OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 19, 2014, 10:42:56 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Canadian Sikhs allowed to wear small daggers in public schools  (Read 7961 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #90 on: March 04, 2006, 11:56:26 AM »

But the murder of an innocent child is not. Either way, there are appropriate places for an image like this to be posted - it is not here.

From a historical perspective the death of small children, by violent or natural means, is probably more common that that of adults, I really dont understand modern America's phobia towards death. I'm as materialistic as the next guy, but death is inevitable.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #91 on: March 04, 2006, 12:00:28 PM »

From a historical perspective the death of small children, by violent or natural means, is probably more common that that of adults, I really dont understand modern America's phobia towards death. I'm as materialistic as the next guy, but death is inevitable.
GiC, I think a bit of the "android" is surfacing here. Wink
I can understand TomS's reaction- he is the father of a small child.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #92 on: March 04, 2006, 12:02:20 PM »

GiC, I think a bit of the "android" is surfacing here. Wink

The android is never far below the surface  Grin
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #93 on: March 04, 2006, 12:07:27 PM »

Thanks ozgeorge

I just object to the idea that violence and death is an acceptable image, yet if I posted a picture of a naked woman or a couple (male and female!) having sex, it is objectionable.
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #94 on: March 04, 2006, 12:10:25 PM »

Thanks ozgeorge
I just object to the idea that violence and death is an acceptable image, yet if I posted a picture of a naked woman or a couple (male and female!) having sex, it is objectionable.

The problem with posting pornography is not that it's objectionable, anyone who believes in the free flow of information should not object to speech or other publications simply because it is objectionable anyway. The real problem is bandwidth, porn sites take up a large amount of bandwidth, thus generally requiring different more expensive servers, generally speaking the concerns are purely practical.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #95 on: March 04, 2006, 12:17:54 PM »

The problem with posting pornography..

Who said anything about pornography? And your reasoning and justification on WHY it would be objectionable is just loopy.  Cheesy

Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #96 on: March 04, 2006, 12:22:47 PM »

Who said anything about pornography?

It's a generally accepted term for the posting of such pictures as you suggested. It is you who are applying society's negative connotations to the word, not me.

Quote
And your reasoning and justification on WHY it would be objectionable is just loopy.  Cheesy

Not at all, look around at various web servers that have policies against pornography, those that offer an explanation will rarely object to pornography on moral grounds, the objection is the amount of bandwidth. Pornographic sites tend to be fairly popular, with large numbers of images or video to download, more bandwidth means more money, which means which means a higher cost for the server. Simple economics, the only thing most businesses object to is not making money.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #97 on: March 04, 2006, 12:24:28 PM »

Thanks ozgeorge
I'm sorry if I offended you.

I just object to the idea that violence and death is an acceptable image
Then don't look at what stands behind every altar in every sanctuary, in every Orthodox Church. Wink

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #98 on: March 04, 2006, 12:45:45 PM »

It's a generally accepted term for the posting of such pictures as you suggested. It is you who are applying society's negative connotations to the word, not me.

Dude. What is it with you an having to always get the last word in? Ahh, that's right, studying to be one of those know-it all priests or "theologin"  Grin
« Last Edit: March 04, 2006, 12:46:01 PM by TomS » Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #99 on: March 04, 2006, 02:24:53 PM »

I believe the problem with public schools in the US and Canada is that the common wisdom of the parents of the students has been ignored. Professional educators and extreme groups working throught the courts have set the agenda in the schools.

To the degree that parents are invested and it is their kids, they should have the lion's share of the say.

It's not ageism. You could be a single 60 year old with no kids, nieces/nephews, grandkids.
Or you could be a twenty-something. But if you don't have kids in the local school, it's not your business, for the most part (I'm over stating to make a point).
Sorry, that's the way I see it.

But thanks for the props on the private school issue.

What do you think of vouchers (or are we dirfting toward the taboo of american political discussion?)

I am looking at it from a perspective of religious freedom. And hence I believe I and all other religious people have a stake in the argument. For the record, I don't have kids in the public school, but I work in the public school.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Riddikulus
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,788



« Reply #100 on: March 04, 2006, 05:43:35 PM »

I thought I'd throw this quote in response to all the arguments in favour of safety, which are by their very nature cowardly, dishonourable, and unchristian (fear for one's temporal well being is a mockery of our faith in the final resurrection and contrary the most fundamental tenets of the Christian Religion).

'The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.' -- Tacitus

I would agree that fear for one's temporal well being, etc is, indeed, a mockery of our faith. Which is why I, personaly, would object to the concept of "going out with guns blazing" and taking as many with me as possible, which seems also to be a mockery of our faith. (Note: this isn't a point I bring up for debate, but my own personal conviction. I understand that others have a differing viewpoint. That is between them and God, just as my viewpoint is between me and God.)

