Explain the prayer in schools thing to me

[Cow Poke]

That raises an interesting question as well. When is it learning about different cultures and when is it practicing a specific religion? Is a "Forms of Religious Experience" class forbidden? Or specific classes that are not about practice but social studies?

If they (in my situation) had TAUGHT Islam's practices as part of a study of world religions, including Christianity, it would have been much different. And this was WAY pre-911, before I had much exposure at all to Islamic teachings.

Then again, I don't think I want a non-Christian teaching about Christianity -- I had THAT in high school back in the 60s/70s, and the history teacher made a point of emphasizing the "holy rollers" and anything derogatory he could sneer at.

[Cow Poke]

Hey come on now, if God gave you a terrible voice give it back to him loudly!!!

Well, the Word DOES say to "make a joyful NOISE".

[Hamster]

Yeah I'm really gonna trust the public education system to teach people about Jesus

[Seasanctuary]

http://www.christianpost.com/news/gr...y-in-us-49588/

Thanks! Now let's look at these cases:

* Not opening official city government meetings with prayers 'in Jesus name.'
The only problem here is opening government meetings with any prayers at all. It is more apparent that the government is endorsing a particular kind of religion when prayers to "Jesus" are made, but Christian-style prayers exclude many (but not all) non-Christian views. Not to mention the objection some Christian sects have with this practice.

* Removing Gordon Klingenschmitt from him military chaplaincy for praying in Jesus' name.
A quick Google casts some serious doubt on whether this was the reason for his dismissal. But in general, it depends on how the chaplain thing is being run. If a member of the military can personally choose to take part in sectarian services, great! I support the notion of providing options to soldiers. If, on the other hand, religious views are being pushed on this captive audience, that's crummy all around.

* UCLA not allowed a student to thank Jesus during a graduation speech.
Again, Google reveals it's not so simple. A school official was reading remarks from multiple students and wanted to say 'God' instead of 'Jesus.' Certainly if the officials are going to do one, the other should be allowed! Letting students speak for themselves or adding a disclaimer that "The views expressed are not...etc." should have dodged the issue entirely.

* A university (UC Hastings, it turns out) denying Christian groups (a group it turns out) recognition for requiring its leadership to agree to a religious creed. It was university policy that officially recognized student groups and leadership positions in them be open to all students and, from what I can tell, this was being applied fairly.

* Fourth graders told by the school that they couldn't do Bible study on their own prerogative in a Knoxville school.
OH HEY, I agree with this article for once. This is a clear violation of civil liberties, unless students are generally barred from (1) talking to each other at recess or (2) reading books during recess. Both of which would be very silly rules.

* Federal funding for the arts sometimes ends up going to artists who offend Christians, but people tip-toe around offending Muslims.
Are you for school vouchers? The argument I defend in favor of school vouchers is that the government money is not given based on having or not having certain views on religion. The same argument applies to national art grants. And, yes, the same freedom applies to art Muslims find offensive.

* A private group wants to make Quran desecration a hate crime.
I'm happy to protest the government adopting any such laws.


For the most part, it sounds like government representatives (acting in that role) are trying to be fair and neutral toward private religious rights. The graduation reader and the elementary principal were overcorrecting and not understanding the spirit of the law.

But then, there's no evidence that the people who wrote this alarmist article understand religious freedom themselves. Insisting on a Christianity-promoting government is what provokes unthinking overcorrections in the first place.

[Seasanctuary]

About 15 years ago I did some substitute teaching in one of our public Junior High schools. As Hamster as mentioned, there was a "cultural emphasis" on "Islam", and Muslim children were encouraged to bring their prayer mats and share their experiences with other children. Several classrooms were turned into Muslim prayer rooms for the full "experience". Observance of this "cultural event" was not optional.

Yes, that's terrible.

EDIT — Similar for Rogue's example. Having kids imitate religious rituals is not an appropriate way to teach them about a religion in public school.

[Carrikature]

But that doesn't mean there should be a knee-jerk overcorrection whenever Christianity is mentioned. We've seen this happen time and again, most notably in the past 30 years in regards to tolerance of homosexuality. Our nation has overcorrected there.

I'm not sure what you mean...

With a religion that specifically decries certain acts that have become societal norm, the knee-jerk reaction by the public is to be expected. The countless examples of sheer ignorance on the part of Christians has only added fuel to the fire.

[rogue06]

Hey come on now, if God gave you a terrible voice give it back to him loudly!!!

My church will despise you if I take you up on this advise.

[justgin]

I'm not sure what you mean...

With a religion that specifically decries certain acts that have become societal norm, the knee-jerk reaction by the public is to be expected. The countless examples of sheer ignorance on the part of Christians has only added fuel to the fire.

And that makes over-correction right? And if so how? Let's not forget Jesus said this would happen (if the world hates you, know it hated Me first...) - so it's expected but that doesn't make it fair.

[justgin]

Thanks.....place.

(Shortened for brevity)


Thanks for your opinion. I'll file it away with all the other opinions i disagree with.

[Seasanctuary]

Why do you disagree? Because I advocate freedom of religion instead of government promoted Christianity?

[phaedrus]

And that makes over-correction right? And if so how? Let's not forget Jesus said this would happen (if the world hates you, know it hated Me first...) - so it's expected but that doesn't make it fair.

I'm not convinced that not allowing your particular religion a privileged place in a public schools amounts to hate. I think this sort of overstatement cheapens what persecution really entails for people in much more oppressive circumstances than this all around the world.

[justgin]

I'm not convinced that not allowing your particular religion a privileged place in a public schools amounts to hate. I think this sort of overstatement cheapens what persecution really entails for people in much more oppressive circumstances than this all around the world.

I'm not even asking for a privileged place in schools. I'm talking about tolerance and the notion that all religions should be tolerated in our country. That's fair. And i'm also not even talking about persecution experienced by other brothers and sisters around the world. I wouldn't dream of "cheapening" their situations. Don't put words in my mouth.

[justgin]

Why do you disagree? Because I advocate freedom of religion instead of government promoted Christianity?

If you really do promote freedom of religion, then surely you won't mind if i pray in a public place in the name of Jesus Christ and tell others about Him.

[Cow Poke]

Why do you disagree? Because I advocate freedom of religion instead of government promoted Christianity?

Humanism is a religion, and it is government promoted.

Humanist Magazine

"I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public classroom by teachers that correctly perceive their role as proselytizers of a new faith which will replace the rotting corpse of Christianity." John J. Dunphy, Humanist Magazine, January-February 1983

© source where applicable

[phaedrus]

Humanism is a religion, and it is government promoted.

Humanist Magazine

"I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public classroom by teachers that correctly perceive their role as proselytizers of a new faith which will replace the rotting corpse of Christianity." John J. Dunphy, Humanist Magazine, January-February 1983

© source where applicable

Well that's just dumb, and imo an extreme view. I consider myself to be a humanist and don't feel anything like this at all.