Going to jail for PRAYING?

[Spy Car]

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.

 

Well my son is in kindergarten, not High School, but his school is prominently Jewish, and as non-Jews we are in a very small minority. So it is possible to have majority Jewish schools in America.

 

Bill

[Tea Time]

I can see by the vigorous responses to my posts that I am really annoying people by pointing out that elephant. I really do not have time to respond to everyone and everything, although I would really like to. What was that about tyranny of the majority? Definitely works.

 

Biting my tongue and going away...

:auto:

[mommaduck]

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.

 

An understanding of Post Modern American Christianity would show you that a Christian kid most likely would not have a problem with Jewish led prayer ;) Muslim prayer, yes. Pagan prayer of whatever sort, yes. Native prayer, would depend on the type and the kid. :p

 

Bill, there is the nearly monolithic NEA.

[Jenny in Atl]

An understanding of Post Modern American Christianity would show you that a Christian kid most likely would not have a problem with Jewish led prayer ;) Muslim prayer, yes. Pagan prayer of whatever sort, yes. Native prayer, would depend on the type and the kid. :p

 

Bill, there is the nearly monolithic NEA.

 

Really, even if it was in Hebrew? Most kids who are Jewish, in my area of the world, still get picked on by the majority Christian kids. I really don't think much has changed in that area. Anytime anyone is different (even within the same "faith" family) there are mixed emotions when it comes to leading group prayer.

[Heather in Neverland]

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

 

I agree. That's why they don't work. The problem is if you eliminate all outward displays of religious conviction (you can't pray, can't have a bible, can't wear a cross, can't wear a religious t-shirt, can't, can't, can't...) what you end up with is NOT a neutral territory. You end up with secularism and as I said before, secularism is NOT neutral. It has its own agenda and it is FORCED on children legally. You say you don't think religion should be forced on kids and I agree but we have to acknowledge that there is no neutral territory.

 

I know you have zero sympathy for that principal. But I would ask you to consider for a moment that it IS hard on adults TOO to have to conceal your religious beliefs for the majority of your waking hours five days a week. I worked in the public school system for 15 years and it was hard on me. And yes, sometimes things slipped out of my mouth that probably shouldn't have, things of a christian nature because I HAVE a christian nature. It is not a part of who I am, it IS who I am.

 

And since I am in confessing mode, one of the reasons I LEFT my job in the ps system was because of the detrimental effect it was having on my faith. My kids were protected by homeschooling but I was pummeled by secular humanism 8-9 hours a day. That IS indoctrination. And if it doesn't convert you it will at least make you feel dejected. Christianity IS openly mocked everywhere including public schools and it can be very depressing. My dh and I had some long talks and though I had fought the good fight, I could not deny what 15 years of it, day in and day out, was doing to me. So when I got this opportunity I jumped at it.

 

I know you want to protect the non-christians from being prosyletized but let me assure you, THEY are the ones who are in the majority.

 

 

 

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.

 

Here is where you and I definitely agree. But I still don't think that principal is the evil mastermind you make him out to be. I kinda like his moustache. ;)

 

Bill

.

[mommaduck]

Really, even if it was in Hebrew? Most kids who are Jewish, in my area of the world, still get picked on by the majority Christian kids. I really don't think much has changed in that area. Anytime anyone is different (even within the same "faith" family) there are mixed emotions when it comes to leading group prayer.

 

Amoungst the various Christians I know, generally there isn't an issue. I'm talking about Christians, not "cultural" christians. That might also make a difference. Also, I don't live in Georgia. That could make a difference as well, I admit. I live in PA, I'm from Charleston, and I've globe hopped around in between. I also know it would have never phased me or my children.

[Heather in Neverland]

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.

 

 

Bill

 

 

TEA TIME...I think you have some really interesting points and I like reading your perspective but, for what turned out to be a REALLY long thread, we have kept this really civil and I'd like to finish the conversation before it gets locked. So I respectfully ask you to play nice, OK?

[Jenny in Atl]

"secularism is NOT neutral. It has its own agenda and it is FORCED on children legally."

 

Help educate me... what the heck is secularism really. What is the agenda? Bad tv? Plastic sexual images? Evolution? I'm all for everyone being able to express their beliefs/faiths etc (within reason...). I guess growing up in the South I've not seen much in the way of forced "secularism" but then I'm not sure how most here define it.

[mommaduck]

"secularism is NOT neutral. It has its own agenda and it is FORCED on children legally."

 

Help educate me... what the heck is secularism really. What is the agenda? Bad tv? Plastic sexual images? Evolution? I'm all for everyone being able to express their beliefs/faiths etc (within reason...). I guess growing up in the South I've not seen much in the way of forced "secularism" but then I'm not sure how most here define it.

A more accurate term would possibly be humanism, as in the Humanist Manifesto.

[Heather in Neverland]

A more accurate term would possibly be humanism, as in the Humanist Manifesto.

 

True. Secular humanism is the full term for it. Here is some info and you will find that the textbooks in public schools adhere to this particular "faith".

 

 

 

First, Secular Humanism is a worldview. That is, it is a set of beliefs through which one interprets all of reality—something like a pair of glasses. Second, Secular Humanism is a religious worldview. Do not let the word “secular†mislead you. The Humanists themselves would agree that they adhere to a religious worldview. According to the Humanist Manifestos I & II: Humanism is "a philosophical, religious, and moral point of view."

 

Not all humanists, though, want to be identified as “religious,†because they understand that religion is (supposedly) not allowed in American public education. To identify Secular Humanism as a religion would eliminate the Humanists' main vehicle for the propagation of their faith. And it is a faith, by their own admission. The Humanist Manifestos declare:

 

"These affirmations [in the Manifestos] are not a final credo or dogma but an expression of a living and growing faith."

 

What are the basic beliefs of Secular Humanism? What do Secular Humanists believe?

 

Theologically, Secular Humanists are atheists. Humanist Paul Kurtz, publisher of Prometheus Books and editor of Free Inquiry magazine, says that "Humanism cannot in any fair sense of the word apply to one who still believes in God as the source and creator of the universe." Corliss Lamont agrees, saying that "Humanism contends that instead of the gods creating the cosmos, the cosmos, in the individualized form of human beings giving rein to their imagination, created the gods."

 

Philosophically, Secular Humanists are naturalists. That is, they believe that nature is all that exists - the material world is all that exists. There is no God, no spiritual dimension, no afterlife. Carl Sagan said it best in the introduction to his Cosmos series: "The universe is all that is or ever was or ever will be." Roy Wood Sellars concurs. “Humanism is naturalistic,†he says, "and rejects the supernaturalistic stance with its postulated Creator-God and cosmic Ruler."

 

Secular Humanist beliefs in the area of biology are closely tied to both their atheistic theology and their naturalist philosophy. If there is no supernatural, then life, including human life, must be the result of a purely natural phenomenon. Hence, Secular Humanists must believe in evolution. Julian Huxley, for example, insists that "man ... his body, his mind and his soul were not supernaturally created but are all products of evolution." Sagan, Lamont, Sellars, Kurtz—all Secular Humanists are in agreement on this.

 

Atheism leads most Secular Humanists to adopt ethical relativism - the belief that no absolute moral code exists, and therefore man must adjust his ethical standards in each situation according to his own judgment. If God does not exist, then He cannot establish an absolute moral code. Humanist Max Hocutt says that human beings "may, and do, make up their own rules... Morality is not discovered; it is made."

