Satanic after school clubs?

[Χά�ων]

I can see where it comes from (I taught in a Bible Belt "public school" for a decade, although we didn't have such clubs on campus)-but at the same time, I wouldn't allow my child to participate in something with "Satan" in the name precisely BECAUSE we're in the Bible Belt. It would be MUCH harder on the playground for the kid who goes to the "Satan" Club than to be the kid who doesn't go to the "Christian" club or doesn't go to church at all, and in the bible belt, not going to the "Right" church is already a major social strike against a kid. Not going to church or being of a different, but understood religion is another (and there's a hierarchy there as well-Moslem and Hindu kids have it tougher than atheist or agnostic kids do). I hate to think of where "Satanists" would fall, but I suspect that the kid would practically need an armed guard to be able to make it through the day. I could see high school kids choosing to self-identify and setting up their own club, but that's not a decision I would be comfortable letting my 5-11 yr old make.

I am in the bible belt and would be OK with my child in it. He self identified as hellanistic pagan around age 5 and it would have been a good fit for him to have like minded peers and to know he was not alone.

 

My son's personality and ability to ask sincere questions that stumped the proselytizing kids actually helped him. I wish I could say it opened eyes, but it did not, the indoctrination was strong.

 

From what I have read about the good news club's curriculum, I would never allow my son to join. At the younger ages, he would have been traumatized, at the older ages, well, let's just say he grew tired of the bullshit and will tell them exactly what he thinks.

[SparklyUnicorn]

re criteria for public schools permitting after school clubs to use the space:

 

Whether or not rent payments are involved, different towns make different decisions even in our area.  When we first moved to town nearly 20 years ago, the public schools permitted (without charge) both the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts to use school space after school.  Then after the BS policy on gay members got more traction, the school rescinded the BS' access to the space.  Unsurprisingly the BS troops protested that they were being "evicted" while the GS were not.  For a year or so the issue threatened to reach the courts until the local GS council asked troops to find other spaces.  

 

The ultimate compromise was that the school system began running a bus to the library, which happens to be within walking distance of various other public spaces.  The various troop leaders would meet the kids there and walk them over to wherever they met.  (The school system also runs a bus to CCD, as one point of comparison.)

 

A neighboring town in which I used to teach held the line and permitted GS but not BS to use school space.  Dunno how/if that's changed with the BS relaxation of its policies.  Other districts allow both.  I'm not aware of any around here who charge rent for non-profit organizations (for-profit organizations, yes.)

 

Glad they defend gay students, but what about atheist students?  KWIM?  Even the groups/clubs aimed at gay/transgendered/etc will often word it as those people and their supporters/friends.  So anyone can join. 

[Lady Florida.]

Or the "real atheist's" six year old gets told by adults in the homeschool group that he's going to hell because his parents let him watch Harry Potter.

 

Or when the mom of a real atheist's friends cuts her kids off from hers because the real atheist isn't voting for the right (God-chosen) candidates.

 

Or that same real atheist's ten year old a few years later is tossing a football with some neighborhood kids and they find out he doesn't believe in god/gods. They start shouting at him asking how he possibly can't believe and doesn't he know Jesus died for his sins? And they never ask him to play again.

 

Real atheists experience real discrimination and real bullying, and when they speak up they're the assholes? Real atheists would absolutely love to live and let live. Real believers won't allow them to. Real atheists have decided it's finally time to no longer just shut up and be good little unbelievers.

Edited August 4, 2016 by Lady Florida.

[J-rap]

But it is happening. These clubs are arising DIRECTLY in response to the Good News clubs. In fact, the Satanic Church applies to offer a club only in schools which have allowed the Good News Evangelical clubs. 

 

Good News apparently is in >4000 schools in the US. 

 

Someone wrote a book about this https://www.amazon.ca/Good-News-Club-Christian-Americas/dp/1586488430  (haven't read the book so can't comment on it..) 

 

Interesting.  I haven't heard of those at all.  I'm a Christian, but believe pretty strongly in a separation of church and state.  I have a big problem with that.

[Bluegoat]

I would like to point out that the good news club is not a student organized or student lead club.

 

From their own website:

"What is a Good News Club?

