Going to jail for PRAYING?

[kaylk in tx]

when it's in the context of minor children being a captive audience, such as you find in public schools. So it wouldn't matter to me AT ALL what religion it was.... it's the fact that it's religion and the children CANNOT opt out because their attendance at school is mandated by law.

[Spy Car]

Saying a prayer isn't proselytizing!!

 

Th court found previously the Principal (and others) were proselyting. Not conducting prayers was part of the court order in response to that finding.

 

I'll turn this. Here is my question to you and those of you who are so appalled: Would you feel the same way if it was Islam or Wiccan or, wow, basically ANYTHING other than Christianity that they were "proselytizing" during class?

 

Absolutely 100% without question. Yes!

 

The same would go for a School Principal or teacher who ridiculed a student's faith, and tried to push atheism on students.

 

You must protect every child's freedom of conscious, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Wiccans, atheists, or whatever. We can't allow coercion of any young person on campus. It's not hard to imagine a campus somewhere where a Christian child is the one in the minority. Would we allow their faith to be treated hostilely by campus officials? I hope not.

 

I know I'd protest that instance as strongly as I am in this case. Unless we are all free, none of us are free.

 

No school official should force their faith (or non-faith) position on a child. Ever.

 

There is nothing to celebrate in this decision. This is not a victory for religious freedom.

 

Bill

[Impish]

Agreeing with Bill.

 

I don't care WHAT religion they're spouting, it has no place in a classroom.

 

And yes, I'm Christian. I firmly believe, though, that if you allow ONE religion access to vulnerable children, then you MUST allow all. And not something that I think should be taking up time in a classroom, period.

 

Heck, I have MAJOR issues with the Gideons giving out Bibles. I received one in grade 6, and my mother promptly threw it in the garbage. If you're going to allow Bibles being passed out, then equal time should be given to pass out every other religion's book of faith.

[Tea Time]

Agreeing with Bill.

 

I don't care WHAT religion they're spouting, it has no place in a classroom.

 

And yes, I'm Christian. I firmly believe, though, that if you allow ONE religion access to vulnerable children, then you MUST allow all. And not something that I think should be taking up time in a classroom, period.

 

Heck, I have MAJOR issues with the Gideons giving out Bibles. I received one in grade 6, and my mother promptly threw it in the garbage. If you're going to allow Bibles being passed out, then equal time should be given to pass out every other religion's book of faith.

 

 

 

To disallow ALL religious discussion, behavior, etc. (spouting? Whatever that gets defined as) is to tacitly support a secular, atheistic belief system by default which is largely what we are doing at this point. Besides providing a huge advantage to this world view, which many people argue is its own form of religion, it is rather insular and not reflective of the real world where many people are, well, religious. Public education is all about preparing kids for the real world, so they say.

 

This whole problem highlights the reason that a socialist, public education system is not the best fit for a truly pluralistic society. You can't please everyone or meet the needs of everyone, but you can sure take everyone's money.

 

Is this the elephant in the room? I tend to always bring up the blasted elephant. People hate that.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Th court found previously the Principal (and others) were proselyting. Not conducting prayers was part of the court order in response to that finding.

 

 

 

Absolutely 100% without question. Yes!

 

The same would go for a School Principal or teacher who ridiculed a student's faith, and tried to push atheism on students.

 

You must protect every child's freedom of conscious, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Wiccans, atheists, or whatever. We can't allow coercion of any young person on campus. It's not hard to imagine a campus somewhere where a Christian child is the one in the minority. Would we allow their faith to be treated hostilely by campus officials? I hope not.

 

I know I'd protest that instance as strongly as I am in this case. Unless we are all free, none of us are free.

 

No school official should force their faith (or non-faith) position on a child. Ever.

 

There is nothing to celebrate in this decision. This is not a victory for religious freedom.

 

Bill

:iagree::iagree:

[Jen500]

To disallow ALL religious discussion, behavior, etc. (spouting? Whatever that gets defined as) is to tacitly support a secular, atheistic belief system by default which is largely what we are doing at this point. Besides providing a huge advantage to this world view, which many people argue is its own form of religion, it is rather insular and not reflective of the real world where many people are, well, religious. Public education is all about preparing kids for the real world, so they say.

 

 

 

 

 

The 'real world'? I have never been employed in a workplace and been forced to listen to a manager/boss pray before a meeting.

[Slartibartfast]

To disallow ALL religious discussion, behavior, etc. (spouting? Whatever that gets defined as) is to tacitly support a secular, atheistic belief system by default which is largely what we are doing at this point. Besides providing a huge advantage to this world view, which many people argue is its own form of religion, it is rather insular and not reflective of the real world where many people are, well, religious. Public education is all about preparing kids for the real world, so they say.

 

This whole problem highlights the reason that a socialist, public education system is not the best fit for a truly pluralistic society. You can't please everyone or meet the needs of everyone, but you can sure take everyone's money.

 

Is this the elephant in the room? I tend to always bring up the blasted elephant. People hate that.

 

 

But the flaw in your argument is that the students can discuss religion with each other.

 

Their peers can discuss religion with them, not their teachers, not their authority figures, their peers. How does that not prepare them for the real world?

[tex-mex]

To disallow ALL religious discussion, behavior, etc. (spouting? Whatever that gets defined as) is to tacitly support a secular, atheistic belief system by default which is largely what we are doing at this point.

 

Hmmmm... well, from what I was trained in as a former schoolteacher during inservice times, the lack of sensitivity towards other religions and expousing Christianity as the one true religion (throughout most of history) is the reason for the topic being "neutral". It isn't atheistic. The term to use for this POV is MULTICULTURALISM.

 

And to be frank, a student has the freedom to stand up and say what they believe. An employee of the school district does not. That employee has no right to demean a student for believing in God or telling kids his/her views of why the class should join the communist party. The OP was that the Principal crossed the line (many times) with his role and his faith. None of us have disagreed with his personal choice of faith... most of us have issues with his actions crossing the line as a professional educator.

 

To answer your question: If you allow other religions in, then yes, the Bible should be included... TX has listed the Bible as an approved book for literature. Multiculturalism in the public schools is a hot topic. But that can be another thread... :confused:

[PineFarmMom]

never mind...beating a dead horse

Edited September 22, 2009 by Texas T

[Erica in PA]

To disallow ALL religious discussion, behavior, etc. (spouting? Whatever that gets defined as) is to tacitly support a secular, atheistic belief system by default which is largely what we are doing at this point. Besides providing a huge advantage to this world view, which many people argue is its own form of religion, it is rather insular and not reflective of the real world where many people are, well, religious.

 

I think that is an *excellent* point. The fact that faith is not allowed in schools is a major reason why we homeschool... imo, this stance in essence promotes a secular viewpoint, and seeks to relegate faith to the fringes of life. You can be religious, but not openly so for most of the day, and not in relation to what you're learning, because real education doesn't involve religion-- that's something you can participate in on weekends if you want to. And it's absolutely *not* just adults in the school system who are prohibited from speaking about matters of faith in schools... I could link to any number of news articles where children of various ages were told they could not bring God into their schoolwork or classrooms.

[5kidsforME]

But the flaw in your argument is that the students can discuss religion with each other.

 

Their peers can discuss religion with them, not their teachers, not their authority figures, their peers. How does that not prepare them for the real world?

 

So in the "real world" a boss can't talk about religion?

[Tea Time]

The 'real world'? I have never been employed in a workplace and been forced to listen to a manager/boss pray before a meeting.

