Hey Guys!
I was wondering about how you thought about prayers in school. This topic is very important to me, and I would love some other's opinions on it! Please, everyone, reply with your thoughts!
Thanks so much!

Christian prayer is OK.. in a christian school.

Why do you think so?

People can celebrate their religion in schools that are devoted to followers of that religion. Public schools are for everyone, all races and religions, so it isn't right to select one religion to celebrate when you know that the atudents are from either several differnets religions or practice no religion.

What do YOU think?

.. I think that all religions are welcome in public schools, because they should be able to have a voice and be heard. This is america, and its what its about.
If students who don't believe in christianity don't like the fact that there is prayer, then they don't HAVE to pray with them. They can ignore it.

Actually you're wrong on all counts there but this debate has been done to death. Read more here: The Case Against School Prayer (http://ffrf.org/nontracts/schoolprayer.php)

I personally vote for the "moment of silence." Those who wish to pray (silently, and in accordance with their own faith) may, and those that don't----well, a "moment" isn't TOO long to be quiet and respect others.

Well, thanks. I wanted opinions, and that includes opposing ones. I would like some thoughts on prayer and why it should be allowed...

well, thanks. i wanted opinions, and that includes opposing ones. i would like some thoughts on prayer and why it should be allowed....

I can play both sides of this one, but since you asked for reasons it should be allowed...

1. The Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment. All one has to do is read the Federalist Papers (assuming one has read the Constitution) to get a very good feel for that oft-debated "Founders' Intent." It seems to me to be rather clear that the founders were absolutely dead-set against the central government (the feds) mandating any specific religion/denomination. I do NOT see public schools allowing prayer as being an endorsement by the central government of any specific religion. If anything, it's only an endorsement by that school, or that principal, or that teacher.

2. Freedom of expression/speech. If I want to pray before I start my classes, who's to say I can't? In fact, by saying I can't, isn't that a very real breach of my freedom of religion as well as my freedom of speech?

Really, though, I don't get that hung up on this issue. The way I see it, my God doesn't need Washington's approval to exist. He doesn't need for the Department of Education, the various state boards of education, the superintendents, the principals, the teachers, or the PTA to acknowledge Him for Him to exist. He's big enough that if they want to kick Him out, they can--but as soon as one child or teacher calls on Him (silently or aloud), He will be there.

I personally worry a whole lot more about those who are trying to force religion out of schools than those of us who practice our faith. Like the song says, "My judge will judge us all one day," and I fear for those people at that time.

"Praying in school is not against the law. In fact, the U.S. Constitution guarantees students the right to pray in public schools; it is a protected form of free speech. A student can pray on the school bus, in the corridors, in the cafeteria, in their student-run Bible club, at the flagpole, sports stadium, and elsewhere on school grounds. They can even pray silently before and after class in the classroom. They are not allowed to pray solely Christian prayers as an organized part of the school schedule. However, they may be able to hear or read prayers from a variety of religious traditions and inspiring statements from secular sources. Prayers cannot solely be from a single religious faith group."

Bold added by me. Read more here: How to have prayers in public schools -- legally (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ps_pra2.htm)

"Praying in school is not against the law. In fact, the U.S. Constitution guarantees students the right to pray in public schools; it is a protected form of free speech. A student can pray on the school bus, in the corridors, in the cafeteria, in their student-run Bible club, at the flagpole, sports stadium, and elsewhere on school grounds. They can even pray silently before and after class in the classroom. They are not allowed to pray solely Christian prayers as an organized part of the school schedule. However, they may be able to hear or read prayers from a variety of religious traditions and inspiring statements from secular sources. Prayers cannot solely be from a single religious faith group."

Bold added by me. Read more here: How to have prayers in public schools -- legally (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ps_pra2.htm)


You're right, of course.

Like I said, I can play both sides of the card on this one.

I, for one, prefer student-led activities/organizations. That way, I know the students' hearts are in it, and they're not being coerced by parents/teachers/whoever.

Do you guys think that by having prayer taken out of schools... much would be affected? Other than the hysterics who would go off the wall. Do you think that the school itself would go through much change, if any?

I don't think much would happen at all. We don't have school prayer here in Canada and all is well.

No, not really.

How much religious education is in public school as it is? Pretty much zero, unless you count the percentage of schools (not many) who teach a segment of "comparitive religion," in which they outline the tenets of the three biggies, and toss in a smattering of Buddhism and Hinduism.

No, for the most part, the schools would roll on just as they have been, which ain't all that great. (Being a public school teacher, I figure I can get away with that last)

I'd have no problem with prayers in school if EVERY time there was a prayer, it was taken from a DIFFERENT religious background.

Monday, Christianity. Tuesday, Buddhism. Wednesday, Hinduism. Thursday, Islam. Friday, Judaism.

Monday, Paganism. Tuesday, Satanism. Wednesday, the Roman Pantheon. Thursday, the Norse pantheon. Friday, the Celtic pantheon.

Monday, ancestor worship--are you getting the idea here?

I think that if Christians were allowed to be represented about once every 3-4 weeks, they'd be MUCH less likely to want prayer in school.

I have always stood by the statement that if you want your kids to pray in school, send them to a parochial school.

Students who wish to pray on their own during school hours, as long as it does not interrupt class time is fine. In other words, praying before you eat lunch, or taking a moment in the hall to pray before a big test, no big deal. As long as it is not led by a teacher or administrator, there's nothing wrong with it, and it should not be prohibited. The problem I see with having a moment of silence is that it still indicates the endorsement of religion. Not a particular religion, but religion in general, and we all know public schools should not be endorsing religion of any type. Also, what time do you choose for this moment of silence? Is it to take place at the start of the day? The end? What about the Muslim kids who then can't pray at their designated times? Then there's the inevitable conflicts kids are going to have - "YOU didn't pray" "What god did you pray to?" "You pray differently than me" and so on. I used to work in a daycare where there was one Jewish girl who would pray in Hebrew before snack time. The other kids would make fun of her because she wasn't speaking in English, and one girl actually came up to me and said, "Sally is weird, she's Jewish. She doesn't believe in god like you and me, that's why she prays like that." Do we really need that being introduced to public schools as a result of a moment of silence?

I personally think organized prayer or moments of silence have no place in public schools. Our kids need as much time learning as they can without things like prayer and conflicts over what god who prayed to or didn't pray to (which you know would happen) interrupting things.

I'd have no problem with prayers in school if EVERY time there was a prayer, it was taken from a DIFFERENT religious background.

Monday, Christianity. Tuesday, Buddhism. Wednesday, Hinduism. Thursday, Islam. Friday, Judaism.

Monday, Paganism. Tuesday, Satanism. Wednesday, the Roman Pantheon. Thursday, the Norse pantheon. Friday, the Celtic pantheon.

Monday, ancestor worship--are you getting the idea here?




Woa, that's an idea I would have never thought of. That's a really great thought, but too bad not many schools would be too excited on participating in that. Could you imagine the outraged parents? Which would, I guess, show how close-minded people are. It would be a good oppurtunity to teach the kids about religious differences and such though. Thanks so much for your reply.

woa, thats an idea i would have never thought of. thats a really great thought, but too bad not many schools would be too excited on participating in that. could you imagine the outraged parents? which would, i guess, show how close-minded people are. it would be a good oppurtunity to teach the kids about religious differences and such though. thanks so much for your reply.

I don't necessarily think people are close minded simply because they would protest the prayer of all the religions on different days. There is a difference in learning about other religions and actually participating in that religious belief/worship. Even as Christian I agree with prayer being taken out of school as a set time. The reason I am okay with it is for two reasons, 1- What if instead of Chrsitian prayer they were praying another religious prayer. I too would want prayer taken out. Secondly, our children can still pray in school if they want to, no matter the religion. That freedom has not been taken away. It is just the set time and involvement of all that has been. Which is fine because individually we can still pray in whatever religion.
What I wish hadn't been done away with is religion elective classes. In high school we were required to have so many elective courses. There were many to choose from which allowed you to choose those classes you were interested in. I don't think having a class that teaches different religions is a bad thing. Matter of fact it is a wonderful opportunity. And best of all it is elective. No one has to take it if they don't want to. I wish that were still available for children. And I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be. It does no violate any rights. Churches usually only teach their religion and denominational beliefs therefore learning about different religions from church is out. So our children must learn either through parents, there own studies or they will have to wait for college. And you know that people don't usually take theology college courses unless they plan to get a degree in theology. Therefore a great opportunity for children was eliminated when they took religion class out of schools as well.

I agree with all the reasons here for not having prayer in school... well, not a "scheduled" time. Time should not be taken out of academic time to pray. If they want to pray, they can do it at times already mentioned above... like lunch, before class begins, recess, etc.

If prayer in school is so important, then those children should go to a school devoted to that religious belief... like a christian school, a jewish school... etc.

Moon, I just have to say I agree with you about offering an elective to students on the major religions of the world. I think it would be so helpful for students to learn about the diversity of religions, and the class could easily be taught without focus on a particular religion, or being taught like a sermon. If the origins and influences of the major religions of the world are taught, basic beliefs, etc, it could really promote tolerance in this country. Think of all the misconceptions about Islam, for example, and how quickly those stereotypes could be taken care of.

Savage,
It's elective. That's the beauty of it. The class would be about, like jillian said, the basics of religions. Because there are so many different religions it wouldn't leave time for the teacher to lean on their preferred religion. Which I know is not a guarantee, but I would think it could be done without prejudice or favoritism. But I don't think it will happen. Taking religion out period became ugly by both sides, it caused upheaval and now that it is over I don't think anyone (government officials) will be willing to go through it again just to put one controversial class back into all public schools.
Does anyone know if keeping a religion elective in schools was considered during this whole ordeal, or was it more of a "okay this is causing too much trouble and upheaval, let's just take religion out completely"?

Needkarma is right. Teachers and schools wrongfully suspend students for praying and wearing crosses and so forth. The ACLJ will fight for the students in court. They are allowed to have Christian social clubs BEFORE OR AFTER school N0T DURING school.

ACLJ • American Center for Law & Justice (http://www.aclj.org/)

Yeah, I actually had a friend who was suspended for coming up to a girl and saying, "Jesus loves you."
Does a simple saying like this really make that big of a deal?

Suspended for that is a bit much, unless there was a previous history. What possesses someone to blurt that out of the blue? I don't know of any other religion where one would go up to people and say "Mohmmed loves you" or "The Flying Spagetti Monster loves you." etc.

Suspended for that is a bit much, unless there was a previous history. What possesses someone to blurt that out of the blue? I don't know of any other religion where one would go up to people and say "Mohmmed loves you" or "The Flying Spagetti Monster loves you." etc.

Who cares if what it is. Why can anyone make any statement they want. I guess this country has freedom of speech unless you are Christian. That doesn't surprise me, it is the spirit of the anti-christ in operation

N0help4u agrees: exactly! You can swear and talk vulgar that is acceptable Jesus love N0 Way! Insanity!

Actually swearing and using vulgar speech can and does get a student suspended - it just doesn't make the news. The student in question, however, should not have been suspended for simply saying such a thing, unless, as NK mentioned, there was a previous history of this student harassing the other student or something. In other words, if there was tension between the two students, and "Jesus loves you" was said as a method of provoking, harassing or picking on the student, suspension could be a reasonable punishment. Unless we see the news story, however, there's no way to say for sure.

EDIT: Sorry, I just realized this wasn't a news story, but a personal account. There's no way to know for sure unless we know both sides of the story.

I think there's more to the story than someone saying "Jesus loves you"

Seriously... not being Christian, it's annoying that Christians constantly push their religious agenda everywhere, but someone saying just that one line would make me shake my head and walk away.

HOWEVER--if she had said it before and said it to me every day, after being asked to stop--that's harassment, and that's generally something that gets ONE warning before punishment is meted out.

Hey Guys!
I was wondering about how yall thought about prayers in school. this topic is very important to me, and i would love some other's opinions on it! please, everyone, reply with your thoughts!
thanks so much!

From online dictionary - "5. prayers, a religious observance, either public or private, consisting wholly or mainly of prayer".

As such, a "religious observance" is not necessary for all to observe, but for the person praying this can be a "private" observance that will not broadcast any specific religious demonstrations.

No institution can deny this type of prayer.

Mkay, so what happened with the whole "jesus loves you" thing that involved my friend, it went like this.
There was some girl that my friend passed every day in the hallway, and so they started talking a bit, you know, not like best friends or anything, just like aquaintences (sp?). And this girl always seemed sad and stuff, so one day, when this girl looked like she was almost in tears, my friend just said, "dont worry, jesus loves you." and yeah. I don't know if the girl was offended and told the principal, or another student over heard and they told or what, my friend was just called to the office and was suspended. And soooo... yeah.
That was basically the history behind it, and there was definitely no harassment involved.

In my opinion that doesn't deserve a suspension.

I don't think it deserves a suspension either--but neither do I believe that that 5 year old little boy should have gotten suspended for kissing a girl in the coat hall.

Some schools go overboard with enforcing things, others hardly enforce anything.

The name Jesus will always be contreversial. It seems to make people mad or uncomfortable. People can say God, Buddha, muhamed, dhali Lama and no one cares. But the moment you Say the name of Jesus people take offense and attacks fly. This is because of the spirit of the anti christ that the Bible warns us about. Its is even more intense now, the devil is working over time now because his time is running out. Jesus was hated and his followers are too. We just have accept the price we pay for being followers of Christ.

Sounds like a cult the way you describe it.

Soldout,
I see you are new here, you may want to get familiar with the rules surrounding the commenting feature on this site:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/feedback/using-comments-feature-24951.html

I don't think it deserves a suspension either--but neither do I believe that that 5 year old little boy should have gotten suspended for kissing a girl in the coat hall.

Some schools go overboard with enforcing things, others hardly enforce anything.

Don't forget the kid who was suspended for using a chicken finger as a "gun" during lunch.

Student suspended for chicken finger gun (http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2001/05/31/ns_chicken010531.html)

But I agree, from the sounds of the story, the student should not have been suspended. It would be interesting to hear the principal explain him/her self.

Hey Guys!
I was wondering about how yall thought about prayers in school. this topic is very important to me, and i would love some other's opinions on it! please, everyone, reply with your thoughts!
thanks so much!
Heyy
My opinion is that praying should be done in schools. However if there is a child of a different belief they shouldn't have to pray with the other children.

Hey Guys!
I was wondering about how yall thought about prayers in school. this topic is very important to me, and i would love some other's opinions on it! please, everyone, reply with your thoughts!
thanks so much!

In order to answer the question adequately, we must consider that "prayers in school" have several manifestations:

In a Public School:

1. Should prayers in school be organized by officials of the school, such as the principal or the teachers?

Only if the composition of the students is considered first and it is permitted by the students' parents.

Why? Because Public School will have many religions represented by its students and some may be offended.

2. Should prayers in school by students, either organized or impromptu, be forbidden by the government, the school officials or the teachers?

a. No. This is a free country which recognizes the existence of God. In forbidding the establishment of a national religion, the Constitution did not declare that this was an atheist country. We can look at our coins which say, "In God We Trust" and at the Declaration of Independence, "endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights", and see that this Government is not atheist.

In addition, an atheistic belief system is as much forbidden by the separation of Church and State as any other religion.

b. Prayer should also not be forbidden because it is simply an expression of faith. It is also protected by freedom of speech.

3. Should prayer in School by officials such as principals and teachers be forbidden.

No. Our faith is an integral part of our being. If a person is not permitted to pray or to speak of God, this is a curtailment of our freedom of Speech which is guaranteed by the Constitution.

Private Schools are another matter:

It is a contract with a private person and one must observe the rules by which he agreed to abide.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Sorry deMaria, you are wrong on many counts. Best to read this first:
School Prayer - The Issue (http://www.itvs.org/schoolprayer/issue7.html)
THE RULING


http://www.itvs.org/schoolprayer/images/issue7_quote.gif
"The Bill of Rights was created to protect the minority from tyranny of the majority," said Judge Biggers, responding to the school's argument that the prayers should continue because a majority of students and parents are in favor of the practice. "To say that the majority should prevail simply because of its numbers is to forget the purpose of the Bill of Rights."

The plaintiff in the case, Lisa Herdahl, was insistent that: "Parents and kids should be able to decide for themselves if they want to go to Sunday school, or what church or synagogue they want to attend. They shouldn't have to battle that out in court." Herdahl brought suit in December 1994 after school officials at the North Pontotoc Attendance Center refused her request to discontinue the religious practices. When news of her request got out, she and her five school children, ages 5 to 15, were harassed and ostracized. You can read more here too: Prayer In Public School (Precedents): (http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/prayer-in-public-school.htm)

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment requires public school officials to be neutral in their treatment of religion, showing neither favoritism toward nor hostility against religious expression such as prayer.

Wow! I diddn't know this was a debate forum, but that is wonderful!


Sorry deMaria, you are wrong on many counts.

Perhaps, but you didn't address any of them. Or if you addressed my first point, you confirmed it.


Best to read this first:

You might take your own advise and read my message again. Your reference is concerned with prayer organized by School officials and I said:


1. Should prayers in school be organized by officials of the school, such as the principal or the teachers?

Only if the composition of the students is considered first and it is permitted by the students' parents.

Why? Because Public School will have many religions represented by its students and some may be offended.

Therefore, my statement substantially agrees with your reference because if the parents of the students agreee with the program, there is no tyranny.

On the other hand, the tyranny of the minority needs to be addressed. Why must the majority be denied a God given right simply because a minority does not agree with it?


School Prayer - The Issue (http://www.itvs.org/schoolprayer/issue7.html)
[ You can read more here too: Prayer In Public School (Precedents): (http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/prayer-in-public-school.htm)




I've read enough on the issue and my mind is made up. If you are trying to persuade me to your side of the argument, you'll have to provide your own arguments.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Wait wait wait... "God given right"?

YOUR god has rights in His church.

MINE has rights in my Circle

NEITHER has rights in a public school.

If you want your kids to pray in school, send 'em to a private school. My tax dollars pay for education, not morality. Teach morals at home, please.

Wait wait wait... "God given right"?

That is correct.


YOUR god has rights in His church.

Are you curtailing our freedom of speech? Do you claim the right to assert that God does not exist in our Public Schools and deny me the right to assert that God does exist?

Do you claim the right to live as though God does not exist in Public School and deny me the right to act as though God exists?

Do you claim the right to live according to your beliefs where ever you go and deny me the same right?


MINE has rights in my Circle

Yet I see atheists prominently asserting their claims in children's public school curricula.


NEITHER has rights in a public school.

That isn't the reality. The reality is that atheists and secular humanists have asserted themselves in Public School to the exclusion of other religions.


If you want your kids to pray in school, send 'em to a private school. My tax dollars pay for education, not morality. Teach morals at home, please.

The question of prayer in Public School is one thing. The question of teaching morals is another.

Morals are taught in Public School. There is no way you can be rid of moral teaching.

The question is whose morals are being taught? Are they Christian, Muslim, humanist or some other morals.

Luckily, the United States is founded on Christian principles which still dominate the moral teaching of the Public Schools. But atheists and humanists are trying to change that by making homosexuality, abortion, and other anti-Christian concepts part of the curricula.

But perhaps that is the answer. Perhaps we should all teach our children at home. It is now possible with the advent of the internet to teach children anything you want at home.

As for me, I bailed out of the Public Schools twenty years ago. I've graduated two children from our Catholic HomeSchool and I've got two in third and fifth grade respectively. It is the most wonderful experience to teach your own children and actually raise them up being your best friends.

I'll be writing more about Catholic Homeschooling on my website.
Catholic Homeschooling (http://mdechristi.googlepages.com/home)

It is still under construction, so bear with me:

Sincerely,

De Maria

That isn't the reality. The reality is that atheists and secular humanists have asserted themselves in Public School to the exclusion of other religions.
The reality is an aim for neutrality i.e. not any religion or dogma to be endorsed by the school. It isn't that difficult to understand, it's part of the First Amendment (state-supported prayer amounts to the establishment of a religious practice and is therefore unconstitutional). No one is denying you your belief or your wish for silent prayer to yourself. God hears you and knows all that goes on in your head and He knows all your thoughts.

By the way there are limits (http://www.freedomforum.org/packages/first/Curricula/EducationforFreedom/supportpages/L04-LimitsFreedomSpeech.htm) to freedom of Speech, that whole screaming "Fire" in a crowded theater bit.

Synnen-"If you want your kids to pray in school, send 'em to a private school. My tax dollars pay for education, not morality. Teach morals at home, please. "

SDont forget that christians are also paying tax dollars so it is not only your tax dollars.FYI, there are more Christians paying their tax dollars than there are Atheist towards most public schools. People should be free to practice their beliefs no matter where they are.
I don't think Christians should have to pay for Private school just to be able to practice what they believe, other wise they should also suspend kids who try to push athiesim on other kids too. It's the same thing but there is a double standard.

I am a bit confused by some of these posts. Soldout & DeMaria, in response to Kelly's original question are your personal positions that in the U.S. there should be a specified time set aside for prayers in school for Christian based religions, all religions, or are you simply stating that children should be allowed to say Grace before a meal, or have a moment of prayer at a convenient time that won't disrupt a teaching session? I truly don't mean to offend. I am just having a difficult time figuring out what your answers are to Kelly's original question.