 

Good News Club® is a ministry of Child Evangelism Fellowship in which trained teachers meet with groups of children in schools, homes, community centers, churches, apartment complexes, just about anywhere the children can easily and safely meet with their parent's permission. Each week the teacher presents an exciting Bible lesson using colorful materials from CEF Press. This action-packed time also includes songs, Scripture memory, a missions story and review games or other activities focused on the lesson's theme."

 

No one is denying a student freedom to associate and form a club. The students are free to join and attend. The school is not free to promote or allow only the good news club.

 

What is happening is an evangical christian organization has pushed to be allowed as an after school group. The group is not student lead and is not secular has been allowed into publicly funded schools. Now a different group is using the same grounds to gain the same access to elementry aged children. Theu even offer a teacher lead curriculum and similar tactics to draw in students.

 

I don't think it matters if it is a club set up from outside.  People set up their clubs in schools if they think there will be interest, scouting or 4-H, all kinds of things.  Students are still free to join or not based on their interests.

 

As far as I know, other religions are free to set up a club as well, if they wish and think there will be interest. In places where there aren't any groups to do so, it's not very meaningful that no such clubs exist. It would be a lot more revealing to see if people objected to setting up some other legitimate religious club, and if they objected that could be addressed appropriately. 

[fraidycat]

I don't think it matters if it is a club set up from outside. People set up their clubs in schools if they think there will be interest, scouting or 4-H, all kinds of things. Students are still free to join or not based on their interests.

 

As far as I know, other religions are free to set up a club as well, if they wish and think there will be interest. In places where there aren't any groups to do so, it's not very meaningful that no such clubs exist. It would be a lot more revealing to see if people objected to setting up some other legitimate religious club, and if they objected that could be addressed appropriately.

This club is quite legitimate on it's own. No need for other "real" litmus tests.

[Bluegoat]

I disagree with the bolded. You may not see evangelism in public schools as a substantive issue but others do. The 'offence' is not for the lolz.

 

It isn't a substantive change if you haven't actually changed anyone's mind, but on the contrary, have actually polarized them.  Substantive change would involve some kind of real discussion, but sarcastic reductive taunts don't only fail at that, they usually make it even les possible for that to happen.

 

Again, there is a fairly substantive idea behind these groups. You may disagree with that idea, but the concept is substantive to many.

 

The FSM?  Well, creationism is substantive to many as well.  And in fact I think it may have originally been intended specifically as an analogous argument for certain creationist arguments, so I suppose it would make sense that is about the level it is at. 

[hornblower]

As far as I know, other religions are free to set up a club as well, if they wish and think there will be interest. In places where there aren't any groups to do so, it's not very meaningful that no such clubs exist. It would be a lot more revealing to see if people objected to setting up some other legitimate religious club, and if they objected that could be addressed appropriately.

They're not. That's the point . This is literally what is happening.

 

Good News sets up club in a school.

 

Satanic Temple tries to set up club .

 

They are a legitimate religious group regardless of what anyone else thinks of their beliefs.

 

They have been blocked by one school district already.

[Bluegoat]

This club is quite legitimate on it's own. No need for other "real" litmus tests.

 

If the complaint is there are only Christian clubs, then yes, wjether there is in fact suppresion of other legitimate religious clubs does make a difference.

 

This particular club fails either way - if it is being opposed specifically because it i thought to be a real Satanist group, that probably isn't a great indication of the principle, a lot of people will have very targeted concerns about a group like that, some based on incorrect information, likely, but legitimately worrying if it was true.  And there are some things that most parents, Chritian or atheist or anything else, might be potentially worried about in some real Satanic groups.

 

If, OTOH, this group objects that they aren't REALLY Satanists or a religious group at all so no one should worry about those things, it doesn't tell us anything much about people's feelings about religious diversity in school clubs, because people that object will probably do so for totally different reasons, including that the group is presenting itself as religious for the purposes of arguing they should be allowed as a club like other religious clubs.

[TranquilMind]

Also you don't get to define what 'real' atheist is. 

It is fairly simple. 

Mockery is not part of the definition. 

[Bluegoat]

They're not. That's the point . This is literally what is happening.

 

Good News sets up club in a school.

 

Satanic Temple tries to set up club .

 

They are a legitimate religious group regardless of what anyone else thinks of their beliefs.

