 |
Hello Sold:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soldout
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by jillianleab
P.S. Are we saying the same thing? I am not sure. LOL! But it kind of sounds like it.
Just in case you did not see this response, here it is. This is what I am trying to explain..Quote:
Originally Posted by RubyPitbull
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Here is the source, I probably should have linked to that first:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soldout
The Graduate Center, CUNY
I think we are saying the same thing... sort of! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by RubyPitbull
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.
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.?Quote:
Originally Posted by Synnen
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.
Hopefully you saw my post #200 stating that I didn't see your follow up post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soldout
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.
I disagree. Its an interpretation problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by RubyPitbull
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. .Quote:
Although some people on this thread disagree, the majority recognize that we have a clearly defined separation of church and state.
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..
This has nothing to do with religious instruction but with the free exercise thereof.Quote:
The state oversees the public school system. So, religion instruction is not allowed to be a part of the public school curriculum.
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.Quote:
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.
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.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.) ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
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>
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by RubyPitbull
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
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...
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."Quote:
Originally Posted by lobrobster
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
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...Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
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.
In fact, Muslims seem to be making headway in that respect. I have nothing against Muslims praying in Public School.Quote:
Originally Posted by lobrobster
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 - 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
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 - 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
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
Oh, do you guys consider yourself persecuted? Ain't that kind of paranoid?
Sincerely,
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
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?
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by De Maria
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by jillianleab
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.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:41 PM. |