Practice what you want. Just remember that your prayer in public schools gets to share time with my yodeling.

WAit--where did I say that I was an atheist? I'm not, you know.

Also... I don't push my religion in schools at all. I'd just prefer that students were taught Calculus and how to read, and how to write, and MAYBE how to play an instrument rather than being taught the Lord's prayer and that the Pledge of Allegiance ALWAYS had the word "God" in it.

Frankly, I'm not pushing ANYTHING except the Christians BACK to where they belong--on equal footing with ALL other religions. THAT is why there is a separation of church and state--so that the majority cannot determine how the minority should worship.

"Christian" morals are not solely Christian, you know. Treating your neighbor with love and respect, honoring your parents and grandparents (and other family members), not killing, not cheating, not lying--Those are all pretty basic parts of just about any religion out there.

I'm not pushing atheism into schools--I'm pushing Christianity out. There is no place for formal recognition of a particular god in a secular school. If a student wants to have a silent prayer before a test, or prays out loud at their lunch table--I couldn't care less.

IF, however, you want a prayer on the loudspeaker first thing in the morning, or a prayer before a ball game, or a teacher leading a prayer in class before whatever--forget it. Pray yourself, pray at home--just don't make it a point to have organized prayer in school, unless (as I have previously said) you make it so that EVERY religion is EQUALLY recognized.

All religions are equal in this country. That's a big part of WHY this country was founded.

WAit--where did I say that I was an atheist? I'm not, you know.

Sorry, I jumped to the wrong conclusion.


Also... I don't push my religion in schools at all. I'd just prefer that students were taught Calculus and how to read, and how to write, and MAYBE how to play an instrument rather than being taught the Lord's prayer and that the Pledge of Allegiance ALWAYS had the word "God" in it.

Frankly, I'm not pushing ANYTHING except the Christians BACK to where they belong--on equal footing with ALL other religions.

But you are pushing.


THAT is why there is a separation of church and state--so that the majority cannot determine how the minority should worship.

But you want the minority to determine how the majority should worship? Or you want to force the majority not to worship at all?

In fact, the newest trend is not just to stop worship and prayer, but any mention of God at all.

Students Free to Thank Anybody, Except God

Monday, November 22, 2004
By Laurel Lundstrom
Fox News
FOXNews.com - Students Free to Thank Anybody, Except God - U.S. & World (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,139304,00.html)


"Christian" morals are not solely Christian, you know. Treating your neighbor with love and respect, honoring your parents and grandparents (and other family members), not killing, not cheating, not lying--Those are all pretty basic parts of just about any religion out there.

Then you shouldn't mind the Ten Commandments being taught in Public School.


I'm not pushing atheism into schools--I'm pushing Christianity out.

And that's better because..


There is no place for formal recognition of a particular god in a secular school. If a student wants to have a silent prayer before a test, or prays out loud at their lunch table--I couldn't care less.

But the law does. The law restricts private prayer to two minutes. And that is unconstitutional. We have freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of conscience. Students should be free to pray and to discuss God and religion anytime they want as long as they are not disruptive.


IF, however, you want a prayer on the loudspeaker first thing in the morning, or a prayer before a ball game, or a teacher leading a prayer in class before whatever--forget it. Pray yourself, pray at home--just don't make it a point to have organized prayer in school, unless (as I have previously said) you make it so that EVERY religion is EQUALLY recognized.

I believe that is what I said in my first post on this subject. In fact, my statement was broader. I said that the parents of the children must agree. Therefore, that includes those who do not practice a religion.


All religions are equal in this country. That's a big part of WHY this country was founded.

Correct. But religions was never abolished. Nor was freedom of conscience, freedom of religion nor freedom of speech. In fact, the abolishment of prayer in Public School was done without precedent.
Sincerely,

De Maria

I am a bit confused by some of these posts. Soldout & DeMaria, in response to Kelly's original question are your personal positions that in the U.S. there should be a specified time set aside for prayers in school for Christian based religions, all religions, or are you simply stating that children should be allowed to say Grace before a meal, or have a moment of prayer at a convenient time that won't disrupt a teaching session? I truly don't mean to offend. I am just having a difficult time figuring out what your answers are to Kelly's original question.

In my opinion, schools should be extensions of the parents and the schools should not organize anything with which the parents don't agree.

I also believe that a minority should not rule over the majority. That goes against the basis of our democratic nation.

In my opinion, it is the student's constitutional right to pray and talk about God and religion when and where they want according to the Bill of Rights which guarantees free speech and freedom of religion as long as they are not disruptive.

Sincerely,

De Maria

If someone wants to pray so be it. If a group prayer is unfortunitly discouriged so be it. To ban all together is unexceptable and unamerican.

I also believe that a minority should not rule over the majority. That goes against the basis of our democratic nation.Hello De:

Not really. It IS the basis of our democratic nation.

The Bill of Rights gives YOU rights. YOU have them, not because you belong to the majority or the minority. YOU have them because you're an American. The majority can't take them away. They can't VOTE them out. You have them because, as Thomas Jefferson said, they're "inalienable rights".

Even if ALL 300 million people in this country decided to pass a law that contravened the Bill of Rights, and YOU were the ONLY one opposed to it, you would win - and you should.

Does that mean a minority of ONE could tell the entire 300 million majority where to stick it?? In terms of prayer in school, YOU BETCHA!

excon

If the school is a christian school then prayer is OK, but it's very important not to force prayer onto an individual as well x

Then you shouldn't mind the Ten Commandments being taught in Public School.

NO, the ten commandments should NOT be taught in schools. Why? Because one of the commandments is:

Do not worship any other gods

Another is:

Do not make any idols

Another is:

Do not misuse the name of god

Another is:

Keep the Sabbath holy

Those "rules" apply to christians, and christians only. They are not essential to having a civilized, functioning society like oh, I don't know, telling kids murder is wrong and listening to your parents is good. :rolleyes:

Children in school should be free to express their own faiths. If that includes them praying in private or in their own groups that should be allowed ( and really is) kids in school can have their own private prayer groups and the such.

The schools unconsitutional behavior at restricting symbols such as the star of david or the cross and others should not be allowed and people of any or no faith should be outraged by such behavior of our schools.

Also we have to be close to remember that God and Christianity is a large part of the history and heritage of the US, and that not teaching their roles can often be a loss of the true meaning of many things from the US constitution, to the building of America which was often based on some religious group

The schools unconsitutional behavior at restricting symbols such as the star of david or the cross and others should not be allowed and people of any or no faith should be outraged by such behavior of our schools.If one is going to display a cross then one should display all the markings of all religions, correct?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...

The schools unconsitutional behavior at restricting symbols such as the star of david or the cross and others should not be allowed and people of any or no faith should be outraged by such behavior of our schools.

Also we have to be close to remember that God and Christianity is a large part of the history and heritage of the US, and that not teaching thier roles can often be a loss of the true meaning of many things from the US constitution, to the building of America which was often based on some religious group

If by restricting symbols you mean students wearing jewelry, etc, I agree with you. I see no reason for a school to forbid students from wearing a cross, etc. I also agree with you that Christianity is a large part of US history, and see no reason students can't learn about that history without being delivered a sermon (or someone thinking that the mention of the word "god" equates to a sermon).

Yes, I have issues with many school officials where students wearing crosses have been ordered to take them off. We normally refer this to one of the christian legal teams for action.

Was not talking about the display of crosses by the school, but displays by students for certain activities, if they do art work for the holidays, santas would be OK but a manger scene not allowed for example.

For example the "mormon wars" or even the forcing christianity on the american indians were some sad points in our history but need to be taught also as an example what happens when one is not tolerant of other religions If we don't teach our history, good and bad, we are doomed to repeat a lot of the bad.

But the fact that almost all schools were first ran by churches, all early colleges were all church schools, is just a fact, part of the history never taught.d

The fact that the Cherokee people had the first real constitution in the US and alotof the one we have can be seen in theirs. I bet almost no student ever learns this.

I figured that's what you meant, Chuck, and I agree with you. I remember reading an article about a girl (in England) who was suspended for wearing a chastity ring to school; her school has a strict "no jewelry" policy, but made exceptions for religious icons. The school said the chastity ring was not an icon for her religion, so she must take it off. Though I disagree with the ban, I agreed with the school up until this point. Then it was revealed the school was permitting Muslim female students to wear bracelets to school with no penalty. I thought it was ridiculous to enforce the rules selectively - rules should be fairly applied to everyone, otherwise there's no point in having them.

Sorry - got a little off topic there!

Ok, understood. I agree with Jillian.

Hello De:

Not really. It IS the basis of our democratic nation.

You seem to be saying that a minority may tyranize a majority, but you are wrong. This is not the American way.


The Bill of Rights gives YOU rights. YOU have them, not because you belong to the majority or the minority.

Exactly! The Bill of Rights protects the individual rights endowed by our Creator. The Declaration of Independence recognizes that we have a Creator.


YOU have them because you're an American. The majority can't take them away.

CORRECT! And the reverse is not true either. A MINORITY may not take them away from the majority.


They can't VOTE them out. You have them because, as Thomas Jefferson said, they're "inalienable rights". Even if ALL 300 million people in this country decided to pass a law that contravened the Bill of Rights, and YOU were the ONLY one opposed to it, you would win - and you should.

Not that I want to, but as I understand it, you can vote them out. The procedure for amending the Constitution is in the Constitution.
Constitutional Amendments - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net (http://www.usconstitution.net/constam.html)



Does that mean a minority of ONE could tell the entire 300 million majority where to stick it?? In terms of prayer in school, YOU BETCHA!

Sorry, but that is wrong. The intent of the Founding Fathers is that individual rights be upheld and that legal decisions be made by majority vote.

Sincerely,

De Maria

NO, the ten commandments should NOT be taught in schools. Why? Because one of the commandments is:

Do not worship any other gods

Another is:

Do not make any idols

Another is:

Do not misuse the name of god

Another is:

Keep the Sabbath holy

Those "rules" apply to christians, and christians only.

I said taught, not forced upon. And remember, if you've been reading my messages, I believe that the parents are the ultimate teachers of their children and the schools should be extension of the parents. That means that I don't approve of children being taught anything against their parents' will.


They are not essential to having a civilized, functioning society like oh, I don't know, telling kids murder is wrong and listening to your parents is good. :rolleyes:


Which happen also to be Commandments. Thou shalt not kill and thou shalt honor thy father and mother. So, what, you want to teach 8 out of the 10 Commandments?

Now if I'm the parent in question and I want the Public Schools to teach the Commandments, I want them to teach the complete set. The rest of the Commandments make no sense without the first, to love God with all your heart and soul, upon which all Commandments are based.

Sincerely,

De Maria

I said taught, not forced upon. And remember, if you've been reading my messages, I believe that the parents are the ultimate teachers of their children and the schools should be extension of the parents. That means that I don't approve of children being taught anything against their parents' will.

Which happen also to be Commandments. Thou shalt not kill and thou shalt honor thy father and mother. So, what, you want to teach 8 out of the 10 Commandments?

Now if I'm the parent in question and I want the Public Schools to teach the Commandments, I want them to teach the complete set. The rest of the Commandments make no sense without the first, to love God with all your heart and soul, upon which all Commandments are based.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria, you are clearly missing the point and do not understand why religion is not taught nor does (should) it have a presence in schools.

For one, parents don't determine a school's curriculum, therefore it doesn't matter if the parents want the ten commandments taught in school or the story or Adam and Eve - it's not up to them. It's up to the school board. If you are a parent and want your child to know the ten commandments, teach them yourself. Leave the school out of it. If you don't want to teach it, send your child to church. Leave the school out of it. I'm sure you would object to your child's school teaching the 11 Satanic Rules of the Earth, even though most of them consist of pretty good behaviors (such as not harming children). If you'd like to read them all, here's a link:

Eleven Rules of the Earth (http://churchofsatan.com/Pages/Eleven.html)

I disagree that schools should be an extension of parents - I think it should be the other way around. It is up to the school to facilitate functional and informational knowledge (reading, writing, 'rithmatic) and it is up to the parents to reinforce that knowledge (helping children with homework, encouraging them to read, etc). Morality should be taught at home, not at school.

I'm well aware that listening to your parents and not killing people is part of the ten commandments, which is why I specifically referenced those points. THOSE behaviors benefit and apply to ALL not to a specific religious group. Not to mention murder is illegal and ought to be taught as a part of law or government class. The ten commandments have nothing to do with it. But if you prefer, yes, I only want those commandments taught - not ten, just two (you might want to check your math above, btw). But I don't want them called "2 of the 10 commandments" I want them to be called, "Ways to be a good person in any society on earth".

And sorry, but what kind of world do you live in that "Don't kill people" doesn't make sense without prefacing it with "Do not worship other gods"?

I would LOVE to have certain things taught in school. I know that is not realistic. So, should prayer be allowed in school?
Well, if my daughter wants to pray - then I think she should. Should she stop class to do it? No. Not in a public school.

But she is taught to say her blessing at meal times, she is taught if she is struggling or scared, to pray about it. So, if she needs to talk to God, she does. Is a big production made of it? No. She can quietly pray or just say the prayer in her head.
You can't govern what thoughts are running through someone's head.

And she does have Christian jewlery. She has a cross necklace and a ten commandments bracelet and has worn both to school. Nothing was ever said about it and I didn't think much of it until someone said something here.

NowWhat I think your daughter praying quietly or in her head is great; and it's great you recognize she should be able to do so without disturbing classtime or other students around her.

The thing about the jewelry was only made a big deal because the school has (or had, I don't know if they still do) a no-jewelry policy. I think such a policy is silly myself, and see no problem with students wearing necklaces, bracelets, etc. But, I'm not in charge of the school! :)

De Maria, you are clearly missing the point

No. I understand the point perfectly. I disagree with the point you are making.


and do not understand why religion is not taught

I understand precisely why religion is not taught in Public School. I disagree with the arguments.


nor does (should) it have a presence in schools.

I believe it should be prominent again.


For one, parents don't determine a school's curriculum,

But they should.


therefore it doesn't matter if the parents want the ten commandments taught in school or the story or Adam and Eve - it's not up to them. It's up to the school board. If you are a parent and want your child to know the ten commandments, teach them yourself. Leave the school out of it. If you don't want to teach it, send your child to church. Leave the school out of it. I'm sure you would object to your child's school teaching the 11 Satanic Rules of the Earth, even though most of them consist of pretty good behaviors (such as not harming children). If you'd like to read them all, here's a link:

Eleven Rules of the Earth (http://churchofsatan.com/Pages/Eleven.html)

What we have here is a case of "straw man" argument. You build up a false case and attribute it to me and then tear it down.

I did not say and never have said that any religion should be forced on anybody. If the school which you theorize comprises Satanists and they decide to teach their children Satanism, I believe it is their right to do so.


I disagree that schools should be an extension of parents

And that is the true quarrel here. We are on opposite poles if that is your stance. I do not believe that my children are mine only part of the time. They are always mine whether send them to Public, private or any other type of school and the teachers should do as I say.

It is the classic case of the customer is always right. We pay for a product, the education of our children in the way we see fit. But the government, our servant, usurps our children and strips them of the values which we wish to be instilled in them.


- I think it should be the other way around. It is up to the school to facilitate functional and informational knowledge (reading, writing, 'rithmatic) and it is up to the parents to reinforce that knowledge (helping children with homework, encouraging them to read, etc). Morality should be taught at home, not at school.

I disagree. Parents are ultimately responsible for their children. Parents raise children in their own traditions and values. They don't want their children to become strangers to them.

Schools should be providing a servcie for the parents. Instead of usurping the parents' rights.


I'm well aware that listening to your parents and not killing people is part of the ten commandments, which is why I specifically referenced those points. THOSE behaviors benefit and apply to ALL not to a specific religious group. Not to mention murder is illegal and ought to be taught as a part of law or government class. The ten commandments have nothing to do with it. But if you prefer, yes, I only want those commandments taught - not ten, just two (you might want to check your math above, btw). But I don't want them called "2 of the 10 commandments" I want them to be called, "Ways to be a good person in any society on earth".

And you have the right to have your child taught the way you want. But I want my children to be taught the way I want. That is, in fact, why my wife and I teach our children at home.


And sorry, but what kind of world do you live in that "Don't kill people" doesn't make sense without prefacing it with "Do not worship other gods"?

I was atheist before I was Christian. I believed in abortion, euthanasia and selective killing of any type to advance the human race.

In the "dog game" it is called "culling". Have you ever heard the term, "cull the herd"?

Since these techniques seem to work with getting a better breed of animal, I figgered they would work with getting a better breed of human.

Without God, there is no reason not to kill. Your only limit is your conscience, or the lack thereof.

Sincerely,


De Maria (http://mdechristi.googlepages.com/home)

I did not say and never have said that any religion should be forced on anybody. If the school which you theorize is comprised of Satanists and they decide to teach their children Satanism, I believe it is their right to do so.The same right is given to you: if the school you theorize comprises your denomination of christians and they decide to teach their children your brand of christianity, I believe it is their right to do so.



Parents are ultimately responsible for their children. Parents raise children in their own traditions and values. They don't want their children to become strangers to them.
Schools should be providing a servcie for the parents. Instead of usurping the parents' rights. On the one hand you want the schools to be partly responsible to raise your children but then you say that parents are ultimately responsible. Which is it? You and your wife cannot do this on your own as millions of others do? I don't feel that any school usurps my parental rights.



And you have the right to have your child taught the way you want. But I want my children to be taught the way I want. That is, in fact, why my wife and I teach our children at home.So why not send your children to a christian school then? It would appear that your have an issue with government schooling in its entirety. You should probably start your own thread then.



Without God, there is no reason not to kill. Your only limit is your conscience, or the lack thereof.
I have no god yet I have no inkling to kill, there are millions like me, how do you explain that?

Hello again, De Maria:

I misspoke earlier when I said you don't have a clue. You DO. I like your argument. In fact, I agree with you for the most part.

The problem is that with PUBLIC education, we can't have a jillion different schools teaching a jillion different things. The public (you) DOES have the right to say what is taught in school. They (you) do so by their local school boards.

If your public schools aren't teaching your children what YOU want them to, you have the right to take them out and home school them, just like you're doing. You also have the right to say that the schools are wrong. You also have the right to try to change them more to your liking.

But, in reality, it's the only way to run a public school system. Unless, you have something better? Let's hear it?

excon

I don't think it should be forced on children but prayers in school to some degree don't harm.

I was atheist before I was Christian. I believed in abortion, euthanasia and selective killing of any type to advance the human race.

In the "dog game" it is called "culling". Have you ever heard the term, "cull the herd"?

Since these techniques seem to work with getting a better breed of animal, I figgered they would work with getting a better breed of human.

Without God, there is no reason not to kill. Your only limit is your conscience, or the lack thereof.

Selective killing of any type to advance the human race is not an atheistic belief - that was your own belief and one which I do not hold, nor do I know any other atheists who hold it. That belief demonstrates a lack of empathy, compassion and appreciation for others. It demonstrates a clear want for self-preservation only and in my opinion is not only disgusting, but also uncivilized. You would have thrived in Cuba where they force women to have abortions because the fetus has a genetic illness. Or perhaps you would have been an upstanding member of the Nazi party.

Without god there are plenty of reasons not to kill, my conscience is only one, and certainly not the primary one. I can't help it if when you were an atheist you had no morals. And to tell the truth, if those were your beliefs when you were an atheist, I'm glad you converted and I hope you never come back. People with those beliefs give all atheists a bad name and stregthen the (bad) argument that we have no values or morals.

Back to the school thing, I still don't think you fully realize WHY religion doesn't belong in public schools, but I'm through trying to explain it. Let's agree to disagree.

I know of more situations where people have killed in the name of their god than situations where they have killed for the lack of a god.

If THAT is your argument--Hitler was Christian. So was the Spanish Inquisition. So were the Crusades, and those who burned witches in Salem.

And you wonder why I don't want kids to learn to be Christian in a public school?

I'm glad you teach your kids at home--then they are getting EXACTLY the education you want for them, including that of religion. However--the public school system comprises MANY religions, not just Christianity. Would you want ALL of those religions taught, to the detriment of reading, writing, math, and science?

Personally, I think that the education system is lacking in THOSE subjects--kids today as high school seniors don't know as much in those areas as kids 50 years ago did at the end of 8th grade, though they do have quite a bit more knowledge in more diverse subjects (computer science, as an example). While schools should not undermine the teachings of parents, neither do they have the obligation to teach kids to pray. That's a parent's obligation.

The same right is given to you: if the school you theorize comprises your denomination of christians and they decide to teach their children your brand of christianity, I believe it is their right to do so.

OK


On the one hand you want

Did I say, "I want"?


the schools to be partly responsible to raise your children

It is a fact. Schools are given the responsibility of taking care of and raising the children during school hours.


but then you say that parents are ultimately responsible. Which is it?

Parents should be monitoring the schools to make sure their children are getting the education they expect. When business people hire employees, they monitor them to make sure they are behaving honestly and not taking or damaging their assets. I think most parents would agree that our children are our most precious assets. We should take at least as much care to ensure that the schools are acting responsibly towards them.

