Satanic after school clubs?

[justasque]

I do know that donkeys would fly before any of that would be allowed in our local public schools though. 

 

If someone challenges practices or policies that are against the law, they are usually changed.  That's true regardless of which side of the fence is involved.  When you look at news stories and follow up on them (rather than just getting riled up about the initial headlines), you'll find that this is the case.

 

Ok, thanks for clearing that up.

No, not by school officials in any way.  Those are outside things.  The kids can say what they want. 

 

No different than if some other kids goes to a group like the one that started this post.  He can say what he wants to other students.  But the staff or leadership cannot. 

 

Quite right, in the sense that teachers and staff are not suppose to lead students in religious practices during the regular course of their duties.  After all, there's no guarantee that a teacher shares the dominant religion of their community.  Having teachers allowed to lead students in the religious practices of their choice would not go well.  Most families prefer that their young children are not put in situations where they are expected to participate in religious practices that aren't from their own faith.  There are a LOT of different faiths in this country.  Let's be careful what we wish for.

[justasque]

Where does that Released time instruction even happen?  I know of no instances where kids are released while still on school hours, because of liability, if nothing else. 

 

In my area, Catholic second or third grade elementary school students used to be released once a week during school hours to attend First Holy Communion instruction.  I don't think this is done now, but more for reasons of maximizing instructional time in the age of standardized testing, rather than any religious issues. 

[Corraleno]

While looking, I did find this lovely video in which a bunch of high school teens, among others, are literally cursed at by Dan Savage for believing the "bul**hit" of the Bible at a journalism conference.  Several walked out.   Many references to this incident have been oddly removed from the internet, where it was referenced in various articles, all of which now say "Page not found" (at least the 5 or 6 I looked at).  However, it remains on Youtube by the guy who took it. 

 

That was at a convention held in a hotel, not a public school; it was sponsored by journalism organizations that are not associated with public schools; the speaker was a private individual with no connection to public schools; and attendance was voluntary and open to students from public, private, and religious schools.

 

So this video has what, exactly, to do with a discussion of Christian evangelism in public schools? 

 

Or is your point to somehow counter the fact of Christian proselytizing and bullying in public schools by saying "well, sometimes nonChristians say mean things about the Bible outside of public school"? Because that's not a logical argument.

[albeto.]

You're not "way off" and appreciate your comment. I would only offer a single correction. I do not think the world would be a better place if everyone eschewed religion. I think that's an impossibility, so it is not a hope or a desire or even a fleeting fantasy. Humans are by nature superstitious animals. It's one reason we are such a successful species, actually, and because it's perfectly natural, it would be silly to hope it somehow all goes away. If I'm an evangelical, I'm an evangelical for rationalist thinking, humanitarian behavior, and evidence-based public policies. Religion often gets in the way of these things in my opinion, but when it doesn't, I have no beef with it. 

 

-And there is something between evangelical (encouraging people to their viewpoint) and militant (violence), where members try to deprive the other group of rights.  An example would be not allowing a Muslim mosque or a Hindu temple in an area where a Christian Church permit would be easy to get. Or allowing Christian groups or prayers in government organizations, but not other religions. There are also lots of examples of Christians not being able to build churches or worship in other countries.

 

So I've been looking for an example of a "militant atheist," and the best I can find is a very offensive one by the name of Chaz Stevens, from the Church of Satanic Activism (not the same as the Satanic Temple). Some may recognize him as they guy who puts offensive displays up at Christmas next to nativity scenes. He's offensive, he's unapologetic in his approach: "I am crystal clear on what needs to be done … nothing less than the removal of religion from government. Won’t happen in my life, nor yours. But, it’s a good fight, a worthy cause." (quote found in link)

 

But he's not dangerous by any standards. He's offensive, he's divisive, he's angry, he's impossible to ignore if you live in an area he targets, but does that make him "militant"? Who has died at his hands? What property has been destroyed or vandalized by his work? What rights is he blocking or threatening to do away with?  "Militant" in this respect, simply means "really, really, offensive," whereas when it's used religiously, it means oppression or terror or death. This double standard does not escape me. 