 

Secular Humanism, then, can be defined as a religious worldview based on atheism, naturalism, evolution, and ethical relativism.

 

HTH

[Spy Car]

I agree. That's why they don't work. The problem is if you eliminate all outward displays of religious conviction (you can't pray, can't have a bible, can't wear a cross, can't wear a religious t-shirt, can't, can't, can't...) what you end up with is NOT a neutral territory.

 

I've never heard of a student being forbidden wearing a cross, toting a Bible, wearing a hijab, or kippah, or forbidden other displays of faith.

 

Perhaps "message" t-shirts are forbidden as part of dress-code restrictions in some locals, but not as part of an anti-Christian or anti-faith agenda.

 

So I'm not sure what you are complaining about.

 

You end up with secularism and as I said before, secularism is NOT neutral.

 

I too am confused by "secularism." If you mean you end up with schools that neither promote nor constrain the religious freedom of their students, then I'd agree you get "secularism".

 

But if your suggesting this means the schools are non-neutral agents of atheism, then I'd strongly disagree.

 

It has its own agenda and it is FORCED on children legally. You say you don't think religion should be forced on kids and I agree but we have to acknowledge that there is no neutral territory.

 

I simply disagree.

 

I know you have zero sympathy for that principal. But I would ask you to consider for a moment that it IS hard on adults TOO to have to conceal your religious beliefs for the majority of your waking hours five days a week.

 

It's not a matter of sympathy or non-sympathy. He violated a Court Order, and was found to be forcing his religious beliefs on children in the past. You yourself said he should lose his job. And I agree.

 

I worked in the public school system for 15 years and it was hard on me. And yes, sometimes things slipped out of my mouth that probably shouldn't have, things of a christian nature because I HAVE a christian nature. It is not a part of who I am, it IS who I am.

 

I'm sure you did your best to follow the rules and not make your students uncomfortable. Right? I don't think anyone wants "thought-police" making everyone afraid and over-sensitive. But this school and principal, from all reports, was way over the top in abusing their positions of authority.

 

And since I am in confessing mode, one of the reasons I LEFT my job in the ps system was because of the detrimental effect it was having on my faith. My kids were protected by homeschooling but I was pummeled by secular humanism 8-9 hours a day. That IS indoctrination.

 

I'm not quite understanding. Were you teaching? How do you get pummeled 8-9 hours a day by secular humanists?

 

Christianity IS openly mocked everywhere including public schools and it can be very depressing. My dh and I had some long talks and though I had fought the good fight, I could not deny what 15 years of it, day in and day out, was doing to me. So when I got this opportunity I jumped at it.

 

I've never seen or heard of Christianity being mocked in a school. That my only experience. I'm sorry if you've had a different experience. That should not happen. And as you know, such things are hurtful and harmful to a person. That's why I oppose them no matter who is the target.

 

I know you want to protect the non-christians from being prosyletized but let me assure you, THEY are the ones who are in the majority.

 

I want to protect everyone. Majority, or minority. No one should be compelled, coerced, or mocked. No one.

 

But I still don't think that principal is the evil mastermind you make him out to be. I kinda like his moustache.

 

 

I don't think he's an evil mastermind. Just a man with an inflated view of his own righteousness, and a lack of understanding of what is (and is not) acceptable practice in running a public school.

 

Bill

[monk17]

True. Secular humanism is the full term for it. Here is some info and you will find that the textbooks in public schools adhere to this particular "faith".

 

 

 

First, Secular Humanism is a worldview. That is, it is a set of beliefs through which one interprets all of reality—something like a pair of glasses. Second, Secular Humanism is a religious worldview. Do not let the word “secular†mislead you. The Humanists themselves would agree that they adhere to a religious worldview. According to the Humanist Manifestos I & II: Humanism is "a philosophical, religious, and moral point of view."

 

Not all humanists, though, want to be identified as “religious,†because they understand that religion is (supposedly) not allowed in American public education. To identify Secular Humanism as a religion would eliminate the Humanists' main vehicle for the propagation of their faith. And it is a faith, by their own admission. The Humanist Manifestos declare:

 

"These affirmations [in the Manifestos] are not a final credo or dogma but an expression of a living and growing faith."

 

What are the basic beliefs of Secular Humanism? What do Secular Humanists believe?

 

Theologically, Secular Humanists are atheists. Humanist Paul Kurtz, publisher of Prometheus Books and editor of Free Inquiry magazine, says that "Humanism cannot in any fair sense of the word apply to one who still believes in God as the source and creator of the universe." Corliss Lamont agrees, saying that "Humanism contends that instead of the gods creating the cosmos, the cosmos, in the individualized form of human beings giving rein to their imagination, created the gods."

 

Philosophically, Secular Humanists are naturalists. That is, they believe that nature is all that exists - the material world is all that exists. There is no God, no spiritual dimension, no afterlife. Carl Sagan said it best in the introduction to his Cosmos series: "The universe is all that is or ever was or ever will be." Roy Wood Sellars concurs. “Humanism is naturalistic,†he says, "and rejects the supernaturalistic stance with its postulated Creator-God and cosmic Ruler."

 

Secular Humanist beliefs in the area of biology are closely tied to both their atheistic theology and their naturalist philosophy. If there is no supernatural, then life, including human life, must be the result of a purely natural phenomenon. Hence, Secular Humanists must believe in evolution. Julian Huxley, for example, insists that "man ... his body, his mind and his soul were not supernaturally created but are all products of evolution." Sagan, Lamont, Sellars, Kurtz—all Secular Humanists are in agreement on this.

 

Atheism leads most Secular Humanists to adopt ethical relativism - the belief that no absolute moral code exists, and therefore man must adjust his ethical standards in each situation according to his own judgment. If God does not exist, then He cannot establish an absolute moral code. Humanist Max Hocutt says that human beings "may, and do, make up their own rules... Morality is not discovered; it is made."

 

Secular Humanism, then, can be defined as a religious worldview based on atheism, naturalism, evolution, and ethical relativism.

 

HTH

 

I don't know a single soul that proclaims themselves a secular humanist. I have friends who call themselves free thinkers or atheist. But when people are not part of an organized religion with a central dogma I think it's pretty hard to organize them into a cohesive group. With all due respect this sounds like a fringe group that is being made to be more then it is. Perhaps a boogy man?

[hornblower]

Secular humanism is not a religion.

 

Secular humanists do a good job of describing themselves here:

http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?page=declaration&section=main

 

Some excerpts :

 

"Secular humanism is not a dogma or a creed. There are wide differences of opinion among secular humanists on many issues. Nevertheless, there is a loose consensus with respect to several propositions. We are apprehensive that modern civilization is threatened by forces antithetical to reason, democracy, and freedom. Many religious believers will no doubt share with us a belief in many secular humanist and democratic values, and we welcome their joining with us in the defense of these ideals. "

 

"Secular humanists may be agnostics, atheists, rationalists, or skeptics, but they find insufficient evidence for the claim that some divine purpose exists for the universe."

 

 

Whom are you quoting, Heather in NC?

[hornblower]

I don't know a single soul that proclaims themselves a secular humanist. I have friends who call themselves free thinkers or atheist.

 

I'm an atheist and I've called myself secular humanist as well.

UU churches often have a secular humanist group.

 

What I don't call myself is a SOUL.....

[Spy Car]

I don't know a single soul that proclaims themselves a secular humanist. I have friends who call themselves free thinkers or atheist. But when people are not part of an organized religion with a central dogma I think it's pretty hard to organize them into a cohesive group. With all due respect this sounds like a fringe group that is being made to be more then it is. Perhaps a boogy man?

