were being groomed in a very similar fashion.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Whats also creepy is the section of our community who are prepared to be offended by anything that look salacious to their (dirty) adult minds and transfer this to children who are still innocent.
They also have little faith in the ability of parents to pass over proper values to their children, believing they can be contaminated by fairy tales of religion. For a child that age Mary is just as valid as Cinderalla and Santa Claus. Don't worry; When you're six Hansel and Gretel trumps the Immaculate Conception any day.
This 'battle' is not about child abuse. Its about atheism and anti clericalism. Fair enough to fight those battles, but leave the kids out of it.
Leave the kids out of it? Who introduced a child into a story about a woman? Who is writing school lesson books about a child saying 'yes' to a sexual encounter? Who is endorsing this lesson?
Do schools devote entire classes to convincing children that Cinderella was real and they should accept it, believe it and take life lessons from it?
No-one is disputing that this forum is about atheism (see name of forum) and anti-clericalism - someone needs to be anti-cleric - but this discussion is about children and this really quite disturbing approach to what is otherwise just a story.0 -
Wait - at six? Your child was taught to walk up to unknown adults at six years of age and to ask for a loan of their phone? Really??
Mine certainly wouldn't have been - on the rare occasions at that age where they might find themselves without an adult who was already known to them, (if they ever got lost in a crowd, mainly) I always told them to look preferably for someone in authority, with a uniform for example : because those people are more likely to have been vetted - not by me personally, but then that's neither necessary nor possible.
I simply don't believe that you just allowed your six year old to be in situations where he not only knew no adults but may have had to walk up to random strangers and ask them for favours. I genuinely do not believe that a careful parent would show that level of negligence towards their child's safety.
So either you are (IMO) unfit to be a parent or you are still desperately inventing excuses to make this "Mary said yes!" business into unexceptionable. I suspect strongly that it's the latter.
I'm ok with being thought of an an unfit parent by your standards. If it's any consolation though, I got him his own phone at six so he wouldn't have to be asking other people (and I could track him on Google Latitude!). I taught him from a very early age to be independent, much to my wife's frustration, because she was, like yourself, more concerned about his safety than his independence.
Different parenting styles I guess. I wouldn't ever suggest you were an unfit parent though if I didn't at least first try and understand you without being so quick to pass judgment. Kinda funny how that works, and you're not even religious?EDIT:
I'm also deeply puzzled by what you think the "nuance" in the message you taught them was : mine was that no matter how trusted someone appeared to be, whether by me or by the children or by "authority", if what the person was asking the child to do made them feel uncomfortable, then they were to trust their own feelings about the situation and didn't have to obey - and that they should never be afraid to talk to us about it before doing anything that worried them.
It's the negation of that essential nuance that worries me in this business.
The message I taught him was that I'm not always going to be there to wipe his arse for him and pick him up when he falls. He has to learn to look after himself (and he does, he's 10 now and walks to school himself), because he's not afraid of the world around him, he's not afraid of strangers, he knows how to handle himself and what to do in an emergency situation, not just a situation where he breaks a nail or someone calls him nasty names.
He is a confident, happy, socially outgoing child, high achiever academically (up at half 5 the other morning doing extra math on his tablet), high achiever in numerous sports and social clubs, and has a healthy respect for adults and people in positions of authority.
In isolation of course, your judgement is that I'm an unfit parent, but working with social care professionals every day who have nothing but praise for my child, I think they're more likely to know my child and I better than a stranger on the Internet (no disrespect meant to you personally volchista, but it's one of the other things I talk to children about when I talk to them about protecting themselves - not needing validation from strangers on the internet).0 -
-
One eyed Jack wrote: »If the STORY of Mary were taught as fact, then you might have a point about there being conflicting messages being taught to children
....
It's only a story Cabaal, there's no need to worry, Mary isn't real remember?One eyed Jack wrote: »It isn't, and it never was, and that IS a fact, rather than what you're trying to claim is a fact.
Jack, I realize you claim to be an atheist, and that may be true, going by your apparent ignorance about the fundamentals of catholic theology anyway - but there comes a point where someone with apparently zero knowledge of what exactly children are being taught in religion classes shouldn't be defending that content by posting direct falsehoods about what it consists of!
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15448a.htm
The Virgin Birth is taught as fact, not only to children but as a basic tenet of Catholicism.
That you and indeed many practising Catholics may think that Mary had sex either with Joseph or with someone else entirely and that the virgin birth was just a made up story is not relevant when six year olds are being taught it as fact.