 

They have been blocked by one school district already.

 

And yet it's being argued here that they are not in fact a religious group, they are a group that promotes non-religion and secularism. 

 

I have no issue with saying that religious and non-religious worldviews, theistic and pantheistic, atheistic, and every other variation, all constitute worldviews and should be equally treated as such.  So from my perspective, the principle and the law should protect their worldview as much as the evangelicals - (though not necessarily the way they choose to label their club.)

 

But that seems to be the opposite of what they are saying - they are saying religious worldviews should be excluded.  To say on the one hand that they are by principle a non-religious group makes it rather contradictory to claim they need to be included on the basis that they are a religious group. 

[DawnM]

I think you are assuming these are just high school. In my area elementary and middle schools have clubs too. In the high school students go after school or at lunch on their own. However middle and elementary students have to have permission to stay after. So at those levels parents would know and approve of what their kids are joining.

 

Also the schools talked about in my area for the Satanic After school Club are elementary schools, which why I brought up the afterschool childcare issue in poor districts. Essentially, Christian groups are coming in to do clubs. They act as afterschool childcare. There is no other cheap school based alternative. That is a captive audience for evangelism.

 

 

Ok, I guess I am not understanding.  So the Christian clubs come to the school every day after school and offer free childcare on the school property?

[hornblower]

Ok, I guess I am not understanding. So the Christian clubs come to the school every day after school and offer free childcare on the school property?

They're weekly.

 

I think the point is that low income families usually rely on a patchwork of after school childcare options and this might end up being one of them even if it's not their first choice to have their children in a missionary program.

[hornblower]

It is fairly simple.

Mockery is not part of the definition.

In your opinion.

 

Others might have just as strong opinions about what defines a proper religion. For instance someone could say the only legitimate religions are ones that don't proselytize and don't judge others.

[TranquilMind]

In your opinion.

 

Others might have just as strong opinions about what defines a proper religion. For instance someone could say the only legitimate religions are ones that don't proselytize and don't judge others.

 

Not just my opinion.

 

Dictionary.com: 

noun

1.

a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Merriam-Webster: 

 

a :  a disbelief in the existence of deity

b :  the doctrine that there is no deity

 

 

[hornblower]

 

Not just my opinion.

 

but there's no prohibition against mockery. You can do all that & sprinkle it with mockery on top. 

[Mergath]

 

Not just my opinion.

 

Dictionary.com:

noun

 

1.

a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

 

Merriam-Webster:

 

a : a disbelief in the existence of deity

b : the doctrine that there is no deity

 

 

So going by your logic, any Christian who eats cauliflower isn't really a Christian because the dictionary definition doesn't say that Christians eat cauliflower.

[DawnM]

They're weekly.

 

I think the point is that low income families usually rely on a patchwork of after school childcare options and this might end up being one of them even if it's not their first choice to have their children in a missionary program.

 

 

Huh, well, I am just trying to understand this because normal clubs are 30-45 min. after school.  I can't see how one club meeting for 30-45 min. will provide some kind of stable childcare situation and I don't think there is a different club/group coming each day to provide this, so I guess I don't see this as a solution to anyone's after school issues (and typically busses or transportation provided by the state) doesn't run after clubs or activities, so it would prove to be more problematic transportation wise.

 

But I fear I am far too tired to really get my point across tonight.

[TranquilMind]

So going by your logic, any Christian who eats cauliflower isn't really a Christian because the dictionary definition doesn't say that Christians eat cauliflower.

[TranquilMind]

No. That does not follow. Not remotely alike.

[Mergath]

No. That does not follow. Not remotely alike.

No? You just claimed an atheist who mocks people isn't a real atheist because the dictionary doesn't say that atheists mock people. I fail to see the difference.

[luuknam]

Huh, well, I am just trying to understand this because normal clubs are 30-45 min. after school.  I can't see how one club meeting for 30-45 min. will provide some kind of stable childcare situation and I don't think there is a different club/group coming each day to provide this, so I guess I don't see this as a solution to anyone's after school issues (and typically busses or transportation provided by the state) doesn't run after clubs or activities, so it would prove to be more problematic transportation wise.

