Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
The State doesn't set up an educational system to exert control over supra-individual identities. The behavior is driven by a belief that more consistently educated children will make for a better Country.
The author tries to work on the old 'liberals don't have foundation principals so they must worship the State' schtick...but this flies in the face of reality, many liberals embrace religion, community, culture...did they really say culture?
-spence
|
Do you believe that the State's consistently educating children reinforces the "reality" of "liberals" embracing their religion? Does the consistent education by the State strengthen the differences of various communities, liberal or otherwise? Does the State's uniform curricula with its consistent orientation encourage the diversity of all "cultures" liberal or conservative?
Does the State allow the "embrace" of religion to supersede the State's demands? Does the State's definition of marriage replace a liberal's religious definition of marriage? Does the State's definition of life and when it begins strengthen a liberal's religious definition? Does the State attempt through consistent education and legislation to "liberate" people from religious or cultural views on sexuality. Does the State attempt through consistent education to manage the people's views to a more uniform perspective on things personal and civil? Do you, or do "liberals" believe that the State has the right and the power to do these things, and if so, do you believe that the State is more important than your religion, or community, or culture? Is allegiance to the State , for "liberals" greater than religious worship or cultural "inheritance?" Does a more consistently educated society make for a "better country"? Or is that a sort of worship of the States "schtick"?
Just trying to stir the pot.
Threaded Mode