 

Same here Mike. I've never in all my days never know a single person who identified themselves as a "secular humanist."

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

Same here Mike. I've never in all my days never know a single person who identified themselves as a "secular humanist."

 

Bill

 

ETA: Hornblower has blown 50+ years of living in the dark :D

[Jenny in Atl]

Same here Mike. I've never in all my days never know a single person who identified themselves as a "secular humanist."

 

Bill

 

Dito... and I live in the South, where everyone is something. :lol: Except me :tongue_smilie:

[Spy Car]

Whom are you quoting, Heather in NC?

 

Summit Ministries, an utra-right fundamentalist organization that rails against homosexuals, tries to prove rock music is part of a Marxist/Communist conspiracy and that Secular Humanism is a "religion."

 

Bill

[mommaduck]

I have known ppl that identify as secular humanists. I've also seen and been a student that was reamed and told we weren't permitted to bring our Bibles to school or discuss our faith in the classroom. But it was okay for a girl associated with Nation of Islam to discuss her's and for one particular teacher we had to not only push her views that directly attacked the faith of more than a few students, but also to slap me in the face for stating that I didn't believe x as I believed z.

 

The Christian teachers in our school were silent and simply avoided certain areas of the texts. The non-Christian teachers we're out and out vocal about all their beliefs, views, and faiths. You could tell, even as a student, how difficult the workplace was made for the Christian teachers. This was a school in the midwest, btw (I've attended elsewhere, but this school was the worse of the bunch).

[Tea Time]

TEA TIME...I think you have some really interesting points and I like reading your perspective but, for what turned out to be a REALLY long thread, we have kept this really civil and I'd like to finish the conversation before it gets locked. So I respectfully ask you to play nice, OK?

 

Well, thank you for the very polite rebuke and the kind invitation to continue to play. Very well done. I admit to a thicker skin than most, so what seems to me as lively sparing can be "ouchy" to others. I would be horrified to truly hurt anyone's feelings, but I highly doubt that was the case here.

 

I did not "ridicule" Bill's education. I know nothing about his education. I was simply pointing out (with a good dose of self deprecation and tongue in cheek humor) that a degree does not equate with an education. The question about the Pell grant was purely rhetorical, which I am sure that he knew quite well. But by blinking his eyes and pretending ignorance and implying I was inappropriate to ask, he could ignore the implication which is that the power of the gov't does not stop at K-12 schools. BTW, how many of you are aware that the gov't is moving to take complete control over college loans? Sorry, off topic.

 

What I really should have said was the same thing I said when Tex-Mex brought up her ethnic background and her Christianity, which was that it was not relevant to the point I was making. Bill has repeatedly told me how I do not understand the term socialism, but his highly academic understanding doesn’t really address my point. It makes me look foolish, which I probably am, but it doesn’t negate the point I made. I would be happy to be “educated†in the subtle differences in terminology so that I can better make the point. That does not seem to be the goal.

 

Saying that I was not polite is another method of dodging the argument. When intimidation did not work, Bill resorted to character assassination (not really, just the name of the tactic). I see it a lot. Whenever someone does not want to address the point being made, he/she just accuses the poster of being mean, or impolite, or making assumptions or some other "not nice" thing that will make the poster feel bad so he/she will back off. It is very effective, except for with thick skinned people like me. He and others on this board do it a lot. It works really well on Christians who are very afraid of being accused of intolerance or mean spiritedness. Other Christians even get on each other's cases. I just want him to be aware that it doesn't work as well as it might appear.

 

It is a good thread. Very important and revealing. I keep trying to bow out because I do think I will get it shut down. That is not my intent, but neither is it my intent to leave people unchallenged in their arguments. I think some of the tactics used should also be challenged. People can be very mean in their posts and appear on the surface as very cordial. You almost can’t see what hit you.

 

Also, it is probably me that brought up the fact that secular humanism is favored in the PS system either by default or on purpose. I really don't know which, but it is favored. You can argue that it is not a religion, that's semantics, but it is this (by its own statement):

 

"Democratic secular humanism has been a powerful force in world culture."

 

Whatever it is, it has no business being backed by the State any more than any other belief system. Schools have the power to indoctrinate any belief, and it is not only religious beliefs that can be misused. It is becoming increasingly hard to check that power. Someone else said that Chavez was "voted." Well, that is fine, but if he takes control of the schools and openly indoctrinates students (his own words), then voting really no longer matters.

 

But just in case, please delete my posts only, moderator, if you feel I am over stepping. I honestly do not see anything hurtful in my comments. Just please make sure it is my methods and not my message that make you do so.

 

I'm leaving town, so this really will be my last post on this thread, which is why I tried to cover everything, and it is so long. Best wishes to everyone, and long live homeschooling!

[Spy Car]

I admit to a thicker skin than most, so what seems to me as lively sparing can be "ouchy" to others. I would be horrified to truly hurt anyone's feelings, but I highly doubt that was the case here.

 

You didn't hurt my feeling. I hope the reverse is true.

 

The question about the Pell grant was purely rhetorical, which I am sure that he knew quite well. But by blinking his eyes and pretending ignorance and implying I was inappropriate to ask, he could ignore the implication which is that the power of the gov't does not stop at K-12 schools.

 

Actually, I didn't know what you were getting at with the Pell Grant question, so any ignorance on my part was genuine (not feigned) :D

 

Bill has repeatedly told me how I do not understand the term socialism, but his highly academic understanding doesn’t really address my point. It makes me look foolish, which I probably am, but it doesn’t negate the point I made. I would be happy to be “educated†in the subtle differences in terminology so that I can better make the point. That does not seem to be the goal.

 

Actually, both Mike and I tried to offer up simple definitions of "socialism" for your edification. And it certainly isn't my goal to make you look foolish.

 

Saying that I was not polite is another method of dodging the argument.

 

I haven't dodged any of your arguments, but addressed each and every one of them.

 

When intimidation did not work, Bill resorted to character assassination (not really, just the name of the tactic).

 

This one leaves me speechless. Moving on.

 

It is a good thread. Very important and revealing.

 

I agree. And I'm happy for your participation, even if we reason things differently.

 

Bill

[monk17]

I have known ppl that identify as secular humanists. I've also seen and been a student that was reamed and told we weren't permitted to bring our Bibles to school or discuss our faith in the classroom. But it was okay for a girl associated with Nation of Islam to discuss her's and for one particular teacher we had to not only push her views that directly attacked the faith of more than a few students, but also to slap me in the face for stating that I didn't believe x as I believed z.

 

The Christian teachers in our school were silent and simply avoided certain areas of the texts. The non-Christian teachers we're out and out vocal about all their beliefs, views, and faiths. You could tell, even as a student, how difficult the workplace was made for the Christian teachers. This was a school in the Midwest, btw (I've attended elsewhere, but this school was the worse of the bunch).

I'm sorry for your public school life but I' think it's pretty isolated, of course it's been 35 years since I've been to school and things have changed.

[Spy Car]

I've also seen and been a student that was reamed and told we weren't permitted to bring our Bibles to school or discuss our faith in the classroom. But it was okay for a girl associated with Nation of Islam to discuss her's and for one particular teacher we had to not only push her views that directly attacked the faith of more than a few students, but also to slap me in the face for stating that I didn't believe x as I believed z.