 

For example, school here ends at 2:50. Add a 45 min club starting at 3pm, and you're at 3:45. Kid walks home, you're getting close to 4pm. A 2nd grader being home alone for an hour and a half until parent gets home is borderline doable, but 2.5 hours alone would be really pushing it. The more days a week you can put your kid in an after school club like that, the better. Like someone else said, patchwork solutions. Maybe your kid can have a playdate at his friend's house once a week, but not every day. Who knows.

[DawnM]

For example, school here ends at 2:50. Add a 45 min club starting at 3pm, and you're at 3:45. Kid walks home, you're getting close to 4pm. A 2nd grader being home alone for an hour and a half until parent gets home is borderline doable, but 2.5 hours alone would be really pushing it. The more days a week you can put your kid in an after school club like that, the better. Like someone else said, patchwork solutions. Maybe your kid can have a playdate at his friend's house once a week, but not every day. Who knows.

 

I understand the concept, it just doesn't seem that it is that much of a solution.   And, if the kid is old enough to walk home, he/she is probably old enough to be alone for a couple of hours.   If they really didn't want whatever the club was, the kid could just come home.

 

Here we have busses, most kids don't live close enough to walk, and even if they did, it isn't safe.  Narrow streets and no sidewalks and  having to cross busy streets without crosswalks.   I realize this isn't where everyone lives, but I could not, in any good conscience, put my kid in a club with a religion I were completely in opposition to, even if I had no other alternatives.   I would prefer he ride the bus home and be a latchkey kid.

 

I guess my point is, in this particular scenario, they do have a choice.  And, all religions have the opportunity to offer an after school day.  Instead of saying "those Christians are so horrible because they trap kids who don't have alternatives,"  why not offer an alternative?   Want an agnostic club?  Go for it.  Start one.  Want a Muslim club?  Great, get one going.  Want a Jehovah's Witness club, get one going!

 

I would assume that if you start a club, you will indeed talk about your own beliefs and ideologies.  

[DawnM]

In some cases a "real" atheist is fine to live and let live.  And then she sends her child to a public school, where other children try to convince him that Jesus is the answer to everything and make him feel bad that he doesn't have Jesus, every single day.  The teachers might mention Christianity in class and discuss Creation Science.  The fun clubs that ALL the kids are part of are Christian.  There are even Christian groups that sponsor assemblies or offer Christian prayer at events.  Then the atheist parent might feel that the "live and let live" is a bit one-sided.  

 

If "Jesus" is replaced with "Muhammed" and "Christian" is replaced with "Islam," you might get an inkling of how she feels.  

 

The hypothetical family probably ought to move out of the Bible Belt, but sometimes that isn't possible and gosh-darn-it public schools are not supposed to push a specific religion.  (Some frustration here might explain the origin of the club from the OP.)

 

 

See, I see this as completely different than offering an after school club that preaches Jesus.  This is a PS situation where a child is lead to feel shame.  I honestly do have a problem with some of the shame culture I see in Christianity.  And I am a Christian.  I went to a Christian school for a while where there was a lot of shame manipulation.  I still struggle with some of the things we were told in our 3 day revival meetings we had to go to each year.   I won't go into details, partly because I don't want to bring it all up again.

[luuknam]

I understand the concept, it just doesn't seem that it is that much of a solution.   And, if the kid is old enough to walk home, he/she is probably old enough to be alone for a couple of hours.  

 

Here they let 1st graders (kids 5.75yo+ due to cut-off) walk home alone for up to 1 mile. A 5.75yo should not be staying home alone for 2+ hours, at least not according to all of society around me (I'd be scared to death of CPS).

[DawnM]

Here they let 1st graders (kids 5.75yo+ due to cut-off) walk home alone for up to 1 mile. A 5.75yo should not be staying home alone for 2+ hours, at least not according to all of society around me (I'd be scared to death of CPS).

 

 

And I don't think a 5-6 year old should be walking home alone.  Another fear of CPS involvement.

[luuknam]

And I don't think a 5-6 year old should be walking home alone.  Another fear of CPS involvement.

 

See, I'm not concerned about it, since the school is letting them, so I doubt CPS is going to get involved over something the entire school district has as their policy.

[mellifera33]

 

Not just my opinion.