 

I agree, which is why I think socialized public education is not the best choice for a pluralistic society. But in fact people in "the real world" are religious and they do pray. They may try to force their employees to do so, too, but the employees are welcome to complain or look for other work. All kinds of stuff happens is a real pluralistic culture.

 

But the flaw in your argument is that the students can discuss religion with each other.

 

Their peers can discuss religion with them, not their teachers, not their authority figures, their peers. How does that not prepare them for the real world?

 

Would that it were that simple.

 

If the authority figures are restricted from discussing a topic, this has a long term influence upon the children. It is not missed on them. It has a chilling effect, and I personally see that people in the "private sector" increasingly cannot differentiate between private sector and gov't situations like PS schools or the military. There are numerous examples of people starting to think that things that would not be allowed or appropriate in school or the military are therefore not allowed or appropriate in a private settings.

 

I submit that all religion is systematically being repressed by the public school system, and there is even an advantage from this perspective to incite a certain level of conflict between the religious groups to quiet each other. This happened historically when the Protestants so desired to quiet the Catholics that the Catholics started the parochial schools to combat this trend. A was a very effective way for the secularists to shut down both groups, and this trend has continued. (See John Taylor Gatto, The Underground History of Education in America).

 

Hmmmm... well, from what I was trained in as a former schoolteacher during inservice times, the lack of sensitivity towards other religions and expousing Christianity as the one true religion (throughout most of history) is the reason for the topic being "neutral". It isn't atheistic. The term to use for this POV is MULTICULTURALISM. I reject what you were taught at the inservice. Did you feel that you had a right to reject what you were taught? How would someone who questioned this dogma be received at such an inservice?

 

And to be frank, a student has the freedom to stand up and say what they believe. An employee of the school district does not. That employee has no right to demean a student for believing in God or telling kids his/her views of why the class should join the communist party. The OP was that the Principal crossed the line (many times) with his role and his faith. None of us have disagreed with his personal choice of faith... most of us have issues with his actions crossing the line as a professional educator. I do not think students are free to say what they believe, any of them. Again, I think socialistic education chills free speech for students and faculty alike and is not helpful to any world view except the secular atheist world view and those with socialist agendas.

 

To answer your question: If you allow other religions in, then yes, the Bible should be included... TX has listed the Bible as an approved book for literature. Multiculturalism in the public schools is a hot topic. But that can be another thread... :confused: I did not ask this question, but I agree that multiculturalism is a buzzword, so I used "pluralistic" instead. I do not think the goal of public education was or is to help facilitate a healthy "multicultural" society. That is a ruse.

 

My point, the elephant, is that I think this case highlights the inherent flaws in trying to force everyone to pay for a school system which cannot accommodate an increasingly wide range of beliefs. It is not fair to anyone.

 

I better stop since I will probably get this thread shut down.

[Tea Time]

I think that is an *excellent* point. The fact that faith is not allowed in schools is a major reason why we homeschool... imo, this stance in essence promotes a secular viewpoint, and seeks to relegate faith to the fringes of life. You can be religious, but not openly so for most of the day, and not in relation to what you're learning, because real education doesn't involve religion-- that's something you can participate in on weekends if you want to. And it's absolutely *not* just adults in the school system who are prohibited from speaking about matters of faith in schools... I could link to any number of news articles where children of various ages were told they could not bring God into their schoolwork or classrooms.

 

:iagree:

 

Yes! You said this much better than I did. Thank you.

[Greta]

To disallow ALL religious discussion, behavior, etc. (spouting? Whatever that gets defined as) is to tacitly support a secular, atheistic belief system by default which is largely what we are doing at this point.

 

I agree with you on this point. Though I've been a long-time supporter of keeping religion out of schools, I have come to realize this basically means that secularism/atheism/whatever is essentially what is being taught, implicitly if not explicitly. I don't know exactly how to best approach a solution or change to this situation, but I think it does warrant some attention and thought. Because what we have right now is not accepting of any/all religions equally (which I think is a good thing!), it is accepting of *no* religion, and I think that's a different cup of tea.

 

This whole problem highlights the reason that a socialist, public education system is not the best fit for a truly pluralistic society.

 

Not sure that I follow you are agree with you here though. I don't think socialism necessarily equals secularism, if that's what you're getting at??? Someone (Laura, anyone) correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that U.K. schools are more accepting of religion, more likely to teach it, but that's obviously a more socialist-leaning country than the U.S. But I'm not sure if that's what you meant.

[Joker]

I've been reading lately that many Texas schools are going to have a Bible as literature class in public schools. I don't live in TX so don't know anything for sure but what I've read say they are not teaching the Bible as the word of God or even that God exists - they are teaching it as a historic piece of literature. Anyone know anything about this or what it may mean for other states?

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

So in the "real world" a boss can't talk about religion?

I suppose they can, but I was always taught that it is best not to talk politics or religion at work.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Hmmmm... well, from what I was trained in as a former schoolteacher during inservice times, the lack of sensitivity towards other religions and expousing Christianity as the one true religion (throughout most of history) is the reason for the topic being "neutral". It isn't atheistic. The term to use for this POV is MULTICULTURALISM.

 

And to be frank, a student has the freedom to stand up and say what they believe. An employee of the school district does not. That employee has no right to demean a student for believing in God or telling kids his/her views of why the class should join the communist party. The OP was that the Principal crossed the line (many times) with his role and his faith. None of us have disagreed with his personal choice of faith... most of us have issues with his actions crossing the line as a professional educator.

 

To answer your question: If you allow other religions in, then yes, the Bible should be included... TX has listed the Bible as an approved book for literature. Multiculturalism in the public schools is a hot topic. But that can be another thread... :confused:

:iagree::iagree:

 

I also think that of being secular in the schools or other government run facilities as being neutral and not atheistic and therefore protecting our religious freedoms.

 

IMHO their is plenty of time for prayer outside of school for teachers and they are always free to pray silently to themselves:).

 

I just do not want to see a particular religion imposed in public government run places.

[tex-mex]

I've been reading lately that many Texas schools are going to have a Bible as literature class in public schools. I don't live in TX so don't know anything for sure but what I've read say they are not teaching the Bible as the word of God or even that God exists - they are teaching it as a historic piece of literature. Anyone know anything about this or what it may mean for other states?

 

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/2009/08/08/0808bible.html

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/090609dnmetbibleteach.3ff862f.html

 

This is one example of a state approved curriculum using the Bible:

http://www.bibleinschools.net/

[monk17]

Besides providing a huge advantage to this world view, which many people argue is its own form of religion, it is rather insular and not reflective of the real world where many people are, well, religious. Public education is all about preparing kids for the real world, so they say.

 

 

Never mind

[tex-mex]

Originally Posted by tex-mex

Hmmmm... well, from what I was trained in as a former schoolteacher during inservice times, the lack of sensitivity towards other religions and expousing Christianity as the one true religion (throughout most of history) is the reason for the topic being "neutral". It isn't atheistic. The term to use for this POV is MULTICULTURALISM.

 

I reject what you were taught at the inservice. Did you feel that you had a right to reject what you were taught? How would someone who questioned this dogma be received at such an inservice?