 

The Christian teachers in our school were silent and simply avoided certain areas of the texts. The non-Christian teachers we're out and out vocal about all their beliefs, views, and faiths. You could tell, even as a student, how difficult the workplace was made for the Christian teachers. This was a school in the midwest, btw (I've attended elsewhere, but this school was the worse of the bunch).

 

I'm sincerely sorry such things happened to you. This kind of treatment of a student is plainly wrong. No excuses. It's wrong.

 

Bill

[mommaduck]

I'm sorry for your public school life but I' think it's pretty isolated, of course it's been 35 years since I've been to school and things have changed.

Having talked with many others, it's not.

[Heather in Neverland]

Having talked with many others, it's not.

 

I agree. It happened to me as a student in both school and college and I saw it all the time when I was a teacher. I taught AP English and classic literature is filled with biblical allusions. If I even mentioned that students would yell, "You can't talk about God. My mom will sue you!". I wasn't prosyletizing but when kids ask what a certain turn of phrase means or where it comes from and I say "the Bible" and then I get threatened by my students????

 

Students ARE ridiculed for bring Bibles. And in one high school were I worked they had a wiccan group that met weekly but when the kids wanted to start a Bible study group they were told no. Also, we had to take down "Merry Christmas" signs in our school but the kids made Islamic prayer rugs in art class. I had a Bible verse taped to the top of my desk that inspired me to KEEP teaching and I was told to take it off. Yet the teacher down the hall could wear her hijab to school. It isn't a separation of church and state. It is a of separation of the CHRISTIAN church and state.

 

With violence, drugs, teen pregnancy, and a general lack of a moral compass in schools... some prayer now and then is the least of their worries.

[funschooler5]

True. Secular humanism is the full term for it. Here is some info and you will find that the textbooks in public schools adhere to this particular "faith".

 

 

 

First, Secular Humanism is a worldview. That is, it is a set of beliefs through which one interprets all of reality—something like a pair of glasses. Second, Secular Humanism is a religious worldview. Do not let the word “secular” mislead you. The Humanists themselves would agree that they adhere to a religious worldview. According to the Humanist Manifestos I & II: Humanism is "a philosophical, religious, and moral point of view."

 

Not all humanists, though, want to be identified as “religious,” because they understand that religion is (supposedly) not allowed in American public education. To identify Secular Humanism as a religion would eliminate the Humanists' main vehicle for the propagation of their faith. And it is a faith, by their own admission. The Humanist Manifestos declare:

 

"These affirmations [in the Manifestos] are not a final credo or dogma but an expression of a living and growing faith."

 

What are the basic beliefs of Secular Humanism? What do Secular Humanists believe?

 

Theologically, Secular Humanists are atheists. Humanist Paul Kurtz, publisher of Prometheus Books and editor of Free Inquiry magazine, says that "Humanism cannot in any fair sense of the word apply to one who still believes in God as the source and creator of the universe." Corliss Lamont agrees, saying that "Humanism contends that instead of the gods creating the cosmos, the cosmos, in the individualized form of human beings giving rein to their imagination, created the gods."

 

Philosophically, Secular Humanists are naturalists. That is, they believe that nature is all that exists - the material world is all that exists. There is no God, no spiritual dimension, no afterlife. Carl Sagan said it best in the introduction to his Cosmos series: "The universe is all that is or ever was or ever will be." Roy Wood Sellars concurs. “Humanism is naturalistic,” he says, "and rejects the supernaturalistic stance with its postulated Creator-God and cosmic Ruler."

 

Secular Humanist beliefs in the area of biology are closely tied to both their atheistic theology and their naturalist philosophy. If there is no supernatural, then life, including human life, must be the result of a purely natural phenomenon. Hence, Secular Humanists must believe in evolution. Julian Huxley, for example, insists that "man ... his body, his mind and his soul were not supernaturally created but are all products of evolution." Sagan, Lamont, Sellars, Kurtz—all Secular Humanists are in agreement on this.

 

Atheism leads most Secular Humanists to adopt ethical relativism - the belief that no absolute moral code exists, and therefore man must adjust his ethical standards in each situation according to his own judgment. If God does not exist, then He cannot establish an absolute moral code. Humanist Max Hocutt says that human beings "may, and do, make up their own rules... Morality is not discovered; it is made."

 

Secular Humanism, then, can be defined as a religious worldview based on atheism, naturalism, evolution, and ethical relativism.

 

HTH

 

What is the source of this quote, if you don't mind my asking? I'm curious, because I've only recently begun to refer to myself as a secular humanist...I thought "athiest" was too controversial, but apparently I'm wrong :lol:). According to the Council for Secular Humanism website, SH is:

 

A comprehensive, nonreligious lifestance.

 

Secular humanism is comprehensive, touching every aspect of life including issues of values, meaning, and identity. Thus it is broader than atheism, which concerns only the nonexistence of god or the supernatural. Important as that may be, there’s a lot more to life … and secular humanism addresses it.

 

http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=main&page=what_is

Edited September 24, 2009 by funschooler5
Spelling errors, ugh.

[Mary in VA]

was a Humanist - John Dewey. Dewey in fact was a signer of the Humanist Manifesto. And he stated, "Education is the fundamental method of social progress and reform [religion being bypassed] . . . Every teacher should realize the dignity of his calling; that he is a social servant set apart for the maintenance of proper social order and the security of the right social growth. . . . In this way the teacher is always the prophet of the true god and the usherer of the true kingdom of god." Another founder, Horace Mann, stated, "What the church has been for medieval man the public school must become for democratic and rational man."

 

While certainly not everyone in education is a Humanist, it is enlightening to see what moved some of the founders of the public school system in America. And just 26 years ago, John Dunphy, in The Humanist wrote, "The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new-the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism."

 

Several posters mentioned they personally don't know any Secular Humanists(SH), but I would suggest that after over 100 years of public education they are everywhere. Most SH don't belong to the Humanist Society, most don't even know they are SH. But if you asked them questions about what they believed, those beliefs would line up with Secular Humanism. Some may even state they are Christian, but it is only "cultural christianity," and their bedrock beliefs are humanist. Many college students would fall into this category. And this is the undermining effect of the public school system.

 

I know I sensed the hostility to Christianity when I was in school, particularly college, and I wasn't even a Christian until my senior year. (And that was 29 years ago :glare:) The hostility if not open, is insidious, and it can have a lasting and detrimental effect on children, teens and young adults. If it can do that to Heather, a strong, vibrant Christian, what more can it do to young people who are still young in their faith. Sometimes it can be as little as a condescending attitude to a Christian for being unintelligent to believe in the Bible. The effect of that builds up over years. It's much worse in the college classroom where it is open. Students are afraid to speak up for fear of jeopardizing their grades or needed recommendations for graduate school. That is why my dh and I felt so strongly about NOT sending our dds to public colleges. We will not pay a school to tear apart our dds beliefs. God has been faithful in supplying what we need to send our oldest dd to the right school for her, and she is majoring in elementary education, ironic huh :001_smile:

 

I have enjoyed reading this thread the whole way. Every time I check back to the board I am amazed to see it is still going!!

 

Mary

 

Whoo, Hoo, my 100th post! (I'm a long time lurker, rare poster.)

Edited September 24, 2009 by Mary in VA

[Spy Car]

Having talked with many others, it's not.

 

Your experience goes to prove the point I was trying to make some pages back (my this thread has grown long :D) that Christian students can (and have been) on the other side in having their religious freedoms tread upon by schools.

 

To my mind the proper response is to decry and fight any situation where school authorities let such a situation exist, or worse, are the cause of the problem. Rather than cheering when "our side" prevails in getting away with abuse*.

