|
Post by Arlon10 on Jun 20, 2023 2:03:18 GMT
The Bible is banned in a Utah district at elementary and middle schools after being deemed 'too vulgar or violent' for children. The Davis, Utah, school district declared the Bible too violent for children and banned the book in schools. The move came after a parent was frustrated by a push to ban other titles. The Book of Mormon could be next in the state with a high population of member of Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter-Day Saints.. A copy of the complaint obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune through a public records request shows that the parent concerned noted the Bible contains instances of incest, prostitution and rape....[don't forget the genocides] www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12157953/Bible-banned-Utah-district-elementary-middle-school-students-vulgar.html A case of unintended consequences for the religious right, busy throwing stones in glass houses. The deliberate irony here reminds me of the affair in Florida where in order to confirm religious pluralism, there was a push to place a Statue of Baphomet next to a Ten Commandments monument by The Satanic Temple. Actually most "religious" people I know never intended for the Bible to be read by children. In fact they went to great lengths to compile a "Children's" Bible just for elementary school aged children that contains more pictures and none of the disturbing violence and sex the children would not be prepared to confront. I have seen several of these "Children's" Bibles and I know people who have one in their family, as well as a regular Bible for the adults. The Children's Bibles are great and beautiful and better capture the imagination of children anyway. The regular Bible is too long and boring for them. When you say that banning the regular Bible is an "unintended" consequence of throwing stones, where do you get that? Can you "substantiate" it was not intended? They "banned" the Bible from elementary school children before you did! How is your banning it later an "unintended" consequence? Please make some sense. I know how stupid you must feel now, but don't. I can explain what happened. Your concept of "religion" is from people who have no strong religious traditions themselves. They have not yet learned to read above a rudimentary level, much like their atheist counterparts. They turn to a book they are not competent to read to fill the void in their lives. Have you noticed that the people who vote for Donald Trump are not reading much of anything? They are new, lately called "newbies," who hopefully will understand more later. They probably should avoid voting for now though. You want them to "represent" religion so that you can win arguments against religion. We however just might get someone else than Trump Many atheists have the attitude that anyone with any religion must have failed science. Actually it was the atheists who failed science. Or maybe you would like to try "substantiating" otherwise?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 20, 2023 10:58:39 GMT
When you say that banning the regular Bible is an "unintended" consequence of throwing stones, where do you get that? Can you "substantiate" it was not intended? They "banned" the Bible from elementary school children before you did! How is your banning it later an "unintended" consequence? Please make some sense. By this I mean that a school district in the US state of Utah (for this is the example I gave) removing the Bible from elementary and middle schools for containing "vulgarity and violence" is an unintended and somewhat ironic consequence of laws intended to be used on (as some would see them) less desirable, more frequently banned secular titles. The Utah state lawmaker who wrote the 2022 law had previously dismissed the Bible removal request as a "mockery", but changed course this week after calling it a "challenging read" for younger children. No, I feel fine thank you. It is never a problem to substantiate what I say. I am not sure what this has to do with book banning in Utah even if it was true (which it is not). Really gets to you, all this asking for badly-needed substantiation, doesn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jun 20, 2023 13:04:38 GMT
When you say that banning the regular Bible is an "unintended" consequence of throwing stones, where do you get that? Can you "substantiate" it was not intended? They "banned" the Bible from elementary school children before you did! How is your banning it later an "unintended" consequence? Please make some sense. By this I mean that a school district in the US state of Utah (for this is the example I gave) removing the Bible from elementary and middle schools for containing "vulgarity and violence" is an unintended and somewhat ironic consequence of laws intended to be used on (as some would see them) less desirable, more frequently banned secular titles. The Utah state lawmaker who wrote the 2022 law had previously dismissed the Bible removal request as a "mockery", but changed course this week after calling it a "challenging read" for younger children. No, I feel fine thank you. It is never a problem to substantiate what I say. I am not sure what this has to do with book banning in Utah. Not a word about children's Bibles? Hmmm? Maybe it's your computer that doesn't go to the top floor.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 20, 2023 13:30:52 GMT
By this I mean that a school district in the US state of Utah (for this is the example I gave) removing the Bible from elementary and middle schools for containing "vulgarity and violence" is an unintended and somewhat ironic consequence of laws intended to be used on (as some would see them) less desirable, more frequently banned secular titles. The Utah state lawmaker who wrote the 2022 law had previously dismissed the Bible removal request as a "mockery", but changed course this week after calling it a "challenging read" for younger children. No, I feel fine thank you. It is never a problem to substantiate what I say. I am not sure what this has to do with book banning in Utah. Not a word about children's Bibles? Hmmm? Maybe it's your computer that doesn't go to the top floor. That's probably a query that needs to be addressed to the good citizens of Utah.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jun 20, 2023 23:48:25 GMT
Not a word about children's Bibles? Hmmm? Maybe it's your computer that doesn't go to the top floor. That's probably a query that needs to be addressed to the good citizens of Utah. Are you aware how very annoying it is when you try to characterize religion by its worst representatives? The attempt to characterize religion by its worst representatives has appeared to succeed so far in that so many people still believe Donald Trump represents religion. He represents kids whose understanding of religion, science, and the world around them is not well developed quite yet. I hope those kids understand in time to replace him. Do you ever secretly laugh at all the others on this board who apparently think you are ever right about anything? Do they think you agree with them?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jun 21, 2023 11:00:47 GMT
That's probably a query that needs to be addressed to the good citizens of Utah. Are you aware how very annoying it is when you try to characterize religion by its worst representatives? The attempt to characterize religion by its worst representatives has appeared to succeed so far in that so many people still believe Donald Trump represents religion. He represents kids whose understanding of religion, science, and the world around them is not well developed quite yet. I hope those kids understand in time to replace him. Do you ever secretly laugh at all the others on this board who apparently think you are ever right about anything? Do they think you agree with them? Matthew 7:16 “By their deeds you will know them. Does a man gather grapes from thorns or figs from briars?”
|
|