 

As a Native American and Tejano/Hispanic -- gotta say I do not agree with your saying this is dogma. I am a Christian -- however, we Christians need to acknowledge the past misdeeds done to other cultures/religions (i.e. the Inquisition, Manifest Destiny, genocide of indigenous peoples in the New World, etc). Blood has been shed and the ground cries out for justice. What do we do as Christians? Ask for forgiveness and reconcile. It doesn't solve the problem. But it is our duty to undo the past. America has many cultures and it is wrong to declare new arrivals have to "assimilate" and shed off their cultures to be an American. We are all different. We are one nation. So, unlike the principal's behavior -- I do not beleive in cramming my faith down people's throats in an effort to share my faith. Ethically, it is immoral and leads to bitterness.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

And to be frank, a student has the freedom to stand up and say what they believe. An employee of the school district does not. That employee has no right to demean a student for believing in God or telling kids his/her views of why the class should join the communist party. The OP was that the Principal crossed the line (many times) with his role and his faith. None of us have disagreed with his personal choice of faith... most of us have issues with his actions crossing the line as a professional educator.

 

I do not think students are free to say what they believe, any of them. Again, I think socialistic education chills free speech for students and faculty alike and is not helpful to any world view except the secular atheist world view and those with socialist agendas.

 

Well, gotta disagree with you on this one. I personally have seen students get the ACLJ to sue my school district for having their rights violated based on their Christian faith. And public schools are not socialistic. Neutrality (all faiths) is the idea -- imperfectly done -- but the overall idea in public schools.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

To answer your question: If you allow other religions in, then yes, the Bible should be included... TX has listed the Bible as an approved book for literature. Multiculturalism in the public schools is a hot topic. But that can be another thread... :confused:

 

I did not ask this question, but I agree that multiculturalism is a buzzword, so I used "pluralistic" instead. I do not think the goal of public education was or is to help facilitate a healthy "multicultural" society. That is a ruse.

 

Again, I disagree with you. I did not state it was a goal. However, it is not a ruse but a strong factor in selecting Social Studies textbooks, for example. I was part of a select group of educators chosen by my state dept. of education (due to my ethnic background) to have a voice in the development of new history/social studies textbooks.

 

 

 

My point, the elephant, is that I think this case highlights the inherent flaws in trying to force everyone to pay for a school system which cannot accommodate an increasingly wide range of beliefs. It is not fair to anyone.

 

I better stop since I will probably get this thread shut down.

 

Obviously we do not agree on this issue. And yes, I think we are veering way from the OP... but I have answered your comments above. Cheers.

Edited September 23, 2009 by tex-mex

[Tea Time]

Originally Posted by Tea Time

Originally Posted by tex-mex

Hmmmm... well, from what I was trained in as a former schoolteacher during inservice times, the lack of sensitivity towards other religions and expousing Christianity as the one true religion (throughout most of history) is the reason for the topic being "neutral". It isn't atheistic. The term to use for this POV is MULTICULTURALISM.

 

I reject what you were taught at the inservice. Did you feel that you had a right to reject what you were taught? How would someone who questioned this dogma be received at such an inservice?

 

As a Native American and Tejano/Hispanic -- gotta say I do not agree with your saying this is dogma. I am a Christian -- however, we Christians need to acknowledge the past misdeeds done to other cultures/religions (i.e. the Inquisition, Manifest Destiny, genocide of indigenous peoples in the New World, etc). Blood has been shed and the ground cries out for justice. What do we do as Christians? Ask for forgiveness and reconcile. It doesn't solve the problem. But it is our duty to undo the past. America has many cultures and it is wrong to declare new arrivals have to "assimilate" and shed off their cultures to be an American. We are all different. We are one nation. So, unlike the principal's behavior -- I do not beleive in cramming my faith down people's throats in an effort to share my faith. Ethically, it is immoral and leads to bitterness.

 

________________________________

 

You did not answer those questions, or address my underlying premise which I stated before:

 

My point, the elephant, is that I think this case highlights the inherent flaws in trying to force everyone to pay for a school system which cannot accommodate an increasingly wide range of beliefs. It is not fair to anyone.

 

I agree with you that cramming faith down people's throats causes bitterness (I certainly never suggested doing anything like that). Ridiculing people of faith causes bitterness. Marginalizing people's faith also causes bitterness. Ignoring people's faith causes bitterness. The list goes on. But I can think of nothing worse than taking people's hard earned money and using it to pay for doing these things.

 

With all due respect to the fact that you are part of a minority class or that you are a Christian, it is not relevant to this point. Your other train of thought about the evils of Christianity is totally beside this point, too.

 

But since you brought it up, I must say I find it alarming. The public school system is not the place for any race or religion to be forced to atone for the past. The public schools should remain "neutral," right? But how can they do that if the Christians are all busy atoning for their past sins as your teacher in-service suggested. It totally contradicts the idea that children will be able to speak freely or that the schools are neutral about religion, especially Christianity which is being taught (by your text book choices) as being guilty of all manner of things that may or may not be particularly historically accurate. None of this is neutral. Which is exactly what I am saying. Taxpayers should not be forced to support this. I could make similar arguments around other faiths which might also suffer at the hand of institutionalized schooling. Really only atheism (secular humanism) comes out sparkling.

 

Public schools are socialistic by definition. They take a pool of money from everyone (?) to pay for a service. It is "socialistic." What is hard about that? How is that deniable? I just don't see how that can be denied. There are other things in society that are socialistic, but none of them reaches the level of intimacy and invasiveness that the PS system does since it influences our children and forms the minds of future generations. Hardly the same as the post office or building roads, or even the military (all of which have distinct and definable goals that can largely be agreed upon by everyone). When goals can no longer be agreed upon by a huge majority, or when a social program becomes oppressive in general, it is time to break up the socialistic system and provide choice. You may be fine with it as is. You should know, however, that not everyone is fine with it.

 

It comes back to this… if the ACLU has to get involved with every little thing, this just supports my premise all the more. It is getting ridiculous when students have to sue the schools and the ACLU has to sue the faculty and we pay for all this nonsense. Something is wrong.

[tex-mex]

 

I reject what you were taught at the inservice. Did you feel that you had a right to reject what you were taught? How would someone who questioned this dogma be received at such an inservice?

 

I already told you my POV about this from an indigenous look into history. History is filled with Christians doing ungodly things to other religions and leaving a trail of bitterness. If we do not understand history, we are doomed to repeat it. Multicultural education is a field of study and an emerging discipline whose major aim is to create equal educational opportunities for public school students from diverse racial, ethnic, social-class, and cultural groups. One of its important goals is to help all students to acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to function effectively in a pluralistic democratic society and to interact, negotiate, and communicate with peoples from diverse groups in order to create a civic and moral community that works for the common good.

No, I do not reject what the inservice taught. I applaud the school district for bringing it forth for us teachers to discuss during the MULTICULTURAL inservice. One person did speak up and was allowed to share what they thought. No one argued or got heated up. We behaved quite kindly to each other. It was a very good discussion. It also opened up eyes for those who never had to think about this before. You choose to reject it. You choose to call it pluralism. That is fine too.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But since you brought it up, I must say I find it alarming. The public school system is not the place for any race or religion to be forced to atone for the past. The public schools should remain "neutral," right? But how can they do that if the Christians are all busy atoning for their past sins as your teacher in-service suggested.

 

Hmmmm? :confused: Excuse me? Please note I did not say this is done during school nor did an inservice suggest this. It is a movement in many Charismatic circles since the early 1990's. In fact, a large number of adult Christians from many denominations do this type of atonement in sacred assemblies nationally on their own time. Again, if we do not understand history -- we are doomed to repeat past sins.

