Is Sweden an evil nation?

It is kinda like here where all forms of religion have go be hidden from the public or you open the door to all radical groups...unless you just allow what your country to founded on....nah, that will never happen.

 

Are you perfectly happy with all the US actions of homeland security for the same issues? (Hopefully you are not reading this at the airport.)

Just pointing out that the intent may sound good, but the execution will probably not generate the results expected.

 

You don't have to be a genius to know that religion is fiction.

A bowling alley???

Sweden has not legislated intolerance. It's only said that the construct of lies which constitute religion cannot be forced upon children in school. I personally have zero tolerance for vicious and hateful lies perpetrated upon children. I would, if I could, impose jail terms upon people who tell children that they will burn for eternity if they fail to believe bullshit. But Sweden has merely said that schools may not be used for religious indoctrination. You can still abuse your kids with religious indoctrination in homes and churches. Sad.

 

Wow, their Christians are WAY different than our Christians then.

... Brad

 

My point had nothing to do with religion.

 

But the topic of this thread was the law banning religion from schools.

 

Yep. Little know trivia.

"[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] A life size diorama at The International Bowling Museum and Hall of Fame portrays Martin Luther bowling on the single lane at the side of his home. A brochure from the Museum states that Luther, an avid bowler, "once preached a sermon which, if put into bowling vernacular, proclaimed we all strive for perfection in life. But if we roll a gutterball, all is not lost.""


[/FONT]

 

Actually, that was what the topic instantly turned into, not what the original article was detailing. (Nowhere did I see Sweden banning religion.) What struck me as strange, is that a lot of posters (you included) have big problems with the heavy hand that the US government applies. We have some agreement there. But when Sweden is detailing how it's government is going to strongly interject itself into education, it's "full speed ahead".

 

From the article:

How can you say it's not what the article was about??? It's precisely what the article was about: Religion may not be taught in schools as if it was true.

And contrary to your rather wild assertion, I have never complained about "the heavy hand of government." I have complained about human rights violations by government; I have complained about government murdering and terrorizing people (a.k.a. "war"); I have complained about criminal activity by government and elected officials; but I have not complained about government being "heavy-handed." Quite the contrary, I think government sometimes needs to be heavy-handed, as for example a 5-year mandatory prison sentence for first-time drunk driving and a three-strikes rule for the same; as for example protecting children from second-hand tobacco smoke and religious indoctrination in the home; as for example eliminating television; as for example taking all money out of election campaigns; and many more.

 

First, You are correct about my overstating you original positions. It was a wild assertion. Forgive me for being wrong on that account.

Back to the interesting issue. I just flat cannot interpret that article as Sweden deciding to eliminate religion. I can see there being some "fuzzy" worded stuff to address murderous Islamic fundamentalism, but it looked like a whole lot of folks wanted it to be a complete elimination of all "religion" from all schools. It that what Sweden is getting ready to do, or is that what you want Sweden to do?

 

For what it's worth, I understood from the article that Sweden is planning to eliminate religious instruction from their education system. Personally, I think that's a great idea. They're not banning religion, or churches, or dictating what people can believe in, so individual freedoms are being preserved, and children who don't know any better are no longer taught that others are 'bad' because they have different beliefs.

 

FL_Prius_Driver: Indeed, Sweden is not banning religion and the article does not say that they are banning religion. You are correct on that point. However, nobody in this thread has asserted that Sweden is banning religion. They are banning only the act of teaching religion in schools as though it was true.

They are not even banning prayer from schools.

I personally believe that religion is one of the most damaging and scurrilous influences in the world, and I'd ban all religious indoctrination. But that's not what Sweden is doing. They are only banning it from schools. And they are not banning all religion from schools, they are only banning the teaching of religion as though it was true, in schools.

Note that it would be a violation of human rights to ban any sort of belief. But it is not a violation of human rights to bad acts of fraud. And indoctrinating children into demonstrably false beliefs is an act of fraud committed upon those children. Belief is internal and is protected. Indoctrination is an external action perpetrated by one person upon another, and if that indoctrination is demonstrably false then it is fraudulent and the right of the child to be protected from abuse outweighs the "right" of the indoctrinator to lie to the child.

 

You view on religion is clear and I have some dramatic differences and some similarities. The big difference is that your viewpoint is "religion is one of the most damaging and scurrilous influences in the world". I would say that people doing evil acts is not fueled by "religion" at all, but only that "religion" is used as a cover story, one that can be replaced with a non-religious cover story just as easily. (Example, Stalin's killing to maintain his power did not use much "religion", but looked the same as many killers who did.) However, let's not get sidetracked on that. We are both too old to change on those points.

The more core point is WHO gets to decide the dividing line between belief and fraud? The government? The courts? The family? Three examples of what could be taught in a church school:

1) God wants all evildoers punished.
2) God will reward those who help others.
3) Follow the words of Jesus, it will improve your life.

Hopefully you get the idea. If these were the lessons being taught, would any of them be fraud?

 

I think each of us has to make that decision for ourselves. Otherwise, some group or another would be dictating what individuals could think, and that would violate their freedom of religion.

As a 'non-believer', I would consider the three lessons you mentioned to be fraudulent, in that they are beliefs taught - to borrow the wording of Sweden's legislation - "as if they were true."

 

But....how do you feel about bowling?

 

While it is true that much evil is done by people pretending to be following religion (e.g. George Bush) I contend that an additional and scurrilous evil is the mere religious indoctrination of children, instilling in them fear and guilt and self-loathing based on evil fairy tales. (That we are born in sin, that we are all evil by nature and only belief in an imaginary man in the sky can save us, that if we make a mistake we will burn forever. Teaching such things to children is evil. And that is pure religion, apart from the murders committed in the name of religion.)

 

The third reference in the base post
AFP: Sweden cracks down on religious influences in schools
makes it fairly clear how this is to be implemented: religious content can be taught only in religious classes. For example, a biology class may not teach creationism or "intelligent design", a geology class may not teach that the Earth is 6000 years old, a math class may not teach that pi =3, and so on. This is as it should be in every secular pluralistic society. Religious nutballs who believe otherwise can move to their favorite theocracy; they will not be allowed to create one here.

 

What you are describing is truly a perversion. But I have seen the same types of indoctrinations with political theologies (Democratic, Republican, etc.), not to mention many state sponsered ideals that were totally secular, but awful (South Africa).

I was hopeing for a response to the harder question posed previously. I am not engaging in a religious debate, but a discussion of who and where does the fraud/truth line gets drawn. It is easy to get agreement on schools that teach "do this or go to hell". That is destructive. But a great many church schools are more focused on the positive striving for higher ideals than a purely secular approach to life offers. Are these to be shut down as frauds?

 

Of course, if you get right down to it... it's their country, so it really isn't our business anyway. A principle we Americans don't seem to understand.

 

There is a core point of terrorist training being fueled under the cover of "religious training". It is happening in Sweden. It is happening in the United States. Open discussions like this are not about telling Sweden what they are going to do. It is about figuring out the best ways to solve a really nasty problem without doing more damage than good. Join in.