[justasque]

It was a journalism conference.  Lots of kids were there.  I do not know on what day it was held.

Yeah, I know exactly what I would hear. Lots and lots of hate. 

Yes, Dan Savage was at the National High School Journalist Conference.  Presumably high school students who aspire to careers in journalism should be able to handle speech against their beliefs in the course of their work.  In fact, I would argue that a journalist who can't listen to things they don't agree with is not going to be a very good journalist.  And frankly, his speech was on a "current events" topic and made a fairly standard argument albeit sprinkled with profanity (of which I am not a huge fan).  Current events are often part of high school studies - I took a year-long CE class in high school back in the day.    

 

But all of that is neither here nor there.  What does it have to do with issues around religion in public schools?  It was not IN a public school.

There are all kinds of speakers out there which one group or another would find to be offensive or hateful.  We have a first amendment, which means that they are free to speak (outside of public schools) and parents are free to let their children attend if they wish.

[Mergath]

It existed when I was a kid. As I mentioned up thread, I loved it because the one Jewish kid in the class and I went to the library each week :). Everyone else walked to one of several Christian classes, divided by denomination, at a church down the block. It definitely pointed out who was in what group. In my case, I was already going in and out of class a lot due to special Ed and GT pullouts, so I don't think it was obvious that I wasn't going to the WRE class due to my parents refusing to sign the permission form, as opposed to missing math twice a week because that was when the Speech therapist was at my school.

 

I had to go when I was a kid, too. The very small number of kids who didn't go had to sit in detention for the morning. Seriously. The (public) school wasn't exactly subtle about punishing the kids who weren't some flavor of Christian. 

 

And they still have release time here as of the 2015-16 school year, though I don't know what they do with the kids who don't attend in this school district.

[TranquilMind]

Yes, Dan Savage was at the National High School Journalist Conference.  Presumably high school students who aspire to careers in journalism should be able to handle speech against their beliefs in the course of their work.  In fact, I would argue that a journalist who can't listen to things they don't agree with is not going to be a very good journalist.  And frankly, his speech was on a "current events" topic and made a fairly standard argument albeit sprinkled with profanity (of which I am not a huge fan).  Current events are often part of high school studies - I took a year-long CE class in high school back in the day.    

 

But all of that is neither here nor there.  What does it have to do with issues around religion in public schools?  It was not IN a public school.

There are all kinds of speakers out there which one group or another would find to be offensive or hateful.  We have a first amendment, which means that they are free to speak (outside of public schools) and parents are free to let their children attend if they wish.

 

Agree with the bolded. Count Dan among those who cannot listen to opposing viewpoints. 

 

Here, he called the students who removed themselves from his profane spewing "pansy-as*ed". 

Nice, Dan.  Good job. 

He was brought in to address students. 

 

[katilac]

Where does that Released time instruction even happen?  I know of no instances where kids are released while still on school hours, because of liability, if nothing else. 

 

Argh, forum ate my response! 

 

I can't duplicate it all, but RT happens even in the biggest of cities, like NYC:  

 

http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/23B1B8F3-6DD0-460B-A066-3735BE19983A/0/201516ReleasedTimeProgramforReligiousInstruction.pdf

 

It was actually first discussed there: 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Released_time

 

RT in South Carolina: 

 

http://www.thestate.com/news/local/article77529377.html

 

This pro released time site estimates that there are over 1,000 RT programs involving 250,000 students: 

 

http://www.releasedtime.org/history

 

There are a ton of links! 

Edited August 7, 2016 by katilac

[Corraleno]

Agree with the bolded. Count Dan among those who cannot listen to opposing viewpoints. 

 

Here, he called the students who removed themselves from his profane spewing "pansy-as*ed". 