 

http://www.ndptf.org/church/index_1600.cfm

 

http://prayerleader.blogspot.com/2007/10/sacred-assembly-wow-moment.html

 

http://www.bostonsacredassembly.org/

 

My friend, you are getting very misdirected and emotional over this one. Plus the fact you think the evils of our faith has no involvement in this OP is far off... the principal is being the stereotypical Christian cramming his faith down the student's throats. He overstepped his boundaries professionally. Bluntly stated. But basically it is what it is. We Christians need to acknowledge our past. On our own time -- I did not say this is going on during school hours nor taught at an inservice. LOL ;)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

It comes back to this… if the ACLU has to get involved with every little thing, this just supports my premise all the more. It is getting ridiculous when students have to sue the schools and the ACLU has to sue the faculty and we pay for all this nonsense. Something is wrong.

 

 

Ummmm... you are confusing the ACLU with the American Center for Law and Justice founded by Jay Sekulow (ACLJ) -- a very well known Christian Law Foundation. They are well known in evangelical circles for taking on the public schools in lawsuits. Check them out:

 

http://www.aclj.org/

 

Obviously we agree on disagreeing. You say "tomato" and I say "to-mah-toe". Which again proves my point on how we cannot get along in our own faith... while the rest of the religions look at us disapprovingly. Great witness, huh? I think times like this we need to drop the subject and give each other some grace and mercy. The ball is in your court. I don't wish to keep on in this pointless back and forth bickering. What was that old saying about discussing religion and politics in polite company? It brings division, disharmony, and discord. You cannot force others to agree with your POV. (The principal of the school should have heeded this.) We simply don't agree. Shalom, my friend. Peace be with you.

Edited September 23, 2009 by tex-mex
Orange-y color is hurting me eyes... ;-)

[Heather in Neverland]

 

 

I also think that of being secular in the schools or other government run facilities as being neutral

 

 

 

There is absolutely no such thing as "neutral". We all have a worldview that colors everything we think, do and say whether we realize it or not. NOT teaching religion does not make a school "neutral"...it makes it secular and secular is anything but neutral.

[KidsHappen]

There is absolutely no such thing as "neutral". We all have a worldview that colors everything we think, do and say whether we realize it or not. NOT teaching religion does not make a school "neutral"...it makes it secular and secular is anything but neutral.

 

How would you fix this? Since your premise is that there is no neutral how would you suggest the public school system handle religion?

[Heather in Neverland]

How would you fix this? Since your premise is that there is no neutral how would you suggest the public school system handle religion?

 

Honestly? They can't. That's why public schools don't work and won't work. That's why we homeschooled and now that my kids have started school they go to a christian school so they don't have to "pretend" to separate their religious views from the rest of their life (which can't be done anyways). That's why we will always have these problems in public schools...because, no matter how hard we try, who we really are will seep out eventually and muddy the water.

 

It's why I don't doubt that the principal of that school DID momentarily forget about the new rule and request prayer before the meal...it's what he has always done...it's who he is...he has tried to follow the rule and has been successful but then his real self slipped out again. He DID still violate the court order (I think...still waiting on exact details) and so he has to accept the consequences.

 

But the idea that we could ever come up with one method of educating (meaning the public school system) that will be equal and adequate for ALL kids (respecting and NOT rejecting who they are) is a fallacy. It can't be done.

 

Another reason why homeschooling is so great!

[monk17]

Originally Posted by Tea Time

Originally Posted by tex-mex

Public schools are socialistic by definition. They take a pool of money from everyone (?) to pay for a service. It is "socialistic." What is hard about that?

 

By your definition all of government would be socialistic, which it's not. I was always taught that a socialistic system by definition was when the means of producing and distributing goods was owned collectively by the people. I really think the term socialism as been hijacked over the last ten years.

[Spy Car]

[

Honestly? They can't. That's why public schools don't work and won't work. That's why we homeschooled and now that my kids have started school they go to a christian school so they don't have to "pretend" to separate their religious views from the rest of their life (which can't be done anyways). That's why we will always have these problems in public schools...because, no matter how hard we try, who we really are will seep out eventually and muddy the water.

 

It's why I don't doubt that the principal of that school DID momentarily forget about the new rule and request prayer before the meal...it's what he has always done...it's who he is...he has tried to follow the rule and has been successful but then his real self slipped out again. He DID still violate the court order (I think...still waiting on exact details) and so he has to accept the consequences.

 

But the idea that we could ever come up with one method of educating (meaning the public school system) that will be equal and adequate for ALL kids (respecting and NOT rejecting who they are) is a fallacy. It can't be done.

 

Another reason why homeschooling is so great!

 

Heather, no one is asking people not to be who they are, or to pretend something. What they are asking is for them to live up to the principle that no matter what their faith beliefs (or non-faith beliefs) are, that they don't use their positions of authority to push those beliefs on children. It is simple.

 

The "I forgot" defense is laughable. Oops I lead a public prayer at school, when I just got a court order not to do so. My bad?

 

Religion and religious life flourishes in the United States, with freedom for all. In those nations with "established" religions it is often no the case. Look at Europe. Christianity is dying in the nations with "state religions". But not here.

 

Not pressing ones religious stance in school gives every faith an opportunity to flourish, this includes Christianity, which is strong here in the United States.

 

Being "secular" is not the same as being "pro-atheism". Any school administrator or teacher pressing their atheism on a student and creating a hostile campus environment should be stopped; taken to court, fired, jailed, whatever it takes to assure no coercion takes place on a school campus.

 

This is not an issue where one should line up with their own "community" and say it's OK to force our faith (or non-faith) position on children, at everyone elses expense. And to cheer "our side" winning. Because this is short-sighted thinking.

 

You allow non-Christian students to feel compelled or coerced today, and maybe it's Christians in the same position tomorrow. We should stand firm that such things are intolerable for everyone.

 

Bill

Edited September 23, 2009 by Spy Car

[Spy Car]

By your definition all of government would be socialistic, which it's not. I was always taught that a socialistic system by definition was when the means of producing and distributing goods was owned collectively by the people. I really think the term socialism as been hijacked over the last ten years.

 

You are correct Sir :001_smile:

 

Bill (channeling his inner Ed McMahon)

[Impish]

I was going to have a long reply...but then read Bill's responses. I'll just go with :iagree:

[Tea Time]

 

Obviously we agree on disagreeing. You say "tomato" and I say "to-mah-toe". Which again proves my point on how we cannot get along in our own faith... while the rest of the religions look at us disapprovingly. Great witness, huh? I think times like this we need to drop the subject and give each other some grace and mercy. The ball is in your court. I don't wish to keep on in this pointless back and forth bickering. What was that old saying about discussing religion and politics in polite company? It brings division, disharmony, and discord. You cannot force others to agree with your POV. (The principal of the school should have heeded this.) We simply don't agree. Shalom, my friend. Peace be with you.

 

Yes, you can. You need only control the public school system. It may not work perfectly, but it works amazingly well.

[Tea Time]

By your definition all of government would be socialistic, which it's not. I was always taught that a socialistic system by definition was when the means of producing and distributing goods was owned collectively by the people. I really think the term socialism as been hijacked over the last ten years.

 

I addressed this. You conveniently chose to ignore it. Indeed, all of gov't is socialistic in the sense of being "collectively owned," which is why it desperately needs firm limits. The term has not been hijacked, the full complexity has not been taught in public schools so people no longer have a healthy respect for how dangerous it can be when given no limits.

