Dr. Mario's Retard Rehabilitation Program

Status
Not open for further replies.
Izo

Izo

Tranny Chaser
19,374
23,255
Kriptini_sl said:
I was raised religious (went to public school though, not private/home school) and I wasn't a jerk. I tried to always treat people with respect. "What would Jesus do," etc. All my friends in middle school especially were also all raised religious and not jerks. We mostly just kept to ourselves while everyone else set each other on fire. (Middle school is a terrible place.)
Click to expand...
It's good to see solid scientific research. Have you thought about having this data peer reviewed and published in a scientific journal? Try sending your contribution to 'Current Biology' - fame and fortune awaits. Have at that Nobel Prize, Kriptini!
 
Kriptini

Kriptini

Vyemm Raider
3,675
3,572
Well if your reading comprehension wasn't abysmal, you would have noticed that the part of the article you quoted wasn't saying that children raised religious were jerks, it was saying that children raised religious weren't more moral than children raised not-religious.
 
lurkingdirk

lurkingdirk

AssHat Taint
<Medals Crew>
46,164
211,350
Izo_sl said:
Okay, so science doesn't impress you much.

Could you get back to the schooling of your children then? I asked if you home schooled. You said no -> public school and then 7th grade onto an unnamed supposedly top school. I asked by what standard it was a top school, and also if it was a religiously founded - and also why 7th grade. Could you elaborate on this?

In contrast we do public/private schools 0-9th, then high school/trade school, then prof. bachelors or university).
Click to expand...
Good attempt to trigger. Still failing.

Science impresses me a lot. I didn't find the science in that article particularly compelling. I'm not dismissing science, but if I came at you with an article that said religious children were less likely to get involved in destructive behaviour, you'd find a way to dismiss it. That article is linked at the bottom of the article you insisted I read.

My children start at the private school in 7th grade because that's when the school starts. If it stated earlier, they'd start earlier. It is one of eight schools nation wide that has won the Blue Ribbon for Academic Excellence from the federal government four times. They teach the Socratic method, and whenever possible they have classes in seminar style, with a heavy emphasis on student participation, student argumentation, and preparedness. They also emphasise writing a great deal, and the students from the school arrive at university entirely ready to write essays, critical, historic, or analytic.

As it turns out, the school is founded by a Catholic organisation, but there is no obligation to take religious courses. The emphasis is on the education, not the religion. If it were devoid of all religious content, and they had the same teaching methods, that's still where my kids would go. Now you're welcome to focus on the religious side of it, and say whatever you will, but it is a nationally recognized school. Schools from all over the country are buying their curriculum. Periodically I teach there. Know a lot of grade 10 kids who are reading Dostoevsky in the context of the Communist Manifesto? It's a good education by any standards, even yours.
 
Palum

Palum

what Suineg set it to
26,298
40,650
Why risk the chance they will lose faith and suffer eternal damnation? Aren't your parental duties to protect your children first and foremost?

I don't understand the distinction between introducing your religion at age 16, 18, 20 whenever they can comprehend and assess versus age 5 where you would suddenly decide risking their eternal soul is worth exposing them to skepticism about their world views. If it's not indoctrination and just exposure aren't both just similarly risky propositions?

Would you even be forgiven during the rapture with the guilt and shame of having damned your own children by allowing them/causing them to lose their faith? Kinda feel like that's some heavy judgement material.
 
Erronius

Erronius

<WoW Guild Officer>
<Gold Donor>
17,204
44,467
Why anyone would come to these forums to argue about how to raise their children is beyond me.
 
AngryGerbil

AngryGerbil

Poet Warrior
<Donor>
17,781
25,897
I have always held this community up with a sort of reverence. Honestly. Where the hell else can I ask the opinions of people across religions and cultures and from other places in the world from the comfort of my home? Not to mention the ability to photoshop dicks into pictures, something you can't do IRL. Fedor's entire personality would be lost outside the medium of the internet. Bisi would just be a dude. I would likely never speak to Mist or Dumar, I would never have had a chance to kill Onyxia and get a glowy green sword, or have been a Senator from Best Corea, Pancreas and Iannis have the same gifts Hemingway and Fitzgerald did except they're shitlord versions of them (which makes them something to be cherished), and guys like khalid fanaskin and hodj have probably made me smarter.

