 |
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Dec. 4 will again hear a challenge by Michael Newdow to the Pledge of Allegiance and its phrase "under God." Newdow won his prior lawsuit against the pledge until the Supreme Court, perhaps to avoid public outrage in the 2004 presidential election year, tossed out his case on a procedural technicality.
Is atheism in schools often censorship in disguise? Or does the author of the article slant it towards Christanity?
The Bill of Rights, as you know, has an amendment that calls for... Freedom of Religion AND Freedom of Speech. The United States was founded as a secular Republic by men who were students of the Enlightenment philosophy... they were Dieists, Unitarians, and Christians. They were very concerned that America not have established religions which become very powereful like in Europe.
Freedom of Speech----go out and proselitize, preach, what ever is lawful.
Freedom of Religion----go out and proselitize, preach, whatever is lawful.
BUT SINCE WE HAVE A SECULAR GOVERNMENT, NOT ON GOVERNMENT PROPERTY! Such as schools, courts, government buildings, etc. Nothing that suggests a connection between the government and religion. Everything else, have at it! Build churches, mosques, temples, advertise, proseletize...
The insistence of some religious people to include the mention of God in public school amazes me. I’m not offended in any way; in fact I sometimes invoke the use of the term, but come on, why do some people push it so hard.
sadly christians spend too much time fighting among their denominations, and not enough working together, and to be honest, the US long ago stopped being truly christian because too many christians are not really active or merely want to practice religions according to their own ideas, not real christianity.
if all christians who claim to be actually voted only for christian political people, not by political party, then only chrinstian political people would be in office, and christian values would be inforced.
but freedom of speech is a person thing, not a forced group activity, so one can pray all they want, just not be told to by a teacher.
I think a lot of people don’t realize just how much liberty to practice their religion they really have. Usually the cases we hear about are odd-ball cases that involve activist breaking the rules, or ignorant school personnel.
“Students have the right to pray individually or in groups or to discuss their religious views with their peers so long as they are not disruptive. Because the Establishment Clause does not apply to purely private speech, students enjoy the right to read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, pray before tests, and discuss religion with other willing student listeners. In the classroom students have the right to pray quietly except when required to be actively engaged in school activities (e.g., students may not decide to pray just as a teacher calls on them). In informal settings, such as the cafeteria or in the halls, students may pray either audibly or silently, subject to the same rules of order as apply to other speech in these locations. However, the right to engage in voluntary prayer does not include, for example, the right to have a captive audience listen or to compel other students to participate.
Students may express their religious beliefs in the form of reports, homework and artwork, and such expressions are constitutionally protected. Teachers may not reject or correct such submissions simply because they include a religious symbol or address religious themes. Likewise, teachers may not require students to modify, include or excise religious views in their assignments, if germane. These assignments should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance, relevance, appearance and grammar.”
http://www.logtv.com/films/schoolprayer/educate.htm
I have traveled to some places in South America before and I work with pastors in the far east, middle east and even places like england where there are all sorts of restrictions we take for granted here in the US, even differences between US and Canada on some church rights.
IN the US, we don't fear of someone coming in and shooting up the church, or we don't fear government coming in and arresting the pastor, many places in the world today that happens.
Hello DC:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_crow
It does. You can pray anywhere you like. You just can't organize a prayer in school. I don't know why that's so hard to understand.
Plus, if we had our choice of which Pledge of Allegiance to say, then I wouldn't mind if you said the Christian one, and I could say the other one. But, we only have ONE pledge. Therefore it's EVERYBODY'S pledge – not just the Christians. Inserting your god into our pledge separates and divides us into Christians and everybody else. That's not what a pledge of allegiance should do. Frankly, a pledge of allegiance has NOTHING to do with religion.
Clearly, it should be struck down.
Of course, it's not surprising that when you see black, I see white.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_crow
In my view, the lack of organized prayer in public school is NOT atheism. But, you did give me a chuckle.
excon
First of all, DC's original post never mentioned schools. It mentioned a challenge to the words "under g-d" in the Pledge of Allegiance. So bringing schools into this discussion is a bit of a red herring. The question is whether the government has the right to force us to stop saying "under g-d" in the pledge, just because an individual or group of individuals don't like it. It would seem that freedom of expression includes the right to use the term "under g-d" in the pledge, and would also allow those who do not like that term to not use it. But is it constitutionally permissible to force a change in the Pledge of Allegiance under the First Amendment? I would think not.
However, if we are going to talk about prayer in schools, we should keep in mind that a court recently ruled that a public school had to provide washing basins for Muslim's to wash their feet and for specific Muslim prayer times as part of the daily schedules. I don't remember all the details, but I think the case was adjudicated in Detroit.
