Christian atheists

[bluethread]

It has come to my attention that there are atheists who support theistic institutions, because they believe that theism, particularly Judaism and Christianity, have been integral to the development and maintenance of some of the positive aspects of modern culture. Do you find this approach to be reasonable, practical, or consistent?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 1 by bluethread]

Sure to a certain extent and given a particular circumstance. It generally is not a carte blanche acceptance though. The reasonability practicality and consistency is often followed with a whole lot of nuance.

[2ndRateMind]

This happens in the UK, too, and frequently with church schools. Sometimes, some parents, (it is alleged) who haven't been to church since they left school, will move to the catchment area, and go to church a few times, just so that their children will qualify for acceptance into 'a good school'.

I can't help thinking that this manoeuvre is somewhat questionable. Christianity is much less about 'taking from', than 'giving to'. And if the school is so good, then that may be because its ethics are good, and if its ethics are good, maybe that is because its philosophy is good. And if its philosophy is good, that may be because it is founded on a core belief system that approximates truth, even if the sharp-elbowed parents so keen to do the best for their offspring (and simultaneously deprive others of the opportunity) don't subscribe to those beliefs.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 3 by 2ndRateMind]

That is quite the stretch more likely the schools are good because they are well funded from an entity that views school as the best way to attain adherents(given the impressionable minds of children this is likely right). With good funding come better teachers and a good student teacher ratio. A good student teacher ratio leads to better grades and higher scores.

The ethics are a minor factor in much of this.

[OnceConvinced]

In New Zealand, kids pretty much have to go to schools within their zone (in the area they live) Unless of course they go to private schools which cost an arm and a leg. Public schools tend to have a low teacher to student ratio. Religious and private schools tend to have more teachers per students.

We have a lot to do with a young girl who is living with my partner's mother. My partner's mother is atheist and a former catholic married to a former priest, but the problem is the schools that the girl is zoned for do not have good reputations and she has been falling through the cracks. My partner's mother wanted to get the girl out of the useless school and put her into one where she would be looked after properly and it just so happens that the catholic school here has a good reputation. Somehow she managed to get her enrolled in the school based on having once been catholic. I'm not quite sure how she did it, but she did. She ensures that the girl does not get indoctrinated by giving her a more balanced view of the things that she is learning there.

I think it's just a matter of which schools have the best reputation. Christian schools often do have good reputations because they generally seem to have a lot higher standards when it comes to behaviour plus more teachers per student. They usually cost more to send your kids to as well so that's going to keep out families at the lower socio-economic levels - thus keeping out a lot of problem children or kids that need extra attention when it comes to education.

My partner's daughter is ten years old and going to a private school, but most likely my partner will try to get her into the catholic high school later, the same one the other girl is going to. The high school in our zone is considered the worst in the city so we don't want her to go there.

Better for an atheist to send their kids to school with a good reputation than one where their children are likely to fall through the cracks.

[dianaiad]

It has come to my attention that there are atheists who support theistic institutions, because they believe that theism, particularly Judaism and Christianity, have been integral to the development and maintenance of some of the positive aspects of modern culture. Do you find this approach to be reasonable, practical, or consistent?

I'm no atheist...but I will chime in anyway. I would say that the vast majority of the culture we have as humans depends upon theism. I don't think that Judaism and Christianity are the most/best influences there. I can't see that they are any better, culturally, than anybody else. No worse, but no better.

Of course, the 'positive aspects' seem to be mostly in the eye of the beholder, and dissenters seem to be extremely positive that some of the things the mainstream sees as 'positive,' aren't. Each person would have to do his own pick and choosing, there.

With my cynical hat on, it could be that the 'golden rule' (which seems to be the basis upon most theistic beliefs are formed) is the thing responsible for whatever ethical or moral culture happens. It's just that most people seem to require Someone to complain to if they are not getting justice, and others seem to need a Higher Power to call on in support as they go mete out injustice. It all ends up in the culture.


Now I said I was a thiest. I am, very much so...but that doesn't mean I don't see just how messed up people can get when they either ignore the possibility of a deity, or twist that possibility into an excuse to do what you want to do anyway.

As for me, the problem of schools (and I'm a retired high school teacher; I KNOW what the public schools are like), I say....parents, suck it up and home school. Do it right and save your kids.

[Aetixintro]

[Replying to post 1 by bluethread]

True, that seems all fine, but why not describe themselves as (Atheist/Secular) Humanists, first and foremost? There is the danger side too of a dangerous World that they seek out to dominate and harass/suppress the weaker, religious members of the congregation. Don't you think? I mean, how are you supposed to see the Satanist from only the looks? Commonly, Satanists describe themselves also as Atheists...

[Metadian]

It has come to my attention that there are atheists who support theistic institutions, because they believe that theism, particularly Judaism and Christianity, have been integral to the development and maintenance of some of the positive aspects of modern culture. Do you find this approach to be reasonable, practical, or consistent?

I agree, I think we're at a point that we need both non-believer's voices calling out unfair demonizing of Christianity as a whole, just as much as believer's voices calling out trespasses against non-believers. And sure that a lot of our heritage and Western culture hinges on Christian values, especially, which aren't "all bad" as some try to sell (eg anything right of sexual liberation is puritan, anything right of gender ideology is transphobia,...).

As for me, the problem of schools (and I'm a retired high school teacher; I KNOW what the public schools are like), I say....parents, suck it up and home school. Do it right and save your kids.

This sounds so defeatist. Isn't there some chance to push for quality public education in the States? I know how it goes for public anything but, some sort of compromise that can provide minimums, do so equally and respect things like non-politization.

I mean I don't live there so I don't know how bad it is, but now in Spain we have a big problem with decentralization because separatists in Catalonia have been using public education for decades to indoctrinate children into hating the country and supporting their own agenda. It's a disaster.

[dianaiad]

As for me, the problem of schools (and I'm a retired high school teacher; I KNOW what the public schools are like), I say....parents, suck it up and home school. Do it right and save your kids.

This sounds so defeatist. Isn't there some chance to push for quality public education in the States? I know how it goes for public anything but, some sort of compromise that can provide minimums, do so equally and respect things like non-politization.

Public schools are a crap shoot, and very few are 'the best education one can have.' Most of 'em are there, quite frankly, to warehouse the kids until they are old enough to let loose on society....and in the meantime, winnow out the very few who can get educated in spite of them.

IF there were a choice of schools...public, church sponsored, private, 'charter'...but there really are not, and the poor couldn't afford the alternative choices anyway.

However, the poorest of the poor can afford to give their kids a far better education than they can find in a public school. If not completely 'instead of,' certainly 'in addition to.' Even if the PARENTS don't have that much education.

Amazing what a parent can learn when he has to teach math to his kid.

[Metadian]

[Replying to post 9 by dianaiad]
Ha I bet... explaining to someone else is the best way to learn

By the way, you've been here since 2010, and I've just remade an account, but I was here around 2011-14. I vaguely remember arguing about gay weddings with you, and the "Christians for evolution" tag has called my attention. I was "Ragna", I haven't stumbled upon anyone I knew back then yet, but your name rings a bell... do you remember me, by any chance?