Nice, Dan.  Good job. 

He was brought in to address students. 

 

 

No, he was hired to speak at a convention, which was held in a hotel, which students and teachers from around the country voluntarily attended. 

 

What does this have to do with what happens in public schools???

[justasque]

Agree with the bolded. Count Dan among those who cannot listen to opposing viewpoints. 

 

Here, he called the students who removed themselves from his profane spewing "pansy-as*ed". 

Nice, Dan.  Good job. 

He was brought in to address students. 

 

 

If you want someone who is not controversial, you sure as heck don't hire Dan Savage.  He makes his living as a sex columnist for an alternative newspaper.  He speaks and writes often about his, and his husband's, negative experiences with Christians and Christianity.  Again, the organizers knew (or should have known) exactly what they were getting.  In fact, given the content of his columns and his podcast, he was being rather reserved.  It could have been ever so much more explicit.

Edited August 7, 2016 by justasque

[Mergath]

If you want someone who is not controversial, you sure as heck don't hire Dan Savage.  He makes his living as a sex columnist for an alternative newspaper.  He speaks and writes often about his, and his husband's negative experiences with Christians and Christianity.  Again, the organizers knew (or should have known) exactly what they were getting.  In fact, given the content of his columns and his podcast, he was being rather reserved.  It could have been ever so much more explicit.

 

:iagree:  It would be like hiring Ann Coulter to speak at a political science convention and then being outraged when she insulted liberals. 

[TranquilMind]

No, he was hired to speak at a convention, which was held in a hotel, which students and teachers from around the country voluntarily attended.

 

What does this have to do with what happens in public schools???

He was brought in specifically to speak to high school students (since we are italicizing) that would be brought to this location instead of at the school, since convention rooms are larger, and also because the folks from longer distances need somewhere to stay.  This was a matter of logistics, not audience or purpose. If your journalism teacher tells you about a conference about your future profession, you go.  I bet it didn't seem voluntary. 

 

Completely inappropriate in every way, especially the nonstop cursing.  

 

Had someone been proselytizing on stage in an opposing fashion, some would be screaming about it since it was aimed at school students and certainly an anti-Bible tirade has NOTHING to do with the topic of journalism.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 7, 2016 by TranquilMind

[TranquilMind]

:iagree:  It would be like hiring Ann Coulter to speak at a political science convention and then being outraged when she insulted liberals. 

Yep, bet that wouldn't fly at a high school convention with high school students either.  But then I hope she would know not to spew curses at them. Who knows? 

[TranquilMind]

If you want someone who is not controversial, you sure as heck don't hire Dan Savage.  He makes his living as a sex columnist for an alternative newspaper.  He speaks and writes often about his, and his husband's, negative experiences with Christians and Christianity.  Again, the organizers knew (or should have known) exactly what they were getting.  In fact, given the content of his columns and his podcast, he was being rather reserved.  It could have been ever so much more explicit.

 

Yes, they should have known that this ugly spew is completely inappropriate and this person is known for spewing hate. 

 

But someone dropped the ball there.  Or got exactly what he intended.  No way to know from this vantage point.

 

[Caroline]

I bet it did seem voluntary.

 

He was brought in specifically to speak to high school students (since we are italicizing) that would be brought to this location instead of at the school, since convention rooms are larger, and also because the folks from longer distances need somewhere to stay. This was a matter of logistics, not audience or purpose. If your journalism teacher tells you about a conference about your future profession, you go. I bet it didn't seem voluntary.

 

Completely inappropriate in every way, especially the nonstop cursing.

 

Had someone been proselytizing on stage in an opposing fashion, some would be screaming about it since it was aimed at school students and certainly an anti-Bible tirade has NOTHING to do with the topic of journalism.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[planner]

Where does that Released time instruction even happen?  I know of no instances where kids are released while still on school hours, because of liability, if nothing else. 