Edited September 23, 2009 by Tea Time
for clarification

[Tea Time]

Originally Posted by Tea Time

 

I reject what you were taught at the inservice. Did you feel that you had a right to reject what you were taught? How would someone who questioned this dogma be received at such an inservice?

 

I already told you my POV about this from an indigenous look into history. History is filled with Christians doing ungodly things to other religions and leaving a trail of bitterness. If we do not understand history, we are doomed to repeat it. Multicultural education is a field of study and an emerging discipline whose major aim is to create equal educational opportunities for public school students from diverse racial, ethnic, social-class, and cultural groups. One of its important goals is to help all students to acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to function effectively in a pluralistic democratic society and to interact, negotiate, and communicate with peoples from diverse groups in order to create a civic and moral community that works for the common good.

 

It doesn't work. I see no scientific evidence to support that these programs work. I live in a "diverse" area, and believe me, it doesn't work. I had a lovely African American woman in my town ask me about homeschooling because her sweet 8 year old son was call a *iger at this public school. A school that is probably about 90% Hispanic. Makes me ill.

 

And Christianity is not being treated the same way as other faiths. Do we address in school the horrors committed by Islam in the same manner? Being committed by Islam? No. Why? Because they are not being committed by Islam. It is just nut cases claiming to be Muslim. Christianity has a history of violence; Islam has a history of nut cases claiming to be Muslim. There's your multiculturalism. We worry about Muslim children and their self esteem, but not Christian children. Those "stereotypical Christians" always giving away Bibles and praying thanksgiving over their food and "shoving their faith down people's throats" don't need any self esteem.

 

And you still did not answer the question, so I'll cover it for you. You will not be received well nor will the discussion be cordial if you bring up anything I just stated in the above paragraph at your in-service. You'll be flamed or worse, ignored.

 

Compliance makes friends; truth engenders hatred. (One of the first phrases my dd learned in Latin class at college)

 

Yes. I am emotional about this. I have spent 13 years homeschooling because I do not want people shoving their ideas down my children’s throats nor do I wish to shove mine down theirs, but I have spent almost $20,000 in property taxes directly to the local school system so they can do it.

 

I am not asking for your money to support my ideas, I only wish for the same courtesy. Continue your multicultural exercises to your heart’s content with your own money, not mine.

 

This post is not intended to be rude or snarky or mean spirited, but it is intended to be blunt and not sugar coated. These are very serious matters, and when we sugar coat them, we do not see them as they really are.

 

And as far as invoking my Christian beliefs to make me be quiet – stop “bickering,†well, I never said anywhere that I am Christian. You assumed that because of a position I have taken in the argument, but I have held the whole time that any oppression directed at Christians can also be directed at other groups at any point. Everyone seems to agree with that and worry about it, but they don’t see how we, as a people, should not be forced to support this with taxpayer dollars.

 

Sometimes I wonder if this is a homeschooling board anymore.

 

I will go now. The wagon is being circled. I appreciate the people who have lent some support. Where is everyone else?

[Spy Car]

I addressed this. You conveniently chose to ignore it. Indeed, all of gov't is socialistic, which is why it desperately needs firm limits. The term has not been hijacked, the full complexity has not been taught in public schools so people no longer have a healthy respect for how dangerous it can be when given no limits.

 

I was a Political Science major at one of the nations leading universities, and I can assure you your usage of "socialism" is incorrect.

 

Socialism refers to an economic system where the means of production are governmentally or collectively owned [such as a collective of workers] and where allocation of capital resources is in public [or mostly public] control.

 

Socialism has nothing to do with governments providing fire services, police, schools, post offices, or anything of the kind.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

Sometimes I wonder if this is a homeschooling board anymore.[/font][/color]

 

 

To the best of my knowledge this isn't a "homeschooling" board, it's a board for people interested in "Classical Education At Home", and includes home-schoolers, so-called after-schoolers, and people interested in their own self-education.

 

And it sure isn't my experience that Muslims in America are treated with kid-gloves, while Christians are persecuted as a faith of violence. To suggest that's the case strikes me as highly bizarre.

 

Bill

[mommaduck]

To the best of my knowledge this isn't a "homeschooling" board, it's a board for people interested in "Classical Education At Home", and includes home-schoolers, so-called after-schoolers, and people interested in their own self-education.

 

And it sure isn't my experience that Muslims in America are treated with kid-gloves, while Christians are persecuted as a faith of violence. To suggest that's the case strikes me as highly bizarre.

 

Bill

Not in America in general, but in the public school classroom there has been evidence of such.

[Spy Car]

Not in America in general, but in the public school classroom there has been evidence of such.

 

I think we live in a society where Muslims feel the full weight of hostility that emanates from misplaced anger over actions of al-Qaeda and other terrorists claiming an Islamic agenda.

 

That a public school should attempt to mitigate some of the bigotry and ignorance is a worthy social goal from my perspective. And bashing Christians is not. I certainly never experienced Christian bashing in school [but its been a long time since I was a student].

 

Needless to say [or perhaps it's not], I would very strongly oppose bigotry towards Christians or Christianity in our public schools.

 

Bill

[Harriet Vane]

I think we live in a society where Muslims feel the full weight of hostility that emanates from misplaced anger over actions of al-Qaeda and other terrorists claiming an Islamic agenda.

 

That a public school should attempt to mitigate some of the bigotry and ignorance is a worthy social goal from my perspective. And bashing Christians is not. I certainly never experienced Christian bashing in school [but its been a long time since I was a student].

 

Needless to say [or perhaps it's not], I would very strongly oppose bigotry towards Christians or Christianity in our public schools.

 

Bill

 

Interjecting here . . .

 

Bill, I fully agree with the idea of being intentionally sensitive to those whom you know have suffered. I have dedicated my whole life to doing just this, as I am a white woman who lives in an African-American community.

 

As far as Christian-bashing, though, my experience has shown this to be a reality. I was a Christian English major at a large public university. There are many, many works of literature that contain quite a bit of religious symbolism. As a Christian I could often make those connections. I was intentionally careful to do so in an informative way, not an evangelistic way. In more than one class, with more than one teacher, when I brought up the religious symbolism I was mocked. There was one teaching aide, my freshman year, who was particularly sarcastic publicly. There was another teaching aide who used early American literature as an opportunity to rant about his Methodist mother-in-law and seriously bash narrow-minded, oppressive Christians and the emotional damage they inflict. This was hard on me, and quite frustrating particularly reading older literature that is steeped heavily in religious symbolism.

 

I got to be downright nervous about bringing it up. I remember fondly, though, one professor, who was Jewish. I was completely amazed when she read from the New Testament book of Ephesians in class as it related to something we were reading. She was not a Christian, but she was quite comfortable discussing religious symbolism when it presented itself in the text. She was a breath of fresh air, and I am grateful for her fair-minded and insightful teaching.

 

All this to say that yes, Christian-bashing does happen.

[Spy Car]

[

Interjecting here . . .

 

Bill, I fully agree with the idea of being intentionally sensitive to those whom you know have suffered. I have dedicated my whole life to doing just this, as I am a white woman who lives in an African-American community.