Because ultimately, in the end, it is the parents who will pay for any damage done to their children.


You and your wife cannot do this on your own as millions of others do?

I don't understand the question. It sounds more like a statement with a question mark at the end.

The fact is, we've raised two who never set foot in public school and are raising two more.


I don't feel that any school usurps my parental rights.

That is wonderful for you. Apparently you are getting what you want from the school system.


So why not send your children to a christian school then?

We homeschool (http://mdechristi.googlepages.com/home).


It would appear that your have an issue with government schooling in its entirety.

No. I believe public schools have their place to serve in society. I don't think they are run very well anymore.


You should probably start your own thread then.

No thanks. I was just answering a question.


have no god yet I have no inkling to kill, there are millions like me, how do you explain that?

Not all people are as evil as I was. I know that as an atheist I came to believe those things. And as a Christian, I no longer believe those things.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Selective killing of any type to advance the human race is not an atheistic belief - that was your own belief and one which I do not hold, nor do I know any other atheists who hold it. That belief demonstrates a lack of empathy, compassion and appreciation for others. It demonstrates a clear want for self-preservation only and in my opinion is not only disgusting, but also uncivilized. You would have thrived in Cuba where they force women to have abortions because the fetus has a genetic illness. Or perhaps you would have been an upstanding member of the Nazi party.

Two atheist regimes.


Without god there are plenty of reasons not to kill, my conscience is only one, and certainly not the primary one. I can't help it if when you were an atheist you had no morals. And to tell the truth, if those were your beliefs when you were an atheist, I'm glad you converted and I hope you never come back. People with those beliefs give all atheists a bad name and stregthen the (bad) argument that we have no values or morals.

Atheists give atheists a bad name.


Back to the school thing, I still don't think you fully realize WHY religion doesn't belong in public schools, but I'm through trying to explain it. Let's agree to disagree.

Sounds like a good idea.

Atheists give atheists a bad name.Comments like that must make the good christians shudder. We now know who we are dealing with. Thank you for outing yourself. And thank you for homeschooling your children.

Actually, almost all of De Maria's comments make me shudder--and I'm not Christian.

It's the intolerance and rabid opinion that everyone should be taught Christianity in public schools that scares the heck out of me.

I stand by my original answer: Unless ALL religions are taught in public schools, NONE should be.

Is it intolerance? OR is it standing for what you believe?
It seems to me that when christians stand up for what they believe in - we get label with "intolerant". Why is that?

Read my post above with the quote.

I guess I am slow today, forgive me, but do you think this poster is atheist?

Well... woa. I guess I got my answers. I'm actually really, really glad people are debating over this. Thanks to all of you, so much, for your opinions. I'm happy to know that there are people out there who stand firmly by their beliefs, whatever they might be.

I guess I am slow today, forgive me, but do you think this poster is atheist?Doesn't matter, the comment was directed at the whole group.

I think I understand what you are getting at.
Because he "targeted" the whole group - he is intolerant. Right?

Well he certainly doesn't care to be compassionate in any way.

I know of more situations where people have killed in the name of their god than situations where they have killed for the lack of a god.


Atheists in the 20th century alone have killed more people than all religious wars in the history of mankind.


If THAT is your argument--Hitler was Christian.

"Was" is the keyword in that phrase. Just so happens that Hitler was one of my heroes in my youth. So I made it a point to study him extensively.

He was born of Catholic parents. But he did not believe in God. Some said he was a pantheist, a nature worshipper. But I don't believe it. However, the man was shrewd. He disguised his speech with pious sayings. But in the end, he planned to destroy all religion and religious just as he was destroying the Jews.


So was the Spanish Inquisition. So were the Crusades, and those who burned witches in Salem. And you wonder why I don't want kids to learn to be Christian in a public school?

Yeah, I do. A well rounded education would have given YOU the other side of the story on the Inquisition and the Crusades.

The Inquisition (http://home.inreach.com/bstanley/inquis.htm)
Dave Hunt and the Spanish Inquisition (http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/philvaz/articles/num25.htm)
StayCatholic.com - The Crusades (http://www.staycatholic.com/the_crusades.htm)


I'm glad you teach your kids at home--then they are getting EXACTLY the education you want for them, including that of religion. However--the public school system comprises MANY religions, not just Christianity. Would you want ALL of those religions taught, to the detriment of reading, writing, math, and science?

All types of sports are taught without detriment to reading, writing math or science.

All types of science are taught without detriment to the others.
All types of math without detriment to the others.


Personally, I think that the education system is lacking in THOSE subjects--kids today as high school seniors don't know as much in those areas as kids 50 years ago did at the end of 8th grade, though they do have quite a bit more knowledge in more diverse subjects (computer science, as an example). While schools should not undermine the teachings of parents, neither do they have the obligation to teach kids to pray. That's a parent's obligation.

Sounds as though we've come closer to agreement.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Well, where he seemingly lacks compassion - he makes up for in passion.

Comments like that must make the good christians shudder. We now know who we are dealing with. Thank you for outing yourself. And thank you for homeschooling your children.

Apparently your definition of a good Christian is one who agrees with everything you say.

But atheists do give atheists a bad name. Hitler, Stalin, the Kmer Rouge...

Sincerely,

De Maria

Priests who violate young innocent boys, George Bush sending thousands to die, Crusades, Inquisition, suicide bombers, etc. - it's a wash.

Has there ever been a christian suicide bomber?

In the name of religion was what I was going for. To kind of counter his "all atheists are animals" theme.

Oh, gottcha

Doesn't matter, the comment was directed at the whole group.

I guess you are reaching for some kind of victory in this discussion. But twisting my meaning to do so is dishonest of you.


The statement "atheists give atheists a bad name" means that the "subset of atheists who have committed enormous atrocities in the history of mankind have given the complete set of atheists who had nothing to do with their enormous evils a bad name."

A complete reading of my messages should confirm what I've explained above.

Sincerely,

De Maria
.

The statement "atheists give atheists a bad name" means that the "subset of atheists who have committed enormous atrocities in the history of mankind have given the complete set of atheists who had nothing to do with their enormous evils a bad name."You are completely incorrect. Had you meant 'subset' you would have written 'subset' but you didn't.

In the name of religion was what I was going for. To kinda counter his "all atheists are animals" theme.


Mare fallacious argument from you. Please quote me.

You are completely incorrect. Had you meant 'subset' you would have written 'subset' but you didn't.

I think I know what I meant.

I am about to come off as a bit of a smart a$$, but I can not help it.

So you are trying to say that bad atheist give good atheist a bad name? Or we were supposed to get all of that from what little you said?
Okay...

Well, where he seemingly lacks compassion - he makes up for in passion.

Please explain what you mean be lack of compassion?

I am about to come off as a bit of a smart a$$, but I can not help it.

So you are trying to say that bad atheist give good atheist a bad name? Or we were supposed to get all of that from what little you said?
Okay....

Yeah.

Is it intolerance? OR is it standing for what you believe?
It seems to me that when christians stand up for what they believe in - we get label with "intolerant". Why is that?

There's a difference between standing up for what you believe in and having a "Christian way or no way" mentality. Some Christians insist THEIR values and morals are the ONLY ones that are correct and as such should be taught or dominate society. Some Christians take the attitude that since they are the majority in this country it must mean they are right, making everyone else wrong. There's no gray area - just my way or no way.

I'm all for Christians having a Christian-dominant household and private life, but what some seem to forget is that not everyone agrees with their point of view, and we have a diverse society. Some appear to have the attitude that other's views and rights are less important that those of a Christian and deserve less attention or respect.

There was a thread a while back about the bible being taught in schools, and several Christians made an excellent point as to why it should NOT be taught in schools - who is qualified to teach it? If you believe the bible is a literal book without error and it is taught to your child as a book of morals and metaphor, that goes against what your view is. The same works in reverse, so isn't it better for YOU to teach the bible the way YOU see fit to your children? To me, that's one of the primary reasons religion doesn't belong in schools, because not all people in any denomination agree on everything 100%, so it would be better to teach it on your own so your message comes through the way you want it.

I also feel school is a place for education not moral lessons. Teachers should focus on the fundamentals - reading, writing, math, science, and in turn socialization plays a part. Schools should teach social morals (not nice to call names, play well with others, etc) but personal morals (no sex before marriage, prayer before meals, etc) should be taught at home.

Standing up for what you believe in (to me) would be fighting for your child's right to pray quietly or silently before a test or meal, their right to wear religious jewelry, and so on. But those things can quickly move to intolerance if the person wants to allow only members of their own denomination those rights and no one else (only Christians can pray, not Muslims or only Christians can wear crosses, no one else can display their icons).

There's a difference between standing up for what you believe in and having a "Christian way or no way" mentality....

Perhaps some Christians do so. But I didn't. Nor has any Christian whose messages I've read on this forum.

However, something which nonChristians and atheists on this forum have done is t misrepresent Christian argument.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Perhaps some Christians do so. But I didn't. Nor has any Christian whose messages I've read on this forum.

I didn't say you and I didn't name anyone on this forum. I said SOME. And if you haven't seen anyone on this forum who has that mentality you haven't been reading very closely. Perhaps they are absent from this thread, but they certainly exist on this site.

Not all people are as evil as I was. I know that as an atheist I came to believe those things. And as a Christian, I no longer believe those things.Hello again, De Maria:

May I suggest that you weren't really an atheist. If you were, you'd still be one today. I know you don't understand that. That's why you never were an atheist to begin with.

I think you may be right about one thing. Really evil people aren't atheists at all. They're just pretenders, like you were. And, it's people like THAT who give atheists a bad name.

Real atheists aren't evil at all.

excon

Well he certainly doesn't care to be compassionate in any way.

I was responding to this.

I was responding to this.Serial killers have little compassion but also have a lot of passion for what they do, so I guess that's good!

You guys are making me tired.

Well we could allow prayer as long as they are diverse. Meaning we have a muslim praying in class instead of going to a private place to pray. As long as we can respect each other pray . Prayers should be allow but if we are going to make difference in praying practices and allow ones an other not. Then we should not allow it because descrimination is uncostitutional

I didn't say you and I didn't name anyone on this forum.

Thanks for the clarification.

Serial killers have little compassion but also have a lot of passion for what they do, so I guess that's good!

What serials killer have is a lack of conscience. Which is what you are displaying here.

Now, please provide a quote or some evidence of my so-called "lack of compassion".

What serials killer have is a lack of conscience. Which is what you are displaying here.

Now, please provide a quote or some evidence of my so-called "lack of compassion".Lack of conscience (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/conscience)? How so?

As for the lack of compassion I was referring to your attempts to denigrate a group of people who are not like yourself. NowWhat agrees as well and she's on your side. :)

Hey! Leave me out of this! :)

Lack of conscience (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/conscience)? How so?

You are maliciously using a type of fallacious argumentation called "poisoning the well". By associating me with a serial killer, you hope to make me so repulsive that others will avoid reading my comments:

Here is a better explanation:

The phrase was first used in its relevant sense by Cardinal John Henry Newman during a controversy with Charles Kingsley:

…[W]hat I insist upon here…is this unmanly attempt of his, in his concluding pages, to cut the ground from under my feet;—to poison by anticipation the public mind against me, John Henry Newman, and to infuse into the imaginations of my readers, suspicion and mistrust of every thing that I may say in reply to him. This I call poisoning the wells.

"I am henceforth in doubt and fear," he says, "as much as any honest man can be, concerning every word Dr. Newman may write. How can I tell that I shall not be the dupe of some cunning equivocation?" …

Well, I can only say, that, if his taunt is to take effect, I am but wasting my time in saying a word in answer to his foul calumnies… We all know how our imagination runs away with us, how suddenly and at what a pace;—the saying, "Caesar's wife should not be suspected," is an instance of what I mean. The habitual prejudice, the humour of the moment, is the turning-point which leads us to read a defence in a good sense or a bad. We interpret it by our antecedent impressions. The very same sentiments, according as our jealousy is or is not awake, or our aversion stimulated, are tokens of truth or of dissimulation and pretence. There is a story of a sane person being by mistake shut up in the wards of a Lunatic Asylum, and that, when he pleaded his cause to some strangers visiting the establishment, the only remark he elicited in answer was, "How naturally he talks! you would think he was in his senses." Controversies should be decided by the reason; is it legitimate warfare to appeal to the misgivings of the public mind and to its dislikings? Any how, if Mr. Kingsley is able thus to practise upon my readers, the more I succeed, the less will be my success. … The more triumphant are my statements, the more certain will be my defeat.

Source: John Henry Newman, Apologia Pro Vita Sua

Type: Argumentum ad Hominem
Logical Fallacy: Poisoning the Well (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/poiswell.html)


As for the lack of compassion I was referring to your attempts to denigrate a group of people who are not like yourself.

You continue to corrupt and misrepresent my words. Provide the evidence. Where did I denigrate a group of people?


NowWhat agrees as well and she's on your side. :)

NowWhat never made any such comments. And she wants you to leave her out of this. So it comes back to you.

Sincerely,

De Maria

I attended both public and private schools (although it was a longtime ago. When I was in Kindegarten we said the pledge of allegience before school started and did not leave out the word God. I do not remember ever praying in public school but I don't see what the big deal about it is. I believe that everyone has the right to believe what they want to believe and they also have the right to express it the way they want to. Freedom of speech is guaranteed by the Constitution. What I find sad is that so many people want to argue over what offends them. Why do we have to walk on eggshells so often and worry about whether or not we are offending someone by what we believe? It takes all kinds to make the world go round.

G'Day... again
Well I do believe children should pray in schools, we teach our kids they are descended from monkeys and they prey in schools.
The house built on the rock stands firm the shack built on the sand falls.
Pray for our Kids!!
Blessings <M>

Christian prayer is ok..in a christian school.

I agree

G'Day.....again
Well I do believe children should pray in schools, we teach our kids they are descended from monkeys and they prey in schools.
The house built on the rock stands firm the shack built on the sand falls.
Pray for our Kids!!!!
Blessings <M>


As far as MY Goddess is concerned---well, she doesn't really have a creation story. Descended from monkeys is okay with me.

However--if you think you're going to make MY kids pray a Christian prayer, or even have to LISTEN to one every day in a secular school, you've got another think coming.

EVERY religion is valid in this country. If we have prayer in schools, you'll have to make sure that every day you pray to a new god--and with so many pantheons have multiple gods, well--the Christian god is only going to get his chance once every few months.

Let's put it this way--would you want YOUR kids to pray to Satan? Or to even have to listen to a prayer to Satan?

As far as MY Goddess is concerned---well, she doesn't really have a creation story. Descended from monkeys is okay with me.

However--if you think you're going to make MY kids pray a Christian prayer, or even have to LISTEN to one every day in a secular school, you've got another think coming.

EVERY religion is valid in this country. If we have prayer in schools, you'll have to make sure that every day you pray to a new god--and with so many pantheons have multiple gods, well--the Christian god is only gonna get his chance once every few months.

Let's put it this way--would you want YOUR kids to pray to Satan? Or to even have to listen to a prayer to Satan?

Let me get this straight. If the majority of the Christian parents want Christian prayer in the public school and the minority want to pray to satan, you believe the majority should put their children in private school or take them home in order to do so?

It just seems undemocratic to me.

What's wrong with the minority putting their children in private school if they don't want to hear Christian prayer in public school?

Sincerely,

De Maria

I will stress again--Separation of church and state is NOT subject to a majority vote. It's in our Constitution - part of the First Amendment. It means basically that the state will NOT endorse any religion, and the church will not support any particular politics. The state can't tell a church how to believe, the church can't tell the state how to legislate. Absolute separation.

Because schools are a part of the state (run by state agencies, paid with state money, and endorsed by state laws), there can be NO "official" religion at any school. It doesn't matter if the school is 100% a particular religion--the school still can not endorse that religion. They can't prevent people from expressing their religious beliefs (which is why kids can still pray), but they can not choose one religion over any other (which is why teachers and administrators can not lead those prayers the kids are saying).

I don't care if the kids pray, or read the Bible, or the Book of Mormon, or the Taliban's Code of Conduct, or the Talmud, or any OTHER religious tract. I don't care if they support their religion by wearing religious symbols.

What I care about is that the state should NOT choose any one religion over another, and that's EXACTLY what they'd be doing if they had prayer in school.

It just seems undemocratic to me.

What's wrong with the minority putting their children in private school if they don't want to hear Christian prayer in public school?Hello again, De Maria:

Well, we're back to the argument I posted a waaaaay's back. Clearly, you didn't understand what I said. Let me try again.

The only thing in the way with putting minority children in private school is the Constitution.

You think the majority should win. You keep saying that. The majority cannot VOTE away the rights from the minority. That's not how our system works. I don't know what's so hard about that. I know you think it does. You're wrong. Maybe if you took a civics class instead of your religious stuff, you'd know more about how your own country works.

excon

The majority cannot VOTE away the rights from the minority. That's not how our system works.

Thank God for that! ;)

I would have to say yes to prayers I am not in any faith nor are my kids but a little silence during the morning would help kids settle down and get to work I don't think a little quiet time would hurt we all have something to be greate full for a little time to express that would be nice and if a child decides to pray well let them but not out loud. If a child wants to thank our soldieurs or the teachers or anything well here is the time.

... so many things come down to parents saying "oh I am not this or that so my kids are not coming to this school unless it changes what happened to the Oh canada song and god save the queen song in the morning what happened to putting your head down once during the day to sit for a moment to say thanks to anyone or anything, what happened to merry christmas?

We have so much to be thankful for whether it be for our freedom our homes our families some one had to get that for us why not set aside a time to say thanks... and oh my merry christmas is now seasons greeting!! I mean what is with that does it really make a difference what people say? It all means the same thing in the end

... in the end we all have something to pray for some time given in school would be nice.. if the child don't want to pray well its gives that child time to relax and get ready to work.

I will stress again--Separation of church and state is NOT subject to a majority vote.

1. The Constitution can be amended by 2/3 majority.
2. Separation of Church and State means that the government can't establish a State religion.


It's in our Constitution - part of the First Amendment.

The Constitution also provides for freedom of speech and freedom of religion.


It means basically that the state will NOT endorse any religion,

Correct.


and the church will not support any particular politics.

False. That's only if the particular church wants to be tax exempt. If a Church is willing to lose this status, they may participate in any politics they want.


The state can't tell a church how to believe,

Correct.


the church can't tell the state how to legislate.

The church can tell the state anything it wants. The state is under no obligation to obey.


Absolute separation.

False, every religious person regardless of creed must behave according to his religious conscience. Being an American does not mean we check our faith at the door or our school nor our government office.


Because schools are a part of the state (run by state agencies, paid with state money, and endorsed by state laws), there can be NO "official" religion at any school.

We aren't asking for an official religion. We're asking for prayer.


It doesn't matter if the school is 100% a particular religion--the school still can not endorse that religion.

Permitting prayer is not endorsement of a religion. It is endorsement of individual conscience.


They can't prevent people from expressing their religious beliefs (which is why kids can still pray),

And so they should.


but they can not choose one religion over any other (which is why teachers and administrators can not lead those prayers the kids are saying).

That is the ruling we hope to overturn. I personally believe, if the parents agree, the School should serve the parents will. It is the parents who are ultimately in charge of their children.




I don't care if the kids pray, or read the Bible, or the Book of Mormon, or the Taliban's Code of Conduct, or the Talmud, or any OTHER religious tract. I don't care if they support their religion by wearing religious symbols.

What I care about is that the state should NOT choose any one religion over another, and that's EXACTLY what they'd be doing if they had prayer in school.

I disagree. If they do what the parents agree upon, they will simply be permitting prayer. Not establishing a religion.

But did you answer my question?

You seem to think it fine that a Christian should leave Public School if he wants to pray. What's wrong with a nonChristian leaving Public School if he doesn't want to hear prayer?

Sincerely,

De Maria

Hello again, De Maria:

Well, we're back to the argument I posted a waaaaay's back. Clearly, you didn’t understand what I said. Let me try again.

Clearly you forgot what you said:
I misspoke earlier when I said you don't have a clue. You DO. I like your argument. In fact, I agree with you for the most part.

That was message #66 on page 7.

Bye

1. The Constitution also provides for freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

Uh, just as importantly it provides freedom from religion!




We aren't asking for an official religion. We're asking for prayer.

Prayer has religious connotations. Again, the constitution just as importantly provides for freedom from religion.



That is the ruling we hope to overturn.

It will never happen. I have too much faith in the strength of our constitution. If it's so important to you that your kids pray, then make the time for them to do so at home each day. But why should other kids lose valuable school time, because you're too lazy or disorganized to provide this daily prayer time in your own home where it belongs?

Again, I have faith in our constitution. You will lose this one. I'd bet money on it.

De Maria--

The answer to your question is another question:

If a minority feels left out and put upon because of the actions of the majority in a school--should the minority have to leave a public place because of the actions of the majority? Or should the majority have to make concessions to NOT make the minority feel out of place? Aren't actions that make someone feel pushed into something they don't believe BAD? In other words--should a child have to feel like they have to pretend to be Christian to fit it, to NOT feel bullied or judged? Should they have to act like they believe the same thing as everyone else?