All across the western United States in communities with enough LDS kids and an LDS chapel next to the high school you will find release time seminary. So basically all of Utah (which has seminary buildings) and many other communities in the western United States. The high school just north of us in suburban Phoenix has release time seminary. Our high school doesn't. There's just as many LDS kids at our neighborhood high school but there's not a building for them so they go to seminary in the morning before school starts.

[justasque]

He was brought in specifically to speak to high school students (since we are italicizing) that would be brought to this location instead of at the school, since convention rooms are larger, and also because the folks from longer distances need somewhere to stay.  This was a matter of logistics, not audience or purpose. If your journalism teacher tells you about a conference about your future profession, you go.  I bet it didn't seem voluntary. 

 

Completely inappropriate in every way, especially the nonstop cursing.  

 

Had someone been proselytizing on stage in an opposing fashion, some would be screaming about it since it was aimed at school students and certainly an anti-Bible tirade has NOTHING to do with the topic of journalism.  

 

Again, this event was not run by a public school.  Typically students who attend these events do so through their participation in after-school clubs, which, as we have been discussing, are different than classroom instruction when it comes to allowable religious content.  Such conventions aren't cheap, either, and require parental permission.  This is not the type of thing an entire class would attend.

Such conventions are not held in hotel meeting rooms just because they are too big for schools.  The organizations that run them are not part of the public schools.  It is no different than a dance convention or a student evangelism convention.

 

In addition, should they have had a speaker who went over the top on the opposite side of this issue (say, bashing atheists or Muslims or non-Creationists), it would likely have played out the same way.  This is how the first amendment works in our country.  The "Good News Club," and after-school club with religious content, is free to invite their participants to go to a Christian convention, where students may hear speeches with religious content they (or their parents) do not agree with or feel uncomfortable or offended by.

 

It's a tricky line to see, sometimes, but we must remember that the key is that the first amendment is about avoiding giving students (and their families) the impression that particular religious beliefs are endorsed by the government (typically in the form of government-employed public school teachers).  With that in mind, and taking into account the case law that has addressed these issues for many years, this incident simply isn't problematic from a church/state perspective.  (Now, of course, there's lots to argue about whether it was problematic in other ways, but church/state?  Not an issue here.)

 

Really and truly, this incident has NOTHING to do with religion in public school classrooms. 

[Corraleno]

He was brought in specifically to speak to high school students (since we are italicizing) that would be brought to this location instead of at the school, since convention rooms are larger, and also because the folks from longer distances need somewhere to stay.  This was a matter of logistics, not audience or purpose. If your journalism teacher tells you about a conference about your future profession, you go.  I bet it didn't seem voluntary. 

 

What the heck are you talking about??? You clearly had no idea of the actual context of that video when you linked it, and now you are just making stuff up.

 

This is a national conference, attended by students and adults from all over the country. Do you think that the students who paid money to fly there from other parts of the country, and stay in a hotel, were somehow "ordered" by their PS teachers to attend? Savage was one of many speakers who spoke at the convention, on many different topics, and there were speeches, workshops, critiques, meetings, and other events all happening simultaneously — just like they do at most large conventions. Students who chose to attend the conference were not required to attend Savage's talk or any other particular talk.

 

Here is a link to the program for this year's conference. You are trying to make it seem like a bunch of local high school students were bussed to a hotel, under orders from their PS teachers, and forced to listen to someone who was brought in specifically to offend Christian students. That is complete and utter BS.

[TranquilMind]

What the heck are you talking about??? You clearly had no idea of the actual context of that video when you linked it, and now you are just making stuff up.

 

This is a national conference, attended by students and adults from all over the country. Do you think that the students who paid money to fly there from other parts of the country, and stay in a hotel, were somehow "ordered" by their PS teachers to attend? Savage was one of many speakers who spoke at the convention, on many different topics, and there were speeches, workshops, critiques, meetings, and other events all happening simultaneously — just like they do at most large conventions. Students who chose to attend the conference were not required to attend Savage's talk or any other particular talk.

