Going to jail for PRAYING?

[Spy Car]

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?"

 

 

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Tea Time]

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.

 

It should be noted that the secular humanists have a very good reason for wanting to make sure they do not obtain the label of a religion (besides their disdain for the word). That reason is that we have nearly made the separation of church and state a religious dogma in itself, and they do not want that limitation put on their influence. It would hinder their pervasive influence on culture and especially the public schools if people began to see them in that light. This is true regardless of whether the term religion is properly applied to them or not (that is a different issue, and it has nothing to do with the point I am making).

[mommaduck]

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

Thank you for admitting this. It's not something we are likely to "get over" just as I don't believe you would "get over" living in a theocracy (and neither would I for that matter). Want to talk about change? Some want change one way, others another, and still more a third, fourth, and fifth way. Can't make everyone happy, but we all fight for whichever change we believe in.

[monk17]

Thank you for admitting this. It's not something we are likely to "get over" just as I don't believe you would "get over" living in a theocracy (and neither would I for that matter). Want to talk about change? Some want change one way, others another, and still more a third, fourth, and fifth way. Can't make everyone happy, but we all fight for whichever change we believe in.

 

Lets talk about change. Tell me specifically the chnges you want and the what you'd like to keep in the government. Glad we agree on the theocracy issue.

[mommaduck]

Lets talk about change. Tell me specifically the chnges you want and the what you'd like to keep in the government. Glad we agree on the theocracy issue.

 

Like I said earlier in the thread, I'd like to see smaller government (money gets lost the more hands are in the pot), and the government out of education, various areas of healthcare, religion, marriage, etc. I'd like to see us getting out of debt, not tossing trillions at executives. I'd like to see them bringing industry and business BACK into this country, not running it off. I'd like to see them butt out of native membership affairs. I'd like a lot of things...but we all know how that goes.

[monk17]

Like I said earlier in the thread, I'd like to see smaller government (money gets lost the more hands are in the pot), and the government out of education, various areas of healthcare, religion, marriage, etc. I'd like to see us getting out of debt, not tossing trillions at executives. I'd like to see them bringing industry and business BACK into this country, not running it off. I'd like to see them butt out of native membership affairs. I'd like a lot of things...but we all know how that goes.

Please help me undestand what programs you would reduce or cut? That's where I always have trouble.

 

Thanks!

[mommaduck]

Please help me undestand what programs you would reduce or cut? That's where I always have trouble.

 

Thanks!

 

It starts with the ideals. People should take responsibility. The churches, synagogues, etc and other organisations (for those that claim non-religious) were the ones that started schools, hospitals, etc. If they didn't do it individually, then communities started, participated in, and fully supported these things along with fire departments, etc. Individual business was heavily supported. The government didn't tell you that you couldn't buy a dress for your daughter from a local seamstress or eggs from your neighbour. It was your own choice, your business to ask questions and weigh the risks, not the nanny state.

 

Personal Responsibility and Freedom...not a Nanny State.

[hornblower]

Personal Responsibility and Freedom...not a Nanny State.

 

Could we start then with churches & religious organizations giving up their tax exemptions & ceasing to take public funding?

[mommaduck]

Could we start then with churches & religious organizations giving up their tax exemptions & ceasing to take public funding?

No church I have ever been in has taken public funding. And quite a few have refused to be tax exempt to avoid ANY partnership with the state....they give you an exemption today and tell you what you can and can't do tomorrow...I'm against tax exemptions for churches. Correction, I'm against churches accepting tax exemption.

 

But in fair turn, let's not give funding to philosophical or other organisations either.

Edited September 24, 2009 by mommaduck

[Erica in PA]

Could we start then with churches & religious organizations giving up their tax exemptions & ceasing to take public funding?

 

Why would that be the first step? Other than animosity toward religious groups?