 

As far as Christian-bashing, though, my experience has shown this to be a reality. I was a Christian English major at a large public university. There are many, many works of literature that contain quite a bit of religious symbolism. As a Christian I could often make those connections. I was intentionally careful to do so in an informative way, not an evangelistic way. In more than one class, with more than one teacher, when I brought up the religious symbolism I was mocked. There was one teaching aide, my freshman year, who was particularly sarcastic publicly. There was another teaching aide who used early American literature as an opportunity to rant about his Methodist mother-in-law and seriously bash narrow-minded, oppressive Christians and the emotional damage they inflict. This was hard on me, and quite frustrating particularly reading older literature that is steeped heavily in religious symbolism.

 

I got to be downright nervous about bringing it up. I remember fondly, though, one professor, who was Jewish. I was completely amazed when she read from the New Testament book of Ephesians in class as it related to something we were reading. She was not a Christian, but she was quite comfortable discussing religious symbolism when it presented itself in the text. She was a breath of fresh air, and I am grateful for her fair-minded and insightful teaching.

 

All this to say that yes, Christian-bashing does happen.

 

I'm sorry you had these experiences. I'm not saying Christian-bashing never happens, I'm saying it should never happen. The pain you felt should not be felt by any child, Christian or not Christian.

 

We don't move ahead by permitting one group to bash, while shouting: Woo Hoo! Because the bashers share our worldview. We need to take a firm line that ridicule (or worse) is unacceptable regardless of ones faith position.

 

And that school administrators and teachers should not use there positions to create a hostile environment for students. Because, as you've experienced it hurts. Bigotry and and coercive infringement of ones freedom of conscious are not harmless. Far from it. I'm sure you don't disagree.

 

And I'm sincerely interested in protecting Christian children from being abused as any child of any faith (or non-faith). Anything less damages the best of what is is to be an American.

 

No one wins if any group has their rights trampled.

 

Bill

[mommaduck]

That a public school should attempt to mitigate some of the bigotry and ignorance is a worthy social goal from my perspective.

 

That a public school should attempt to mitigate any bigotry is a worthy goal. On the other hand, there are religious views that are considered bigoted simply because they disagree with others and yes, I've not only been derided for my faith in the public school system, I've been slapped in the face by a teacher (and yes, she got away with it...she was a big "somebody" and no one was going to touch her).

 

And bashing Christians is not. I certainly never experienced Christian bashing in school [but its been a long time since I was a student].

 

You are Jewish, yes? (I thought I read somewhere that you were, correct me if I'm wrong :001_smile: ) Many times we don't sense what is going on if it's not directed at us.

 

Needless to say [or perhaps it's not], I would very strongly oppose bigotry towards Christians or Christianity in our public schools.

 

Bill

 

Glad to hear.

 

 

I think we can all be in agreement that, those of us who have chosen to do so, we homeschool for similar reasons. One of the issues being the enforcing of one view over our own and the unwillingness of the system to accurately represent all sides (case in point, Columbus Day and Thanksgiving are coming up....).

[Spy Car]

That a public school should attempt to mitigate any bigotry is a worthy goal. On the other hand, there are religious views that are considered bigoted simply because they disagree with others and yes, I've not only been derided for my faith in the public school system, I've been slapped in the face by a teacher (and yes, she got away with it...she was a big "somebody" and no one was going to touch her).

 

Sure. And that's why public schools are a poor venue for arguing the merits of inherently irreconcilable religious dogmas.

 

You are Jewish, yes? (I thought I read somewhere that you were, correct me if I'm wrong :001_smile: ) Many times we don't sense what is going on if it's not directed at us.

 

No, I'm not Jewish. I did, however, grow up (and continue to live) in a heavily Jewish area, and feel very close to my Jewish friends and neighbors.

 

I just finished working on the Chabad "L'Chaim: To Life" telethon, working closely with a number of Hassidic Jewish rabbis. I feel very very comfortable with Jews, but am not Jewish myself.

 

I think we can all be in agreement that, those of us who have chosen to do so, we homeschool for similar reasons. One of the issues being the enforcing of one view over our own and the unwillingness of the system to accurately represent all sides (case in point, Columbus Day and Thanksgiving are coming up....).

 

No one wants to feel they, or their children, have to swallow positions they find intolerable. That's why I support the right to home-school, or private school, children on religious (among other) grounds.

 

Bill

[Erica in PA]

[

 

 

I'm sorry you had these experiences. I'm not saying Christian-bashing never happens, I'm saying it should never happen. The pain you felt should not be felt by any child, Christian or not Christian.

 

We don't move ahead by permitting one group to bash, while shouting: Woo Hoo! Because the bashers share our worldview. We need to take a firm line that ridicule (or worse) is unacceptable regardless of ones faith position.

 

And that school administrators and teachers should not use there positions to create a hostile environment for students. Because, as you've experienced it hurts. Bigotry and and coercive infringement of ones freedom of conscious are not harmless. Far from it. I'm sure you don't disagree.

 

And I'm sincerely interested in protecting Christian children from being abused as any child of any faith (or non-faith). Anything less damages the best of what is is to be an American.

 

No one wins if any group has their rights trampled.

 

Bill

 

I think one reason why some Christians may find it slightly off-putting when public prayer is cited as borderline *abusive,* is because we have had the types of interactions that Strider mentioned above. I grew up in central PA, a relatively conservative, working class area, and throughout high school teachers mocking Christianity was *widespread.* It was, and is, completely routine. From what I've heard from others, secular colleges are even worse in this area. I would be shocked if you were to find another religion more openly mocked in the classroom than Christianity. So, comparatively speaking, I have to admit that it doesn't sound so terrible to me when a teacher mentions their faith in school, or prays in public. I would have *much* rather have had an Islamic teacher who prayed in our classroom, than the secular humanists I had who were truly seeking to undermine religious (specifically Christian) faith.

[Spy Car]

I think one reason why some Christians may find it slightly off-putting when public prayer is cited as borderline *abusive,* is because we have had the types of interactions that Strider mentioned above. I grew up in central PA, a relatively conservative, working class area, and throughout high school teachers mocking Christianity was *widespread.* It was, and is, completely routine.

 

I just don't see how any intrusion on the religious freedoms of Christian students, or ridicule from teachers or school officials is in any way offset in a positive fashion by allowing a hostile environment for non-Christian students.

 

Both situations are bad. Christians ought not be mocked, and non-Christians should not be pressured. Allowing either to take place undermines freedom of conscious.

 

...I have to admit that it doesn't sound so terrible to me when a teacher mentions their faith in school, or prays in public. I would have *much* rather have had an Islamic teacher who prayed in our classroom, than the secular humanists I had who were truly seeking to undermine religious (specifically Christian) faith.

 

I'd have no time for a teacher who attempted to undermine the religious faith of his or her students. Any teacher who does so deserves to be reprimanded and/or fired.

 

And while I don't think it is all all necessary (or desirable) for a teacher to pretend they aren't Muslim, Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Jewish, or whatever, I don't think praying in the classroom, or pushing ones faith or non-faith position has a place in a public school.

 

But to be crystal clear, the mocking of Christians and Christianity by teachers or school officials is something for which I'd have zero tolerance. None at all!

 

Bill

[Erica in PA]

I just don't see how any intrusion on the religious freedoms of Christian students, or ridicule from teachers or school officials is in any way offset in a positive fashion by allowing a hostile environment for non-Christian students.

 

Both situations are bad. Christians ought not be mocked, and non-Christians should not be pressured. Allowing either to take place undermines freedom of conscious.

 

I'd have no time for a teacher who attempted to undermine the religious faith of his or her students. Any teacher who does so deserves to be reprimanded and/or fired.

