Wide Eyed in Wonder <kand...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On May 6, 5:13 pm, "Joe S." <non...@nosuch.net> wrote:

"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kand...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1178465011.532106.55030@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

Things are not what they tell you they are:

-Liberals are not liberal (won't allow Christian or conservative
dialog).

Since when?? It's not us liberals who killed the equal time doctrine.

-Liberal Education isn't (no Bible or conservative teaching in
schools).

You can teach all the Bible you want in a private, religious school. As for
"conservative teaching," exactly what might that be?

Is religious schools "liberal education?"

One might get a liberal education in a religious school, or one might
not.

And, since you admit public
school don't include Bible or religious study, you are admitting
public education isn't a "liberal education" either...right?

You apparently don't know what a "liberal education" is (why am I not
surprised).

The primary definition of "liberal education" is that it is an
education in the "liberal arts". This is consistent with the agency
that accredits schools in "liberal education"

http://www.aale.org/aale/about.htm
<The American Academy for Liberal Education (AALE) is a national
< association that accredits institutions offering quality general
< education programs in the liberal arts that meet the Academy's
< stringent educational, administrative, and financial criteria

From the aale site...

Here is a definition of the liberal arts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts
<The term liberal arts has come to mean studies that are intended to
< provide general knowledge and intellectual skills, rather than more
< specialized occupational, scientific, or artistic skills.
<
<The term liberal in liberal arts is from the Latin word liberalis,
< meaning "appropriate for free men", and they were contrasted with the
< servile arts. The liberal arts thus initially represented the kinds
< of skills and general knowledge needed by the elite echelon of
< society, whereas the servile arts represented specialized tradesman
< skills and knowledge needed by persons who were employed by the
< elite.
<
<In the history of education, the seven liberal arts comprised two
< groups of studies: the trivium and the quadrivium. Studies in the
< trivium involved grammar, dialectic (logic), and rhetoric; and
< studies in the quadrivium involved arithmetic, music, geometry, and
< astronomy. These liberal arts made up the core curriculum of the
< medieval universities.
<
<The scope of the liberal arts has changed with society. It once
< emphasised the education of elites in the classics; but, with the
< rise of other humanities during the Age of Enlightenment, the scope
< and meaning of "liberal arts" expanded to include them.
...

<While non-existent in the traditional liberal arts, but common among
< many contemporary American undergraduate liberal arts curricula, are
< such topics as theatre, painting, fashion design, women's studies,
< gender studies, pedagogy, journalism, business, physics (as separate
< from astronomy), chemistry, biology, geology, agriculture, medicine,
< physiology, dentistry, pharmacology, engineering, computer science.

So it becomes plainly evident that a education in religion is NOT part
of a "liberal education".

But since different kinds of education are not mutually exclusive, a
quality religious institution could provide a "liberal education"
along with education in religious topics.

lojbab

Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:

Is religious schools "liberal education?" And, since you admit public
school don't include Bible or religious study, you are admitting
public education isn't a "liberal education" either...right?

So, you would have no problem with public schools teaching your children
from the Koran? You would have no problem with your child being forced to
sit through an hour of Scientology class once a week? And you would be
overjoyed to have your children spend an hour a week in public school with
some Mormons telling them their version of "Truth".

You really are so very open minded.

I, on the other hand, don't want them and their beliefs taught in public
schools any more than I want your beliefs or even mine taught in a public
school. I figure it's a parents job to teach their child their faith, not
the public schools. But I really am glad to see you embracing diversity by
demanding that all religions have equal time to teach your child their
religious study in public school.