[Phred]

When you try to build a public school system that has no particular religious affiliation yet is fair to all religions held by its students how do you do it? Well, first you make certain that the schools themselves partake of no religion. Yet, because of the culture that they reside in we simply celebrate Christmas, a religious holiday, without a second thought. We take spring break at Easter, another religious holiday. Both of these are CHRISTIAN religious holidays. Why? Because the majority of students in the United States are Christian. Now, in recent years the tide is turning. Over ten percent of people in the U.S. are "nones" meaning they have no religious affiliation. Many more are not Christian. They notice that the schools are favoring Christians. They're acting to stop it. And they're right. As I said at the start of this post, the schools should have no religious affiliation. If you want your child educated in religion that's up to you either by teaching them yourself, taking them to church or enrolling them in a private school that will teach them whatever you want them taught.

 

Do students get Jewish holidays off? Muslim ones? High holy Wiccan days off? Nope. Just the Christian ones. It's favoritism. It's favoritism and it's not right in a school system created for everyone.

 

Some Christians are angry that the favoritism they've enjoyed for all these years is being questioned. Why should their holidays be questioned?

 

But it goes further than this. Christians also inject their religion into public schools by getting prayers in before special events. Prayers before football games, before graduation, before the Marching Band's Pancake Breakfast. When these prayers are questioned people don't like it. But in truth they should not be there in an impartial public school setting.

 

So the word, "Secular" is used. Our public schools should be "secular" meaning they should be without religion. All religion. Any religion. And this is where the religious right has become clever. They've tried to redefine the word "secular" by calling it a religion too. Conflating "secular" with "secular humanists" and suggesting that "secular humanists" are a religion unto themselves religionists are trying to say that even a state of no religion is a religion. That's quite a stretch.

 

In an ideal world you would be able to worship any religion you saw fit in your own way. You just wouldn't be able to evangelize in the public schools. If you want to have a Bible study group or a prayer rug-hooking festival... that's fine. The school is there for everyone equally. Just know that you don't have the right to force your belief onto others. Also know that because our literature, our culture and our history has been influenced heavily by Christianity there's going to be discussion of it within the confines of English, literature, social studies and history classes. It would be nice if those references could be made without having to fear anyone speaking up against them.

 

Yes, there are times when religionists are discriminated against. I suspect there are many times when they are simply watching the system reset itself to be less affiliated with Christianity and they just don't like it.

[mommaduck]

When you try to build a public school system that has no particular religious affiliation yet is fair to all religions held by its students how do you do it? Well, first you make certain that the schools themselves partake of no religion. Yet, because of the culture that they reside in we simply celebrate Christmas, a religious holiday, without a second thought. We take spring break at Easter, another religious holiday. Both of these are CHRISTIAN religious holidays. Why? Because the majority of students in the United States are Christian. Now, in recent years the tide is turning. Over ten percent of people in the U.S. are "nones" meaning they have no religious affiliation. Many more are not Christian. They notice that the schools are favoring Christians. They're acting to stop it. And they're right. As I said at the start of this post, the schools should have no religious affiliation. If you want your child educated in religion that's up to you either by teaching them yourself, taking them to church or enrolling them in a private school that will teach them whatever you want them taught.

 

Do students get Jewish holidays off? Muslim ones? High holy Wiccan days off? Nope. Just the Christian ones. It's favoritism. It's favoritism and it's not right in a school system created for everyone.

 

Some Christians are angry that the favoritism they've enjoyed for all these years is being questioned. Why should their holidays be questioned?

 

But it goes further than this. Christians also inject their religion into public schools by getting prayers in before special events. Prayers before football games, before graduation, before the Marching Band's Pancake Breakfast. When these prayers are questioned people don't like it. But in truth they should not be there in an impartial public school setting.

 

So the word, "Secular" is used. Our public schools should be "secular" meaning they should be without religion. All religion. Any religion. And this is where the religious right has become clever. They've tried to redefine the word "secular" by calling it a religion too. Conflating "secular" with "secular humanists" and suggesting that "secular humanists" are a religion unto themselves religionists are trying to say that even a state of no religion is a religion. That's quite a stretch.