Seriously--it's Christians that think that everyone and everything should conform to them because they are the majority religion in this country that just ticks me right off. I honestly believe that that whole "only one god" thing you have makes you have quite the lack of tolerance for other religions. After all--when's the last time a minority religion walked up to you on the street and asked, "have you found the Flying Speghetti Monster? Only He can save you! Convert! Be saved now!"?

So... I guess what I'm saying is that my belief is that neither you nor the state can tell me what to believe, and because PARENTS are ultimately in charge of their children, not TEACHERS--then PARENTS should tell their kids what to believe.

Teachers have far too much influence on kids, especially small kids. I don't want another adult to influence my child to another religion. Why can't we just have teachers teach kindness and respect and TOLERANCE, not a specific religion? Aside from the things they SHOULD be teaching, of course--reading, writing, math, science, history, geography, etc.

I shouldn't have to pull my kids from a school that prayed--but you're right that I would. And then I'd sue the school district for teaching religion in a state institution--because like it or not, a prayer to a specific god in a school is endorsing ONLY that religion. The state can not endorse a religion.

One can act according to their religious beliefs without forcing them on to others.

As far as your 2/3 majority--the rest of the world could pretty much vote Christians down

Major Religions Ranked by Size (http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html)

Though in the US, they'd certainly beat out any other religion by a large majority

Largest Religious Groups in the USA (http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html)

So... see if you can get your laws passed. I'll keep fighting to make sure they don't.

De Maria--

The answer to your question is another question:

That is acceptable.


If a minority feels left out and put upon because of the actions of the majority in a school--should the minority have to leave a public place because of the actions of the majority? Or should the majority have to make concessions to NOT make the minority feel out of place? Aren't actions that make someone feel pushed into something they don't believe BAD? In other words--should a child have to feel like they have to pretend to be Christian to fit it, to NOT feel bullied or judged? Should they have to act like they believe the same thing as everyone else?

The answer is no. That is why they are free to go to a private school.

My point in making the question is this. I don't believe it is right or just for the majority to have to be forced to make concessions to the minority. If they did it of their own free will, I have no problem.


Seriously--it's Christians that think that everyone and everything should conform to them because they are the majority religion in this country that just ticks me right off.

So you don't believe in majority rule. That is the point I was making earlier.


I honestly believe that that whole "only one god" thing you have makes you have quite the lack of tolerance for other religions.

But this country permits freedom of religion.


After all--when's the last time a minority religion walked up to you on the street and asked, "have you found the Flying Speghetti Monster? Only He can save you! Convert! Be saved now!"?

I've never heard of that minority religion. But the Hare Krishnas frequently used to approach me. So did the Mormons. And so did Muslims.


So... I guess what I'm saying is that my belief is that neither you nor the state can tell me what to believe,

I agree.


and because PARENTS are ultimately in charge of their children, not TEACHERS--then PARENTS should tell their kids what to believe.

I agree. But I also believe that since Parents are ultimately in charge of their children, Teachers should not contradict what Parents teach. Teachers should be an extension of the Parents.


Teachers have far too much influence on kids, especially small kids. I don't want another adult to influence my child to another religion. Why can't we just have teachers teach kindness and respect and TOLERANCE, not a specific religion? Aside from the things they SHOULD be teaching, of course--reading, writing, math, science, history, geography, etc.

Well, I'm only talking about the permitting the prayers with which the parents agree.

On another topic though, that is why I never sent my children to Public or Private School. Learning is something which can't be turned off. Teachers, teach their students even when they aren't aware they are teaching.


I shouldn't have to pull my kids from a school that prayed--but you're right that I would.

And that is your right.

I simply do not believe the majority should be put in the situation where they are ruled by the will of the minority.


And then I'd sue the school district for teaching religion in a state institution--because like it or not, a prayer to a specific god in a school is endorsing ONLY that religion. The state can not endorse a religion.

I don't agree. If the school is doing what the majority of parents agreed upon, the school is simply recognizing the needs of its constituents.


One can act according to their religious beliefs without forcing them on to others.

Correct.


As far as your 2/3 majority--the rest of the world could pretty much vote Christians down

Major Religions Ranked by Size (http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html)

Though in the US, they'd certainly beat out any other religion by a large majority

Largest Religious Groups in the USA (http://www.adherents.com/rel_USA.html)

And that is what we are talking about.


So... see if you can get your laws passed. I'll keep fighting to make sure they don't.

That is what makes this country so great!

Sincerely,

De Maria

The answer is no. That is why they are free to go to a private school.

Tell me you're kidding with this comment. It's meant to be a joke of some sort, right?


I don't believe it is right or just for the majority to have to be forced to make concessions to the minority.

The problem with this is that the *majority* in some areas are ignorant. This is why we have a constitution and judicial system in place. To protect EVERYONE'S rights! This is what prevented the "majority" from getting creationism taught alongside real science in public classrooms. A near catastrophe avoided because our judicial system worked.


So you don't believe in majority rule. That is the point I was making earlier.

The majority wins the popular vote to office. They rarely *rule*. The majority of Christians oppose abortion. Again, minority common sense has so far prevailed here as well. Now if it can only prevail with stem cell research... I'll bet it does.




But this country permits freedom of religion.

I guess I'm going to have to put this on my clipboard when responding to you.. Just as importantly, this country permits freedom from religion!




I've never heard of that minority religion.

It's called Pastafarianism. It's founded on the premise that there is just as much real evidence for a Flying Spaghetti Monster as there is for the Christian God.


Well, I'm only talking about the permitting the prayers with which the parents agree.

In other words, prayers that YOU agree with, right? I'd expect you to at least make a token effort to hide your bias.



I simply do not believe the majority should be put in the situation where they are ruled by the will of the minority.

Again, nobody *rules*. I'm not sure why you're so fond of this word. Perhaps you're thinking of some childhood game you used to play. In our government there are systems in place to prevent dangerous ideologies from spreading too quickly and taking over. Yes, even in the face of a majority bias! They can eventuallyy win out, but not before a serious testing of our constitutional laws and the will of the people. Our founding fathers ingeniusely set up our constitution the way they did for exactly this reason. Unlike many foreign governments, ours cannot quickly be overthrown by fast rising militias, or religious zealots.



If the school is doing what the majority of parents agreed upon, the school is simply recognizing the needs of its constituents.

This statement is actually scary and shows a complete lack of forethought. In many places parents are ignorantly uneducated and clearly shouldn't have a say in the educational curriculum of our public schools! If the majority of parents want creationism taught, instead of scientific evolution, should any self respecting teacher go along with that? Maybe a silly question to ask you, because I'm guessing you'd agree. But the rest of us, want our kids learning REAL science, not Christian dogma. Perhaps you'd feel the same way if we allowed FSM (Flying Spaghetti Monster) propanda to be taught to your child, instead of real science.

And by the way, let's clear this up... Christianity might make up the single largest religious segment of America, but fundamental Christianity most certainly does not. Many who happen to be born into the Christian faith (myself included), are not practicing Christians. When you take this into consideration along with all other religions and faiths, conservative Christianity (those who want prayers in schools), are an overwhelming MINORITY! Yet you still seem to think you run the country and our public schools. The last election should've quelled any such notion for you. It's apparent that the *majority* you're so fond of quoting has voted the 'Christian right' out of congress. And I'm pretty sure the oval office is next.

And THAT sir, is what makes this country so great! No one group can take over our government or public schools. But you can keep trying. It's a free country.

Tell me you're kidding with this comment. It's meant to be a joke of some sort, right?

Nope.


The problem with this is that the *majority* in some areas are ignorant.

Are you saying the minority is superior to the majority?

Tell me do you believe in democracy?


This is why we have a constitution and judicial system in place.

The Constitution and the judicial system are part of a democratic process. They were put in place by the consensus of the constituents of this country in order to ensure we would not be ruled by a king that was across the sea. In order to ensure we would not be ruled by a minority of one.


To protect EVERYONE'S rights!

Correct. That includes the majority.


This is what prevented the "majority" from getting creationism taught alongside real science in public classrooms. A near catastrophe avoided because our judicial system worked.

Wrong. Creationsim was taught exclusively for a time, evolution has been taught exclusively for a time. But more and more people are recognizing that freedom of thought requires that the children be exposed to the most popular opposing theories and let them make up their minds. Shutting out Christian thought is simply censorship.

New Law Allows for Creationism in the Classroom

JACKSON, Miss. (AP) -- School officials can't prohibit teachers and students from discussing how life began under a new state law signed by Gov. Haley Barbour.
WLBT 3 - Jackson, MS: New Law Allows for Creationism in the Classroom (http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=4834067)


The majority wins the popular vote to office. They rarely *rule*.

The majority rules through the proxy they have given their elected officials.


The majority of Christians oppose abortion. Again, minority common sense has so far prevailed here as well. Now if it can only prevail with stem cell research... I'll bet it does.

In fact, abortion is on the retreat. The newest technology which views the child in the womb has done more than all the protests in front of abortion clinics. To convince a woman of conscience not to get an abortion, all you need do is show her a video of her child in her womb.

In addition, people have come to recognize the discrepancy in our laws which came about after the abortion laws were permitted. On the one hand, law pertaining to abortion rights tries to depict the human embryo as being simple matter, a blob of tissue. But laws pertaining to murder have always recognized that if someone kills a pregnant woman and the fetus dies, the person has committed not one but two murders. Therefore, law pertaining to murder all over the United States continue to recognize the humanity of the fetus.


I guess I'm going to have to put this on my clipboard when responding to you.. Just as importantly, this country permits freedom from religion!

No. It permits freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Therefore, religious people have a right to speak their religious mind.


It's called Pastafarianism. It's founded on the premise that there is just as much real evidence for a Flying Spaghetti Monster as there is for the Christian God.

And its wrong. There is no evidence for the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Yet thousands of people witnessed Christ and His miracles and four eyewitnesses wrote about it in their testimonies of His life, the Gospels.


In other words, prayers that YOU agree with, right?

Prayers the parents agree with.


I'd expect you to at least make a token effort to hide your bias.

That is strange coming from someone that isn't hiding his own.


Again, nobody *rules*.

Yes, in a democracy, We the People, rule. Apparently you haven't learned enough about democracy to value the fact that you live in one.


I'm not sure why you're so fond of this word. Perhaps you're thinking of some childhood game you used to play. In our government there are systems in place to prevent dangerous ideologies from spreading too quickly and taking over.

Correct. And the ideology that Christians should be censored is a dangerous ideology indeed.


Yes, even in the face of a majority bias! They can eventuallyy win out, but not before a serious testing of our constitutional laws and the will of the people.

The "will of the people" means the majority rules.


Our founding fathers ingeniusely set up our constitution the way they did for exactly this reason. Unlike many foreign governments, ours cannot quickly be overthrown by fast rising militias, or religious zealots.

Correct. Read your own words carefully.

When militias overthrow governments, they have always formed dictatorships which rule the people against their will. The constitution is in place to prevent a minority of this type from ruling the government.

The Constitution does not prevent nor even consider "religious zealotry". The Constitution protects our rights to be religious zealots. The Constitution forbids the establishment of a national religion.


This statement is actually scary and shows a complete lack of forethought. In many places parents are ignorantly uneducated and clearly shouldn't have a say in the educational curriculum of our public schools!

Actually, what you just said is the really scary stuff.

1. This country is founded on respect for the individual. The idea that we know what is right for our children and our families is paramount in our founding documents.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
Declaration of Independence

2. Your statement reminds me of the fact that Hitler didn't think that parents should teach their children either.

Have you ever heard the truism, "if you don't know history, you are likely to repeat its mistakes."


If the majority of parents want creationism taught, instead of scientific evolution, should any self respecting teacher go along with that?

Yes. Teachers aren't there to promote their own agenda. They are extensions of the parents. Unfortunately, this is not yet recognized by the state which considers teachers an extension of the government.


Maybe a silly question to ask you, because I'm guessing you'd agree. But the rest of us, want our kids learning REAL science, not Christian dogma. Perhaps you'd feel the same way if we allowed FSM (Flying Spaghetti Monster) propanda to be taught to your child, instead of real science.

You should have the right to have your child taught whatever you consider is real science. I should have the same right.


And by the way, let's clear this up... Christianity might make up the single largest religious segment of America,

Correct.


but fundamental Christianity most certainly does not.

I'm Catholic.


Many who happen to be born into the Christian faith (myself included), are not practicing Christians.

True.


When you take this into consideration along with all other religions and faiths, conservative Christianity (those who want prayers in schools), are an overwhelming MINORITY!

THEN WHY ARE YOU SO AFRAID THAT PARENTS SHOULD VOTE ON THE MATTER!!


Yet you still seem to think you run the country and our public schools. The last election should've quelled any such notion for you. It's apparent that the *majority* you're so fond of quoting has voted the 'Christian right' out of congress. And I'm pretty sure the oval office is next.

We'll see won't we.


And THAT sir, is what makes this country so great! No one group can take over our government or public schools. But you can keep trying. It's a free country.

Try to stop me.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Yes, in a democracy, We the People, rule. Apparently you haven't learned enough about democracy to value the fact that you live in one.Hello again, De Maria:

I know you're ignoring me. I don't care. I'm sure it's because you don't have an answer for me, and you wish I would go away. Well, I'm not going to. Other people read here too.

I have pointed out several times during this discussion, that the majority cannot vote away the rights of the minority. You seem to think that it's not so. Ok, let's talk about it.

YOU have a right NOT to be searched without a warrant being issued based upon probable cause. YOU have that right. You have it because the Constitution gives it to YOU. The Constitution doesn't give it to you because you're the majority. It gives it to you because you're an INDIVIDUAL.

Let me ask you plainly, under our democracy, can the majority ever vote that right out of existence? It cannot. That's just so. That's apparently the part of THIS democracy YOU don’t understand.

That's fine. If you'll engage me, we can fix that. However, I'm sure I'll just be ignored again. K. Do you think that if you hide from the truth long enough, it’ll go away?

excon

Hello again, De Maria:

I know you're ignoring me. I don't care.

No, I can't remember ever putting people on ignore. However, you are right. I have no idea what to tell you.


I'm sure it's because you don't have an answer for me, and you wish I would go away. Well, I'm not going to. Other people read here too.

I gather you've decided that you DON'T agree with me anymore?


I have pointed out several times during this discussion, that the majority cannot vote away the rights of the minority. You seem to think that it's not so. Ok, let's talk about it.

Please quote where you claim I said that the majority could take away anyone's rights.


YOU have a right NOT to be searched without a warrant being issued based upon probable cause. YOU have that right. You have it because the Constitution gives it to YOU. The Constitution doesn't give it to you because you're the majority. It gives it to you because you're an INDIVIDUAL.

Way off topic.


Let me ask you plainly, under our democracy, can the majority ever vote that right out of existence? It cannot. That's just so. That's apparently the part of THIS democracy YOU don’t understand.

Nothing to do with the topic at hand. If you want to discuss the rights of felons, or the right to a free trial, please start another thread.


That's fine. If you'll engage me, we can fix that. However, I'm sure I'll just be ignored again. K. Do you think that if you hide from the truth long enough, it’ll go away?

Excon

No and repeating a lie long enough won't make it true.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Hello again, De Maria:

It's true, I used another of the 10 rights you have as an individual instead of the one we're talking about here. I used it as an example of how THAT right, just like the minority's right to NOT have religion shoved down their throat, can't be taken away.

I guesss the comparison didn't work. I thought you might get it - but no... In fact, nothing is going to work with you. You don't want to discuss. You want to pronounce. K. I'll let you live in your ignorance.

excon

I am not sure I want to throw my 2 cents in here, in fear of whatever I say being taken the wrong way, but here goes...

Even though there is no prayer "time" at my daughter's school, she still prays. Whenever she wants. If she feels the need before a test or before going on the playground, she prays. She prays that God blesses her food.
She prays at will. Does she "disturb" other kids, no, but she DOES pray.

And THAT sir, is what makes this country so great! No one group can take over our government or public schools. But you can keep trying. It's a free country.

Try to stop me. De Maria,
One thing I have noticed is that you seem to no sympathy or empathy for others who are different from you, in fact you seem to derive some pleasure in antagonizing others. That is not the case with all my christian friends I have around me. Also you mention that you were once an atheist and during that period you did awful deeds, you then blame those deeds on the fact that you were an atheist. I have concluded that your views most certainly do not represent the views of christians but of those of a tortured soul. I hope you find some sort of internal peace, I mostly hope this for your children.

Even though there is no prayer "time" at my daughter's school, she still prays. Hello again, Now:

You actually point out the crux of the argument.

Of course she prays, and she should. She absolutely HAS the right to do that ANYWHERE in this great land of ours, and at any time of her choosing.

The difference is, "prayer time". Prayer time is some time set aside BY THE SCHOOL. It's ORGANANIZED time - ORGANIZED by the authorities who run the school who receive their paychecks from the GOVERNMENT. In other words they ARE the GOVERNMENT.

What your daughter is doing is INDIVIDUAL prayer NOT ORGANIZED by anybody.

I don't know. The concepts are simple to me.

excon

And you know, Synnen pointed out that if we allow one group to pray, then we should allow each group to have equal time.
And as much as I would love for there to be prayer in school - I would not want my daughter to pray to Satan (as the example Synnen gave). So, I am okay with her praying on her own. Does that make me intolerant of other religions? I don't know.
The way things are now are working for US, so if the change would involve all or nothing - then I would go for nothing.
Does that make sense?

NowWhat,
Yes, it makes very good sense.
:)

Tell me do you believe in democracy?

Absolultely!


Are you saying the minority is superior to the majority?

No.




Shutting out Christian thought is simply censorship.

But no one is trying to shut out Christian thought.


In fact, abortion is on the retreat.

No one likes abortion. But I doubt that a rape victim is going to change her mind after viewing the ultra-sound of a 3 day old embryo.


And its wrong. There is no evidence for the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

How intolerant!


Yet thousands of people witnessed Christ and His miracles and four eyewitnesses wrote about it in their testimonies of His life, the Gospels.

This is very wrong! There was not a single eyewitness who wrote anything down! In fact, no accounts of Jesus' life were written down until YEARS after his death. You should try reading some real books written by real historians, instead of believing everything you hear.



Correct. And the ideology that Christians should be censored is a dangerous ideology indeed.

Again, no one is saying that Christians should be censored.




1. This country is founded on respect for the individual.

Right. This includes ALL individuals. Including those that don't pray, or believe in your god.


You should have the right to have your child taught whatever you consider is real science.

This is what I think is a REALLY dangerous thought by you. I am not a scientist, mathemetician, writer, or physicist. I (nor you), can know what is best for our kids to be taught regarding these subjects. I can teach my kids values. You can teach your kids to pray if you'd like. But you should have no say in what they learn about real world science or math! At least not if you want them to be competent adults competing in the real world.

Here's the thing... People like you want our children taught what YOU think is right. The problem is, you don't know anything about these subjects! As it is, we are losing our once held superiority in the areas of science, math, and physics. And it's only going to get worse if people like you have their way and start dumbing down this country by teaching things like creationism alongside real science.



I'm Catholic.

I was born Catholic as well.




THEN WHY ARE YOU SO AFRAID THAT PARENTS SHOULD VOTE ON THE MATTER!!

I've already explained why. It's because the majority of parents are not experts in the required fields of study where accurate knowledge will be necessary for our kids to be competitive by the time they're adults.

If you had your way, the next generation of Americans will still be thinking in primitive 2000 year old terms believing that the earth is only 10,000 years old, while other countries make huge strides in molecular biology, curing diseases, and other sciences. The America you want will be left in the rest of the civilized world's dust.

De Maria,
One thing I have noticed is that you seem to no sympathy or empathy for others who are different from you, in fact you seem to derive some pleasure in antagonizing others.

The only thing I'm guilty of is defending myself from your attacks on my character. See Messages #105 and 107 on this thread.


That is not the case with all my christian friends I have around me.

As I said before, you must be used to Christian friends who let you insult them, twist their words and otherwise walk all over them. As for me, I reserve the right to face my accuser and have them prove their accusations.


Also you mention that you were once an atheist and during that period you did awful deeds, you then blame those deeds on the fact that you were an atheist. I have concluded that your views most certainly do not represent the views of christians but of those of a tortured soul.

Please define tortured soul. As I don't feel tortured, I don't think I fit that category. But I don't know what it means.


I hope you find some sort of internal peace, I mostly hope this for your children.

It is one of the greatest things about being Christian since I converted. Yes, I do feel the peace that only Christ can give.

But I wonder, you and your friends always accuse me of antagonizing others. Yet, you don't acknowledge the insults first directed at me. Do you selectively read the messages or what?

Did you comment to lobrobster about accusing me of being biased?
In other words, prayers that YOU agree with, right? I'd expect you to at least make a token effo rt to hide your bias.

Or after twisting the meaning of my words to pretend I want to run the country:
Yet you still seem to think you run the country and our public schools. The last election should've quelled any such notion for you.