 

 

 

Bill

 

On your first point, I'd just like to clarify that I don't think that hostility toward other faiths offsets the mistreatment that Christians often get in public schools... I just don't see prayer as hostile in the way that mocking and deriding are, and it bothers me to see them equated, because I don't think they are comparable. This is not to say that I think it's a great idea for teachers to pray in schools... just that I think actual mocking and criticism is worse than offering a public prayer, and I've not seen much acknowledgment of that in this thread. I also wanted to point out that though people often portray Christianity as this powerful majority position that needs countering, that is *not* the case in most public schools-- as I indicated in my post, I believe the opposite is now true: no faith is as openly criticized in schools as Christianity.

 

As for your second point. I appreciate that you are consistent opposing persecution of all faiths; however, I think it's important to recognize that in practice, our schools are *not* consistent on that point. While schools seem to be fairly unanimous in not allowing prayer or Christian expression among teachers and students so as not to offend non-Christians, there is a great deal of criticism tolerated toward Christians.

[Tea Time]

I was a Political Science major at one of the nations leading universities, and I can assure you your usage of "socialism" is incorrect.

 

Socialism refers to an economic system where the means of production are governmentally or collectively owned [such as a collective of workers] and where allocation of capital resources is in public [or mostly public] control.

 

Socialism has nothing to do with governments providing fire services, police, schools, post offices, or anything of the kind.

 

Bill

 

LOL! I am so very impressed by your political science degree from one of the nation’s leading universities. Some might say (not me of course) that you have received the highest and most complete indoctrination of all (maybe, but I don't know, some might say - not me of course - that the person with the public school in-service time might have one up on you). Did you pay for that or did Pell grants? Personally, Pell grants paid for a lot of the psychology degree (indoctrination) I got from one of the "prettiest" universities in the country. I think the taxpayer got taken, but hey, that is all definitely another thread. (If you got a good education someplace though, you will see the connection.)

 

Split hairs on the definition of socialism if you want, it makes for a good red herring, but I am not fooled by it, nor do I think my understanding of the philosophy behind the term would be improved by getting a “proper political science degree from an accredited, leading national university.†But nice try at discrediting my assertion by way of intimidation.

 

Doesn't address my point in any way. I was actually being nice calling the public school system’s means of funding “socialism.†I much prefer the real term, thievery. Whatever you call it, you take money from some people (not even from everyone) to pay for something that many really do not want to pay for. Yes, we do that for other things, too, and those things may or may not be justifiable (take them all individually in another thread). But forming the minds of our youth is not a good thing to hand over to the gov’t. Just ask the Venezuelan president who boldly proclaims his desire to control the school system because the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.

 

Again, if you really care about maintaining a truly diverse (pluralistic, multicultural, whatever name you want to apply) society where people (help all students to acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to function effectively in a pluralistic democratic society and to interact, negotiate, and communicate with peoples from diverse groups in order to create a civic and moral community that works for the common good.), you do not do it by collectivizing the education system. That is the way that you go about creating a monolithic society that is not diverse.

[Phred]

There is such a thing as the tyranny of the majority. And, while the majority may not wish to admit they are part of such a thing... it happens. Christians in this country are used to seeing their faith portrayed as the "right" faith and all others portrayed as the "wrong" faith. When a situation occurs that a Christian finds themselves equated with other faiths there is a tendency to cry foul, to suggest that they have been wronged. In many cases this is far from the truth.

 

For example... at a high school football game where no one is allowed to lead the student body in prayer it is not "Christian bashing" to prevent a Christian from doing so. Imagine, if you will, a high school with more Jews than Christians where one of the local kids stands up and leads the kids in a Jewish prayer and the Christian kid feels ostracized. You laugh to yourself and think it can't happen because there aren't that many Jews in America. Perhaps... but the analogy is apt. I'm sure the 700 Club would have cameras there to show the poor kid having his rights trampled. Never realizing this is what happens to Jews at every high school in every town on every Friday night across America. But it's "Christian bashing" if someone points that out. In reality it's just that the Christian majority is used to having things their own way and not caring about the way other minorities might feel about their actions.

 

However, there are true instances of people being persecuted for their beliefs as well. In the U.S. this should not happen. We should be free to believe or not believe as we feel is the truth.

 

Problem is... Christianity is an EVANGELICAL faith. To practice it is to spread it, no? Yet our laws say that you cannot spread it in certain circumstances. In order for our society to be free, in order for you to be free to worship as you see fit, we all have to respect each other and our individual beliefs.

 

Why do some Christians feel the need to evangelize even in inappropriate situations which will no doubt lead to negative consequences?

[Spy Car]

On your first point, I'd just like to clarify that I don't think that hostility toward other faiths offsets the mistreatment that Christians often get in public schools... I just don't see prayer as hostile in the way that mocking and deriding are, and it bothers me to see them equated, because I don't think they are comparable.

 

I'll agree to the point that mocking a faith and praying are not directly comparable. However, this school (Pace High) was found to have gone way beyond prayer, and was found to illegally been promoting religion, including engaging in proselytizing, and creating a hostile environment for non-Christian students.

 

And while "mocking" and praying are substantially different, neither has a place in a public school. Both infringe on religious freedom of students when lead by school authorities.

 

This is not to say that I think it's a great idea for teachers to pray in schools... just that I think actual mocking and criticism is worse than offering a public prayer, and I've not seen much acknowledgment of that in this thread.

 

I'll agree with you that mocking and criticism are indefensible. Mocking of Christians or Christianity has no place in a public school. I acknowledge that point emphatically.

 

I also wanted to point out that though people often portray Christianity as this powerful majority position that needs countering, that is *not* the case in most public schools-- as I indicated in my post, I believe the opposite is now true: no faith is as openly criticized in schools as Christianity.

 

I don't believe it is the place of public schools to counter Christianity. And that such attempts would violate the public trust, freedom of religion, and should be dealt with will the full force of the law.

 

As for your second point. I appreciate that you are consistent opposing persecution of all faiths; however, I think it's important to recognize that in practice, our schools are *not* consistent on that point. While schools seem to be fairly unanimous in not allowing prayer or Christian expression among teachers and students so as not to offend non-Christians, there is a great deal of criticism tolerated toward Christians.

 

This hasn't been my experience. But I'm only one guy (with eyes and ears) but still one person. Should I encounter the persecution of Christian children in our public schools, you can rest assured I'll be a strong voice condemning it, and trying to undo the situation.

 

Bill

[monk17]

LOL! I am so very impressed by your political science degree from one of the nation’s leading universities. Some might say (not me of course) that you have received the highest and most complete indoctrination of all (maybe, but I don't know, some might say - not me of course - that the person with the public school in-service time might have one up on you). Did you pay for that or did Pell grants? Personally, Pell grants paid for a lot of the psychology degree (indoctrination) I got from one of the "prettiest" universities in the country. I think the taxpayer got taken, but hey, that is all definitely another thread. (If you got a good education someplace though, you will see the connection.)

 

Split hairs on the definition of socialism if you want, it makes for a good red herring, but I am not fooled by it, nor do I think my understanding of the philosophy behind the term would be improved by getting a “proper political science degree from an accredited, leading national university.†But nice try at discrediting my assertion by way of intimidation.

 

Doesn't address my point in any way. I was actually being nice calling the public school system’s means of funding “socialism.†I much prefer the real term, thievery. Whatever you call it, you take money from some people (not even from everyone) to pay for something that many really do not want to pay for. Yes, we do that for other things, too, and those things may or may not be justifiable (take them all individually in another thread). But forming the minds of our youth is not a good thing to hand over to the gov’t. Just ask the Venezuelan president who boldly proclaims his desire to control the school system because the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.