 

Dictionary.com: 

noun

1.

a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Merriam-Webster: 

 

a :  a disbelief in the existence of deity

b :  the doctrine that there is no deity

 

 

 

 

Instead of "real atheist" maybe "polite atheist" or "reasonable atheist" would be more accurate? Being a twit is an equal-opportunity vocation. I've known real atheists who are twits, real Christians who are twits, real Muslims who are twits, etc. It doesn't negate their belief system, it just makes them annoying. :)

Edited August 5, 2016 by mellifera33

[SparklyUnicorn]

Ok, I guess I am not understanding.  So the Christian clubs come to the school every day after school and offer free childcare on the school property?

 

In some places they do.  I had one of mine in a summer program.  It was free and run in part by the city and in part by some sort of religious mission group thing.  There was nothing religious about it though.  Religious based stuff like this tends to be pretty tame around here. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

And I don't think a 5-6 year old should be walking home alone.  Another fear of CPS involvement.

 

They do around here.  There is no law/rule prohibiting it.  And if there were I'd argue then that the school has to provide a solution at no cost to me. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

 

Not just my opinion.

 

Dictionary.com: 

noun

1.

a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Merriam-Webster: 

 

a :  a disbelief in the existence of deity

b :  the doctrine that there is no deity

 

 

 

 

Some people would take denial in the existence of a supreme being as mockery. 

[Joshin]

I think it is regional. Around here, no one would bat an eye at a group of two or more kindergarteners walking home together, let alone a single third grader. We also have "walking clubs" in our elementary schools, which are adults that lead groups home after school or activities when they have further to go or must cross busy roads after the crossing guards have left.

 

Also, keep in mind that shift work hours are much different. 45 minutes may be just enough time if your shift ends at 4pm. Or, if you have an older child that gets out of middle or high school at 3:30 pm so they can supervise the younger until you get home. And while many of us here would never put a child in a club that didn't match out values, this is because we are speaking from a place of privilege. When the option is a club with a questionable motive or not being able to work and eat that week, the club starts to seem like a better choice.

[katilac]

I understand the concept, it just doesn't seem that it is that much of a solution.     

 

Not to derail the thread but 'not that much of a solution' is the best some people can manage, y'know? A little bit better is better than nothing. 

[Dmmetler]

Huh, well, I am just trying to understand this because normal clubs are 30-45 min. after school. I can't see how one club meeting for 30-45 min. will provide some kind of stable childcare situation and I don't think there is a different club/group coming each day to provide this, so I guess I don't see this as a solution to anyone's after school issues (and typically busses or transportation provided by the state) doesn't run after clubs or activities, so it would prove to be more problematic transportation wise.

 

But I fear I am far too tired to really get my point across tonight.

In my district, the Christian clubs are at churches that either run busses to the school and pick up kids, or are close enough that the kids walk (with permission), and they keep the kids until after 5:00, often providing dinner for families (and sometimes segueing info Wednesday night church activities). They're basically a VBS type program, and also involve some supervised homework time (and possibly tutoring or reading instruction), outside play, and so on. They absolutely are used frequently by parents to reduce child care costs (which are about $20/day for a similar program through the YMCA or a child care center). I imagine that a similar program run by the Satanic temple might get a good response, but they'd have to have it off campus, just like the church run programs are.

 

In schools that have on-campus after care /extended day, clubs are part of the after school program, and are usually run by paid staff, often faculty in the school. So, the music teacher will teach choir as part of the after school program, and either have a free period earlier in the day or get a little extra to supplement. You also might see a math club that, again, a teacher is paid to run, or maybe a sports class or team taught by the PE teacher. In schools without such programs, you don't see after school clubs because there simply aren't many kids to participate in them. Either they're getting on an after school care bus, or they're getting on a school bus to go home. The only schools I know of that have outside clubs/instruction on campus are private ones, and most of those are religious in nature.

[DawnM]

They do around here.  There is no law/rule prohibiting it.  And if there were I'd argue then that the school has to provide a solution at no cost to me. 

 

 

Do they provide bussing?  They do provide free transportation for our students.  That is the transportation, they do not cater to everyone's working schedule.  They provide transportation to and from school.