Or after insinuating that Christans don't want children to learn real science:
But the rest of us, want our kids learning REAL science,

So please explain your obvious partiality here. Others can be rude and unkind towards me and you turn a deaf ear. But when I respond in kind, you and other nonChristians on this forum, whom I've also confronted on the issue, get "their panties in a bind". (To use a euphemism that someone used on me.)

So thanks for the kind thoughts but maybe you should scrutinize your friends words and your own more closely. It is you who tries to stigmatize people without a tinge of conscience isn't it? Messages #105 and 107.

Sincerely,

De Maria

The topic of this thread is to gather people's opinions, not argue constitutional rights. It appears to me that we know what everyone's opinion on this matter is. Synnen, is entitled to her opinion. Excon, NK, Lobrobster are entitled to theirs. DeMaria is entitled to his. In reading through this thread, I actually have not seen DeMaria trying to convince anyone he is right. He has simply stated his opinion and explained why he feels the way he does. Why are people trying to convince him to change his point of view? Seems like you are all going in circles, and in doing so, frustrating yourselves. MY opinion is that organized prayer in public schools in the U.S. will never happen. DeMaria is entitled to hope that it will, and he is entitled to attempt to change it through either voting in like minded candidates, or filing a lawsuit. But, I will be waving to him, offering him a hot cup of coffee, a donut and a handshake, from the other side of the fence arguing against it. :) To each his own. No amount of logical discourse on a web site will change someone who is set in their personal convictions.

Absolultely!

Glad we agree. Then you believe in the democratic practice of voting to decide issues?


No.

Glad we agree that it is unfair for the minority to tell the majority what to do.


But no one is trying to shut out Christian thought.

I thought you said,
This is what prevented the "majority" from getting creationism taught alongside real science in public classrooms. A near catastrophe avoided because our judicial system worked.

That sounds as though you believe that presenting Christian thought (creationism) in the classroom would be a catastrophe. In other words, that sounds as though you want to shut out Christian thought. So please explain yourself.


No one likes abortion. I doubt a rape victim is going to change her mind after viewing the ultra-sound of a 3 day old embryo.

But rape is permitted up to the day of birth in this country.


How intolerant!

Must everything be tolerated?


This is very wrong! There was not a single eyewitness who wrote anything down! In fact, no eyewitness account of Jesus was written down until YEARS after his death. You should try reading some real books written by real historians, instead of believing everything you hear.

Anytime you want to start a thread on the evidence for Christ vs the evidence for the spaghetti monster, I'm ready.


Again, no one is saying that Christians should be censored.

I believe I've proved in previous messages that that is exactly what is going on.


Right. This includes ALL individuals. Including those that don't pray, or believe in your god.

Correct.


... But you should have no say in what they learn about real world science or math!.

As you know I disagree with that thought entirely. I just want to highlight for other people to read and make up their own minds whether a parent has a say in everything their children learns or not.


Here's the thing... People like you want our children taught what YOU think is right.

Is that what I said, or is that what you are putting in my mouth. If that is what I said, provide the evidence that I said it.


The problem is, you don't know anything about these subjects!

Maybe, maybe not. But that is not the question at hand is it. We are talking about prayer in school. Not about what I know or don't know.


As it is, we are losing our once held superiority in the areas of science, math, and physics. And it's only going to get worse if people like you have their way and start dumbing down this country by teaching things like creationism alongside real science.

Again, you have proved that you want Christian thought SHUT OUT of the classroom.


I was born Catholic as well.

Something we have in common. I just mentioned it because I thought you were mistaking me for a Fundie.


I've already explained why. It's because the majority of parents are not experts in the required fields of study where accurate knowledge will be necessary for our kids to be competitive by the time they're adults.

But the parents don't teach the subjects in Public School. So what is your point.

In addition, the students taught by their parents at home are far ahead of public and private school children in every category on the SAT's and ACTs and every other test they have been subjected to.


If you had your way, the next generation of Americans will still be thinking in primitive 2000 year old terms believing that the earth is only 10,000 years old, while other countries make huge strides in molecular biology, curing diseases, and other sciences. The America you want will be left in the rest of the civilized world's dust.

All you have to do is provide the statements I made which lead you to these outrageous ideas. Like the others before you, you are practicing a form of fallacious argument called "straw man". Obviously, no one wants such a world as you ascribe to me. So if you can make people believe that is what I want, well, you've won the argument.

Only one problem. I never said any such thing.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Ruby,

I view this has nothing more than a healthy (and important) debate. Attacks (at least the ones made by me), are not meant to be personal. I also would be glad to offer Demaria a cup of coffee from the sidelines, while opposing his views. It's great that he has a right to express them, vote for them, and even litigate for them.

However, I have to say that if we seem to be going in circles I'm afraid some of that is due to the circular logic that gets espoused on here. Cheers!

I concur lobrobster. And, it certainly does appear to be circular logic. If you all enjoy debating an issue that won't sway anyone, who am I to interfere? I just noticed that he is being placed in a position where he has to not only defend his opinion, but defend himself from people assuming too much and stating he expressed more than he has. But, if he is enjoying himself and wishes to continue, that is his option. As it is yours. :)

I thought you said,
This is what prevented the "majority" from getting creationism taught alongside real science in public classrooms. A near catastrophe avoided because our judicial system worked.

That sounds as though you believe that presenting Christian thought (creationism) in the classroom would be a catastrophe. In other words, that sounds as though you want to shut out Christian thought. So please explain yourself.

You can think, say, or worship whatever you'd like. No one is trying to censor you. But public classrooms are for teaching REAL science and learning about what is definitely TRUE! If you want to teach unfouded beliefs, that's what churches are for (most which are tax-exempt by the way). Teach anything you want in your church. You can teach your kids that the earth is only 10,000 years old, that there was a man on earth before a women ever existed, or that Noah brought dinosaurs on the ark, for all I care. But these teachings don't belong in a public classroom! Why? Because they are unfounded by any evidence or real scientific standard and are simply a matter of certain people's religious faith! My kid doesn't have to learn that. Just as your kid shouldn't have to learn scientology.




But rape is permitted up to the day of birth in this country.

I don't understand. What do you mean "rape" is permitted up until birth? Did you mean to say abortion? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Catholics do not believe in abortion under any circumstances, EVER.. If the fetus is doomed to a critical disease, if the mother's life is in jeopardy, or if the child is a product of rape. Do I not understand the Catholic position on this? I'll stand corrected if I'm wrong.


Anytime you want to start a thread on the evidence for Christ vs the evidence for the spaghetti monster, I'm ready.

I might take you up on that. The thing is, I don't want to be considered a Christian basher. I'm really not anti-Christian. I'm simply for rational thought process, which too often contradicts Christian thought process.


I just want to highlight for other people to read and make up their own minds whether a parent has a say in everything their children learns or not.

Well, let me ask you this... Do you believe that home-schooled children should learn whatever their parents decide they should know? Suppose a parent decides that math just isn't very important, and instead, thinks that study in the pseudo-science of numerology is. Should they be allowed to send this child out into the world as mathematically illiterate adult, but who believes in the powers of numerology? Would that be fair to the child? Yet in a way, this is exactly what you're proposing (albeit in a lesser degree). But the principle is the same. There's a reason why there exists specific standards of learning for every child home-schooled, or not. So that ignorant parents can't unwittingly do harm to their children. If a parent doesn't think math is important, that child still must learn math at a nationally acceptable level. I think this is a good thing. You do not?


Is that what I said, or is that what you are putting in my mouth. If that is what I said, provide the evidence that I said it.

Sorry. Are you not implying that you know better than educators what your children should be taught? I thought this was the very thing we're debating here. That you, the majority, should be allowed to have your children taught what you like, because well, you are the majority! But here's the reality...

99% of all biologist agree on evolution and think creationism is nonsense! Biologists are a minority in the population, but they clearly are in the majority when it comes to creationism. Now who would I want dictating what my kids should learn in a science class? You, or a biology professor?


Again, you have proved that you want Christian thought SHUT OUT of the classroom.

Correct. I don't want it in a public classroom. But that doesn't mean I want to censor Christian thought. Why do you make that assumption? Christian thought can be practiced in your home, or in your church. That's where it belongs. If I were to believe in astrology, I wouldn't presume to have your kid have to engage in this practice at a public school.



Something we have in common. I just mentioned it because I thought you were mistaking me for a Fundie.

Well your views do seem to be on the conservative side. I certainly wouldn't call yourself a liberal, would you? -lol




All you have to do is provide the statements I made which lead you to these outrageous ideas. Like the others before you, you are practicing a form of fallacious argument called "straw man". Obviously, no one wants such a world as you ascribe to me. So if you can make people believe that is what I want, well, you've won the argument.

Only one problem. I never said any such thing.

I'm not suggesting that you want this to happen. Only that if you have your way, there is a very real chance this is what will happen.

The thing is, I don't want to be considered a Christian basher. I'm really not anti-Christian. I'm simply for rational thought process, which too often contradicts Christian thought process.

Are you implying that Christians are incapable of rational thought? Is this because many don't seem to agree with you? And since they don't agree, that aren't rational?







99% of all biologist agree on evolution and think creationism is nonsense! Biologists are a minority in the population, but they clearly are in the majority when it comes to creationism. Now who would I want dictating what my kids should learn in a science class? You, or a biology professor?

Just food for thought, my biology teacher in HS would not teach evolution, he didn't believe it. And is it an established fact? (Evolution?)



Correct. I don't want it in a public classroom. But that doesn't mean I want to censor Christian thought. Why do you make that assumption? Christian thought can be practiced in your home, or in your church. That's where it belongs. If I were to believe in astrology, I wouldn't presume to have your kid have to engage in this practice at a public school.

Christian thought belongs where ever the christian is. Be it the home, the school, whatever. Maybe the practice of open prayer belongs (in the world we live in) in the home or church. But Thought? I will say again, my kid prays at school - that is her right. She will not stop. Is she asking little suzy to join her? Not today.

Are you implying that Christians are incapable of rational thought? Is this because many don't seem to agree with you? And since they don't agree, that aren't rational?

Not at all. I am not in any way saying that Christians are "incapable" of rational thought. But I am saying that much/most of Christianity is not based on rational thought and even contradictory to it.




Just food for thought, my biology teacher in HS would not teach evolution, he didn't believe it. And is it an established fact? (Evolution?)

Evolution is about as established of a fact as any scientific theory gets. A biology teacher that refused to teach evolution should be fired. Period. They certainly have a right to their beliefs, but they have no right to be teaching biology.


Christian thought belongs where ever the christian is. Be it the home, the school, whatever.

That's fine. I'm not arguing that and I'm not sure why you think I am. I'm just saying don't push it on ME or others! I don't care what you're thinking or when you think it. Pray silently to yourself on YOUR time whenever you want.



I will say again, my kid prays at school - that is her right. She will not stop. Is she asking little suzy to join her? Not today.

I don't think you'll find many people who are against prayer in school who disagree with this. Your daughter can and should pray in school or wherever else she wants if that's what she believes. No one is arguing that. As long as she doesn't disturb anyone else.

Not at all. I am not in any way saying that Christians are "incapable" of rational thought. But I am saying that much/most of Christianity is not based on rational thought and even contradictory to it. ?

I guess to a nonbeliver (not saying that is what you are) - something that requires A lot of FAITH can seem irrational.



Evolution is about as established of a fact as any scientific theory gets. A biology teacher that refused to teach evolution should be fired. Period. They certainly have a right to their beliefs, but they have no right to be teaching biology.

But evolution is not a fact, right? It might be "close" - but not an actual fact. It is a theroy.
Why should he be fired? Can a science teacher not be christian? It went against what he believed and what his students believed.



That's fine. I'm not arguing that and I'm not sure why you think I am. I'm just saying don't push it on ME or others! I don't care what you're thinking or when you think it. Pray silently to yourself on YOUR time whenever you want.

When you said that Christianity has it place - home/church. I wanted to clarify that. That is where my thought process came from.

I would not push it on you. But you are in my prayers. :)

You can think, say, or worship whatever you'd like. No one is trying to censor you. But public classrooms are for teaching REAL science and learning about what is definitely TRUE!

Many Christians in this country believe that creationsim is true.


If you want to teach unfouded beliefs,

Did I say I wanted to teach unfounded beliefs? Everything I believe I can articulate and present with evidence and explanation.


that's what churches are for (most which are tax-exempt by the way). Teach anything you want in your church. You can teach your kids that the earth is only 10,000 years old, that there was a man on earth before a women ever existed, or that Noah brought dinosaurs on the ark, for all I care. But these teachings don't belong in a public classroom! Why? Because they are unfounded by any evidence or real scientific standard and are simply a matter of certain people's religious faith! My kid doesn't have to learn that. Just as your kid shouldn't have to learn scientology.

Again, you have proven you want Christian thought SHUT OUT of the classroom.


I don't understand. What do you mean "rape" is permitted up until birth?

Oops. My bad. I meant "abortion".

* United States: In 2003, from data collected in those areas that sufficiently reported gestational age, it was found that 6.2% of abortions were conducted from 13 to 15 weeks, 4.2% from 16 to 20 weeks, and 1.4% at or after 21 weeks. [14] Because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's annual study on abortion statistics does not calculate the exact gestational age for abortions performed past the 20th week, there is no exact data for the number of abortions performed after viability. [14] In 1997, the Guttmacher Institute estimated the number of abortions in the U.S. past 24 weeks to be 0.08%, or approximately 1,032 per year.[15]


Did you mean to say abortion? Correct me if I'm wrong, but Catholics do not believe in abortion under any circumstances, EVER..

Correct.


If the fetus is doomed to a critical disease, if the mother's life is in jeopardy, or if the child is a product of rape. Do I not understand the Catholic position on this? I'll stand corrected if I'm wrong.

That is correct. But if you want to discuss abortion and the Catholic Church, start another thread.


I might take you up on that. The thing is, I don't want to be considered a Christian basher. I'm really not anti-Christian. I'm simply for rational thought process, which too often contradicts Christian thought process.

Rational thought does not contradict faith. Irrational thought frequently does.


Well, let me ask you this... Do you believe that home-schooled children should learn whatever their parents decide they should know?

That is why we homeschool.


Suppose a parent decides that math just isn't very important, and instead, thinks that study in the pseudo-science of numerology is. Should they be allowed to send this child out into the world as mathematically illiterate adult, but who believes in the powers of numerology?

Your assumption is that the Public Schools are doing a good job teaching anything.
But that isn't true. Results of a 2004 study show:
While careers in mathematics, engineering, and technology are exploding around the world, America’s 15 year olds are ranked 24th in math literacy, according to a study the Program for International Student Assessment conducted.
.
Increasing Math Literacy through Innovative Programs » Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology (http://anitaborg.org/news/archive/increasing-math-literacy/)

In fact, students from Christian schools which teach creationism get far better results in science and math and in fact every other subject than students from Public Schools:
Education Matters US » National Scores Versus ACSI Scores (http://educationmatters.us/?p=576)


Would that be fair to the child?

Sounds like it'd be a whole lot better than what Public Schools are currently offering.


Yet in a way, this is exactly what you're proposing (albeit in a lesser degree). But the principle is the same. There's a reason why there exists specific standards of learning for every child home-schooled, or not. So that ignorant parents can't unwittingly do harm to their children. If a parent doesn't think math is important, that child still must learn math at a nationally acceptable level. I think this is a good thing. You do not?

When Public Schools meet the national standards, we can talk.


Sorry. Are you not implying that you know better than educators what your children should be taught?

No. I am implying nothing. I am making an unqualified statement that I know better what my children should be taught. When the educators feed my children and begin to show the love I have for my children. When they forgo their paycheck to be by my children's side, then I might begin to believe that they give one %$#$ about my child.

As far as I have seen, all that students represent to public school employees, is a paycheck. Here's a test. Ask them how many will teach your children if they didn't get paid to do so. But parents don't get paid to take care of their children do they? And they do it all willingly. At least most still do.


I thought this was the very thing we're debating here. That you, the majority, should be allowed to have your children taught what you like, because well, you are the majority! But here's the reality...

Here's the question to which I responded,

People like you want our children taught what YOU think is right.

I want my children taught what I think is right, yes. But this is not what your statement says. Did you leave out a "y"?


99% of all biologist agree on evolution and think creationism is nonsense!

Bells and whistles, bong bong bong. Another fallacious argument. This is called, "appeal to authority". The biologists might be wrong:
Fallacy: Appeal to Authority (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html)


Biologists are a minority in the population, but they clearly are in the majority when it comes to creationism. Now who would I want dictating what my kids should learn in a science class? You, or a biology professor?

You already said you don't want me teaching your kids. Although I don't remember offering to teach them.


Correct. I don't want it in a public classroom. But that doesn't mean I want to censor Christian thought. Why do you make that assumption?

You are contradicting yourself. Shutting Christian thought from the classroom is a form of censorship.

Will they censor from school or college classroom the works of Michael Denton, Sir Fred Hoyle, Jeremy Rifkin and so on (who cannot be accused of a biblical bias)? No, the flexibility of schoolteachers "to supplant the present science curriculum with the presentation of theories, besides evolution, about the origin of life," sanctioned by the U.S Supreme Court, is the breach in the evolutionist citadel's wall which they cannot repair.
Origins Teaching in the Public Schools. (http://www.creationism.org/csshs/v11n4p18.htm)


Christian thought can be practiced in your home, or in your church. That's where it belongs.

According to you. But that is also another form of censorship. You want us to confine our Christian thoughts to our homes while you can explain your thoughts where ever you want.


If I were to believe in astrology, I wouldn't presume to have your kid have to engage in this practice at a public school.

Nor would I. Isn't that my point?


Well your views do seem to be on the conservative side. I certainly wouldn't call yourself a liberal, would you? -lol

Heaven forbid! ;)


I'm not suggesting that you want this to happen. Only that if you have your way, there is a very real chance this is what will happen.

In other words, speculation. I could speculate that morals and ethics would go down the proverbial toilet if we don't permit prayer in Public School. Wait, that already happened. ;)

Sincerely,

De Maria

But evolution is not a fact, right? It might be "close" - but not an actual fact. It is a theroy. The use of the word 'theory' is often misunderstood by the non-scientific community, usually as ammunition.

Here is a great article about it: Clive Thompson: Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law (http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/15-11/st_thompson)


Clive Thompson on Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes Law

Creationists and intelligent-design boosters have a guerrilla tactic to undermine textbooks that don't jibe with their beliefs. They slap a sticker on the cover that reads, EVOLUTION IS A THEORY, NOT A FACT, REGARDING THE ORIGIN OF LIVING THINGS.

This is the central argument of evolution deniers: Evolution is an unproven "theory." For science-savvy people, this is an incredibly annoying ploy. While it's true that scientists refer to evolution as a theory, in science the word theory means an explanation of how the world works that has stood up to repeated, rigorous testing. It's hardly a term of disparagement.

But for most people, theory means a haphazard guess you've pulled out of your, uh, hat. It's an insult, really, a glib way to dismiss a point of view: "Ah, well, that's just your theory." Scientists use theory in one specific way, the public another — and opponents of evolution have expertly exploited this disconnect.

Turns out, the real culture war in science isn't about science at all — it's about language. And to fight this war, we need to change the way we talk about scientific knowledge.

Scientists are already pondering this. Last summer, physicist Helen Quinn sparked a lively debate among her colleagues with an essay for Physics Today arguing that scientists are too tentative when they discuss scientific knowledge. They're an inherently cautious bunch, she points out. Even when they're 99 percent certain of a theory, they know there's always the chance that a new discovery could overturn or modify it.

So when scientists talk about well-established bodies of knowledge — particularly in areas like evolution or relativity — they hedge their bets. They say they "believe" something to be true, as in, "We believe that the Jurassic period was characterized by humid tropical weather."

This deliberately nuanced language gets horribly misunderstood and often twisted in public discourse. When the average person hears phrases like "scientists believe," they read it as, "Scientists can't really prove this stuff, but they take it on faith." ("That's just what you believe" is another nifty way to dismiss someone out of hand.)

Of course, antievolution crusaders have figured out that language is the ammunition of culture wars. That's why they use those stickers. They take the intellectual strengths of scientific language — its precision, its carefulness — and wield them as weapons against science itself.

The defense against this: a revamped scientific lexicon. If the antievolutionists insist on exploiting the public's misunderstanding of words like theory and believe, then we shouldn't fight it. "We need to be a bit less cautious in public when we're talking about scientific conclusions that are generally agreed upon," Quinn says.

What does she suggest? For truly solid-gold, well-established science, let's stop using the word theory entirely. Instead, let's revive much more venerable language and refer to such knowledge as "law." As with Newton's law of gravity, people intuitively understand that a law is a rule that holds true and must be obeyed. The word law conveys precisely the same sense of authority with the public as theory does with scientists, but without the linguistic baggage.

Evolution is supersolid. We even base the vaccine industry on it: When we troop into the doctor's office each winter to get a flu shot — an inoculation against the latest evolved strains of the disease — we're treating evolution as a law. So why not just say "the law of evolution"?

Best of all, it performs a neat bit of linguistic jujitsu. If someone says, "I don't believe in the theory of evolution," they may sound fairly reasonable. But if someone announces, "I don't believe in the law of evolution," they sound insane. It's tantamount to saying, "I don't believe in the law of gravity."

