Quote:
Originally Posted by This_person  But, atheism is a view of religion - a non-diest view. Secular, proven concepts are one thing, theories are another. If something's not proven nor provable, I would think it should have no bearing on what we do in government by this standard. Therefore, economists, meterologists, evolutionists, etc., should not be allowed to teach their philosophies at government funded schools without equal time to each and every conflicting idea. Or, is that just dumb?But, forcing concepts of no faith (which is what I said, not forcing no faith, but the concepts of no faith) on someone would be equally protected against, thus wrong to do, and influencing to governmental leaders. |
Secularism is the absence of belief and is not the same thing.
Your exactly right, Government and Government funded schools, should not be in the practice of approving/relying/teaching/espousing any religion.
Removing Faith from Government is not teaching or forcing No Faith onto anyone. You see it as the same thing, but its not.
No where does it state to teach secularism/atheism/nofaithism, what it does state is to keep Government and Religion seperate.
In Science class its totally acceptable to teach the Theories of Science. Just as its acceptable in a theology class to teach the Theories of beliefs. As much as you want to argue differently, they are not the same thing.