 

* Which is not to suggest you believe otherwise.

 

Bill

[funschooler5]

I agree. It happened to me as a student in both school and college and I saw it all the time when I was a teacher. I taught AP English and classic literature is filled with biblical allusions. If I even mentioned that students would yell, "You can't talk about God. My mom will sue you!". I wasn't prosyletizing but when kids ask what a certain turn of phrase means or where it comes from and I say "the Bible" and then I get threatened by my students????

 

Students ARE ridiculed for bring Bibles. And in one high school were I worked they had a wiccan group that met weekly but when the kids wanted to start a Bible study group they were told no. Also, we had to take down "Merry Christmas" signs in our school but the kids made Islamic prayer rugs in art class. I had a Bible verse taped to the top of my desk that inspired me to KEEP teaching and I was told to take it off. Yet the teacher down the hall could wear her hijab to school. It isn't a separation of church and state. It is a of separation of the CHRISTIAN church and state.

 

With violence, drugs, teen pregnancy, and a general lack of a moral compass in schools... some prayer now and then is the least of their worries.

 

I don't think this kind of thing should happen at all. When kids have their own Bibles, or get together at school on their own time, or a teacher has their own personal religious items, that's their right. I'm really surprised to hear this kind of thing is happening, but I grew up in a very religious town (all of our public schools have bible schools nearby, where students go once a week for Bible study during regular school hours.)

 

I don't, however, agree with leading a prayer in a public school. If someone wants to pray alone, that is their right, but when you make it a group event, you force non-belivers and people of different faiths to either shut up and go along with it (against their beliefs), or be a jerk and speak up against the majority. Honestly, when someone does this (and I've been at functions where someone has done this out of nowhere) it seems like they're either assuming that everyone in the room is the same religion, or they don't care if there are a few people there who will feel uncomfortable. I never have spoken up, and I doubt I ever will...I tend to keep my beliefs to myself (except on message boards :tongue_smilie:).

[mommaduck]

According to the American Humanist Association:

 

(see link for definitions of each)

http://www.americanhumanist.org/who_we_are/about_humanism/What_is_Humanism

Literary Humanism

Resaissance Humanism

 

Western Cultural Humanism

Philosophical Humanism

Christian Humanism

Modern Humanism

Secular Humanism

Religious Humanism

 

(further down the page)

 

 

The most critical irony in dealing with Modern Humanism is the tendency for its advocates to disagree on whether or not this worldview is religious. Those who see it as philosophy are the Secular Humanists while those who see it as religion are Religious Humanists. This dispute has been going on since the beginning of the twentieth century when the secular and religious traditions converged and brought Modern Humanism into existence.

Secular and Religious Humanists both share the same worldview and the same basic principles. This is made evident by the fact that both Secular and Religious Humanists were among the signers of Humanist Manifesto I in 1933, Humanist Manifesto II in 1973, and Humanist Manifesto III in 2003. From the standpoint of philosophy alone, there is no difference between the two. It is only in the definition of religion and in the practice of the philosophy that Religious and Secular Humanists effectively disagree.

The definition of religion used by Religious Humanists is often a functional one. Religion is that which serves the personal and social needs of a group of people sharing the same philosophical worldview.

 

 

Now, while Secular Humanists may agree with much of what Religious Humanists do, they deny that this activity is properly called "religious." This isn't a mere semantic debate. Secular Humanists maintain that there is so much in religion deserving of criticism that the good name of humanism should not be tainted by connection with it.

Secular Humanists often refer to Unitarian Universalists as "humanists not yet out of the church habit." But Unitarian Universalists sometimes counter that a Secular Humanist is simply an "unchurched Unitarian."

http://www.americanhumanist.org/HNN/details/2009-08-why-secular-actvism

Humanism stands for everything that the religious right opposes - critical thinking, education, human rights, smaller military budgets, scientific progress, women's equality, gay rights, international cooperation, and so forth. As such, if one connects the dots logically, one would conclude that humanism in America has enormous potential that has been untapped, and if that potential is eventually realized America is likely to experience a major transformation for the better.

The "religious right" is BIG on critical thinking, education, and human rights. A different approach to something is not anti-that issue. And I believe Christ was very pro-women's equality. As a Christian, I very much believe women are equal. However, we are given different strengths and weakness than men, typically. And were made for a different role. Equal, but different. International cooperation? Well, as a third culture person, I don't exactly see things in they typical American fashion and don't go overboard either way.

 

 

The American Humanist Association initiated the first national advertising campaign promoting the notion of secular humanist identity, and now numerous groups around the country are doing the same. We now have Camp Quest, a camp for children of nonreligious families, and we have education centers, legal centers, charities, student groups through the Secular Student Alliance, and local groups all around the country, all affirming the notion of secular identity.

Much like a religious organisation. Add that this site claims Religious Humanism, but admits to promoting it's ideas through Secular Humanism Identity.

 

 

On this page it also mentions how "dangerous" the "religious right" is. Hmmm, just as those that are on the right, or even moderate, speak of how dangerous the humanists are. And yes, those religious non-humanists are the wackos, fringe, and making-mountains out of mole hills? Pot, meet Kettle :glare:

 

 

Interesting site, btw.

Edited September 24, 2009 by mommaduck

[mommaduck]

I don't think this kind of thing should happen at all. When kids have their own Bibles, or get together at school on their own time, or a teacher has their own personal religious items, that's their right. I'm really surprised to hear this kind of thing is happening, but I grew up in a very religious town (all of our public schools have bible schools nearby, where students go once a week for Bible study during regular school hours.)

 

I don't, however, agree with leading a prayer in a public school. If someone wants to pray alone, that is their right, but when you make it a group event, you force non-belivers and people of different faiths to either shut up and go along with it (against their beliefs), or be a jerk and speak up against the majority. Honestly, when someone does this (and I've been at functions where someone has done this out of nowhere) it seems like they're either assuming that everyone in the room is the same religion, or they don't care if there are a few people there who will feel uncomfortable. I never have spoken up, and I doubt I ever will...I tend to keep my beliefs to myself (except on message boards :tongue_smilie:).

 

I think, for the most part, we've all agreed with this.

[funschooler5]

was a Humanist - John Dewey. Dewey in fact was a signer of the Humanist Manifesto. And he stated, "Education is the fundamental method of social progress and reform [religion being bypassed] . . . Every teacher should realize the dignity of his calling; that he is a social servant set apart for the maintenance of proper social order and the security of the right social growth. . . . In this way the teacher is always the prophet of the true god and the usherer of the true kingdom of god." Another founder, Horace Mann, stated, "What the church has been for medieval man the public school must become for democratic and rational man."

 

While certainly not everyone in education is a Humanist, it is enlightening to see what moved some of the founders of the public school system in America. And just 26 years ago, John Dunphy, in The Humanist wrote, "The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new-the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism."

 

Several posters mentioned they personally don't know any Secular Humanists(SH), but I would suggest that after over 100 years of public education they are everywhere. Most SH don't belong to the Humanist Society, most don't even know they are SH. But if you asked them questions about what they believed, those beliefs would line up with Secular Humanism. Some may even state they are Christian, but it is only "cultural christianity," and their bedrock beliefs are humanist. Many college students would fall into this category. And this is the undermining effect of the public school system.