If schools were teaching in "Santa" classes that Santa was real, and that men in long red robes were fine to be let into the house when the child is home alone, I think parents would object - and rightly so. It wouldn't mean that the parents believed in Santa, would it? It's a question of children being expected to believe what their teachers tell them, and not getting the bits that are not meant to be taken seriously. Like religion, according to you. Which makes one wonder why you are so desperate to defend it in the first place.Reem Alsalem UNSR Violence Against Women and Girls
@UNSRVAW"Very concerned about these statements by the IOC at Paris2024 There are multiple international treaties and national constitutions that specifically refer to
#women
and their fundamental rights to equality and non-discrimination, so the world has a pretty good idea of what women -and men for that matter- are. Also, how can one assess whether fairness and justice has been reached if we do not know who we are being fair and just to?"
0 -
This is A&A! Its how we respond to the mind-boggling nonsense that our government insists can be imposed on us by a foreign power.
Well the evidence suggests that your methods simply aren't working to achieve your aims. One I'm assuming is a separation of Church and State? I'd like that too, which is why I don't get bogged down in the mind boggling mundanity that is pointing out and taking offence to every perceived slight and linking it to child abuse.If you want a discussion on how this beautiful mystery is being taught so sensitively to children maybe you would be happier in the Christianity forum?
Christ no, the Christianity forum isn't half as much fun as this place! I never once suggested I found anything I've ever read here offensive. In order to be offended by something I'd have to take it seriously, and accusations of child abuse or accusations of endorsing child abuse?
No, no I don't take that seriously at all.
(I like Worztron's stuff in the funnies thread though, because it's genuine humour, as opposed to a lot of the stuff that's posted elsewhere in the forum that's unintentionally humorous).0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 26426
One eyed Jack wrote: »Spectacularly missing the irony there yourself in claiming that I'm crying about something and criticising something and being disingenuous, when religious ideas are regularly ripped the piss out of on here,
See's that the thing,
Religion isn't factual, Jesus isn't the actual son of god so we are free to take the piss out of it.
The NSPCC however have actually run safety campaigns, just not one like you claimed called "just say no".What's utterly pathetic is using the issue of child abuse to score points against an ideology you just don't like. It's really that simple.
I don't give a monkeys if this booklet was created by the church or not, creating a message saying its ok to say yes even when you're scared etc is idiotic.
It doesn't matter if the catholic church is involved or not, I'd have the same issue with any similar message pushed in our primary schools.It isn't, and it never was, and that IS a fact, rather than what you're trying to claim is a fact.
So Mary isn't portrayed as actually having existed by catholic schools in religion class?
What drugs are you on?
Catholic Schools push the story of Mary and Jesus as factual and having actually happened, its as simply as that.But in YOUR eyes Cabaal, did any of these things exist?
No of course not, only a complete idiot thinks Mary existed, was made pregnant but still remained a Virgin and her baby was the son of a all powerful god.
:rolleyes:If your answer is no, then cool beans, you have nothing to worry about.
But the thing is we do,
It doesn't matter what I personally think, Catholic Primary schools teach the story as something that actually happened.
Regardless, even if they did say "hey kids, this whole Mary and Jesus think is actually just a fairytale", then its still an idiotic message to teach children.
Of course the frightening thing is they actually do teach it as factual.
Oh for goodness sake, I'm being disingenuous because I'm struggling to take this particular objection seriously, because I know it's less about preventing child abuse, and more about some people's objections to religion in schools.
I don't like the idea of religious ethos State schools, but for anyone to use child abuse in furthering their agenda, I'll quickly tell them to fcuk right off tbh.Sure she is Cabaal. Sure she is. The most worrying part of that whole article is the fact that people like the author think the way they do - paedophiles, paedophiles everywhere.
I'm not sure why but you seem to have a very hard time understanding that the whole story of Mary and Jesus is thought as factual in schools. You seem to forget that without this story the Catholic Church doesn't exist as Jesus on the cross never happened.
The Catholic church very much so states that Jesus actually existed and so did Mary, this is the message put across in catholic schools.
My thinks your reason for claiming it isn't thought as fact is to try and draw away from the issue itself, again another pathetic response from yourself.
Nobody has stated that pedophiles are everywhere,
The issue here is teaching children a common sense message, the message we should teach is that its good to say no when somebody wants to do something to you that is uncomfortable to you or makes you scared. This is especially important if you don't know the person but they claim to be a figure of a authority.