[DawnM]

In my district, the Christian clubs are at churches that either run busses to the school and pick up kids, or are close enough that the kids walk (with permission), and they keep the kids until after 5:00, often providing dinner for families (and sometimes segueing info Wednesday night church activities). They're basically a VBS type program, and also involve some supervised homework time (and possibly tutoring or reading instruction), outside play, and so on. They absolutely are used frequently by parents to reduce child care costs (which are about $20/day for a similar program through the YMCA or a child care center). I imagine that a similar program run by the Satanic temple might get a good response, but they'd have to have it off campus, just like the church run programs are.

 

In schools that have on-campus after care /extended day, clubs are part of the after school program, and are usually run by paid staff, often faculty in the school. So, the music teacher will teach choir as part of the after school program, and either have a free period earlier in the day or get a little extra to supplement. You also might see a math club that, again, a teacher is paid to run, or maybe a sports class or team taught by the PE teacher. In schools without such programs, you don't see after school clubs because there simply aren't many kids to participate in them. Either they're getting on an after school care bus, or they're getting on a school bus to go home. The only schools I know of that have outside clubs/instruction on campus are private ones, and most of those are religious in nature.

 

 

That actually sounds like a wonderful service to the community and people can choose to participate or not.  

 

It is similar to the homeless shelters around here run by churches.  Many don't want to go because they might have to attend a church service first.  That is certainly their choice.

[DawnM]

They do around here.  There is no law/rule prohibiting it.  And if there were I'd argue then that the school has to provide a solution at no cost to me. 

 

 

Is there a law forbidding them to be home alone for a couple of hours?  

[DawnM]

See, I'm not concerned about it, since the school is letting them, so I doubt CPS is going to get involved over something the entire school district has as their policy.

 

 

Personally, I think it would be safer to take the school bus home and go inside your house and lock the door.  That was more my point.  

 

The child may be home alone 2 hours instead of 1.  Big deal.   

 

My point is that if you really and absolutely do not want whatever club is being offered, you do need to either attend and be ok with it, or find another solution.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Do they provide bussing?  They do provide free transportation for our students.  That is the transportation, they do not cater to everyone's working schedule.  They provide transportation to and from school.

 

Yes they do provide busing, but it is based on how far one is from the school and not how old they are.  It's not about catering.  I see nothing wrong with allowing a first grader who knows their way well to walk to school.  Here they have crossing guards in various places.  I see very little kids walking to school regularly. 

 

Although I don't live in a safe area.  I would worry about my kid, but a lot of people really do not have any choice.  They themselves don't have vehicles to drive their kids to school and they might have to get to a job at that time so they send their kids off to school.  I don't think they are doing anything careless. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

Personally, I think it would be safer to take the school bus home and go inside your house and lock the door.  That was more my point.  

 

The child may be home alone 2 hours instead of 1.  Big deal.   

 

My point is that if you really and absolutely do not want whatever club is being offered, you do need to either attend and be ok with it, or find another solution.

 

The cut off for elementary here is 1.5 miles.  If you live 1.5 miles or closer you have to walk.  There probably aren't very many people who live that far though because they have many elementary schools and the city is very densely populated, but overall small in area.  There is nowhere one can live where there isn't a school fairly close.

[DawnM]

Yes they do provide busing, but it is based on how far one is from the school and not how old they are.  It's not about catering.  I see nothing wrong with allowing a first grader who knows their way well to walk to school.  Here they have crossing guards in various places.  I see very little kids walking to school regularly. 

 

Although I don't live in a safe area.  I would worry about my kid, but a lot of people really do not have any choice.  They themselves don't have vehicles to drive their kids to school and they might have to get to a job at that time so they send their kids off to school.  I don't think they are doing anything careless. 

 

 

I don't necessarily either, although I still think it would be safer not to, but the point about they don't have a choice because the parents are working (with after school clubs) doesn't seem to hold much water for me.  If you  really hate the club, have your child come home and lock the doors, if they are going to be alone for 1 hour, 2 really won't be a stretch.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I don't necessarily either, although I still think it would be safer not to, but the point about they don't have a choice because the parents are working (with after school clubs) doesn't seem to hold much water for me.  If you  really hate the club, have your child come home and lock the doors, if they are going to be alone for 1 hour, 2 really won't be a stretch.