 

Here is a link to the program for this year's conference. You are trying to make it seem like a bunch of local high school students were bussed to a hotel, under orders from their PS teachers, and forced to listen to someone who was brought in specifically to offend Christian students. That is complete and utter BS.

 

Did I say they were "ordered" to go.  No, I did not. But when the teacher says, "Hey, big conference in X city - road trip!" or especially, "Extra credit!",  the students go if they possibly can. 

 

I'm imagining there were some unhappy parents who did not appreciate that sort of inappropriate proselytizing at a journalism workshop.  His anti-Biblical rant about how the Bible is "bulls**it" was completely out of place at an event with high school students, and has exactly zero to do with journalism. That was my point.

 

 

[hornblower]

It's like you don't understand how conventions work. 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Did I say they were "ordered" to go.  No, I did not. But when the teacher says, "Hey, big conference in X city - road trip!" or especially, "Extra credit!",  the students go if they possibly can. 

 

I'm imagining there were some unhappy parents who did not appreciate that sort of inappropriate proselytizing at a journalism workshop.  His anti-Biblical rant about how the Bible is "bulls**it" was completely out of place at an event with high school students, and has exactly zero to do with journalism. That was my point.

 

lol

If you are going to work in a newsroom you will be hearing much worse than "bullshit" when deadlines are looming.

[justasque]

...

I'm imagining there were some unhappy parents who did not appreciate that sort of inappropriate proselytizing at a journalism workshop.  His anti-Biblical rant about how the Bible is "bulls**it" was completely out of place at an event with high school students, and has exactly zero to do with journalism. That was my point.

 

 

For the record, here is the transcript of the 3-minute segment in question (from an hour-long speech).  Aside from the use of the word "bull****" used three times, and the use of "pansy-assed" to describe the action of walking out of his speech, neither of which I am defending, he is making a standard argument here as to how to interpret the Bible's references in Leviticus to homosexuality, and pointing to these as a potential barrier to those who are working against anti-gay bullying/violence.  I am not saying the argument is right or wrong, but if you are going to discuss anti-gay bullying, I don't think it's inappropriate, in a majority-Christian country, to examine what the Bible has to say about homosexuality, and how different Christians interpret those passages. And I don't think that anti-gay bullying is an inappropriate topic for a high school conference on student journalism.  It is, in fact, a very important subject for many high school students, who may witness, experience, or participate in it on a regular basis in their everyday lives at school.  There are also many other current events topics that will also have a religious component - abortion, how to treat the poor, and church/state issues, all of which will to some extent include Biblical content in a comprehensive look at the issue.

 

The Bible, we'll just talk about the Bible for a second. People often point out that they can't help it – they can't help with the anti-gay bullying, because it says right there in Leviticus, it says right there in Timothy, it says right there in Romans, that being gay is wrong.

 

We can learn to ignore the bullshit in the Bible about gay people. [applause] The same way, the same way we have learned to ignore the bullshit in the Bible about shellfish, about slavery, about dinner, about farming, about menstruation, about virginity, about masturbation. [applause] We ignore bullshit in the Bible about all sorts of things.

 

The Bible is a radically pro-slavery document. Slave owners waved Bibles over their heads during the Civil War and justified it. The shortest book in the New Testament is a letter from Paul to a Christian slave owner about owning his Christian slave. And Paul doesn't say “Christians don't own people.†Paul talks about how Christians own people.

 

We ignore what the Bible says about slavery, because the Bible got slavery wrong. Sam Harris, in A Letter To A Christian Nation, points out that the Bible got the easiest moral question that humanity has ever faced wrong. Slavery! What're the odds that the Bible got something as complicated as human sexuality wrong? 100% percent.

