The_Carpathia <writingken@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> On Jul 24, 7:41=A0am, John <dahlgren.j...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > On Jul 24, 5:57=A0am, The_Carpathia <writing...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Jul 22, 11:00=A0am, Bob LeChevalier <loj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> > > > The_Carpathia <writing...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > >So, to all those that think government funded entities cannot
teach
> > > > >about Scripture, there is a PBS do***entary coming out
November....
> >
> > > >
>http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/tv/orl-exodus2108jul21,=
> 0...
> >
> > > > >The do***entary will suggest that the Bible's stories are not
true;
> > > > >however, they will be teaching about those Bible stories.
> >
> > > > Key word is "about".
> >
> > > So, you have no problem if teachers taught about the Bible?
> >
> > Not at all, provided they taught it in a comparative religion class or
> > in a literature class.
>
> Was the PBS program comparative religion or about a specific
> religion...only one.
Three, at a minimum.
-- cary
>
> > > > >So, I must ask....is PBS violation a suggested "separation of
church
> > > > >and state," being a government funded entity
> >
> > > > Most of PBS programming is funded privately. =A0The government
pays f=
> or
> > > > only something like 15% of NPR and CPB's budget. =A0We don't know
who
> > > > paid for this program. =A0It was likely NOT the government.
> >
> > > If you don't think it is government, why was it im****tant to point
out
> > > it was "about" the Bible, above.
> >
> > I'm not Bob, but I assume he pointed out that it was "about" the Bible
> > because you made a production about the "Government" teaching the
> > Bible. =A0One begat the other.
> >
>
> He made it clear that it was ok, since it was ABOUT religion. If it
> were a private company, it wouldn't matter.
>
> > > =A0If they weren't the government, they
> > > could teach religion directly...right? =A0
> >
> > Legally, yes.
> >
> > >So, you are contradicted and
> > > busted. =A0
> >
> > How so?
> >
>
> Think man...use your gray matter.
>
> > >Further, are you finally admitting that receiving money from
> > > the government doesn't make you a part of the government, clearing
the
> > > way for religious vouchers and grants to religious organizations?
> >
> > Lots of places and people receive money from the government and are
> > NOT part of the government. =A0That doesn't mean that the government
> > should send money directly to churches for vouchers to proselytize or
> > to teach their brand of religion. =A0Why do you think it should?
> >
>
> If people can receive money from the government without becoming
> extensions of the government, the same is true for government funds to
> religious schools and organizations. If sending money to private
> organizations to push a specific religious view, sending money to PBS
> to push their specific religious view (here) is equally invalid. You
> cannot have both. Make up your mind.
>
> Kenneth Clifton
> christiansuperhero.com
|