The argument made by the Muslims in the Detroit case was the Muslims have to pray at specific times of the day, and that one of those times comes out during school hours. Thus the need to pray duing school time is unavoidable for the Muslim community. And since the prayertime needed is only 20 minutes or so, it does not significantly interfere with scholastic activities.
The argument against Christian prayer in schools is that Christians do not hae specific prayer times during the day, and can pray after school hours without violating religious doctrine. Therefore, there should be Muslim prayer in schools, but not Chistian prayer.
However, what this argument fails to take into consideration is that Islam is not the only religion that requires prayers at specific times. Judaism has similar requirements. In specific, the Mincha (afternoon) prayer service must take place during school hours, and takes about 10-15 minutes. Using the same argument, the Detroit school system should also be providing for Jewish prayer services along with Muslim prayer services. But I haven't heard any judge make this ruling or stand up for this right.
So it seems to me that Islam is permitted and encouraged on school grounds, but Christianity and Judaism are discouraged on school grounds. That strikes me as a double standard.
Elliot
Hello again, El:Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
Yes, he did. Go read it again.
Is it Constitutionally permissible to force a change in the Pledge?? It was changed some time in the 50's when your side ADDED the words "under God" to our already existing pledge. That happened before you were born. But it DID happen. If we changed it once, we can change it again. And, we should.
excon
Yes, by a vote. Not by the courts. That's the difference. One is making a choice and voting based on that choice. The other is being forced to do something with no say in the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Elliot
ETW,
I think saying that Islam is encouraged on school grounds is going a little to far. If the court had ruled against a case for Judaism in school and for the Muslims the you and I would both be outraged (if that is the case let me know so I can be outraged). I do think that the school paying for the foot washing is a bit silly.
Although on second thought how do I go back to public school and sue them to provide strippers for my lap dances as required by my religion. Which I'm required to be in lap dance meditation for at least 1 hour a day from 8am to 2pm Monday through Friday. OOOO maybe I'm a rastafarian stirppertarian so they have to provide me with pot and strippers. It's my religion so they can't tell me no.
I don't see a real difference between ruling against Christianity and in favor of Islam vs. against Judaism and in favor of Islam. Either way, there's a double standard in favor of Islam and against other religions.Quote:
Originally Posted by michealb
Agreed. And "silly" is not the word that I would use.Quote:
I do think that the school paying for the foot washing is a bit silly.
There you go. I like it. Can I convert?:pQuote:
Although on second thought how do I go back to public school and sue them to provide strippers for my lap dances as required by my religion. Which I'm required to be in lap dance meditation for at least 1 hour a day from 8am to 2pm Monday through Friday. OOOO maybe I'm a rastafarian stirppertarian so they have to provide me with pot and strippers. It's my religion so they can't tell me no.
Elliot
Ex, I didn't realize that recognizing "God" made it a distinctly Christian pledge. Does it?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
It doesn't make it distinctly Christian but it does make it distinctly religious. In order to understand how annoyed others are with this. Replace under god with under satan and that your kid is forced to say under satan in public school when saying the pledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Hello again, El:Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
Yes, Congress voted... And, if the Supreme Court decides that what they voted for is unconstitutional, they'll strike it down. There's nothing new about that.
In our system of government, the majority can't VOTE away the rights of the minority. That IS the way our system works, isn't it?
Or, are the judges only "activist" if they make a decision YOU don't like? Hmmm. I think the latter.
excon
Hello Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Not "distinctly", but pretty darn close.
Yes, there are other religions that worship "God". But, there are some that worship symbols and ideas. There are some who worship the land. There are even some who worship gargoyles and things. Then there's those potsafarians. And don't forget the atheists who have NO God at all.
It's true, they're in the minority. But, they're ALL still Americans who'd like to say the pledge... if it was something they could say without winking and crossing their fingers.
It was - BEFORE the words "under God" were inserted. Truly, it was a pledge that ANY American could say...
I know you're a Christian man. I also know you're a sensible man. That's the way it SHOULD be here in America, no? A pledge of allegiance for EVERYBODY??
excon
When I was in high school just 10 years ago. Teachers forced students to say the pledge in it's entirety. It wasn't something I liked to say it was a requirement for me to get my education. If I would have known anything about anything when I was in high school, I would have raised hell about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
... add to that : for too many american when the word GOD is mention they think it is jesus, but other religions have others in mindQuote:
Originally Posted by excon
Frankly, I think Michael Newdow needs to get a life and stop wasting so much time and money fighting 2 little words amounting to all of 3 syllables that have been a part of our Pledge of Allegiance for over 50 years. After all, if it's such a big deal, then why wasn't anything said about it when it was first added to the pledge?
You know slavery went on for probably 5000 years and nobody really said anything about. Does that make it right? Of course not just because the government has everyone to afraid to fight something when the law is passed doesn't make it right. How you feel if you had to say under satan or under Zeus? I bet you wouldn't like it at all.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:35 PM. |