Instead, here we are saying the opposite.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »I'm ok with being thought of an an unfit parent by your standards. If it's any consolation though, I got him his own phone at six so he wouldn't have to be asking other people (and I could track him on Google Latitude!). I taught him from a very early age to be independent, much to my wife's frustration, because she was, like yourself, more concerned about his safety than his independence.
Different parenting styles I guess. I wouldn't ever suggest you were an unfit parent though if I didn't at least first try and understand you without being so quick to pass judgment. Kinda funny how that works, and you're not even religious?
The message I taught him was that I'm not always going to be there to wipe his arse for him and pick him up when he falls. He has to learn to look after himself (and he does, he's 10 now and walks to school himself), because he's not afraid of the world around him, he's not afraid of strangers, he knows how to handle himself and what to do in an emergency situation, not just a situation where he breaks a nail or someone calls him nasty names.
He is a confident, happy, socially outgoing child, high achiever academically (up at half 5 the other morning doing extra math on his tablet), high achiever in numerous sports and social clubs, and has a healthy respect for adults and people in positions of authority.
In isolation of course, your judgement is that I'm an unfit parent, but working with social care professionals every day who have nothing but praise for my child, I think they're more likely to know my child and I better than a stranger on the Internet (no disrespect meant to you personally volchista, but it's one of the other things I talk to children about when I talk to them about protecting themselves - not needing validation from strangers on the internet).
Okay good, I'm very happy to be wrong about you and him then. Genuinely.
And you'll notice that I said that I actually don't really believe it to be as you said - and still don't tbh, because you say he's confident, which means you expect him not to obey "authority" in situations of grooming, which you accept can happen, and which was my worry about the message transmitted by this story.
So would you agree that not all six year old children in these religion classes are as confident and outgoing as your son, nor as smart (in all senses of the word) and that some may not be able to stand up for themselves to someone in authority if they ever were being groomed?
And that since the story, as it's presented in this book, doesn't need to be told in this particular way (Mary, a confused child in bed at night etc) and that this could be a confusing and potentially dangerous message to teach to children who are (and some are) at risk of being groomed by adults, it's a most unfortunate choice of images and words?Reem Alsalem UNSR Violence Against Women and Girls
@UNSRVAW"Very concerned about these statements by the IOC at Paris2024 There are multiple international treaties and national constitutions that specifically refer to
#women
and their fundamental rights to equality and non-discrimination, so the world has a pretty good idea of what women -and men for that matter- are. Also, how can one assess whether fairness and justice has been reached if we do not know who we are being fair and just to?"
0 -
Join Date:Posts: 26426
Deleted User wrote: »Whats also creepy is the section of our community who are prepared to be offended by anything that look salacious to their (dirty) adult minds and transfer this to children who are still innocent.I'm sorry but historically its the religious people that are the most obsessed with sex and all things sexual.
They also have little faith in the ability of parents to pass over proper values to their children, believing they can be contaminated by fairy tales of religion.
So when it suits god existed,
But at the same time when it suits the story of god is a fairytale?
Which is it?
The issue here is the school spends 10% of primary school time talking about this type of story as factual, now they've decided to include a message in that "factual telling" to teach kids that its ok to say yes if your scared or confused when "god" wants you to do something. Thats messed up.0 -
One in four Irish people have experienced sexual abuse, that is most likely to happen when you are a young child. Sexual abuse is still taboo, kids don't talk about it, adults don't talk about it. Its as likely to happen today as it was back in the 70's or 80's. So little has changed. This message in this one book won't make much of a difference in a country with an already massive problem regarding childrens rights and a slow legal system and most kids will never be influenced by it but if even one child sees this message or its used by one abusive parent to manipulate a child then its one too many. One thing this does show is how important it is for us parents to look at what our kids are being given in school and not to assume that they will be okay or have a positive message.0
-
Jack, I realize you claim to be an atheist
volchista I've make some funky claims in my time, but never have I ever claimed to be atheist. I've always maintained that I identify as Roman Catholic., and that may be true, going by your apparent ignorance about the fundamentals of catholic theology anyway - but there comes a point where someone with apparently zero knowledge of what exactly children are being taught in religion classes shouldn't be defending that content by posting direct falsehoods about what it consists of!
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15448a.htm
The Virgin Birth is taught as fact, not only to children but as a basic tenet of Catholicism.
That you and indeed many practising Catholics may think that Mary had sex either with Joseph or with someone else entirely and that the virgin birth was just a made up story is not relevant when six year olds are being taught it as fact.