 

Well I hate the boys and girls club.  That's the free afterschool care around here.  But I'd send my kids there rather than have them home alone for hours after school every day. 

 

Here I know a lot of people rely on free summer bible camps.  I'd have to be pretty desperate to do that though.

[DawnM]

Well I hate the boys and girls club.  That's the free afterschool care around here.  But I'd send my kids there rather than have them home alone for hours after school every day. 

 

Here I know a lot of people rely on free summer bible camps.  I'd have to be pretty desperate to do that though.

 

 

Right.  If you don't like something but it is not "that bad" then yeah, you might need to do it.  But if I were adamantly opposed to the ideology taught to my children somewhere, I would not even entertain the idea.    

Edited August 5, 2016 by DawnM

[LucyStoner]

The cut off for elementary here is 1.5 miles. If you live 1.5 miles or closer you have to walk. There probably aren't very many people who live that far though because they have many elementary schools and the city is very densely populated, but overall small in area. There is nowhere one can live where there isn't a school fairly close.

Yeah. Here the cut for walking or receiving district transportation is apparently counted as the crow flies and not as one actually has to walk it and with no consideration of the area/conditions you have to walk in. My niece and nephew were supposed to be able to cross busy streets without crossing guards, including an actual highway and a protitution/drug sales strip. Plus the distance you had to walk (because of which streets went through and which dead ended) was a far bit farther than the actual cutoff for transportation services. Great. Fortunately when they cut their bus service, their mom or I was able to drive them.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Yeah. Here the cut for walking or receiving district transportation is apparently counted as the crow flies and not as one actually has to walk it and with no consideration of the area/conditions you have to walk in. My niece and nephew were supposed to be able to cross busy streets without crossing guards, including an actual highway and a protitution/drug sales strip. Plus the distance you had to walk (because of which streets went through and which dead ended) was a far bit farther than the actual cutoff for transportation services. Great. Fortunately when they cut their bus service, their mom or I was able to drive them.

 

Oh no I do think they'd consider other circumstances.  For example, I know of districts that won't allow students to walk if they don't have sidewalks all the way to the school.  I can't think of any place around here that is like that, but one town over most kids don't walk because so many areas have no sidewalks. 

 

I think the worst thing here is that the walk from where I live to the nearest school would involve walking in an area with heavy traffic with a lot of crossing that has no cross lights.  There are a few crossing guards in the worst spots closest to the school, but there is still a few areas that don't that I think should.  That hasn't happened though because I didn't move here for the schools.  But I'm such a spazz that I remind even my 14 year old to be very very careful in certain areas.  It's not unheard of for even adults doing what they are supposed to do getting hit and killed because of drivers who drive like idiots.  I hate it, but I can't imagine not letting him go. 

[luuknam]

But if I were adamantly opposed to the ideology taught to my children somewhere, I would not even entertain the idea.    

 

Good thing you've been so privileged then.

[fraidycat]

Right. If you don't like something but it is not "that bad" then yeah, you might need to do it. But if I were adamantly opposed to the ideology taught to my children somewhere, I would not even entertain the idea.

That is your privilege speaking.

[TranquilMind]

Some people would take denial in the existence of a supreme being as mockery. 

 

But that isn't mockery.

 

Calling yourself the "satan" club, when you are mocking religious belief is an entirely different thing.

[Luanne]

 

I don't understand why being polite has become the end all and be all. Being polite is not what wins rights and changes society.

 

When fighting for separation of church and state, and at a time when people in the US are all shouting about religious freedom but what they really mean is Christian religious freedom. groups like this are vital.

[/quo

 

So, basically the Christians are supposed to be polite and tolerant but the atheists aren't. Gotcha.

[Mergath]

 

I don't understand why being polite has become the end all and be all. Being polite is not what wins rights and changes society.

 

When fighting for separation of church and state, and at a time when people in the US are all shouting about religious freedom but what they really mean is Christian religious freedom. groups like this are vital.

[/quo

 

So, basically the Christians are supposed to be polite and tolerant but the atheists aren't. Gotcha.

 

Er, no. Basically, people need to accept that either all religions get access to the public square, or none of them do. I wouldn't expect Christians to be polite and remain quiet if their rights were being infringed upon, but in this situation, they aren't.