It's time to realize that we're simply never going to school enough of the public in the precise scientific meaning of particular words. We're never going to fully communicate what's beautiful and noble about scientific caution and rigor. Public discourse is inevitably political, so we need to talk about science in a way that wins the political battle — in no uncertain terms.

At least, that's my theory.

But evolution is not a fact, right?

Nothing can be proven. That's the beauty of science! But evolution is every bit as legitimate as the theory of gravity, the theory of relativity, or the theory of elliptical curves. This is why I get so incensed with these debates. People don't understand what a scientific theory is...

A "scientific" theory is not a guess... It's not a hunch... It's not a theory in any sense that you're accustomed to using the term. As in: "I have a theory that if I leave my house 5 minutes later for work in the morning, the traffic will be better". It's nothing like that at all.

A scientific theory is based on the logical conjecture of overwhemlingly abundant evidence. A scientific theory must withstand constant, repeated, and rigorous testing which attempts to falsify the very theory that is being proposed! It must make accurate predictions every time. One falsification... One wrong prediction... And the theory is rendered incomplete by scientists.

So far, not a single thing about evolution has been falsified. Every single prediction it makes has been shown true. If anything, the theory is even more brilliant than Darwin himself could've imagined. Darwin didn't know about molecular biology, or DNA, and the many new techniques that have been developed since his time. If anything, this new knowledge has only greatly STRENGTHEND Darwin's theory even more!

You can take the theory of evolution to the bank. And one other thing... Evolution is not in any way an attack on Christianity. It has nothing to say about it. It is only the religious who have a problem with evolution. They insist on denying it, because it renders many of their beliefs as outdated and obsolete. So it's easy to see why they attack evolution so hard.

Many Christians in this country believe that creationsim is true.

I don't for a minute deny this, but it doesn't make it true! Seriously... I am very comfortable in saying that anyone who does not accept evolution is simply ignorant. I'm not saying they're stupid. Just ignorant. There's a difference. Anyone who knew anything about the subject, would immediately stop talking such nonsense. He'd realize the fool he made of himself to anyone who DOES understand what evolution is about and what a scientific theory REALLY is.




Did I say I wanted to teach unfounded beliefs? Everything I believe I can articulate and present with evidence and explanation.

If you think creationism should be taught in schools, then you're saying you want to teach unfounded beliefs. Creationism is false. You cannot even begin to provide ANY evidence for it! Evolution on the other hand, has TONS of VERIFIABLE and OBSERVABLE evidence! It's not even close.




Again, you have proven you want Christian thought SHUT OUT of the classroom.

Seriously De Maria, what's so hard to understand about this? *Think* whatever you want. Just don't involve me in it. That's all I'm saying. Why am I having such a hard time with you on this?




Rational thought does not contradict faith.

It does if you don't want to believe in virgin births, rising from the dead, water turning into wine, etc. etc. The list is simply too long.


In fact, students from Christian schools which teach creationism get far better results in science and math and in fact every other subject than students from Public Schools:

Hey, I have no doubt that Christians schools can do a better job of teaching. I attended Catholic school myself for a few years. But let's understand why. The reason is more funding for better teachers, less crowded classrooms, which means more individualized attention. I am not saying Christians are dumb!



Bells and whistles, bong bong bong. Another fallacious argument. This is called, "appeal to authority". The biologists might be wrong:

If you are trying to tell me that the majority of people are more knowledgeable about evolution, DNA, genes, and genomes, than the majority of professional biologists... I'm not even going to try and convince you otherwise. You're too secluded in a land of propaganda. I hope the weather's nice where you are.

DeMaria, although you already know that I would not like to see organized prayer in public schools, if you would indulge me, I am curious about something. The OP, KellyH, appears to agree with you and feels we should allow prayer, so I am not really going off topic. My question is: If Christians were able to get this overturned in the courts, and organized prayer were now allowed in public schools, how would you propose it be handled? How would it be structured? Who would oversee it, and how do we do this in a way in which all religions and beliefs (or non-beliefs as the case may be) are included?

Wow, Ruby, that is a good question. In it, I think, will be "our" down fall. No one will be able to agree on who or how it should be done.
I remember when the Bible was still taught in school. It was taken out when I reached second grade - but I remember taking our Bibles out and having our teacher read to us. (Beyond that, I am a bit hazy.)


Evolution... Why not call it fact then? If they can PROVE that we evolved from dirt or whatever, then why not call it fact?
Let me just say this before we even get started on the merits of evolution - let's agree to disagree. PLEASE. It's been a long day and I am not equipped for the debate right now.
Thanks Guys.

Let me just say this before we even get started on the merits of evolution - let's agree to disagree. PLEASE. It's been a long day and I am not equipped for the debate right now.
Thanks Guys.
NW, sometimes you are just too cute for words. LOL! Cmon, you can debate among the best of 'em. Don't worry, I am not going to get onto the topic of evolution. Yet. LOL!

I know you are younger than I am and when I was in public school they never taught the bible. Are you sure you didn't go to a private school early in your education? Or maybe due to your age at the time, you are confusing Sunday school with public school?

Evolution... Why not call it fact then? If they can PROVE that we evolved from dirt or whatever, then why not call it fact??

Sorry about your day. I'll let you rest. But in case you're asking the question sincerely...

Evolution IS a fact. Let's just put it this way... If you accept gravity, then you should have no problem accepting evolution. How's that?

No, it was elementary school. I lived in North Georgia at the time and I remember 1st grade having to bring my Bible to school, we then moved to another part of Georgia, closer to Atlanta, where I started 2nd grade and there was no Bible taught.

Hey Guys!
I was wondering about how yall thought about prayers in school. this topic is very important to me, and i would love some other's opinions on it! please, everyone, reply with your thoughts!
thanks so much!
Well my school has a prayer club and everyone is always talking about it.
I go to Perry High School in Perry, Ga.

Is this a student ran club? Do you have to have a teacher sponsor it?
I think it's great that you have this available to you and that you are a part of this club. Good For You!

I'd like to point out that evolution is both a fact and a theory.

That evolution HAPPENS is a fact.

HOW evolution happens is a theory.

Whether that's how the world began is, like creationism, a theory. Because there are no solid, observable FACTS to back up how the world began, ANY theory is as valid as another - for how the world began.

Evolution happens all the time, though, and THAT is provable.

Evolution as theory and fact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact)

No, it was elementary school. I lived in North Georgia at the time and I remember 1st grade having to bring my Bible to school, we then moved to another part of Georgia, closer to Atlanta, where I started 2nd grade and there was no Bible taught.
Very interesting! I wonder if your old school still does it. I have a hunch it doesn't anymore.

Yeah. I doubt very seriously that it still goes on. Oh well.

NowWhat--I think it's GREAT that your kid prays like that!

I wish MORE kids would pray to whatever they believe in, any old time they felt like it.

I just also wish that adults wouldn't tell kids that they're wrong and going to hell if they don't believe in whatever religion the ADULT believes, or even worse--tell a kid WHAT to believe in the first place (assuming that the adult is someone other than a parent or family member).

When you have your kids at church or are teaching them about the Bible - Heaven and Hell come up.
Questions of what each are coming up. Why do people go to hell, etc. In teaching your beliefs, you have to teach all of it.

And yes, my daughter has said that if you don't believe in Jesus, you go to hell. She was 5 or 6. We have tried to teach her not to say things like that because of the fact not all people believe what we do. Especially after I said that before here and was told I was either a bigot, raising one or just plain intolerant. So, I have tried my very best to talk to her about just blurting things like that out. What is appropriate, etc. We definitely DO NOT want to make anyone else feel bad/sad, or anything like that. Once everyone here pointed out that it wasn't as funny as I thought it was (out of the mouths of babes) and told me how horrible I was, I tried to correct myself and my child.

DeMaria, although you already know that I would not like to see organized prayer in public schools, if you would indulge me, I am curious about something. The OP, KellyH, appears to agree with you and feels we should allow prayer, so I am not really going off topic. My question is: If Christians were able to get this overturned in the courts, and organized prayer were now allowed in public schools, how would you propose it be handled?

As democratically as possible.


How would it be structured?

Perhaps somewhat the way electives are structured today.


Who would oversee it,

I believe parents should oversee the schools. Or at least, I believe the schools are extensions of the parents and should be run that way. I don't believe the government has any business raising our children.


and how do we do this in a way in which all religions and beliefs (or non-beliefs as the case may be) are included?

I don't believe it is possible to include everyone in everything. Nor do I believe everyone wants to be included in everything. I think those who can't be included or won't be included could elect something different or enroll in private school.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria, Have to disagree with you about parents overseeing the schools. I think that would be a nightmare. Have you ever been to a PTO meeting? (Parent/Teacher Organization) ;)
Nothing would get accomplished. Somebody, one entity needs to be at the head. We all have different views on what should be done and how it should be done.
Is that entity the government? I don't know. But parents, some with limited educations, running the school? Oh my!
I think parents and educators should work TOGETHER for the betterment of the kids. And it is SHOCKING how many parents are NOT involved in the kids education.

I'd like to point out that evolution is both a fact and a theory.

That evolution HAPPENS is a fact.

HOW evolution happens is a theory.

Whether or not that's how the world began is, like creationism, a theory. Because there are no solid, observable FACTS to back up how the world began, ANY theory is as valid as another - for how the world began.

Evolution happens all the time, though, and THAT is provable.

Evolution as theory and fact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact)

Now I see why it's so hard for some of you to understand this. Even those who are willing to step outside their religion long enough to see what's going on in the real world, are being driven back by deception and the misuse of words and terminology. Look...

For all intents and purposes, HOW evolution happens is a fact as well. Again, a scientific theory is STRONG! It's not a hunch or a best guess. It's the overwhelming favorite to be the way something happens.

Creationism on the other hand, is no more a scientific theory than the theory of pink unicorns. There's not a single shred of scientific evidence supporting it! NONE!. Zilch... Nada...

But evolution is not a fact, right?

Correct.


It might be "close" - but not an actual fact.

You are precisely correct. Although many try to pawn us the idea that evolution is an established fact, the fact is it is one explanation of the evidence. But not necessarily the right one. And it can't be, because the definition of evolution is itself "evolving". For instance, when I was growing up, the evolution of the horse was explained as eohippus, to some other hippus etc. etc. to the modern horse. But that model of evolution has now been discarded.

As new fossils were discovered, though, it became clear that the old model of horse evolution was a serious oversimplification.
Horse Evolution (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/horses/horse_evol.html)

As shown in a detailed thesis by Walter Barnhart,7 the horse ‘series’ is an interpretation of the data. He documents how different pictures of horse evolution were drawn by different evolutionists from the same data, as the concept of evolution itself ‘evolved.’
The non-evolution of the horse (http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v21/i3/horse.asp)

As time goes on, the entire "theory" and I do mean "hypothesis" of evolution might be discarded.


It is a theroy.

Correct.


Why should he be fired? Can a science teacher not be christian? It went against what he believed and what his students believed.


He shouldn't be. It is an example of the intolerance of religious thought in certain segments of society.


When you said that Christianity has it place - home/church. I wanted to clarify that. That is where my thought process came from.

I would not push it on you. But you are in my prayers. :)

Again, excellent answer.

Sincerely,

De Maria

If you feel so strongly about the influence, on your children, of religion then you best start a campaign to ban CHRISTmas and Easter in case your kids ever ask who Christ is and you would have to tell them, and then they would have to ask why He died on the cross and rose the third day, and you would have to tell them He died to save sinners and that would open a whole box of worms, so best if you have the whole thing banned and tell your kids Xmas has to do with a fat man in a red suit who rides around in a sled pulled by flying reindeer, then they can spend the rest of their life in ignorent oblivien or worse still when they grow up the LOrd God will send them a preacher to tell them the truth and then they will wonder why the Father they loved lied to them for so long. It's a wicked web we weave when we begin with a lie.
Put the salvation of your children before your own conceited ego, if you truly love them that is.
Blessings <M>

If you feel so strongly about the influence, on your children, of religion then you best start a campaign to ban CHRISTmas and Easter in case your kids ever ask who Christ is and you would have to tell them, and then they would have to ask why He died on the cross and rose the third day, and you would have to tell them He died to save sinners and that would open a whole box of worms, so best if you go ahead and have the whole thing banned and tell your kids Xmas has to do with a fat man in a red suit who rides around in a sled pulled by flying reindeer, then they can spend the rest of their life in ignorent oblivien or worse still when they grow up the LOrd God will send them a preacher to tell them the truth and then they will wonder why the Father they loved lied to them for so long. It's a wicked web we weave when we begin with a lie.
Put the salvation of your children before your own conceited ego, if you truley love them that is.
Blessings <M>


My children, Miykle, have no need of salvation.

The goddess loves ALL of her children equally.

PS--I celebrate Solstice, not CHRISTmas, so there's not an issue. Same traditions, different deity.

My children, Miykle, have no need of salvation.

The goddess loves ALL of her children equally.

PS--I celebrate Solstice, not CHRISTmas, so there's not an issue. Same traditions, different deity.

"IT IS WRITTEN'
".. Is there a God beside me? Yea, there is no God ; I know not any. They that make a graven image are all of them vanity; and their delectable things shall not profit; and they are their own witnesses; they see not, nor know,that they may be ashamed."
Isiah 44 : 8 & 9

You will still have to explain why you lied about the fat man in the red suit, goddess or no goddess.

Praying for your heart to be opened <M>

miykle, this thread is about people's opinions regarding prayer in school. Please stay on topic. This isn't the place for proselytizing or a discussion about Santa. If you want to spread the word, please begin a new thread under Christianity. If you want to participate in the discussion at hand, state your opinion about prayer in school.

miykle, this thread is about people's opinions regarding prayer in school. Please stay on topic. This isn't the place for proselytizing or a discussion about Santa. If you want to spread the word, please begin a new thread under Christianity. If you want to participate in the discussion at hand, state your opinion about prayer in school.

C'mon Pit,

NonChristians have been running ramrod on this thread preaching against and belittling Christianity every chance they get and introducing every anti-Christian topic from abortion to evolution. Suddenly, you jump in and tell a Christian to stay on topic.

Isn't this the Christian forum?

If you are going to enforce the rules, please enforce them fairly.

Sincerely,

De Maria

NonChristians have been running ramrod on this thread preaching against and belittling Christianity every chance they get and introducing every anti-Christian topic from abortion to evolution.Hello again, De Maria:

We're not going to get anywhere. Where I see black, you see white. Where I'M interested in rational discussion - you're interested in proselytizing.

Indeed, I saw nobody belittling Christianity anywhere in this thread. Nope, none at all. I suppose you'll say that I'm one of the biggest belittlers. K, show me.

I see people supporting THEIR positions, and leaving you to believe what YOU want. You, however, see attacks. So does Bill O'Reilly.

But, in fact, there are none. The ONLY attack going on here is against the Constitution.

excon

LOL De Maria. I understand what you are saying. I have been trying very tactfully on two previous occasions, to steer people back to topic and to show respect for all opinions. You, yourself have even brought up the topic of Hitler at one point, and a couple of other off topic subjects, but all of it has been in line with the discussion about prayer in school. Not sure why abortion was brought up, but that, along with evolution vs creationism, were also included within the context of the general debate regarding prayer in school, and Christianity as a whole in school. The message in mikle's post doesn't deal with the topic at hand but rather is directed toward Synnen and assuming she is lying to her children about Santa Claus and that she is wrong in her belief system (in quoting scripture).? Yes, this topic was posted in the Christianity forum and non-Christians are going to have to deal with some anger from people when they post less than respectful responses. But, I am greatly enjoying reading your responses and your defense of your position on this topic. Please don't allow this thread to veer so completely off course, that we lose sight of the main discussion.

I will be back at a later time to discuss your suggestion of an elective.

LOL De Maria. I understand what you are saying. I have been trying very tactfully on two previous occasions, to steer people back to topic and to show respect for all opinions. You, yourself have even brought up the topic of Hitler at one point, and a couple of other off topic subjects, but all of it has been in line with the discussion about prayer in school. Not sure why abortion was brought up, but that, along with evolution vs creationism, were also included within the context of the general debate regarding prayer in school, and Christianity as a whole in school. The message in mikle's post doesn't deal with the topic at hand but rather is directed toward Synnen and assuming she is lying to her children about Santa Claus and that she is wrong in her belief system (in quoting scripture). ???? Yes, this topic was posted in the Christianity forum and non-Christians are going to have to deal with some anger from people when they post less than respectful responses. But, I am greatly enjoying reading your responses and your defense of your position on this topic. Please don't allow this thread to veer so completely off course, that we lose sight of the main discussion.

I will be back at a later time to discuss your suggestion of an elective.

Good answer, thanks.

Sincerely,

De Maria

As democratically as possible.
Perhaps somewhat the way electives are structured today.
I believe parents should oversee the schools. Or at least, I believe the schools are extensions of the parents and should be run that way. I don't believe the government has any business raising our children.
I don't believe it is possible to include everyone in everything. Nor do I believe everyone wants to be included in everything. I think those who can't be included or won't be included could elect something different or enroll in private school.
I am sorry that I seemed to have misunderstood your posts. I was under the impression (I know, never ASSUME;) ) that you had a definitive plan in mind.

De Maria, Have to disagree with you about parents overseeing the schools. I think that would be a nightmare. Have you ever been to a PTO meeting? (Parent/Teacher Organization) ;)
Nothing would get accomplished. Somebody, one entity needs to be at the head. We all have different views on what should be done and how it should be done.
Is that entity the government? I don't know. But parents, some with limited educations, running the school? Oh my!
I think parents and educators should work TOGETHER for the betterment of the kids. And it is SHOCKING how many parents are NOT involved in the kids education.
NowWhat has brought up some very valid points. We have a problem in this country in which many people can't agree on some of the simplest of things. Obviously, schooling is not simple and a much more complex issue. The sad reality that I see everyday is what NowWhat is referring to. I see many people who do not get involved at all in what is going on with the schools or their children. I moved to a small town 5 years ago. Outwardly the appearance is that of a very attractive town with a closeknit Christian community. A few weeks after I moved here, I found out that there is a huge heroin problem. It is a sad state of affairs.

I am a person who believes we never stop learning. The thought of someone who dropped out of school at 16, and refuses to continue adding to their knowledge base, being instrumental in making educational decisions is a frightening thought to me. Conversely, we have people who just appear to be on power trips, have a desire to control everything, and refuse to listen to others. Those are the people that are going to be diametrically opposed to anything that you or I, or anyone here, suggest. If you have ever been involved with any kind of committee that has people from all walks of life participating, that should give you a good idea of what would happen, but it would be on a much larger scale. Egads! I see too many stalemates happening in that plan, leaving room for very little to get accomplished.

To a certain extent we already have parents involved in the education of our children. We have schoolboards that consist of parents in the community and are supposed to be our monitors. When a big issue arises, meetings are called and the parents that are involved do attend. So, although the curriculum is established by a gov't entity, the parents do have a say if they feel something is not in the best interest of their children. Is it a foolproof plan? No. Lots of room for problems there as well, as we have all seen.

Even though the majority religion of this country is Christianity, it doesn't appear to me that the majority is intent on changing the system to include organized prayer. excon mentioned at one point that the "Pledge of Allegiance" was changed to include "under God" in the pledge in 1954. That was done through an act of Congress. So, it appears that there was enough pressure applied at that time and the factions that wanted it, were able to manage this change. I understand that you would like to see the changes you are talking about, but I also know that you are logical and rational enough to understand that as long as the general population refuses to make those changes, it isn't going to happen.

Pit,

I don't know if you intended for dialogue there because I don't see a question. I believe my idea is viable. And that there are many ways besides in which prayer in school can be implemented.

Presuming the school officials know the constituency of their school:

A simple example. Ask the parents, a questionnaire in the mail would suffice, "Do you want prayer in School?"

If yes, which prayers?
Offer predominant options based on constituency.
Add a section for "other prayer":

Assign a place where the students will meet for these prayers first thing in the morning before going to class.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Pit,

I don't know if you intended for dialogue there because I don't see a question. I believe my idea is viable. And that there are many ways besides in which prayer in school can be implemented.

Presuming the school officials know the constituency of their school:

A simple example. Ask the parents, a questionaire in the mail would suffice, "Do you want prayer in School?"

If yes, which prayers?
Offer predominant options based on constituency.
Add a section for "other prayer":

Assign a place where the students will meet for these prayers first thing in the morning before going to class.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Wait a minute... Are you actually suggesting they pray out loud? As in, "Art Father full of grace, the Lord is with thee....".

Wow, I was just arguing against the concept of silent prayer. This takes things to a whole new level!

LOL lob, yes it does.

DeMaria, I didn't have any questions. I was simply stating my opinion based on your previous response.

Well, it sounds like you have some sort of plan. Now, the question (LOL!) becomes, how does it get from just a discussion to being actualized?

LOL lob, yes it does.

DeMaria, I didn't have any questions. I was simply stating my opinion based on your previous response.

Well, it sounds like you have some sort of plan. Now, the question (LOL!) becomes, how does it get from just a discussion to being actualized?

First we have to change the law.:p

Sincerely,

De Maria

LOL! You are too funny! I love it!

