Discussion
Re: Jesus camp-us
-
It’s a safe bet that any student in the Faculty of Theology already assumes that God exists and is aiming for employment in the theological sector. Otherwise, they’d be a Religious Studies major. Perhaps the teachings of the Faculty of Theology would be better delivered by a privately funded offshoot of the United Church; nonetheless, the exertion of separating it and the U of W for good should not be carried out simply because the ASA wants it to be.
– Jess C. in Winnipeg, MB | April 2nd 2010 at 12:24pm | Link
-
it makes sense to not teach religion in elementary and secondary school as it is mandatory. if one chooses to enroll in a post secondary theology class, go ahead.
in regards to “assumption”... the world runs on a lot of assumptions.
the ASA runs on the assumption that god does not exist. i went to university on the assumption that it would be rewarding.celebrate diversity, don’t stifle it.
– kristian in winnipeg | April 2nd 2010 at 5:10pm | Link
-
“The only way religion survives is through the repression of critical thinking.”
Find me a great Western university not founded by the Christian Church.
Then find one founded on athiestic principles.
– Robert Galston in Point Douglas | April 3rd 2010 at 11:17pm | Link
-
“Science files you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.”—Victor Stenger
– Fandango in Winnipeg | April 13th 2010 at 9:46am | Link
-
Lack of critical thinking skills in plentiful evidence in the first three comments.
The ASA makes a good argument. It’s not just just because it “wants it to be.”
Diversity should include Satanism. Please include that on the theology curriculum. And FSM. Diversity means more than just *your* world view, so the “diversity” argument is a red herring without acknowledging the full range of diversity, not just your little imaginings.
Convenient to limit a rhetorical question to Western universities only when there are plenty of universities around the world that are founded on non-christian and non-theistic principles. And the founding of universities by christian churches speaks more to cultural hegemony, power and money, than it does to any altruistic pursuit of “truth.”
– Rhett | April 13th 2010 at 10:05am | Link
-
Their argument against separating the United Church from the U of W is mildly (and I do mean mildly) compelling, but won’t bear fruit any time soon. Their argument against the teaching of theology at all is simply laughable. Why would you sign up for something called the Faculty of Theology and NOT expect to be taught within the context of devout Christianity? They don’t exactly hide this fact from anyone.
– Jess C. in Winnipeg, MB | April 13th 2010 at 7:58pm | Link
-
argument for*
– Jess C. in Winnipeg, MB | April 13th 2010 at 11:14pm | Link
-
The way I see it, the point is less that it’s a tautology as Jess submits, but rather the larger issue of funding. The theology program costs the university more than it brings in - so some of the monies that would normally go to programs that are in need of it *cough*philosophy*cough*, programs that study the human condition which are chronically underfunded instead goes to the study of a made up being. That’s what *I* have a problem with.
– Matt in Winnipeg, MB | May 26th 2010 at 10:57pm | Link