 

Again, if you really care about maintaining a truly diverse (pluralistic, multicultural, whatever name you want to apply) society where people (help all students to acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to function effectively in a pluralistic democratic society and to interact, negotiate, and communicate with peoples from diverse groups in order to create a civic and moral community that works for the common good.), you do not do it by collectivizing the education system. That is the way that you go about creating a monolithic society that is not diverse.

 

The problem tea time is that you can't take a word that has a definite meaning and then apply your own meaning to that word. It makes the conversation a little hard to follow. We're definitely not in danger of becoming a monolithic society, I wouldn't have any fear of that happening.

 

I have no problem with someone offering there credentials on this board as long as they back it up with a sound argument. I certainly don't think it's right to belittle them.

 

The challenge with allowing folks to express there religion is when it interferes with basic human rights or our "law". The law triumphs. If you want redress from grievances it should be taken to court. I've certainly seen that happen and I've seem Christian groups intimidate school boards. My gut tells me the Christian prosecution in this country is not so severe, I've certainly never experienced it.

 

But at the end of the day the guy led a prayer on school property spontaneously and the judge reprimanded him for it but didn't want to send him to jail. Not a bad ending, probably just.

[Phred]

Split hairs on the definition of socialism if you want, it makes for a good red herring, but I am not fooled by it, nor do I think my understanding of the philosophy behind the term would be improved by getting a “proper political science degree from an accredited, leading national university.†But nice try at discrediting my assertion by way of intimidation.

Call it what you will, you were wrong.

 

Doesn't address my point in any way. I was actually being nice calling the public school system’s means of funding “socialism.†I much prefer the real term, thievery. Whatever you call it, you take money from some people (not even from everyone) to pay for something that many really do not want to pay for. Yes, we do that for other things, too, and those things may or may not be justifiable (take them all individually in another thread). But forming the minds of our youth is not a good thing to hand over to the gov’t. Just ask the Venezuelan president who boldly proclaims his desire to control the school system because the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.

 

Again, if you really care about maintaining a truly diverse (pluralistic, multicultural, whatever name you want to apply) society where people (help all students to acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to function effectively in a pluralistic democratic society and to interact, negotiate, and communicate with peoples from diverse groups in order to create a civic and moral community that works for the common good.), you do not do it by collectivizing the education system. That is the way that you go about creating a monolithic society that is not diverse.

At the time the public school system was created we need to churn out vast amounts of factory workers and the public school system was able to do that and do it very well. You might also remember that at the time the system was created it was not diverse nor was it multicultural. It was white, primarily Protestant and middle to lower class. Sprinkle in a few Catholics and the occasional Jew and you had the public school system. Blacks were not a concern. No need to educate them and if there was a need there were separate facilities created for them.

 

The system only integrated when forced, it only became concerned about other religions and creeds when forced to confront them thru lawsuits or legislation. In every way the public school system as it was originally created was created to serve a monolithic society.

 

But you've got quite a few things wrong in your post... for example, that Venezuelan president? He was democratically elected by the people of Venezuela. You may not like him but they seem to. The government that you distrust so much? It too is democratically elected in this country. If you don't like what your representative is doing you can vote him or her out. Only the problem we have doing that is in order to elect someone to office in this country it takes money. The money comes from corporations. Corporations have interests. If the politician wants to be re-elected he or she needs to protect those interests. I'll bet you're on the side of "the marketplace" as an answer to our problems. Yet it's this "marketplace" that prevents us from getting responsible representation into office.

 

Taxes are not thievery. They are a way to pay for the things we get from government. Roads, fire and police protection, libraries, military, schools... you get your say about what those taxes pay for when you vote.

 

It's really very simple. And it's not socialism or thievery.

[mommaduck]

No, I'm not Jewish. I did, however, grow up (and continue to live) in a heavily Jewish area, and feel very close to my Jewish friends and neighbors.

 

I just finished working on the Chabad "L'Chaim: To Life" telethon, working closely with a number of Hassidic Jewish rabbis. I feel very very comfortable with Jews, but am not Jewish myself.

 

No one wants to feel they, or their children, have to swallow positions they find intolerable. That's why I support the right to home-school, or private school, children on religious (among other) grounds.

 

Bill

 

Totally understand. I have Jewish friends and friends that nearly converted. We feel pretty comfortable around them also. More of a mutual respect, less debate of dogma, but interesting conversations :)

 

Also why I support however a person wishes to have their child educated.

[Spy Car]

LOL! I am so very impressed by your political science degree from one of the nation’s leading universities. Some might say (not me of course) that you have received the highest and most complete indoctrination of all (maybe, but I don't know, some might say - not me of course - that the person with the public school in-service time might have one up on you).

 

A person can chose to be gracious and polite, or not. Some people (that would be me, because I take accountability for my words) would suggest you have chosen the latter choice.

 

Did you pay for that or did Pell grants? Personally, Pell grants paid for a lot of the psychology degree (indoctrination) I got from one of the "prettiest" universities in the country. I think the taxpayer got taken, but hey, that is all definitely another thread. (If you got a good education someplace though, you will see the connection.)

 

I'm not sure what business it is of yours, but no I didn't take Pell Grants.

 

Split hairs on the definition of socialism if you want, it makes for a good red herring, but I am not fooled by it, nor do I think my understanding of the philosophy behind the term would be improved by getting a “proper political science degree from an accredited, leading national university.” But nice try at discrediting my assertion by way of intimidation.

 

I'm not trying to intimate you, I'm just telling you you're misinformed about what is and isn't "socialism." I don't know why you ridicule having an education and an informed understanding of a subject. To my mind it beats the alternative.

 

I was actually being nice calling the public school system’s means of funding “socialism.” I much prefer the real term, thievery. Whatever you call it, you take money from some people (not even from everyone) to pay for something that many really do not want to pay for. Yes, we do that for other things, too, and those things may or may not be justifiable (take them all individually in another thread).

 

So no military? Police? Fire? Birth Certificate offices? Libraries? Road-building? Street-sweeping? Trash collection? Anything?

 

And taxation is "theft"???

 

What civilization ever existed without taxation. By your definition, every civilization in history was "socialist".

 

But forming the minds of our youth is not a good thing to hand over to the gov’t. Just ask the Venezuelan president who boldly proclaims his desire to control the school system because the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.

 

First, if Hugo Chavez uses the line, it's lifted from the 19th Century American poet William Ross Wallace.

 

Second, I've never seen a cradle in an American classroom.

 

Third, who hands their children's minds to "the Government"? There is no monolithic "the Government". Teachers come in all stripes and colors, and from all sorts of faith backgrounds. There is no "indoctrination camp" agenda, to suggest otherwise strikes me as paranoid. And parent's responsibilities for shaping their children's minds don't end because the children attend school.

 

Again, if you really care about maintaining a truly diverse (pluralistic, multicultural, whatever name you want to apply) society where people (help all students to acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to function effectively in a pluralistic democratic society and to interact, negotiate, and communicate with peoples from diverse groups in order to create a civic and moral community that works for the common good.), you do not do it by collectivizing the education system. That is the way that you go about creating a monolithic society that is not diverse.

 

No argument there. Hence the need to protect those in the minority, or those in an inferior position of power, from those in authority. Christians, non-Christians, everyone.

 

Bill