 

In an ideal world you would be able to worship any religion you saw fit in your own way. You just wouldn't be able to evangelize in the public schools. If you want to have a Bible study group or a prayer rug-hooking festival... that's fine. The school is there for everyone equally. Just know that you don't have the right to force your belief onto others. Also know that because our literature, our culture and our history has been influenced heavily by Christianity there's going to be discussion of it within the confines of English, literature, social studies and history classes. It would be nice if those references could be made without having to fear anyone speaking up against them.

 

Yes, there are times when religionists are discriminated against. I suspect there are many times when they are simply watching the system reset itself to be less affiliated with Christianity and they just don't like it.

Not all Christians agree that those are "Christian" holidays ;)

[Phred]

Not all Christians agree that those are "Christian" holidays ;)

And that's relevant how?

[Mary in VA]

Could we start then with churches & religious organizations giving up their tax exemptions & ceasing to take public funding?

 

No church I have every belonged to has received public funding. I'm not sure what you are talking about.

 

Mary

[Impish]

I wonder how long it will be until Christmas, Easter, Good Friday, etc are no longer stats? What will happen then?

[hornblower]

No church I have every belonged to has received public funding. I'm not sure what you are talking about.

 

Mary

 

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/01/03/1b_for_faith_based_groups/

[mommaduck]

I wonder how long it will be until Christmas, Easter, Good Friday, etc are no longer stats? What will happen then?

Why that schools should be community (whether geographical, religious, philosophical, whatever) run and funded. If a community wants a school with no holidays, let them. If they want a school run open to all faiths, then students should not penalised if they take a day off to recognise a holy day...make up work, sure; penalised, no. This is why I support home education and private education. Public education is never fully "public" as it does not truly meet the needs of the public (and can't), it's simply a catch all.

[hornblower]

I wonder how long it will be until Christmas, Easter, Good Friday, etc are no longer stats? What will happen then?

 

 

Re Easter - in BC, only Good Friday is a stat. Easter Sun & Mon are not.

 

I don't think it would matter. If labour laws remain progressive, we will continue to have a reasonable # of stat holidays a year. What we call them doesn't really matter.

 

The push now is to add stats, not remove them. Ontario has one more than BC.... family day I think they call it.

[mommaduck]

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/01/03/1b_for_faith_based_groups/

 

Again, I don't know any of those groups, never heard of them, and no church I've ever known or been a part of has received any of that funding. Those are the isolated few incidences and I saw issues with that program from a mile away. Those "faith based" programs are also not permitted to share their faith while receiving that money from my understanding.

[monk17]

No church I have every belonged to has received public funding. I'm not sure what you are talking about.

 

Mary

Church's don' pay property tax on the property they occupy but yet do receive the benefits of the goods and services that local government provides. They are also typically exempt from most building codes and employment laws. Ever wonder why there aren't enough bathrooms in a church.

 

I'm not saying this is good or bad but you asked the question. I think there's a lot of points on both sides of this argument. I think that t one time we did in the early stages of this country attempt to tax church land but I'm not sure.

[mommaduck]

Church's don' pay property tax on the property they occupy but yet do receive the benefits of the goods and services that local government provides. They are also typically exempt from most building codes and employment laws. Ever wonder why there aren't enough bathrooms in a church.

 

I'm not saying this is good or bad but you asked the question. I think there's a lot of points on both sides of this argument. I think that t one time we did in the early stages of this country attempt to tax church land but I'm not sure.

You are wrong about building codes. Churches MUST abide by building codes. I've known churches that had their churches built versus buying an already built one...it had to be up to code, the same code everyone else had to follow, unless the building is historical and grandfathered in. The churches I knew also paid their property taxes.