 

I know I sensed the hostility to Christianity when I was in school, particularly college, and I wasn't even a Christian until my senior year. (And that was 29 years ago :glare:) The hostility if not open, is insidious, and it can have a lasting and detrimental effect on children, teens and young adults. If it can do that to Heather, a strong, vibrant Christian, what more can it do to young people who are still young in their faith. Sometimes it can be as little as a condescending attitude to a Christian for being unintelligent to believe in the Bible. The effect of that builds up over years. It's much worse in the college classroom where it is open. Students are afraid to speak up for fear of jeopardizing their grades or needed recommendations for graduate school. That is why my dh and I felt so strongly about NOT sending our dds to public colleges. We will not pay a school to tear apart our dds beliefs. God has been faithful in supplying what we need to send our oldest dd to the right school for her, and she is majoring in elementary education, ironic huh :001_smile:

 

I have enjoyed reading this thread the whole way. Every time I check back to the board I am amazed to see it is still going!!

 

Mary

 

Whoo, Hoo, my 100th post! (I'm a long time lurker, rare poster.)

 

Hmm...I'm starting to re-think my secular humanist beliefs. It seems like their views are interpreted differently in different places. I certainly don't believe in indoctrinating kids at school. I would hope that schools are there to open kids' minds, not brainwash them into thinking a certain way. I think having a variety of teachers would help dispell this.

 

Of course, that's one of the reasons we homeschool, so we can teach our kids what *we* want them to learn.

 

I agree with you about this thread. I've read every single post, and I keep coming back to it. Honestly, when I started reading, I was one of those people who thought that all religion should be kept out of schools. I never thought about those people who weren't able to express their faiths. I was one of the very few non-religous students at my school, where everyone was very open about their religions (almost 100% Christian) so that's colored the way I think about things like this. It's very eye-opening to me to see what has happened to Christians in this thread in different parts of the country.

[funschooler5]

I think, for the most part, we've all agreed with this.

 

Yeah, I was just throwing my opinion into the mix. :001_smile: I've been meaning to reply to this thread for awhile, but I got too caught up in reading it!

[mommaduck]

Your experience goes to prove the point I was trying to make some pages back (my this thread has grown long :D) that Christian students can (and have been) on the other side in having their religious freedoms tread upon by schools.

 

To my mind the proper response is to decry and fight any situation where school authorities let such a situation exist, or worse, are the cause of the problem. Rather than cheering when "our side" prevails in getting away with abuse*.

 

* Which is not to suggest you believe otherwise.

 

Bill

 

Wasn't cheering...was asking more specific detail, since the specifics could not be agreed on even by papers for a time (would love, love to get my hands on the court records...I'm taking legal courses, so yes, I'm being demanding and realise I can't get what I want :lol:) Also, was showing that this issue cuts many different ways. We have so many broadbrushed textbooks and people discuss the same at times "Columbus came to prove the earth was round and bring Christianity to the New World" (gag, so much wrong and missing from that one) "North good, South bad" "Muslims/Mormons/Quiverful are out to outbreed us all and take over!" "Religious Right is Destructive!" "City is Evil and Dirty; Country is Clean and Wholesome" "Homeschoolers are Social Misfits".....Seriously, is any issue that cut and dry???

[mommaduck]

Yeah, I was just throwing my opinion into the mix. :001_smile: I've been meaning to reply to this thread for awhile, but I got too caught up in reading it!

LOL! Understand!

[Spy Car]

I taught AP English and classic literature is filled with biblical allusions. If I even mentioned that students would yell, "You can't talk about God. My mom will sue you!". I wasn't prosyletizing but when kids ask what a certain turn of phrase means or where it comes from and I say "the Bible" and then I get threatened by my students????

 

This is an unfortunate situation. Since "biblical literacy" is a potentially valid part of an education. Unfortunately, the actions of people like Principal Lay lead to lines being drawn tighter and tighter, because they abuse their authorities and make people suspicious of "evangelism" even when it may just be innocent "education". It's blow-back caused (in part) by those manipulating the system, and it undermines a general education.

 

I think the Texas program of instituting "biblical literacy" will blow up in that states face, as the guidelines are naught, and I deeply suspect some educators and administrators will see this as an opportunity to Evangelize.

 

I hope I'm wrong.

 

A teacher ought to be able to point out passages in literature, and point out their biblical (or should we say King James Bible?) origins.

 

But again, this weeks goings-on in Florida don't help. They further polarize people, and cause education to be ever-more "dumbed-down."

 

Students ARE ridiculed for bring Bibles. And in one high school were I worked they had a wiccan group that met weekly but when the kids wanted to start a Bible study group they were told no.

 

How is that legal?

 

I had a Bible verse taped to the top of my desk that inspired me to KEEP teaching and I was told to take it off. Yet the teacher down the hall could wear her hijab to school. It isn't a separation of church and state. It is a of separation of the CHRISTIAN church and state.

 

I could see disallowing biblical verses from being displayed, and Quranic verses for that matter, while allowing a hijab, or head-covering for a modest Christian or Jewish woman who felt it was demanded by her faith. I think that was reasonable of the school.

 

With violence, drugs, teen pregnancy, and a general lack of a moral compass in schools... some prayer now and then is the least of their worries.

 

Well, you and other Christians have felt the pain of what you felt was persecution in your own lives. And it sounds to me these episodes have caused some lasting pain and anguish.

 

People take their faith (and non-faith) positions seriously, and when those belief are trampled it hurts. So we should take pains that it doesn't happen. Not to Christians or to non-Christians. If you don't think it causes anguish to non-Christians to have Christian prayer forced on them I can assure you that your wrong. It is painful. Just as the infringements you've felt were painful to you.

 

These issues can get complex. Even the most fair minded person can have a hard time balancing interests. But we have to try.

 

In Florida they failed. Hopefully Principal Lay and the school learned a lesson. But I fear, reading the right-wing coverage of this event, that much of the Evangelical community drew the wrong lesson from what transpired. And saw it as some sort of victory, when it was in fact a blow to religious liberty. And not something to celebrate.

 

Bill

[Audrey]

tries to prove rock music is part of a Marxist/Communist conspiracy

 

Bill

 

 

Oh, no, Bill. That part is true. We just had a big meeting about what a great job the Jonas Brothers are doing inadvertently for the commie cause in that regard. :lol:

Edited September 24, 2009 by Audrey

[Spy Car]

One of the founders of the American public school system was a Humanist - John Dewey. Dewey in fact was a signer of the Humanist Manifesto.

 

John Dewey (born 1859) wasn't even alive at the beginning of the modern public school movement. While a proponent of public education, and a philosopher with "humanist" ideals, he was hardly the founder of American public school education.

 

And should we be surprised there are some notable "humanists" who favor public education? I hardly think so. Just as there are Christians and Jews who were proponents of public school education.

 

The fact of the matter is until fairly recent times the curriculum, text-books and general flavor of public school education in this country had a decidedly Protestant Christian caste in most states. So much so that many Catholics and Jews formed their own private schools in response. Have you looked at nineteenth century and early to mid twentieth century schoolbooks? I have. They were full of Protestant Christian messages throughout. And were hardly humanist.

 

This tilt towards Protestantism has changed over the past 50 years, but was the case throughout Dewey's lifetime (he died in 1952).

While certainly not everyone in education is a Humanist, it is enlightening to see what moved some of the founders of the public school system in America. And just 26 years ago, John Dunphy, in The Humanist wrote, "The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new-the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism."

 

As I've stated, John Dewey, while a proponent of public school education was not "the founder" or a founder of the American public school system. This assertion simply isn't factual. He was one of a myriad of people who had an interest in public school reform. But he was not the public school czar, or anything close to it.

