We homeschooled our kids for non-religious reasons. Most of the commercially available books, materials and curriculums were Christian oriented. While I am a Christian (although not a conservative) I found some of the materials just flat out intellectually insulting, factually incorrect, extremely biased (without the benefit of scriptural justification) and the above example is far from the worst of what I saw. It says a LOT about where your faith actually lies if you have to promote a false reality to justify it.
It says a LOT about where your faith actually lies if you have to promote a false reality to justify it.
The irony is that such fundamentalists rely on so much engineering, built on layers of scientific research, for what they do (like eating. And housing. And recruitment. And printing and distributing that textbook), and… yeah. It’d be like a flat-earther in orbit. It’s beyond ironic: it’s just not a possible situation without the help of outsiders refuting that belief.
I have a lot more respect for the Amish, isolated monks, folks that take their beliefs seriously and consistently in their lifestyle.
as a person from across the ocean, i don’t get this. why would there be need for some different curriculum for homeschooling, and why would the choice depend on the parent? how is it possible you just get to chose? don’t you have to comply with some general standard? here, home-schooling is extremely rare, but if someone undergoes it, they have to use the same textbooks as everyone else and from time to time pass some exams in school to be sure the kid is not behind its peers.
The requirements for home schooling in the US vary wildly from one state to the other and can be almost devoid of any practical oversight in some circumstances. In most cases, parents have autonomy to choose their curriculum and there is a whole industry built to cater to that market. Unfortunately that includes books that deliver the kind of stupidity that we see above. Also, I think it is difficult for those outside the US to understand just how much we idolize individualism over any sense social responsibility here.
My brother and sister-in-law homeschooled their kids for a while, which was a bit out of character for them. It turned out they were actually sending them to a private school that was technically “home schooling” because the parents taught the kids at home one day out of the week using school-provided materials and the kids were at the school the other four days. That one day a week allowed the technical “home schooling” designation and also allowed the school to use non-state-certified teachers (with the added bonus of being able to pay them hourly and only for four days of work a week). And all of this was only marginally cheaper than normal private schools. My bro and SIL eventually realized how shitty this was all around and moved into a good school district - which was way cheaper than private schools.
We briefly homeschooled during the pandemic, and like you we’re non-conservative Christians. When our Christian friends asked about our curriculum, they always wrinkled their noses at the fact that it said “secular curriculum” on the cover. We told them, “you don’t understand how weird the home school curriculum business is. Trust me, it’s way easier to take this curriculum and add the values we want to impart than to take all the Christian nationalism out of the religious curriculum.”
There’s nothing fundamentally christian about the text in the picture above, it’s just nonsense propaganda. The whole science vs religion thing is frankly bollocks too - science shouldn’t be arguing about religion it’s fundamentally incompatible. OP can believe in a god, believe in an afterlife - science has nothing to say on the subject, it’s not testable, it’s not falsifiable it’s got absolutely nothing to do with science.
I was thinking about how to reply here in a meaningful way but I think your response encapsulates the core of it pretty well. Lots more I could say, but would lead to long essay and probably of limited interest to the topic at hand.
Ah yeah man, I feel ya. One thing I don’t really get is why there’s a subset of Christianity that wants to be so combative - like all that needs to be said is “well, yes, that’s pretty clever - of course god would do it that way” or “in this we better understand our maker” instead of trying to belittle what is a clearly useful and widely applied modelling tool.
People are taught certain doctrines and will not question those doctrines - ever. If some new information conflicts with those doctrines, then their faith is being attacked.
Some are deeply invested in what a certain doctrine allows or prohibits. Think about the sick rationalizations for slavery in the US back in the 1800s supposedly based on the teachings of the Bible. (Sorry, slavery fails the “love your neighbor as yourself” test). To change their thinking means that they have to admit that they were wrong or give up some privilege or perceived position of superiority.
They self identify with those beliefs and anything that contradicts that belief is a personal attack. Basic arrogance.