Erronius, sir, you are too jaded by half my friend. (Or you're just kidding.)
 
Izo

Izo

Tranny Chaser
19,374
23,255
Kriptini_sl said:
Well if your reading comprehension wasn't abysmal, you would have noticed that the part of the article you quoted wasn't saying that children raised religious were jerks, it was saying that children raised religious weren't more moral than children raised not-religious.
Click to expand...
You realize the 'jerk's part was never something I asked or talked about, right? This discussion stems from the parent thread. It's from the journalist interpretation of the study. I'm quoting the study - it's the interesting part. hodj puts it eloquently a few posts back. Now go away, dumbass.
 
Izo

Izo

Tranny Chaser
19,374
23,255
lurkingdirk_sl said:
Good attempt to trigger. Still failing.

Science impresses me a lot. I didn't find the science in that article particularly compelling. I'm not dismissing science, but if I came at you with an article that said religious children were less likely to get involved in destructive behaviour, you'd find a way to dismiss it. That article is linked at the bottom of the article you insisted I read.

My children start at the private school in 7th grade because that's when the school starts. If it stated earlier, they'd start earlier. It is one of eight schools nation wide that has won the Blue Ribbon for Academic Excellence from the federal government four times. They teach the Socratic method, and whenever possible they have classes in seminar style, with a heavy emphasis on student participation, student argumentation, and preparedness. They also emphasise writing a great deal, and the students from the school arrive at university entirely ready to write essays, critical, historic, or analytic.

As it turns out, the school is founded by a Catholic organisation, but there is no obligation to take religious courses. The emphasis is on the education, not the religion. If it were devoid of all religious content, and they had the same teaching methods, that's still where my kids would go. Now you're welcome to focus on the religious side of it, and say whatever you will, but it is a nationally recognized school. Schools from all over the country are buying their curriculum. Periodically I teach there. Know a lot of grade 10 kids who are reading Dostoevsky in the context of the Communist Manifesto? It's a good education by any standards, even yours.
Click to expand...
Could you point out why you don't find the study compelling? Other than you disagree with it and you might be able to find something that contradicts it. You know, review the study, critisize, argue the points. Whether or not I may find a way to dismiss a study which you're not even bothering linking to - has little bearing on the results and discussion of the study I linked you. You're trying to dodge the issue. The answer is this: come at me. Post said study (they exist), argue why it's to be taken seriously - quality, peer review standard, citations etc etc. So far you're doing the equivalent of shoving your fingers in your ears and shouting 'nuh-uh'.

Carmel High School? How many blue ribbons after 2003 when schools no longer nominate themselves? One. Here is the good part: 'The school also requires every student to take religious classes.' and 'run jointly by the priests and brothers of the Order of Carmelites and the Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.'
It's much the same for the other Catholic institutions, Holy names Academy has mandatory 4 year religious class: 'We teach, model, and promote Gospel values' - no blue ribbon after 2003.

Which schools buy their curriculum? Other religious schools you mean, obviously. I doubt you'd send your kids there if it had no religious side. I'm guessing it's how you and why they're there. What is it you teach for instance? What class? What curriculum? Would it be....religion? Dostojevskij, Tolstoj etc is std. curriculum in public highschools here - and especially in theologian curriculum. I wonder why you'd cite these as examples of good education, and not, say, biology - evolution etc. Seems to me you're belitteling the religious influence here indeed.
 
lurkingdirk

lurkingdirk

AssHat Taint
<Medals Crew>
46,164
211,350
Izo_sl said:
Could you point out why you don't find the study compelling? Other than you disagree with it and you might be able to find something that contradicts it. You know, review the study, critisize, argue the points. Whether or not I may find a way to dismiss a study which you're not even bothering linking to - has little bearing on the results and discussion of the study I linked you. You're trying to dodge the issue. The answer is this: come at me. Post said study (they exist), argue why it's to be taken seriously - quality, peer review standard, citations etc etc. So far you're doing the equivalent of shoving your fingers in your ears and shouting 'nuh-uh'.