[monk17]

It starts with the ideals. People should take responsibility. The churches, synagogues, etc and other organisations (for those that claim non-religious) were the ones that started schools, hospitals, etc. If they didn't do it individually, then communities started, participated in, and fully supported these things along with fire departments, etc. Individual business was heavily supported. The government didn't tell you that you couldn't buy a dress for your daughter from a local seamstress or eggs from your neighbour. It was your own choice, your business to ask questions and weigh the risks, not the nanny state.

 

Personal Responsibility and Freedom...not a Nanny State.

I guess I was thinking cut Medicaid in half, reduce social security, bring military spending down to 2000 level etc. You seem to be going toward a city/state type of environment where folks have to fend for themselves. Am I reading this correctly?

[monk17]

You are wrong about building codes. Churches MUST abide by building codes. I've known churches that had their churches built versus buying an already built one...it had to be up to code, the same code everyone else had to follow, unless the building is historical and grandfathered in. The churches I knew also paid their property taxes.

 

Not in our state! Trafic compliance, stormwater run off etc.

 

I checked the roles in our County and not a single one pays property tax, you would be hard pressed to prove that church's pay property taxes in any significant number. Do a google on church and property tax. It's a Federal mandate that's gone to the Supreme Court. I beleive it's roots are from Roman times.

 

The other biggie that I forgot about is tax deductible contributions.

Edited September 24, 2009 by monk17

[brehon]

I wonder how long it will be until Christmas, Easter, Good Friday, etc are no longer stats? What will happen then?

 

 

Re Easter - in BC, only Good Friday is a stat. Easter Sun & Mon are not.

 

I don't think it would matter. If labour laws remain progressive, we will continue to have a reasonable # of stat holidays a year. What we call them doesn't really matter.

 

The push now is to add stats, not remove them. Ontario has one more than BC.... family day I think they call it.

 

What are "stats"? State holidays? Thanks.

[hornblower]

What are "stats"? State holidays? Thanks.

 

Statutory holidays in Canada. They fall under provincial law & hence there's some variation.

[monk17]

I wonder how long it will be until Christmas, Easter, Good Friday, etc are no longer stats? What will happen then?

 

 

Our economy is by different economists estimates driven 60-66% by us consumers. We spend by estimation 40-75% of our discretionary income at Christmas time. We'll have commercial Christmas for a long time!

[Spy Car]

When you try to build a public school system that has no particular religious affiliation yet is fair to all religions held by its students how do you do it? Well, first you make certain that the schools themselves partake of no religion. Yet, because of the culture that they reside in we simply celebrate Christmas, a religious holiday, without a second thought. We take spring break at Easter, another religious holiday. Both of these are CHRISTIAN religious holidays.

 

I dunno Phred. I think I've demonstrated I'm not fan of religious coercion, or infringements on the religious freedom of students (believers and non-believes alike) but having Winter and Spring breaks (that do correlate to traditional "Christian" holidays) is not an issue for me.

 

Nor is the inclusion of Christmas songs or Chanukah songs at the holiday pageant at (and this is an important qualification) schools that have demonstrated that they are not "promoting" one particular faith (or faiths).

 

I think we should all be open to celebrating the cultural diversity of American life, including (in a sensitive manner) religious culture. I think we are poorer as a people if we have to draw lines so sharply that every manifestation of religion is erased from the public schools.

 

Unfortunately, the ruling in Florida is (to my mind) unhelpful to the end of finding a reasonable accommodation of all, as it gives cover to those who would cross lines that should not be crossed, and produces a counter-reaction from those who would banish every culturally religious expression from schools. And that's not a "positive" to me.

 

I like Christmas songs. Have a tree (always). And celebrate Christmas as a joyous "secular" family holiday.

 

And for the past several years have lit a Chanukiah at Chanukah, and played dreidel and read Chanukah stories and Christmas stories to my young son, so he will grow up with an appreciation for (and an understanding of) the cultural and religious traditions of our friends and neighbors.