From my perspective, the teachings of Christ were about humility. Admitting that you were/could be/are wrong and being willing to change. That’s the whole core of acknowledging your own selfishness (sin), moving to repentance (change) and seeking God’s help in that process. Being combative is not compatible with that, in my views.
We homeschooled our kids for non-religious reasons. Most of the commercially available books, materials and curriculums were Christian oriented. While I am a Christian (although not a conservative) I found some of the materials just flat out intellectually insulting, factually incorrect, extremely biased (without the benefit of scriptural justification) and the above example is far from the worst of what I saw. It says a LOT about where your faith actually lies if you have to promote a false reality to justify it.
The irony is that such fundamentalists rely on so much engineering, built on layers of scientific research, for what they do (like eating. And housing. And recruitment. And printing and distributing that textbook), and… yeah. It’d be like a flat-earther in orbit. It’s beyond ironic: it’s just not a possible situation without the help of outsiders refuting that belief.
I have a lot more respect for the Amish, isolated monks, folks that take their beliefs seriously and consistently in their lifestyle.
as a person from across the ocean, i don’t get this. why would there be need for some different curriculum for homeschooling, and why would the choice depend on the parent? how is it possible you just get to chose? don’t you have to comply with some general standard? here, home-schooling is extremely rare, but if someone undergoes it, they have to use the same textbooks as everyone else and from time to time pass some exams in school to be sure the kid is not behind its peers.
The requirements for home schooling in the US vary wildly from one state to the other and can be almost devoid of any practical oversight in some circumstances. In most cases, parents have autonomy to choose their curriculum and there is a whole industry built to cater to that market. Unfortunately that includes books that deliver the kind of stupidity that we see above. Also, I think it is difficult for those outside the US to understand just how much we idolize individualism over any sense social responsibility here.
My brother and sister-in-law homeschooled their kids for a while, which was a bit out of character for them. It turned out they were actually sending them to a private school that was technically “home schooling” because the parents taught the kids at home one day out of the week using school-provided materials and the kids were at the school the other four days. That one day a week allowed the technical “home schooling” designation and also allowed the school to use non-state-certified teachers (with the added bonus of being able to pay them hourly and only for four days of work a week). And all of this was only marginally cheaper than normal private schools. My bro and SIL eventually realized how shitty this was all around and moved into a good school district - which was way cheaper than private schools.
We briefly homeschooled during the pandemic, and like you we’re non-conservative Christians. When our Christian friends asked about our curriculum, they always wrinkled their noses at the fact that it said “secular curriculum” on the cover. We told them, “you don’t understand how weird the home school curriculum business is. Trust me, it’s way easier to take this curriculum and add the values we want to impart than to take all the Christian nationalism out of the religious curriculum.”
But also;
How do you reconcile these two viewpoints?
“It’s all bollocks, but I still believe it.”
There’s nothing fundamentally christian about the text in the picture above, it’s just nonsense propaganda. The whole science vs religion thing is frankly bollocks too - science shouldn’t be arguing about religion it’s fundamentally incompatible. OP can believe in a god, believe in an afterlife - science has nothing to say on the subject, it’s not testable, it’s not falsifiable it’s got absolutely nothing to do with science.
I was thinking about how to reply here in a meaningful way but I think your response encapsulates the core of it pretty well. Lots more I could say, but would lead to long essay and probably of limited interest to the topic at hand.
Ah yeah man, I feel ya. One thing I don’t really get is why there’s a subset of Christianity that wants to be so combative - like all that needs to be said is “well, yes, that’s pretty clever - of course god would do it that way” or “in this we better understand our maker” instead of trying to belittle what is a clearly useful and widely applied modelling tool.
I’ve observed several possible explanations:
From my perspective, the teachings of Christ were about humility. Admitting that you were/could be/are wrong and being willing to change. That’s the whole core of acknowledging your own selfishness (sin), moving to repentance (change) and seeking God’s help in that process. Being combative is not compatible with that, in my views.
I think gp is referring to the fact that there is soooo much in the Bible that defies science that is taken as truth.
Wait so the above is actually real? And there are worse things in existence?
Wtf…