 

The Bible says that if your daughter's not a virgin on her wedding night – if a woman isn't a virgin on her wedding night, she shall be dragged to her father's doorstep and stoned to death. Callista Gingrich lives. [applause] And there is no effort to amend state constitutions to make it legal to stone women to death on their wedding night if they're not virgins. At least not yet. We don't know where the GOP is going these days. [audience laughs]

 

People are dying because people can't clear this one last hurdle. They can't get past this one last thing in the Bible about homosexuality.

 

One other thing I wanna talk about is  [chuckles]  so, you can tell the Bible guys in the hall that they can come back now, because I'm done beating up the Bible. [applause]

 

It's funny, as someone who's on the receiving end of beatings that are justified by the Bible, how pansy-assed some people react when you push back. [applause]

 

I apologize if I hurt anyone's feelings, but I have a right to defend myself. And to point out the hypocrisy of people who justify anti-gay bigotry by pointing to the Bible, and insisting we must live by the code of Leviticus on this one issue and no other.

 

Again, I am not defending the profanity, or the characterization of the students' action in walking out.  And again, this speech does not take place in a public school setting, and has nothing to do with church/state separation.  

[Carrie12345]

Two words. Homeschool conventions.

[Haiku]

I don't have to prove anything. You just did it for me. You took the normal defense tactic of the privileged majority -- denied and belittled the experiences of the minority and then turned it around so that the majority is the victim. This right here is what privilege looks like.

 

This bears repeating.

[LucyStoner]

Ya know, when people point to the Bible as a justification for the bullying of gay students, they definitely open their interpretation of the Bible up to frank criticism. If I were still a Christian I would be more offended by someone using it to justify violence towards gay students than by anything Savage said.

Edited August 7, 2016 by LucyStoner

[TranquilMind]

Ya know, when people point to the Bible as a justification for the bullying of gay students, they definitely open their interpretation of the Bible up to frank criticism. If I were still a Christian I would be more offended by someone using it to justify violence towards gay students than by anything Savage said.

Except no one does legitimately justify bullying.    Anyone who does that is off his rocker. 

 

 It's wrong.  Period.

 

I would be and I have actually been the first person in a setting to stand up against someone's mean-spirited words to anyone present.

 

 

[albeto.]

I don't care what others call sin.  I've read the Bible and I know what sin is.  I only feel convicted if I violate that.  

 

I believe here's your disconnect.

 

Except no one does legitimately justify bullying.    Anyone who does that is off his rocker. 

 

People who use the bible to justify oppressing, endangering, violating, assaulting, neglecting, killing, and bullying others do so because they don't "feel convicted" that they are violating the faith, because they too have "read the bible and know what sin is."

 

The whole point of the After School Satan club (getting back to the topic), is to show children the difference between *knowing* what's up by virtue of using observation, data collection, analysis of the evidence, experimentation, and results being held accountable to the criticism and opinion of others with similar training and knowledge, and "knowing" what's up by virtue of feeling convicted. 

[LucyStoner]

I've heard more people than I can count use "the Bible says it's wrong" as a justification or defense when their child is harassing or bullying students who are gay and/or students who are merely perceived as gay.

 

Plenty of people make that argument and the fact that it's wrong headed has not and will not stop them.

 

A little salty language doesn't invalidate the argument Savage was making. Nor is he a hateful or awful person. I don't think an awful person would pour the resources he has into projects like It Gets Better or his earlier and very clever activism on behalf of those with HIV/AIDS. The dude is a loving father and clearly loves his family. Nor is his issue with Christians, as evidenced by the fact that he loves and respects his Christian family members.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7IcVyvg2Qlo

 

No one's entire worth and personality can be encapsulated in one short convention presentation or undone by a few choice words.

Edited August 8, 2016 by LucyStoner

[justasque]

Except no one does legitimately justify bullying.    Anyone who does that is off his rocker. 

 

 It's wrong.  Period.

 

...

 

I think this was exactly Mr. Savage's point.