Carmel High School? How many blue ribbons after 2003 when schools no longer nominate themselves? One. Here is the good part: 'The school also requires every student to take religious classes.' and 'run jointly by the priests and brothers of the Order of Carmelites and the Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.'
It's much the same for the other Catholic institutions, Holy names Academy has mandatory 4 year religious class: 'We teach, model, and promote Gospel values' - no blue ribbon after 2003.

Which schools buy their curriculum? Other religious schools you mean, obviously. I doubt you'd send your kids there if it had no religious side. I'm guessing it's how you and why they're there. What is it you teach for instance? What class? What curriculum? Would it be....religion? Dostojevskij, Tolstoj etc is std. curriculum in public highschools here - and especially in theologian curriculum. I wonder why you'd cite these as examples of good education, and not, say, biology - evolution etc. Seems to me you're belitteling the religious influence here indeed.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not spending my time finding an article to please you.

It's not Carmel, and two of the four blue ribbons were won after 2003, and they have never nominated themselves for any.

Students do NOT have to take religious classes.

Non-religious schools from Washington, Colorado, New York, and other places buy their curriculum.

So, criticize how I'm raising my kids all you want. I find you irrelevant.
 
Soygen

Soygen

The Dirty Dozen For the Price of One
<Nazi Janitors>
28,402
44,489
I was raised Catholic, went to Catholic school, communion, confession, confirmation. I received all the sacraments, save for a priest's penis. I am now an atheist, but still a huge asshole. Is that residual Catholicism or just natural asshole?
 
Mario Speedwagon

Mario Speedwagon

Gold Recognition
<Prior Amod>
19,525
72,214
I was sent to a Catholic school by atheist parents because it's where they went and it's the best school in the area. Why does lurkingdork trigger Izo hard?
 
Kriptini

Kriptini

Vyemm Raider
3,675
3,572
Izo_sl said:
You realize the 'jerk's part was never something I asked or talked about, right? This discussion stems from the parent thread. It's from the journalist interpretation of the study. I'm quoting the study - it's the interesting part. hodj puts it eloquently a few posts back. Now go away, dumbass.
Click to expand...
What's interesting about a study that essentially boils down to "kids don't immediately grasp the consequences of their actions?" Society has known this for centuries.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Dr. Mario Speedwagon_sl said:
Why does lurkingdork trigger Izo hard?
Click to expand...
My view of what someone is doing when they take their young kids to church and indoctrinate them with their faith, is probably what LurkingDirk feels when he sees something like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Camp

Sure, the Jesus_camp is much much worse, but they are both indoctrination to ancient bullshit. I think Izo feels the same.


I'm not trolling and I bet LurkingDirk is a good parent overall. Just religion is, at best, a gigantic waste of time. At worse, well, shrug. Chaos said something in the parent thread about how horrified he would be if one of his daughters joined something like the Westboro baptist church.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,345
48,555
lurkingdirk, why don't you teach those things without the mysticism? There's nothing about a nice group of friends, good moral lessons, or discipline thats inherent to religion. It's just good parenting/social scene.
 
khorum

khorum

Murder Apologist
24,338
81,363
Actually it's been shown that the correlation with extremely high rates of parental involvement is more supportive of the high achievement rates amongst home-schooled children than whatever their home-schooling curriculum actually is. It could be some raptor-jesus syllabus from westborobaptistslearnings.com, it would barely matter.

Likewise the extremely low rates of parental involvement (more because of long working hours) amongst poor parents is the likeliest indicator of poor educational outcomes.

You can literally just raise your kids teaching him basic math and science while fishing or practicing throwing daggers at pictures of Obama and he would outperform just about 96% of public school kids.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Cad_sl said:
lurkingdirk, why don't you teach those things without the mysticism? There's nothing about a nice group of friends, good moral lessons, or discipline thats inherent to religion. It's just good parenting/social scene.
Click to expand...
This.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.