 

Second. John Murphy isn't a influence on public school education at all. He's just a poet/humanist with a big mouth, who has provided anti-humanists with some "read-meat" quotes. Every group has their loose cannons. But he's got nothing to do with John Dewey or the schools, other than an association with "Humanism" in some degree.

 

I know I sensed the hostility to Christianity when I was in school, particularly college, and I wasn't even a Christian until my senior year. (And that was 29 years ago :glare:) The hostility if not open, is insidious, and it can have a lasting and detrimental effect on children, teens and young adults.

 

Hostility to ones faith or non-faith position can have a long and detrimental effect on children, teens and young adults. Exactly my point!

 

Such things aren't "harmless", as some suggest.

 

That's why what happened in Florida is a disgrace. We shouldn't allow what we wouldn't want happening to Christian young people to happen to non-Christian young people. Nor should we tolerate a hostile environment for Christian kids. There should only be one standard. A standard of decency and respect for all.

 

I have enjoyed reading this thread the whole way. Every time I check back to the board I am amazed to see it is still going!!

 

Whoo, Hoo, my 100th post! (I'm a long time lurker, rare poster.)

 

Welcome :001_smile:

 

Bill

Edited September 24, 2009 by Spy Car

[Spy Car]

Oh, no, Bill. That part is true. We just had a big meeting about what a great job the Jonas Brothers are doing inadvertently for the commie cause in that regard. :lol:

 

Who knew? :D

 

Bill

[Slartibartfast]

I agree. It happened to me as a student in both school and college and I saw it all the time when I was a teacher. I taught AP English and classic literature is filled with biblical allusions. If I even mentioned that students would yell, "You can't talk about God. My mom will sue you!". I wasn't prosyletizing but when kids ask what a certain turn of phrase means or where it comes from and I say "the Bible" and then I get threatened by my students????

 

Students ARE ridiculed for bring Bibles. And in one high school were I worked they had a wiccan group that met weekly but when the kids wanted to start a Bible study group they were told no. Also, we had to take down "Merry Christmas" signs in our school but the kids made Islamic prayer rugs in art class. I had a Bible verse taped to the top of my desk that inspired me to KEEP teaching and I was told to take it off. Yet the teacher down the hall could wear her hijab to school. It isn't a separation of church and state. It is a of separation of the CHRISTIAN church and state.

 

With violence, drugs, teen pregnancy, and a general lack of a moral compass in schools... some prayer now and then is the least of their worries.

 

This is interesting. This sort of thing is so regional.

 

I grew up in a conservative area. I recall Bibles being handed out in grade school and prayer was something a lot of people took part in before games and other events. It wasn't pushed by the teachers but it *was* pushed by the students.

 

Most people were Christian, the "cool" people were certainly Christian.

 

I grew up with students openly practicing their faith. I saw more issues with non-Christians being picked on than the other way around.

 

It is just interesting how our individual experiences with religion in our schools affect our viewpoint. I always see "Christian Persecution" as hyperbole, I always saw the opposite. It wasn't until I was in my early twenties that I was ever really in the religious minority and that was among my friends, I felt more comfortable among pagans/atheists/other :lol: who were liberal/moderate than I did those who shared my faith because many were so intolerant. As a Christian who grew up in a Conservative area I was always in the religious majority but as a Democrat, in the Political Minority.

 

I am not arguing with you or anything, I am just interested in your experiences as mine were so different. :)

Edited September 24, 2009 by Sis

[Mrs Mungo]

I hardly think "well, Christians are sometimes ridiculed too" is an excuse for using a position of power within the public school to proselytize.

 

Is Christianity sometimes ridiculed? Yes. Sometimes people who dress weird are ridiculed by teachers. Sometimes kids are ridiculed for having parents who are Democrats *or* Republicans. Sometimes kids are ridiculed who can understand a passage of literature better than the teacher. There are teachers who are men-hating-style feminists. There are teachers who will tell you feminists are nuts. There are anti and pro Columbus teachers. There are teachers who approve of and even promote a providential view of history. There are teachers who take it to the other extreme and PC it to death. These are opinions and judgments and actions held and taken by *individuals*. You cannot make blanket statements about what "the school system" believes or promotes.

[Heather in Neverland]

I think the Texas program of instituting "biblical literacy" will blow up in that states face, as the guidelines are naught, and I deeply suspect some educators and administrators will see this as an opportunity to Evangelize.

 

Believe it or not I agree that the "bible as literature" should not be taught but for different reasons. The only thing worse than not teaching the Bible is teaching it is if it were merely a novel or history book. As a Christian who sees it as the Word of God, this offends me deeply.

 

A teacher ought to be able to point out passages in literature, and point out their biblical (or should we say King James Bible?) origins. One would think.

 

 

I could see disallowing biblical verses from being displayed, and Quranic verses for that matter, while allowing a hijab, or head-covering for a modest Christian or Jewish woman who felt it was demanded by her faith. I think that was reasonable of the school.

 

Really? It was one verse Galatians 6:9, "Let us not grow weary in well-doing, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart." It was on a 3 x 5 card, taped to the top of my desk where only I could see it (I guess a kid could see it if they came up to my desk and looked under all my ungraded essays). It was not on "display". It was something fo rme to look at as inspiration and keep teaching when kids were tell me to F--- Off. I can't see how that is not OK but expressing your faith in a more obvious way (wearing a head covering) is OK.

 

 

If you don't think it causes anguish to non-Christians to have Christian prayer forced on them I can assure you that your wrong. It is painful. Just as the infringements you've felt were painful to you.

 

I would really like to know more about this from a non-christian perspective. I can understand it being painful to be ridiculed for not believing the way I do. And I am sure in some very conservative communities this can get out of hand (just like it did in my very secular community in Michigan). But I guess I don't see how someone saying a prayer of thanks before a meal is emotionally damaging for a non-Christian. But I am truly interested in knowing since I live in such a multicultural society.

 

 

.

[mommaduck]

My comments in bold.

I hardly think "well, Christians are sometimes ridiculed too" is an excuse for using a position of power within the public school to proselytize.

 

No one is. (or at least most of us aren't, that I see)

 

You cannot make blanket statements about what "the school system" believes or promotes.

 

Correct, but we can make statements about what we have seen the most of in the school system in general. As a military brat, I lived on post, off post, east coast, west coast, midwest, middle of the Pacific, etc. I've not seen where the teaching has varied in public schools.

[monk17]

I agree. It happened to me as a student in both school and college and I saw it all the time when I was a teacher. I taught AP English and classic literature is filled with biblical allusions. If I even mentioned that students would yell, "You can't talk about God. My mom will sue you!". I wasn't prosyletizing but when kids ask what a certain turn of phrase means or where it comes from and I say "the Bible" and then I get threatened by my students????

 

Students ARE ridiculed for bring Bibles. And in one high school were I worked they had a wiccan group that met weekly but when the kids wanted to start a Bible study group they were told no. Also, we had to take down "Merry Christmas" signs in our school but the kids made Islamic prayer rugs in art class. I had a Bible verse taped to the top of my desk that inspired me to KEEP teaching and I was told to take it off. Yet the teacher down the hall could wear her hijab to school. It isn't a separation of church and state. It is a of separation of the CHRISTIAN church and state.

 

With violence, drugs, teen pregnancy, and a general lack of a moral compass in schools... some prayer now and then is the least of their worries.