[TranquilMind]

I've heard more people than I can count use "the Bible says it's wrong" as a justification or defense when their child is harassing or bullying students who are gay and/or students who are merely perceived as gay.

 

Plenty of people make that argument and the fact that it's wrong headed has not and will not stop them.

 

A little salty language doesn't invalidate the argument Savage was making. Nor is he a hateful or awful person. I don't think an awful person would pour the resources he has into projects like It Gets Better or his earlier and very clever activism on behalf of those with HIV/AIDS. The dude is a loving father and clearly loves his family. Nor is his issue with Christians, as evidenced by the fact that he loves and respects his Christian family members.

 

 

No one's entire worth and personality can be encapsulated in one short convention presentation or undone by a few choice words.

The Bible says a lot of things are wrong that people do, but that doesn't mean someone else is anointed judge, jury, and executioner, responsible for imposing the sentence.  

 

Bullying is always wrong, full stop.  It is irrelevant if the victim of bullying is doing something that you do not agree with or not. 

 

I'd be all over my kids if they bullied anyone for any reason at all.   There is no justification ever for bullying someone. 

 

 

We will agree to disagree on Savage's level of hate. 

[TranquilMind]

I think this was exactly Mr. Savage's point.

 

No, it was not the point of that tirade.   He was just unloading on Christianity.  Period.

 

[TranquilMind]

Ya know, when people point to the Bible as a justification for the bullying of gay students, they definitely open their interpretation of the Bible up to frank criticism. If I were still a Christian I would be more offended by someone using it to justify violence towards gay students than by anything Savage said.

Who is pointing to the Bible and saying that it justifies bullying other people? You have said it twice, assuming that it must be true.  It is not true. 

No one who understands scripture advocates bullying of any students whatsoever, nor can make a biblical case for bullying. 

If they bully, it is because they are mean-spirited people, not because it is justifiable biblically. 

 

 

[LucyStoner]

What you don't seem to realize TranquilMind, is that there are plenty of people who disagree with your assessment, including many Christians.

 

For such a hateful person he's certainly done more work to help vulnerable people than the vast majority of people can reasonably claim.

 

 

We ran an ACT UP chapter in Madison, Wisconsin where they were feeding inmates with HIV horrible dietary supplements of white bread with sugar peanut butter and sugar jelly on it and it was making these guys worse and sicker. So, we just started delivering a peanut butter and jelly sandwich to the governor’s office every day. The first day we delivered hundreds of them and we threw them all over the office. And then we kept coming back every day delivering more sandwiches.

 

We met people at the capitol with the sandwich. We said, “Here is your day. You come and deliver the sandwich,†so it wasn’t the same four of us showing up every day with the sandwich. It ended up looking like there were hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people who were paying attention, who gave a crap about this and they had to do something. You know, we sent people in drag. We sent people in ass-less chaps. We sent people as families. But all we said was, “Noon. Meet us in the capitol, we’ll hand you a sandwich, you walk in and it will take two minutes. You helped. You did something.â€

That was back in the 1980s/early 90s. The governor improved those nutritional supplements. Change doesn't happen because everyone asked politely.

 

Like Dan Savage or not. He's made a positive impact. On many fronts.

Edited August 8, 2016 by LucyStoner

[LucyStoner]

Who is pointing to the Bible and saying that it justifies bullying other people? You have said it twice, assuming that it must be true. It is not true.

No one who understands scripture advocates bullying of any students whatsoever, nor can make a biblical case for bullying.

If they bully, it is because they are mean-spirited people, not because it is justifiable biblically.

 

 

I have heard these words first hand, in my actual life. When I was at church, when I was at church camp, when I was in school and on and on. You may not want to believe it but I'm not lying. You have zero basis to claim that it never happens. I doubt I am alone on this thread in having witnessed this phenomena.

 

Heck, I've seen that argument made by the nice ladies on this board at times.

