No, it isn't, but just as parents are lousy at teaching their kids the differences, they're likewise lousy at doing things like taking their kids to museums, where they can see these things side by side and compare.
The answer is still education. The answer is still parents. The answer is likely also actually using some of those home ec classes everyone ends up taking to teach kids about effective child raising beyond having them carry an egg around for a week(if they still even do that).
And again, I don't see it as oppression. Then again, I don't attach that much religious importance to a picture, whether it's my religion or not. It's art. It's about a subject that, like so many (most) things in this world, is controversial thanks to a wider world view. I can't change that that picture exists, that until twenty years ago, it was all right to litter Christian symbols and the like all over the place, or that, whether or not that painting stays or goes, my child will still run into people and things that will challenge what I taught her and what she herself believes in.
But I can certainly teach her respect--both for herself and others--even if the rest of the world is incapable of it.
As for 'educating' other peoples' children--no one really has that right, other than actual teachers, and what they should be teaching and expected to be teaching should be limited to raw facts, regardless of subject. Most religious teaching is subjective and very much 'us verses them'. Which is also how things like this article come across, at elast once we get into everyone's rational for why or why not something should happen.
If people would spend more time on their own offspring rather than other peoples' kids and what the government should be doing for them...a lot of problems would be lesser at the least.
no subject
The answer is still education. The answer is still parents. The answer is likely also actually using some of those home ec classes everyone ends up taking to teach kids about effective child raising beyond having them carry an egg around for a week(if they still even do that).
And again, I don't see it as oppression. Then again, I don't attach that much religious importance to a picture, whether it's my religion or not. It's art. It's about a subject that, like so many (most) things in this world, is controversial thanks to a wider world view. I can't change that that picture exists, that until twenty years ago, it was all right to litter Christian symbols and the like all over the place, or that, whether or not that painting stays or goes, my child will still run into people and things that will challenge what I taught her and what she herself believes in.
But I can certainly teach her respect--both for herself and others--even if the rest of the world is incapable of it.
As for 'educating' other peoples' children--no one really has that right, other than actual teachers, and what they should be teaching and expected to be teaching should be limited to raw facts, regardless of subject. Most religious teaching is subjective and very much 'us verses them'. Which is also how things like this article come across, at elast once we get into everyone's rational for why or why not something should happen.
If people would spend more time on their own offspring rather than other peoples' kids and what the government should be doing for them...a lot of problems would be lesser at the least.