 

I still don't want the schools promoting a faith. But mentioning Ramadan, or showing how the Bible influenced literature, or having "Holiday" pageant? Not a problem in my book (assuming the aforementioned qualification is met).

 

I think your formulation goes too far.

 

Do students get Jewish holidays off?

 

Yom Kippur is coming up, and my son (who I've mention attends a heavily Jewish public school) will be having the day off. And I'm glad that the schools are accommodating Jewish students and their families, just as I'm glad there is no school on Christmas.

 

But it goes further than this. Christians also inject their religion into public schools by getting prayers in before special events. Prayers before football games, before graduation, before the Marching Band's Pancake Breakfast. When these prayers are questioned people don't like it. But in truth they should not be there in an impartial public school setting.

 

On this point I agree. Public school events are not a proper venue for prayer.

 

So the word, "Secular" is used. Our public schools should be "secular" meaning they should be without religion. All religion. Any religion. And this is where the religious right has become clever. They've tried to redefine the word "secular" by calling it a religion too. Conflating "secular" with "secular humanists" and suggesting that "secular humanists" are a religion unto themselves religionists are trying to say that even a state of no religion is a religion. That's quite a stretch.

 

In the main I agree. However, I would take the point offered by some that there is a world-view (if not religion) one could associate with Secular Humanism, and that pushing that "ideology" (if you will) could be coercive in the same way pushing Objectivism, Libertarianism, Socialism, Fascism or any other economic-political construct or ideology if pressed too hard.

 

Teachers ought not be cultural warriors in my opinion. And I understand why people get cross at times.

 

In an ideal world you would be able to worship any religion you saw fit in your own way. You just wouldn't be able to evangelize in the public schools. If you want to have a Bible study group or a prayer rug-hooking festival... that's fine. The school is there for everyone equally. Just know that you don't have the right to force your belief onto others. Also know that because our literature, our culture and our history has been influenced heavily by Christianity there's going to be discussion of it within the confines of English, literature, social studies and history classes. It would be nice if those references could be made without having to fear anyone speaking up against them.

 

I agree entirely, and am dedicated to working towards makes ours a more ideal world. To my mind that does not include trying to suppress every vestige of faith, but understand we have to give one another freedom, mutual respect, and a little space.

 

Bill

Edited September 24, 2009 by Spy Car

[Ibbygirl]

In the public school where my son attends they get the Jewish holidays off as well as the Christian ones. They also recognize Kwanzaa and Ramadan with festive decorations and teach on the holiday in the classrooms. When I was in my ps school's orchestra (many many moons ago) we never played religious Christmas songs for our Holiday program. We did the Burl Ives stuff and nothing that even mentioned Jesus or any religious content at all. In fact it wasn't until years later when I did become a Christian that I even learned who Jesus was. I never knew before then.

 

 

Spycar, I see you're still in full Jedi mode. :rofl: ;) :D

[Mary in VA]

Monk 17- "Church's don' pay property tax on the property they occupy but yet do receive the benefits of the goods and services that local government provides. They are also typically exempt from most building codes and employment laws. Ever wonder why there aren't enough bathrooms in a church."

 

 

Well in VA churches are certainly required to follow the building code. Our church completed a large addition several years ago and because the code had changed since the original building was put up, they had to go back and add a sprinkler system to the old part of the building. Many building decisions were made based on what the code required.

 

Mary

[Impish]

Re Easter - in BC, only Good Friday is a stat. Easter Sun & Mon are not.

 

I don't think it would matter. If labour laws remain progressive, we will continue to have a reasonable # of stat holidays a year. What we call them doesn't really matter.

 

The push now is to add stats, not remove them. Ontario has one more than BC.... family day I think they call it.

Ontario just followed Alberta as far as Family Day goes. Easter Sunday is still a stat in AB

[JennC]

But he was not the public school czar, or anything close to it.

 

Bill

 

thanks for the chuckle ;)