But, that brings us right back around to what I was stating in my previous post. Who is going to get the law changed? ;)

First we have to change the law.:p

Sincerely,

De Maria


So say a classroom has 23 kids. 10 are Christian, 7 Jewish, 4 Muslim, and 2 atheists.

Since 10 of the kids are Christian, I assume you feel a Christian prayer should be said?

But would you be OK with a few lines from the Koran, and a Jewish blessing as well? Or would this offend you?

And then what if the 2 atheist kids were allowed to recite a few logical conjectures based on overwhelming observable evidence from science? Nah... Let's not get crazy. Why would that belong in a school classroom?

So say a classroom has 23 kids. 10 are Christian, 7 Jewish, 4 Muslim, and 2 atheists.

Since 10 of the kids are Christian, I assume you feel a Christian prayer should be said?

But would you be ok with a few lines from the Koran, and a Jewish blessing as well? Or would this offend you?

And then what if the 2 atheist kids were allowed to recite a few logical conjectures based on overwhelming observable evidence from science? Nah... Let's not get crazy. Why would that belong in a school classroom?

As I said, treat it like an elective.

Anyone who wants to pray with Christians, room 1,
Jews, room 2; Muslims, room 3.

Atheists can read a book or do what they elect ; room 4.

Prayer over, go to class.

Sincerely,

De Maria

LOL! You are too funny! I love it!

But, that brings us right back around to what I was stating in my previous post. Who is going to get the law changed? ;)

Workin' on it.

LOL! Good for you! I will have the doughnuts & coffee at the ready (on the other side of the fence)! ;)

As I said, treat it like an elective.

Anyone who wants to pray with Christians, room 1,
Jews, room 2; Muslims, room 3.

Atheists can read a book or do what they elect ; room 4.

Prayer over, go to class.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Well, I got to say that's not a bad way to do it. At least you're being tolerant of other people's beliefs. Again, I have to apologize for not giving you enough credit.

Now the only problem I have is taking up school time for this prayer when it could've/should've been done at home.

I like the idea of a "club". It would be treated more as an extracuricular activity. We have different things at our school now, i.e.. choir or jump rope team, that meet before school and I am sure there are teams that meet after school.
Would something like that be acceptable? I would let my kid join. (big surprise right? ;) )

Well, I gotta say that's not a bad way to do it. At least you're being tolerant of other people's beliefs. Again, I have to apologize for not giving you enough credit.

Now the only problem I have is taking up school time for this prayer when it could've/should've been done at home.

Until you get conflicts because so-and-so went to the Muslim room, and that means he's a terrorist. Or until Billy decides he can't be friends with Bobby because he hasn't accepted Jesus into his heart. Or until the atheist kids are assaulted because they don't believe so they're going to hell. And never mind the fact that organized prayer isn't supposed to take place on government property when organized by government employees, even if it IS prayer to all entities. It opens up a big, ugly can of worms.

Let's also not forget that it's taking time out of the school day for actual learning of core subjects; 5 minutes to get to the classroom, 15 minutes of prayer, 5 minutes to get to your next class... 25 minutes out of the day that could be spent on math, spelling, reading, music, or PE. Have you seen our national test scores? Academic Failure - International Test Scores - Poor TIMSS Results (http://4brevard.com/choice/international-test-scores.htm). Pray at home, learn in school.

Oh, and then there's this...

in order to be constitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment any practice sponsored within state run schools must: 1) have a secular purpose, 2) must neither advance nor inhibit religion, and 3) must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion.

School prayer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_prayer)

Plain and simple - it is against the Constitution and SCOTUS rulings!

Want to have organized prayer in school? Start a prayer club. How to have prayers in public schools -- legally (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ps_pra2.htm) and The Federal Equal Access Act (http://www.religioustolerance.org/equ_acce.htm). That is NOT against SCOTUS rulings.

Way back in the dim dark ages of the 1950's we had a system in Australia where twice a week priests of all denominations would come and take a class, usually straight after lunch, and we would go to the "church" we elected or were told to go to by our parents, or what ever, but we went to separate classes, the whole school, and there was never any hasstle over what religion you went to , we had more important things to fight over, like who did what to whom and why, or the football match or the cricket.
I do believe things have become absolutely ridiculous when children are dragged into the phobias and rejudices of the parents,God said love your enemies but we take vengeance, God said love your heighbour , but only as long as they stay on their side of the fence,
No wonder it grieved God that He had made man on the Earth.
I find it all so sad.
Blessings <M>

Until you get conflicts because so-and-so went to the Muslim room, and that means he's a terrorist.

You mean kids today can't tell which are the Muslim children unless they go into a room marked Musllim? That's hard to believe.


Or until Billy decides he can't be friends with Bobby because he hasn't accepted Jesus into his heart.

I remember Protestant children telling me that in Public School. Protestant adults tell me that today on the streets and in the work place. Should we abridge their right to free speech?


Or until the atheist kids are assaulted because they don't believe so they're going to hell.

Well now, if the atheists kids are anything like I was, they give as good as they get.


And never mind the fact that organized prayer isn't supposed to take place on government property when organized by government employees, even if it IS prayer to all entities. It opens up a big, ugly can of worms.

Nah.


Let's also not forget that it's taking time out of the school day for actual learning of core subjects; 5 minutes to get to the classroom, 15 minutes of prayer, 5 minutes to get to your next class... 25 minutes out of the day that could be spent on math, spelling, reading, music, or PE. Have you seen our national test scores?

Yeah. Schools that permit their children to pray, Christian schools, get higher test scores.


Pray at home, learn in school.

I prefer, pray at home and at school.


Oh, and then there's this...

in order to be constitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment any practice sponsored within state run schools must: 1) have a secular purpose, 2) must neither advance nor inhibit religion, and 3) must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion.

School prayer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_prayer)

This is the so called "Lemon test" a court ruling. Court rulings can be overturned.


Plain and simple - it is against the Constitution

I disagree. Forbidding children to pray violates our Constitutional right to worship.


and SCOTUS rulings!

We're looking to overturn those.

[quote]Want to have organized prayer in school? Start a prayer club.

How to have prayers in public schools -- legally (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ps_pra2.htm) and The Federal Equal Access Act (http://www.religioustolerance.org/equ_acce.htm). That is NOT against SCOTUS rulings.

I look for a day when our children will be free to pray as their parents intend in Public School

Sincerely,

De Maria

Way back in the dim dark ages of the 1950's we had a system in Australia where twice a week priests of all denominations would come and take a class, usually straight after lunch, and we would go to the "church" we elected or were told to go to by our parents, or what ever, but we went to seperate classes, the whole school, and there was never any hasstle over what religion you went to , we had more important things to fight over, like who did what to whom and why, or the football match or the cricket.
I do believe things have become absolutly rediculous when children are dragged into the phobias and rejudices of the parents,God said love your enemies but we take vengence, God said love your heighbour , but only as long as they stay on their side of the fence,
no wonder it grieved God that He had made man on the Earth.
I find it all so sad.
Blessings <M>


That's great, really. If kids didn't have prejudices about who went where--more power to 'em!

But--did kids in the 50s have to deal with suicide bombers primarily from one religion? If they had chosen to go to a buddhist or hindu or Russian orthodox "priest" in the days of big, bad, anti-communism, would they have been labeled commie bastards by their peers?

Also--and really this idea isn't THAT bad an idea--what about those who are from extremely small religions? My religion is less than one percenet of the world's population--does my kid just have to sit quietly with the atheists because the likelihood of a Wiccan priest or priestess going to a school is so slight? Or in a small town, where there may be a school of 204, and 199 are Christian (let's just say there's about 4 different denominations dividing them about equally), 1 is Jewish, 1 is Muslim, 1 is Pagan, 1 is Hindu, and 1 is an atheist. Are you going to still have separate classes for those 5 kids? Or will they just all be lumped together as "other"?

I'm truly not trying to be facetious here--but trying to understand how it might work.

I like Ruby's post about the Prayer Clubs--THAT is a great idea, as long as it's led by a student and not a teacher.

I like Ruby's post about the Prayer Clubs--THAT is a great idea, as long as it's led by a student and not a teacher.

I like this idea too, as I have pointed out. And not to split hairs or anything, but most clubs in schools have to have a teacher sponsor.
And what would be wrong with that? If there is a Christian (or any other religion) teacher that is willing to give up their time to sponsor this group - where is the harm?
I mean, you have teachers sponsoring the cheerleaders, the football players, the french club, spanish club, chess club, etc. Why couldn't you have a teacher sponsor the prayer club?

Reading this thread has reminded me that I am very lucky to be living where I am and am lucky to have the school system that my daughter is in. Kind of likes Thanksgiving everyday. :)

Hello again:

Synnen's got it. There aren't enough rooms in a schoolhouse to accommodate ALL the religions... If you don't accommodate ALL of them, which ones are your going to offend?

What if I made up a religion? Would I be given my own room?? Or is that for "established" religions?? Who decides which ones are "established"?? The government?? The parents?? I don't think so.

Nope. From a practical standpoint, the framers of the Constitution knew what they were talking about...

excon

PS> Please De Maria, within your apparent liberal approach, are you really going to be OK with a room of devil worshipers in your school?? What if you found out that one of the teachers went to the Satan room to pray??

Nahhh, I think your liberalism would end as soon as you got YOUR religion in school.

I actually didn't suggest the prayer club
well my school has a prayer club and everyone is always talking about it. I go to Perry High School in Perry, Ga. And, Nowwhat voiced her agreement with it.

I think prayer clubs are a good idea. I also think that teachers who want to sponsor it should be allowed to do so. As long as it is dealt with in the same manner as other clubs, if there are enough kids that want to join, then it should be allowed.



Yeah. Schools that permit their children to pray, Christian schools, get higher test scores.
Actually that is not entirely true. My nephews go to one of the best public schools in the country. If you look at all those schools there are common factors involved and religion being taught within the schools is not one of them. Those schools scores are higher than many of the private schools. But, I will admit to you that most of the people in that community have very close ties with their houses of worship. At home, religious instruction is a big part of their lives. But, not in the school. These families in that community are very closeknit and for the most part, everything is family oriented.
The parents (school board) in that community ensure that they have the best teachers and curriculum. There is an academic expectation placed on those children. IMO, our problems in the public schools in this country stem from lack of parental involvement.

Hello again:

Synnen's got it. There aren't enough rooms in a schoolhouse to accommodate ALL the religions....... If you don't accommodate ALL of them, which ones are your going to offend?

What if I made up a religion? Would I be given my own room??? Or is that for "established" religions??? Who decides which ones are "established"??? The government????? The parents???? I don't think so.

Nope. From a practical standpoint, the framers of the Constitution knew what they were talking about....

excon

PS> Please De Maria, within your apparent liberal approach, are you really going to be ok with a room of devil worshipers in your school??? What if you found out that one of the teachers went to the Satan room to pray???

Nahhh, I think your liberalism would end as soon as you got YOUR religion in school.

I don't see anything wrong with having a prayer club and if some religions are left out they should not take offense because at the end of the Day the US is 76% Christian and other religios groups consist of fractions of a persentage of the US population. So schools don't have to accommodate every little religious group just to be "fair" because it is not feasible so if the domanant religions have clubs the little one should not take offense. If they choose to take offense then they can move to a country where their religion has the greatest representation. America has aways been predomantantly Christian and it will always be that way and those who don't like it are free to leave to a country that puts more emphasis on their religion.

Really now?

Religious identification in the U.S. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm)


Polling data from the 2001 ARIS study:
The United States appears to be going through an unprecedented change in religious practices. Large numbers of American adults are disaffiliating themselves from Christianity and from other organized religions.

By about the year 2042, non-Christians will outnumber the Christians in the U.S

Prayer clubs are a great idea. See my post #182. Also see these links:

How to have prayers in public schools -- legally (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ps_pra2.htm)

The Federal Equal Access Act (http://www.religioustolerance.org/equ_acce.htm)

They are required to be student-run, but can be teacher supervised. The teachers cannot participate because that would be like the school advocating that particular religion. I suppose an adult volunteer could supervise and lead the children - I'm not sure about that though.

I dont see anything wrong with with having a prayer club and if some religions are left out they should not take offense because at the end of the Day the US is 76% Christian and other religios groups consist of fractions of a persentage of the US population. So schools dont have to accomodate every little religious group just to be "fair" because it is not feasable so if the domanant religions have clubs the little one should not take offense. If they choose to take offense then they can move to a country where their religion has the greatest representation. America has aways been predomantantly Christian and it will alway be that way and those who dont like it are free to leave to a country that puts more emphasis on their religion.

That is possibly the most intolerant thing I've ever read. Congrats, you win.

How about instead you read the law about prayer clubs and you say "I think prayer clubs are a great idea, and any group of students of any denomination should be able to form one. That way it's fair to all and everyone can be happy."

:rolleyes:

Really now?

Religious identification in the U.S. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm)


Yes, really now... lol I am not going to believe some BS you got off the internet that was written by an atheist with serous wishful thinking.. lol I could also find a web sit that says the opposite of that. So if the website comforts you, good for you. :D

That is quite possibly the most intolerant thing I've ever read. Congrats, you win.

How about instead you read the law about prayer clubs and you say "I think prayer clubs are a great idea, and any group of students of any denomination should be able to form one. That way it's fair to all and everyone can be happy."

:rolleyes:


Of course, I agree with you 100% jillian. But I just want to point out that unfortunately, it is NOT always feasible to represent every minority. It happens all the time. For instance...

A school is willing to host several after school clubs. But there just aren't enough students interested in chess to form a chess club. So sorry.. No chess club this year.

This might be off your point, but you see what I mean. It's not always feasible for every minority to be represented. Even if the kids are willing to form a group themselves, the school is not always in a position to provide the resources for these minority students to use. And you can't always fault the school for this.

That is quite possibly the most intolerant thing I've ever read. Congrats, you win.

How about instead you read the law about prayer clubs and you say "I think prayer clubs are a great idea, and any group of students of any denomination should be able to form one. That way it's fair to all and everyone can be happy."

:rolleyes:

There is nothing intolerable about what I said if read the context of what I was responding to. I was responding to someone who said they should not allow Christians to form prayer clubs because that would mean they would have to accommodate every single religion which would be physically imposible. So I said if the Christians and other major religions like Islam for these groups, the other smaller religions should not take any offense because the religions that would be represented have make up a much larger percentage of the population. So no I am not intolerent, but I just don't believe they should stop prayer for 1000 people just because 3 people are not going to be represented.

I am sorry I didn't notice that in your post Jillian. Yes, teachers cannot participate, but as it stands now, the rules are that a teacher must be willing to sponsor & supervise it.


I dont see anything wrong with with having a prayer club and if some religions are left out they should not take offense because at the end of the Day the US is 76% Christian and other religios groups consist of fractions of a persentage of the US population. So schools dont have to accomodate every little religious group just to be "fair" because it is not feasable so if the domanant religions have clubs the little one should not take offense. If they choose to take offense then they can move to a country where their religion has the greatest representation. America has aways been predomantantly Christian and it will alway be that way and those who dont like it are free to leave to a country that puts more emphasis on their religion.
Soldout, once again you are not paying attention to what is being said. I think many of us here on this thread don't have a problem with prayer clubs. The problem the majority of us have is with prayer being an integral part of the academic curriculum in public schools. There are disagreements on this thread regarding the intention and interpretation of the Constitution.

One of the principle reasons this country was founded was to allow freedom from religious oppression. So, in keeping with your last sentence, if you don't like what is occurring in this country, why don't you consider moving, instead of asking non-Christians to do so. Tolerance for others is something that appears to be severely lacking in your statement.

lobrobster, I have to "spread it" but I completely agree with your thoughts in your post. Clubs require a minimum amount of children willing to participate. They also require a teacher who will be willing to sponsor and supervise. Without those factors, clubs cannot be formed.

Of course, I agree with you 100% jillian. But I just want to point out that unfortunately, it is NOT always feasible to represent every minority. It happens all the time. For instance...

A school is willing to host several after school clubs. But there just aren't enough students interested in chess to form a chess club. So sorry.. No chess club this year.

This might be off your point, but you see what I mean. It's not always feasible for every minority to be represented. Even if the kids are willing to form a group themselves, the school is not always in a position to provide the resources for these minority students to use. And you can't always fault the school for this.

The difference is, they are student-led; they don't require a teacher participate. Got two Hindu kids? They can form a Hindu club. Many clubs can be formed (with 2 participants up to 100) and can meet in one large room under the supervision of one teacher; since the teacher doesn't participate, they can supervise multiple groups. When I was in school we formed a writing club, the teacher who sponsored us "supervised" us by coming in every 20 minutes or so to make sure we weren't breaking anything. Maybe that's not the way it's SUPPOSED to be done, but if that's acceptable, why couldn't one teacher supervise three clubs in three different rooms?

But beyond that, the key is that the clubs are OPEN to all religions, and from what I've read, the school cannot allow ONE and refuse ANOTHER. It's either allow them all, or allow none, as it should be. It doesn't mean a club has to be formed for each religion, just the OPTION for the club to be formed.

There is nothing intolerable about what i said if read the context of what i was responding to. I was responding to someone who said they should not allow Christians to form prayer clubs because that would mean they would have to accomodate every single religion which would be physically imposible. So i said if the Christians and other major religions like Islam for these groups, the other smaller religions should not take any offense becuase the religions that would be represented have make up a much larger percentage of the population. So no i am not intolerent, but i just dont believe they should stop prayer for 1000 people just becuase 3 people are not going to be represented.
I didn't see this post when I was responding to your first one. Thank you for explaining your intentions. The problem is that, as you know, the smaller groups that don't have representation do take offense. But, it is up to them to change it and find a way to make their clubs happen if they so choose. A club is just that. It is separate from the public school curriculum and if they abide by the guidelines laid out, then any group has the right to form.

There is nothing intolerable about what i said Hello Sold:

Dude. You're telling people who don't agree with you to leave the country. I think it's QUITE intolerant, myself. I actually have to snicker that you think it isn't.

It's OK if you don't want to be tolerant, but to say they've got to leave, That's being tolerant is actually rather... I can't even think of a word that quite expresses it... But you get my drift... Or maybe you don't. Nahhhh, you probably don't.

excon

The difference is, they are student-led; they don't require a teacher participate. Got two Hindu kids? They can form a Hindu club. Many clubs can be formed (with 2 participants up to 100) and can meet in one large room under the supervision of one teacher; since the teacher doesn't participate, they can supervise multiple groups. When I was in school we formed a writing club, the teacher who sponsored us "supervised" us by coming in every 20 mins or so to make sure we weren't breaking anything. Maybe that's not the way it's SUPPOSED to be done, but if that's acceptable, why couldn't one teacher supervise three clubs in three different rooms?

But beyond that, the key is that the clubs are OPEN to all religions, and from what I've read, the school cannot allow ONE and refuse ANOTHER. It's either allow them all, or allow none, as it should be. It doesn't mean a club has to be formed for each religion, just the OPTION for the club to be formed.
I don't know if all school guidelines across the country are the same. It appears from one of the young posters above, that she does have a Prayer Club in her school. Maybe they include any religions that want to join? I don't know. But, I would imagine if it is Christian based, they probably allow anyone to join and those that are not Christian have decided they don't want to participate. If the other religions don't want to form one, that is also their prerogative. I think the key legal issue is in leaving it open for any student to join.

P.S. Are we saying the same thing? I am not sure. LOL! But it kind of sounds like it.

I am sorry I didn't notice that in your post Jillian. Yes, teachers cannot participate, but as it stands now, the rules are that a teacher must be willing to sponsor & supervise it.


Soldout, once again you are not paying attention to what is being said. I think many of us here on this thread don't have a problem with prayer clubs. The problem the majority of us have is with prayer being an integral part of the academic curriculum. There are disagreement on this thread regarding the intention and interpretation of the Constitution.

One of the principle reasons this country was founded was to allow freedom from religious oppression. So, in keeping with your last sentence, if you don't like what is occurring in this country, why don't you consider moving, instead of asking non-Christians to do so. Tolerance for others is something that appears to be severely lacking in your statement.

Just in case you did not see this response, here it is. This is what I am trying to explain..
There is nothing intolerable about what I said if read the context of what I was responding to. I was responding to someone who said they should not allow Christians to form prayer clubs because that would mean they would have to accommodate every single religion which would not be physically imposible. So I said if the Christians and other major religions like Islam form these groups, the other smaller religions should not take any offense because the religions that would be represented have make up a much larger percentage of the population. So no I am not intolerent, but I just don't believe they should stop prayer for 1000 people just because 3 people are not going to be represented.

You are right, this country was founded on the princliple of religious freedom and I have no problem with that what so ever. But one thing you have to realise is that this country was founded by Christians and the more than 76% of the population is Chrisitian. So as much as there is freedom of religion people have to come to terms with the fact that is a predomantaly christian population. So obviously Christianity is going to be more prominent, so those who are offended by that can go to a country that has a higher percentage of people who worship what they do. So I don't have a problem with religious freedom, I just have a problem when people who represtent fractions of the population try to dictate how things should happen and stop Christians from doing what they have historically been able to do in this country.