If schools were teaching in "Santa" classes that Santa was real, and that men in long red robes were fine to be let into the house when the child is home alone, I think parents would object - and rightly so. It wouldn't mean that the parents believed in Santa, would it? It's a question of children being expected to believe what their teachers tell them, and not getting the bits that are not meant to be taken seriously. Like religion, according to you. Which makes one wonder why you are so desperate to defend it in the first place.
That's an interesting interpretation of what's taught in Roman Catholic ethos schools, but I think there was an actual religious curriculum floating around the place here somewhere that was published by the Catholic Bishops (I think it's either in the patronage thread, or the hazards of belief thread), but some people's thinking here about what's taught in schools is way out tbh.
I can object to the content of a book based upon how it offends me. I don't need to make any excuses about child abuse.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 26426
One eyed Jack wrote: »I've always maintained that I identify as Roman Catholic.
and yet you seem to struggle with the very idea that story of Mary and Jesus are covered as factual by catholic schools and the catholic church as a whole,
The mind boggles how you can be claim to be catholic but you seem to think the story of Jesus and Mary is a fairytale. By thinking it is you disagree with a very very big and critical aspect of the catholic church.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »
I can object to the content of a book based upon how it offends me. I don't need to make any excuses about child abuse.
If there were no child abuse angle, why would it offend anyone? Here we have a child in the warmth and safety of her bedroom, a little worried by 'someone' asking her to agree to 'something'. But its ok, god is asking her to agree to -whatever it is - and she does! Everyone is happy! That isn't a bit offensive!0 -
The new Grow in Love programme is definitely more.... Jesus and God based than the older Alive O used to be.
I'm not teaching infants this year and so I haven't seen the new programme but I agree that's a bit strange.
On the other hand, I guess it's not necessary to over analyse every thing though. The children will be learning about saying NO in their SPHE curriculum and I doubt any child of that age will even draw any similarity to "but Mary said yes"!!
Parents need to fight against religion in schools if they are unhappy.
From what I can gauge, it's only a minority who are unhappy (and informed!) so things won't change until numbers increase.0 -
One eyed Jack wrote: »volchista I've make some funky claims in my time, but never have I ever claimed to be atheist. I've always maintained that I identify as Roman Catholic.One eyed Jack wrote: »That's an interesting interpretation of what's taught in Roman Catholic ethos schoolsOne eyed Jack wrote: »but I think there was an actual religious curriculum floating around the place here somewhere that was published by the Catholic Bishops (I think it's either in the patronage thread, or the hazards of belief thread), but some people's thinking here about what's taught in schools is way out tbh.I can object to the content of a book based upon how it offends me. I don't need to make any excuses about child abuse.
So my question is do you agree that this message could be confusing for young children who are or could be in a situation of being groomed by adults in some authority over them?
A plain yes or no would be helpful.
(Though if it's a no, I would also ask why you are so sure it can't possibly matter, and what use you think it is teaching things to children in the first place if they are then expected to disbelieve them anyway?)Reem Alsalem UNSR Violence Against Women and Girls
@UNSRVAW"Very concerned about these statements by the IOC at Paris2024 There are multiple international treaties and national constitutions that specifically refer to
#women
and their fundamental rights to equality and non-discrimination, so the world has a pretty good idea of what women -and men for that matter- are. Also, how can one assess whether fairness and justice has been reached if we do not know who we are being fair and just to?"
0 -
Advertisement
-
and yet you seem to struggle with the very idea that story of Mary and Jesus are covered as factual by catholic schools and the catholic church as a whole,
Cabaal I don't struggle with the difference between faith and fact at all. I know some people can be annoyingly arse-holey about trying to pass their faith off as fact, but that has never been the case in Catholic schools, and certainly isn't the case in modern Catholic ethos schools.The mind boggles how you can be claim to be catholic but you seem to think the story of Jesus and Mary is a fairytale. By thinking it is you disagree with a very very big and critical aspect of the catholic church.
It's like any story - you can choose to believe it, or you can choose not to. Having faith in a story doesn't conflict with my identity as a Roman Catholic at all, there are plenty of other ways you could point fingers at me for my apparent hypocrisy and disagreeing with the Catholic Hierarchy on issues such as homosexuality and abortion and so on, but as I did in the marriage equality referendum - I can separate civil matters from religious matters and hold conflicting opinions on many issues quite comfortably.
It helps me to examine all aspects of an issue to get a broader perspective, rather than just seeing what I want to see in everything.0