However, though I am completely on the side of the religious choice of the individual with regard to the topic of this thread, which is the carrying of a religious symbol that is apparently less harmful than a set of eye-lash curlers (those things are deadly, believe me!) I would also disagree that, from the Orthodox persepective, death is to be considered "natural" and we should "get over it".

Perhaps I have missed something in the conversations that have preceded, and ask to be excused for any careless reading on my part. But I would respectfully suggest that if we don't mourn - I'm not speaking of perpetual morbidity or fear of death - but sincerely regret the death of each and every human being (with whom we are so closely bound, both in being made in the image of God and in being marred by our human weaknesses) as being completely unnatural according to God's creative purpose, we have missed a crucial point of our faith.

Today is Forgiveness Sunday for those of us residing in the antipodes and I, therefore, ask forgiveness for any offence I may have caused in posting to this forum at any time.

In Christ.    
Logged

I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #101 on: March 04, 2006, 07:45:41 PM »

Ultimately what I'm saying and that Thomas Jefferson and Tacitus were saying is that a society that makes security its goal will inevitably turn into a dictatorship and will, as a society, die. Freedom is very dangerous to a society and a people, but while security offers no long term benifits the long term benifits of Freedom are great



« Last Edit: March 04, 2006, 07:46:55 PM by BrotherAidan » Logged
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #102 on: March 04, 2006, 07:47:54 PM »

see above
I agree with this. But I do not see how an across-the-board no tolerence policy regarding weapons in public schools is a threat to societal freedom.

Not all freedoms are absolute. Citizens in the US do have the right to keep and bear arms, but I don't think we err or threaten all of our freedoms to limit that right and not extend it to three year olds or the mentally impaired, which as far as I know is not seen as tyranny but as common sense.

I think what has left alot of parents frustrated about public schools is that alot of the debates and issues are argued from absolutist positions on the left and the right by legal professionals, without a dose of common sense and so we end up with three year olds toting guns, so to speak (to make a play on the above reference - geez you have me so paranoid that you will quote me & skewer me that I feel like I have to explain everything).
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #103 on: March 04, 2006, 09:43:33 PM »

I agree with this. But I do not see how an across-the-board no tolerence policy regarding weapons in public schools is a threat to societal freedom.

That really depends, if school is mandatory (which is technically unconstitutional, but that's a discussion for another day), then it is an arm of the state, and are restricted in the same ways the state is restricted. They have to place freedom of religion, freedom of speech, right to keep and bear arms, right to privacy, etc. above school safety and creating a learning enviroment...why? because the constitution provides for the aforementioned rights, it doesn't even mention education much less school safety and creating a enviroment for learning. If school is not mandatory, then they can expect people to give up rights while they are there, and if they violate the rules, even if they have the constitutional right to, they can be forced out of the educational institution (though they cannot be criminally liable unless they commit an actual crime). The issue seems fairly straight forward to a strict constructionist.

Quote
Not all freedoms are absolute. Citizens in the US do have the right to keep and bear arms, but I don't think we err or threaten all of our freedoms to limit that right and not extend it to three year olds or the mentally impaired, which as far as I know is not seen as tyranny but as common sense.

I had a rifle when I was three...it's something every kid should grow up with...but, of course, you wouldn't want that because you'd end up with a lot of people who value the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Quote
I think what has left alot of parents frustrated about public schools is that alot of the debates and issues are argued from absolutist positions on the left and the right by legal professionals, without a dose of common sense and so we end up with three year olds toting guns, so to speak (to make a play on the above reference - geez you have me so paranoid that you will quote me & skewer me that I feel like I have to explain everything).

I can understand the frusteration, but it comes from having schools an arm of the state, since they are mandatory extreme care should be taken to ensure that they do not interfere with constitutional rights. In my personal opinion, I believe the solution is to make school optional, if it's not mandatory you can have whatever rules the local school board wants...but as long as it's required, their first responsibility is to safeguard constitutional rights and only secondarily should they think of issues such as safety and education.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
BrotherAidan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,568

OC.net


« Reply #104 on: March 05, 2006, 12:12:52 AM »

GiC
thank you for that response; it makes sense within the strict constructionist framework from which it flows philosophically. I can respect that position while not fully agreeing with it.

personally, I would like to see the state's monopoly on education be broken; I am a big advocate of vouchers, as is already evident from my posts

I also wouldn't think it to be too awful if school attendance was no longer mandatory

BTW, when you take time to address and educate others with a measured reponse in these discussions, rather than going on the attack (or so it sometimes seems) you make yourself far more understandable

I think you must be pretty smart and are obviously well read and sometimes just can't help yourself by "going in for the kill" so to speak; if you are training for the priesthood, please try to soften that tendency out of pastoral considerations. You will educate and persuade far more with gentleness than with aggressive argumentation.

thanks for the measured response
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.09 seconds with 42 queries.