Hello Sold:

Dude. You're telling people who don't agree with you to leave the country. I think it's QUITE intolerant, myself. I actually have to snicker that you think it isn't.

It's ok if you don't want to be tolerant, but to say they've got to leave, THATS being tolerant is actually rather...... I can't even think of a word that quite expresses it..... But you get my drift.... Or maybe you don't. Nahhhh, you probably don't.

excon

All I am saying is those who can't tolerate Christianity being the more dominant religion in the US (due to its larger percentage representation) can leave and go where Christianity is not so prominent, call that intolerant if you want to but I think that is a logical solution to those who are uncomfortable with Christianity being more prominent.

Yes, really now... lol I am not going to believe some BS you got off the internet that was writen by an athiest with serous wishful thinking..lol I could also find a web sit that says the opposite of that. So if the website comforts you, good for you. :DHere is the source, I probably should have linked to that first:
The Graduate Center, CUNY (http://www.gc.cuny.edu/faculty/research_briefs/aris/key_findings.htm)

I don't know if all school guidelines across the country are the same. It appears from one of the young posters above, that she does have a Prayer Club in her school. Maybe they include any religions that want to join? I don't know. But, I would imagine if it is Christian based, they probably allow anyone to join and those that are not Christian have decided they don't want to participate. If the other religions don't want to form one, that is also their perogative. I think the key legal issue is in leaving it open for any student to join.

P.S. Are we saying the same thing? I am not sure. LOL! But it kinda sounds like it.

I think we are saying the same thing... sort of! :)

It's my understanding that if a school allows student-led religious clubs (prayer, scripture reading, book study, whatever) they must allow ANY religion to form a similar club. So if the Christians in the poster's school have a prayer club, the Muslims can form a Qu'ran study club. It's my understanding it's not joining the SAME club, but forming a NEW club for your denomination, and the school can't say, "You can't form this because you aren't x,y,z religion". So if the Hindus want a club, they can have one, same with the Satanists, the Jews, the Muslims, the Buddhists - everyone gets a club if they want one.

Maybe the prayer club the poster is talking about is different - maybe it is open to ALL religions, and they take an afternoon to pray to each denomination who is a member, I don't know. My GUESS is that it is a Christian prayer club, and if another denomination wants to pray as well, they would start their own club.

I agree Jillian. I believe the key to getting around any legal barrier would be to "welcome all." Of course a Hindu won't want to join, but they are free as well to start their own club. Most clubs usually occur after school hours are over. So, kids can either join a club, participate in an after school sports activity, go to the library to study.. or go home.

That's great, really. If kids didn't have prejudices about who went where--more power to 'em!

But--did kids in the 50s have to deal with suicide bombers primarily from one religion? If they had chosen to go to a buddhist or hindu or Russian orthodox "priest" in the days of big, bad, anti-communism, would they have been labeled commie bastards by their peers?

Did we not ? We had the good old boys USA and USSR holding each other by the throat threatening to exterminate every living creature on the planet just to prove who had the biggest you kmow what's, these maniacs today with their po guns don't even come close to total anihilation which we faced in the fifties and sixties.


Also--and really this idea isn't THAT bad an idea--what about those who are from extremely small religions? My religion is less than one percenet of the world's population--does my kid just have to sit quietly with the atheists because the likelihood of a Wiccan priest or priestess going to a school is so slight? Or in a small town, where there may be a school of 204, and 199 are Christian (let's just say there's about 4 different denominations dividing them about equally), 1 is Jewish, 1 is Muslim, 1 is Pagan, 1 is Hindu, and 1 is an atheist. Are you going to still have separate classes for those 5 kids? or will they just all be lumped together as "other"?

What I was getting at was that the whole thing was taken out of the hands of the teachers and the schools and put in the hands of the priests or religious teachers negating all arguments simlpy be leaving it up to the students to decide if they wanted to go or not, provision was made for those who didn't want to go to any religios instruction, no big deal was made about it thats just how it was, but then it only takes one or two petty minded individuals to sour the whole pot doesn' it??


I'm truly not trying to be facetious here--but trying to understand how it might work.

It worked because people allowed it to work "without Prejudice" and we had at least 10 different nationalities at our school, many refugees form europe who's parents had escaped WW2 but to us they were all just people. Australians just accept, we even like Americans.....


I like Ruby's post about the Prayer Clubs--THAT is a great idea, as long as it's led by a student and not a teacher.

Start a club it then becomes an issue and then a clique and then a gang why not just let religion have a set time per week with representatives from denominations and allow the kids to decide for themselves "without prejudice" why is it hard.?

Blessings <M>

Because people that don't believe or whatever still have a problem with it. It is what it is.

I think the compromise would be to have a prayer group/club - whatever you want to call it. Sometimes you have to take what you can get.

I think a lot of times, this is a reason things don't get worked out. If one person/group doesn't get EXACTLY what the want - then they keep fighting. Failing to see the compromise.
Here you have people that are against prayer in school saying that they wouldn't necessarily have a problem with a prayer club but that doesn't seem to be enough. No, we want something manditory, have it this way or that way. Etc...
Let's meet in the middle here.

Mikle, if I remember correctly you are in Australia. The problem in the U.S. is a Constitutional one. Although some people on this thread disagree, the majority recognize that we have a clearly defined separation of church and state. The state oversees the public school system. So, religion instruction is not allowed to be a part of the public school curriculum. Until a group chooses to challenge the constitution by sueing the government, and winning that lawsuit, it won't change. Allowing religious based clubs is the most practical solution.

You are right, this country was founded on the princliple of religious freedom and i have no problem with that what so ever. But one thing you have to realise is that this country was founded by Christians and the more than 76% of the population is Chrisitian. So as much as there is freedom of religion people have to come to terms with the fact that is a predomantaly christian population. So obviously Christianity is going to be more prominant, so those who are offended by that can go to a country that has a higher percentage of people who worship what they do. So i dont have a problem with religious freedom, i just have a problem when people who represtent fractions of the population try to dictate how things should happen and stop Christians from doing what they have historically been able to do in this country.

Hopefully you saw my post #200 stating that I didn't see your follow up post.

I do realize that the founding fathers were overwhelmingly Christian, although there were many different faiths within that framework. Episcopalian/Anglican made up the majority.

I don't think the problem is people being offended by Christianity being the majority religion. But, the constitution is set up so that the rights of the minority are protected. The minority cannot "dictate how thing should happen" and they aren't trying to stop Christians "from doing what they have historically been able to do" (not quite sure what that encompasses. I hope nothing illegal). I think the problem here is that the minority resent being told they have no rights because another group is the majority.

mikle, if I remember correctly you are in Australia. The problem in the U.S. is a Constitutional one.

I disagree. Its an interpretation problem.


Although some people on this thread disagree, the majority recognize that we have a clearly defined separation of church and state.

I agree. We who believe Religious children should be permitted to pray in Public School believe in the ENTIRE Constitution. We believe in the "separation of church and state" clause of the Constitution as well as the "freedom to worship" clause of the Constititution. .

The "separation of church and state" clause prohibits the government from establishing a national church. But, permitting children of every faith to pray in Public School as directed by their parents is not an establishment of a particular church and definitely not the establishment of a national church..


The state oversees the public school system. So, religion instruction is not allowed to be a part of the public school curriculum.

This has nothing to do with religious instruction but with the free exercise thereof.


Until a group chooses to challenge the constitution by sueing the government, and winning that lawsuit, it won't change. Allowing religious based clubs is the most practical solution.

Not so. All that needs to be challenged is the court ruling. We are not suing to change the Constitution. We are suing to overturn the interpretation of the Court.

Coffee and donuts is good on this side. ;)

Sincerely,

De Maria

LOL DeMaria! As I said, there are some who disagree. I didn't know if you wanted me to point you out to anyone. I figured you can do that just fine on your own. And you have! LOL. I also didn't have the time to get into the nitty gritty and specifics of it all. Simple is better In my opinion.

Not so. All that needs to be challenged is the court ruling. We are not suing to change the Constitution. We are suing to overturn the interpretation of the Court.
Coffee and donuts is good on this side. ;)

Ah, so you have finally divulged your plan! Okay, good luck with that! I will be waiting with the C & D! See you on the courthouse steps (I'll not only be the one with the C & D but a big picket sign as well. I will figure out a way to include your name here on it, so you will be sure to not miss me.) ;)

I'd just like to point out that I didn't think that CLUBS should be stopped because we wouldn't have one for every religion. If there aren't enough people in one particular religion that want to participate in a club, so be it.

What I found offense at was the idea that MANDATORY religious time in a public school would very likely ONLY be good for Christians, Muslims, and Jews.

Nearly every other religion has such small following statistically that my kids would be lumped in with atheists, Satanists, Deists, Hari Krishnas, and Followers of Zeus. Seriously--I'm not paying tax dollars for a program that pretty much will automatically single my kids out for not being part of the "in" crowd religiously. And I'm sure as HELL not going to convert.

If you want your kids to pray at school--freedom of religion allows to the do so quietly, and freedom of assembly allows them to create a club.

Why do they have to do it on time that could be better spent learning how not to type like this:

Hi I'm 13 n I tink I mite be pregnunt mi boyfriend n me had sex 2x yest, n 2x mon am I pregunt r should I dump him because I tink he cheats on me with my little sis whoz onle 10 hlp!! I really love him. Ktnxbi.

Ruby Pitbull; That's something I'm not used to factoring into any thing I might ponder, your system is so different to ours, we have no bill of rights or anything like that but we do have a constitution, which can only be changed by a referendum, a country wide vote,and it insures our right to do as we please, within the law of course,but it is not available as a platform for anyone but as a foundation for eveyone, so if I don't like something,say, your doing, providing it's legal, to bad, live with it and get on with your life, but it's not like that with you guys is it??
Blessings <M>

But, permitting children of every faith to pray in Public School as directed by their parents is not an establishment of a particular church and definitely not the establishment of a national church..

Hmm. Now I actually have a serious question. It might be a stupid question, but someone please humor me, because I really don't know.

Exactly what does define a church or a place of worship? And couldn't any place where people gather and worship be defined as a church? If so, could De Maria's plan define a school as being a place of worship?

I anticipate De Maria will say no, because they are allowing different religions to pray, but so what? Any praying is considered worship, no? So the public school at least for a period every day would become a place of worship. I think that's a no-no and De Maria and co. really have their work cut out.

Hello lob:

Does't matter. Here's the First Amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

It's got nothing to do with the building.

excon

The state oversees the public school system. So, religion instruction is not allowed to be a part of the public school curriculum.

This has nothing to do with religious instruction but with the free exercise thereof.
Mikle, above is integral to the problem (along with the other things DeMaria pointed out). In keeping with the quote Excon has kindly provided, part of the problem that comes into play is: how do you properly separate (or marry, as the case may be ;) ) the freedom to pray where ever and whenever you wish, within the framework of a government run system? DeMaria feels that this is a non-issue due to his (and others) interpretations of the constitution. The U.S. Judicial system, in deciding how to interprete that clause, relies not only on the amendment, but the federalist papers (documents written by the founding father that gives us more info on the intentions behind their words), along with the rulings in prior cases. Now, from what DeMaria wrote in earlier posts, it appears that he would like to establish a general prayer session as part of the curriculum. The problem for him (and others) will be in getting the courts to overturn previous rulings on that same issue. Those previous rulings don't allow for it. So, they will need to present a very cohesive argument showing how the rulings against it were faulty and why they should be overturned.

Mikle, I don't know how your constitution, and system works so I can't comment on how much alike or different ours are from yours. Here, anyone can challenge the laws in place (through a lawsuit filed with the court system). Depending on how the paperwork filed is written, the case will either be heard, or thrown out.

BTW, our voting is done through our representatives in Washington. We elect those representatives. Of course, they don't always vote the way we ourselves might vote on a particular matter, but in theory, all the elected officials are supposed to be a good (smaller) representation of the general population's stance on matters. They vote among themselves and certain laws get passed, or rejected. There is a lot more to it and it is too much for me to get into here, but it is a system that was put into place with the intention to ensure everyone has a voice. The majority cannot vote away the rights of the minority. (Although that too is a part of what DeMaria feels is a matter of interpretation, from what I remember of his earlier posts).

So, IMO, if people want to a more formalized group prayer (currently students are allowed to pray where ever or when ever they like, as long as it doesn't interfere with class time) prayer clubs are a good alternative to the current system in place.

You might want to go back to the beginning of this thread and read the responses from people. Interesting stuff. The original purpose behind Kelly posting was due to an incident in her school. Most of us here, I believe, agree (although many here didn't write a response to it) that the school's response was an overreaction and inappropriate.

I think it's okay and those who don't feel they should participate don't have to do it.
I mean my high school dose it we even have sessions after school...

Hmm. Now I actually have a serious question. It might be a stupid question, but someone please humor me, because I really don't know.

Exactly what does define a church or a place of worship? And couldn't any place where people gather and worship be defined as a church? If so, could De Maria's plan define a school as being a place of worship?

I anticipate De Maria will say no, because they are allowing different religions to pray, but so what? Any praying is considered worship, no? So the public school at least for a period of time every day would become a place of worship. I think that's a no-no and De Maria and co. really have their work cut out.

As I understand it, the government is prohibited from making any law which establishes a religion. That means, they can't say, "Hey Lob, from now on you and everyone else have to pray to the Cookie Monster."

At the same time, the government must guarantee the free exercise of any religion to which you adhere. That means, they can't say, "Hey Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus or any other religious people, if you think you're gonna pray, forget about it. We won't permit you to exercise your religion."

And since "atheists" do not exercise a religion, per se, they fall under the "make no law...prohibiting the free exercise" clause. The government must guarantee their right to exercise or not to exercise any religion. Therefore, they can't say, "Hey Lob, pick a god or else."

Sincerely,

De Maria

That means, they can't say, "Hey Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus or any other religious people, if you think you're gonna pray, forget about it. We won't permit you to exercise your religion."

Well, I think this is the area of contention. Many people (myself included), just don't see them as saying any such thing now. Your child is perfectly free to pray as often as he wants in school. He just needs to do so without disturbing others. Let me ask you this...

Many Muslims must pray 3 or 4 times a day. Are you OK with taking 3 times out of the day for prayer? What if Muslims were a majority in a given school?

I see it as you're being unreasonable. Again, we don't need to change a thing so that your child can pray in school right now. He can go to school tomorrow and pray with no repurcussions whatsoever. No one is telling him he can't. His rights are secured. Like I said, you have your work cut out for you.

Well, I think this is the area of contention. Many people (myself included), just don't see them as saying any such thing now. Your child is perfectly free to pray as often as he wants in school. He just needs to do so without disturbing others. Let me ask you this...

Many Muslims must pray 3 or 4 times a day. Are you ok with taking 3 times out of the day for prayer? What if Muslims were a majority in a given school?

I see it as you're being unreasonable. Again, we don't need to change a thing so that your child can pray in school right now. He can go to school tomorrow and pray with no repurcussions whatsoever. No one is telling him me can't. His rights are secured. Like I said, you have your work cut out for you.

In fact, Muslims seem to be making headway in that respect. I have nothing against Muslims praying in Public School.

Prayer at graduation ceremonies of public schools
2001-NOV: NY: New York City public schools: Chancellor Harold Levy stated that the city would facilitate prayers for Muslim students during the lunar month ...
Prayer at graduation ceremonies of public schools (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ps_praf.htm) - 51k - Cached - Similar pages

Muslim prayer at public schools (radical, Reed, Christ, state ...
Public schools grapple with Muslim prayer | csmonitor.com ... I like Mark Steyn's term "creeping sharia", concessions being given to them day by day, ...
Politics and Other Controversies - City-Data Forum: Relocation, Moving, Local City Discussions (http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-other-controversies/)

WorldNetDaily: School allows Muslim to pray
An Ohio high school that barred a Muslim from praying at school reached a compromise, ... prayers or Bible readings at public schools are unconstitutional, ...
WorldNetDaily: School allows Muslim to pray (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48487) - 31k -

But let me ask you. Since Islam requires Muslims to pray 5 times a day, and since Muslims are a very small minority in this country, how do you respond when they want to pray? After all, you said, the majority could not dictate to the minority, didn't you?

Country Name,, Total Population,, Muslims Percentage,, Number of Muslims
United States,, 266,476,278,, 3.75 %,, ,, 9,992,860

Population of Muslims around the world (http://islamicweb.com/begin/population.htm)


Atheists The Persecuted LARGE Minority
See the chart on this website. I couldn't cut and paste. It showed atheists at about 25% in some states and totaling more than 29 million. Only Catholics and Baptists number more.
Atheists In America (http://jcnot4me.com/Items/Misc%20Topics/atheists_in_america.htm)

Oh, do you guys consider yourself persecuted? Ain't that kind of paranoid?

Sincerely,

In fact, Muslims seem to be making headway in that respect. I have nothing against Muslims praying in Public School.
LOL! I am sure you don't. Once Muslims can manage that one, they have just paved the way quite nicely for you and have made your case a MUCH stronger one. LOL. Sorry, I don't see the Muslims making headway if we are to rely on the links you gave to us as proof of that.


Prayer at graduation ceremonies of public schools
2001-NOV: NY: New York City public schools: Chancellor Harold Levy stated that the city would facilitate prayers for Muslim students during the lunar month ...
Prayer at graduation ceremonies of public schools (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ps_praf.htm) - 51k - Cached - Similar pages In the list provided, all were denied the right to pray during normal school hours/class time. Harold Levy had to quickly squash his "brilliant" plan, due to an overwhelmingly negative response from the public. The only issue listed that did not have the correct outcome, IMO, was the one in TX where the children were not allowed to pray during their lunch hour. That should have been allowed. Lunch hour is not class time, it is break time. Since this occurred close to 8 years ago, hopefully the parents of the students have managed to get that decision reversed by now. If not, they should be challenging it.

Muslim prayer at public schools (radical, Reed, Christ, state ...
Public schools grapple with Muslim prayer | csmonitor.com ... I like Mark Steyn's term "creeping sharia", concessions being given to them day by day, ...
Politics and Other Controversies - City-Data Forum: Relocation, Moving, Local City Discussions (http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-other-controversies/)
This is a forum link.? I am sure it has some relevance, but I am being brought to the beginning of the forum and not the thread you want us to look at. Since I am not a member, it isn't allowing for a search and I don't have the time to search through the threads one by one to find it. Is there a direct link to an article that you are referencing here? Or is this merely an opinion thread, like the one we are on now?

WorldNetDaily: School allows Muslim to pray
An Ohio high school that barred a Muslim from praying at school reached a compromise, ... prayers or Bible readings at public schools are unconstitutional, ...
WorldNetDaily: School allows Muslim to pray (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48487) - 31k - This explains that the compromise reached allows the student to pray during lunch hour, along with before and after school hours. The same rights as all other religions if they so choose to exercise their rights.



But let me ask you. Since Islam requires Muslims to pray 5 times a day, and since Muslims are a very small minority in this country, how do you respond when they want to pray? After all, you said, the majority could not dictate to the minority, didn't you?

Country Name ,,,,,,,Total Population,,,,,,,,Muslims Percentage ,,,,,,,Number of Muslims
United States,,,,,,,,,,,,, 266,476,278 ,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,3.75 % ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 9,992,860

Population of Muslims around the world (http://islamicweb.com/begin/population.htm) I respond the same way to all who want to pray during scheduled class time. There should be no exceptions or accommodations made for Muslim students. If other religions aren't allowed to do so, why should they be treated any differently?



Atheists The Persecuted LARGE Minority
See the chart on this website. I couldn't cut and paste. It showed atheists at about 25% in some states and totaling more than 29 million. Only Catholics and Baptists number more.
Atheists In America (http://jcnot4me.com/Items/Misc%20Topics/atheists_in_america.htm)

Oh, do you guys consider yourself persecuted? Ain't that kind of paranoid?
Nothing personal because you didn't write this article, but this has to be one of the most ridiculous things I have read. Who wrote this?

It should be noted statistics on religion in America get skewed depending on the specific question asked, and that "non-religious" doesn't necessarily mean "atheist". I know many people who believe in god, but if asked, "Are you religious" would respond, "No."

It should be noted statistics on religion in America get skewed depending on the specific question asked, and that "non-religious" doesn't necessarily mean "atheist". I know many people who believe in god, but if asked, "Are you religious" would respond, "No."

I think you raise a very important point. Many, many people believe in "belief" in God. That is, they think belief and religious affiliation is important, but when backed into a corner about whether they really believe some of the more outrageous claims of the bible, they will answer no. If cornered further, a good percentage of these people would admit to having doubts about God as well.

What do I think about prayer in school?

First and foremost, public schools are obligated to provide equal educational opportunity to all of its students.

That said, if Christians need 20 seconds at the start of class to say a quick prayer, then there should be a "moment of silence" before the teacher may begin presenting course material. If Muslims need time to pray several times during the day, they should be given schedules that allow for prayer. If Jews need a day off to observe a holiday, teachers should provide make-up sessions or exams.

I believe the "problems" are not caused by religion, but by the inflexibility of public school teachers unions. Those unions fail to recognize that teachers have a duty to educate. Teachers have a responsibility to watch the calendar, plan accordingly, even staying late or working weekends to give EVERY student the education they deserve.