 

My Junior and senior high school teacher pointed out all kinds of biblical parallels in literature we studied. We had FCA chapters on our campus and started each day with a moment of silent meditation. The schools I mentored in a few years ago were not much different. As long as we have tests in school we'll have prayer in school, just can't be led by anyone.

 

I sometimes think the old sage" you don't believe what you see you see what you believe".

[mommaduck]

My Junior and senior high school teacher pointed out all kinds of biblical parallels in literature we studied. We had FCA chapters on our campus and started each day with a moment of silent meditation. The schools I mentored in a few years ago were not much different. As long as we have tests in school we'll have prayer in school, just can't be led by anyone.

 

I sometimes think the old sage" you don't believe what you see you see what you believe".

 

There may also be a difference in era. You stated that highschool was 35yrs ago for you. It's only been 15yrs ago for me. I've also kept up with children of friends and neighbours that are public schooled and it's gotten worse than when I was in school. There seems to be a progression.

[monk17]

That's entirely possible, I do grow tired of Winter Festivals and also fall festivals. It's Christmas and Halloween. I do think it's possible to teach nuetral however, we've done it our co-op's. It's really not hat hard. Science, math, grammar, music just don't have a religion in my opinion.

[monk17]

BTW, how many of you are aware that the gov't is moving to take complete control over college loans? Sorry, off topic.

 

 

Completely false and also inflammatory. The government is stopping there subsidization of student loans to banks who were doing a bad job at it. Banks are free to make whatever loans they seem worthy, free market advocate aren't you?

 

Your not sorry, it's a subtle way of pushing your government is evil agenda except when you agree with the government of course.

[Heather in Neverland]

As long as we have tests in school we'll have prayer in school.

 

:lol::lol::lol:

 

That's for sure.

 

On a lighter note, I did actually see a bumper sticker today that said, "Are you as close to Jesus as you are my bumper?"

 

Considering the way traffic is here, it made me laugh out loud.

 

OK, getting back on topic now......

[Tea Time]

Completely false and also inflammatory. The government is stopping there subsidization of student loans to banks who were doing a bad job at it. Banks are free to make whatever loans they seem worthy, free market advocate aren't you?

 

Your not sorry, it's a subtle way of pushing your government is evil agenda except when you agree with the government of course.

 

Oh, very good! You go pointing out ways that people can subtly push their agenda's though, and you might help create a thinking population that you will have to contend with. I like it, and you are partially correct. Here is my reply to help that process as much as possible:

 

It's "their" not "there." I think I've seen you do that a couple of times.

 

My bringing that up is completely irrelevant to the point being made. It is a tactic I might have used to discredit the argument by way of insulting and intimidating Mike. It is not appropriate or courteous, and it is very likely to backfire on a terrible speller, like me. I am simply using it as an example for the lurking population on the various message board methods of ducking and dodging real concerns and arguments. Another example might be nit-picking of a definition in order to confuse and confound an actual point that is too difficult to address.

 

Another tactic I might use for this post would be to feign insult at his assumption about my agenda, which I am going to use, but I want to point out that it is also pretty irrelevant to the actual point he is making, so I will keep that brief and point out its limitations. Carrying on...

 

Hummm.... never said I had a gov't is evil agenda. I think you have a socialist agenda. I'm sure you will deny that though, and you will continue to obfuscate the definition of socialism so that people will think it is 1) not understandable by the average person (they will need a poly sci degree to engage in those debates), and 2) not something that can happen in the USA.

(See how this is not really relevant to the actual point that he made, but I can use it as a distraction, make another point all together, then I could ignore the real point and the average reader might forget about it?)

 

Addressing the actual, valid point he made, which is often times TRUE, so a lot of people just try to let those go past unnoticed because admitting they are wrong is never an option...

 

I did back away from that comment for the reason that it was inflammatory, and because I have not completely researched it as of yet. You can bet that I will, however. My REAL purpose for dropping that comment was not to inflame, but rather to suggest that others (including myself) DO look into it because it may or may not be a "good thing." I was being purposefully provocative in the hope that it might spur people to doing some research. So, yes, you are partially right in your comment. Thank you for pointing it out, and I cede the point.

 

I am NOT anti-gov't. I am all for a gov't that is properly proportioned to serve the People and to uphold the Constitution, which is increasingly not what we have. The existence of the public school system will continue to make sure that having a properly proportioned gov't is very hard to do.

 

Also, I lied about my last post. Clearly I am some kind of addict, but I really do have to travel today. I have got to kick this habit, but I am having so much fun, and this thread is so good.

[monk17]

Oh, very good! You go pointing out ways that people can subtly push their agenda's though, and you might help create a thinking population that you will have to contend with. I like it, and you are partially correct. Here is my reply to help that process as much as possible:

 

It's "their" not "there." I think I've seen you do that a couple of times.

 

 

My bringing that up is completely irrelevant to the point being made. It is a tactic I might have used to discredit the argument by way of insulting and intimidating Mike.

It is not appropriate or courteous, and it is very likely to backfire on a terrible speller, like me.

"Have absolutely no idea what you're talking about but good job playing the victim mode while simultaneously correcting my grammar."

 

I am simply using it as an example for the lurking population on the various message board methods of ducking and dodging real concerns and arguments. Another example might be nit-picking of a definition in order to confuse and confound an actual point that is too difficult to address.

 

"Words have meanings, you can't redefine them for your use, sorry. Good sarcasm combination with the victim of academic elites."

 

Another tactic I might use for this post would be to feign insult at his assumption about my agenda, which I am going to use, but I want to point out that it is also pretty irrelevant to the actual point he is making, so I will keep that brief and point out its limitations. Carrying on...

 

Hummm.... never said I had a gov't is evil agenda. I think you have a socialist agenda.

"My Mom wore army boots also."

 

I'm sure you will deny that though, and you will continue to obfuscate the definition of socialism so that people will think it is 1) not understandable by the average person (they will need a ploy sci degree to engage in those debates),

Really it's not complicated, I think you understand what socialism means but I understand how definitions get hijacked." Look at social Darwinism.

and 2) not something that can happen in the USA.

 

"We're already partially socialist, get over it."

 

(See how this is not really relevant to the actual point that he made, but I can use it as a distraction, make another point all together, then I could ignore the real point and the average reader might forget about it?)

 

Addressing the actual, valid point he made, which is often times TRUE, so a lot of people just try to let those go past unnoticed because admitting they are wrong is never an option...

 

I did back away from that comment for the reason that it was inflammatory, and because I have not completely researched it as of yet. You can bet that I will, however. My REAL purpose for dropping that comment was not to inflame, but rather to suggest that others (including myself) DO look into it because it may or may not be a "good thing." I was being purposefully provocative in the hope that it might spur people to doing some research. So, yes, you are partially right in your comment. Thank you for pointing it out, and I cede the point.

 

" I would present it that way instead of presenting it as a fact."

 

I am NOT anti-gov't. I am all for a gov't that is properly proportioned to serve the People and to uphold the Constitution, which is increasingly not what we have. The existence of the public school system will continue to make sure that having a properly proportioned gov't is very hard to do.

 

"Nobody said a democratic republic was going to be easy, but beats the alternatives I've seen. I for one like to work with this government and it's dedicated leaders to strive for a better tomorrow."

 

Also, I lied about my last post.

"We all knew that" :001_smile:

Clearly I am some kind of addict, but I really do have to travel today. I have got to kick this habit, but I am having so much fun, and this thread is so good.

 

Thanks you for admitting it was an off hand comment that hadn't been researched.