LogFAQs > #932130544

LinkPizza posted...

By wanting to take religion out of school, you basically take out history. As was stated, history and religion. Go hand in hand. It would be nearly impossible to teach history without the mention of religion, and the little history you can learn would be fragmented. The whole conversation weve been having implies you think history is not important.

so what you're saying is, i never said that history is not important and shouldn't be taught in school

Or are you saying that it is important and you were just wasting time because you havent had anything to add to the conversation, or any actual reason on why religion shouldn't be taught in school...

you're the one wasting time, sir. I stated over 10 posts ago:

"I havent stated a position on whether history ought to be taught - you are the one who has. the burden of proof is on you to prove that history ought to be taught, and 'experts say so' is not a valid argument"

if you want to use "history must be taught" as the reason why religion must be mentioned, you need to establish that history must be taught. otherwise your argument falls apart. my argument doesn't rely on history either way, so i have no burden to establish that history is not necessary, unless you first construct a sound argument against me relying on that basis. and even if you did, I could also attack the claim that religion must be mentioned in order for history to be taught. but there's no reason for me to waste my valuable mental faculties doing that until you actually create a sound argument (not just an appeal to authority)

---

http://boomeressentials.com/.well-known/
https://essentialboomer.guide/robots.txt #NotAllGamers #YesAllLandlords