 

ETA- the folks who point to the Bible as justification for their bullying don't call it "bullying". They call it "religious freedom." They apparently think their children are exercising their "religious freedom" when they mock, belittle, condemn and gang up on a child who doesn't pass for whatever they deem to be straight. Ironically enough, I was once at a high school conference that nearly came to blows over this issue.

Edited August 8, 2016 by LucyStoner

[justasque]

No, it was not the point of that tirade.   He was just unloading on Christianity.  Period.

 

 

 

Who is pointing to the Bible and saying that it justifies bullying other people? You have said it twice, assuming that it must be true.  It is not true. 

No one who understands scripture advocates bullying of any students whatsoever, nor can make a biblical case for bullying. 

If they bully, it is because they are mean-spirited people, not because it is justifiable biblically. 

 

 

 

If you read more about Mr. Savage, his childhood, and that of his husband Terry, you will realize that both of them, particularly Terry, have significant experience with people who have used the Bible to justify a variety of bullying behaviors towards them.  Clearly there are a wide variety of Christian beliefs on this topic, based on a wide variety of Biblical interpretations.  Whether they are accurate Biblical interpretations or not is exactly what Mr. Savage is addressing in this 3-minute segment of his hour-long speech.  

His conclusion is the same as yours - that no one should use the Bible to justify bullying.

[lauraw4321]

Just popping in to say hi Albeto.! Glad to see you post here.

[LucyStoner]

I've met them both. Terry is extremely private and refused to be a public figure even as Dan's star rose as an author and speaker. The reason he decided to say something publically was because the issue of bullying cuts so close to home for him. I think it's clear in the video I linked how much they both want to prevent desperate teens who are living through what Terry lived through from killing themselves.

[TranquilMind]

I have heard these words first hand, in my actual life. When I was at church, when I was at church camp, when I was in school and on and on. You may not want to believe it but I'm not lying. You have zero basis to claim that it never happens. I doubt I am alone on this thread in having witnessed this phenomena.

 

Heck, I've seen that argument made by the nice ladies on this board at times.

 

ETA- the folks who point to the Bible as justification for their bullying don't call it "bullying". They call it "religious freedom." They apparently think their children are exercising their "religious freedom" when they mock, belittle, condemn and gang up on a child who doesn't pass for whatever they deem to be straight. Ironically enough, I was once at a high school conference that nearly came to blows over this issue.

Well, they are wrong, if they are calling bullying anything at all, and attempting to justify it. Bullying is not scriptural or right. Again, I stand by my statement. I'm sorry that it happened to you, but they or their children did it because they were MEAN, not free.

[Josh Blade]

Well, they are wrong, if they are calling bullying anything at all, and attempting to justify it. Bullying is not scriptural or right. Again, I stand by my statement. I'm sorry that it happened to you, but they or their children did it because they were MEAN, not free.

 

I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone that says bullying is okay. Most people don't realize what they are doing is bullying. It's easy for bigotry to be expressed as bullying though. Imagine your bigotry is sanctioned by the creator of the universe, to whom you pray and you think of as perfect. 

 

• It's okay to not only own other humans, but beat them as long as you don't beat them too much.
• Non matrimonial sex should be punishable by being stoned to death by the community (sure sounds like judge/jury/executioner is commanded here...) 
• Women are beneath men - a precept from the very beginning in Genesis where women are punished with the pain of child bearing. Women are unclean during menstruation. Women cannot hold authority over men. Women should be subordinate to men.
• A man lying with a man is an abomination. 

We've mostly overcome those first three bullets in spite of the bible. The last couple of decades, we have been working hard on overcoming that last one. That's what Dan Savage is calling bullshit - the blatant bigotry that we should be able to see is ridiculous, but people condone it because of what some bronze age men had to say several thousand years ago. We know that despite what the bible says, we shouldn't own people, women are equal to men, and sex is okay. Some people are still having a hard time accepting homosexuality and it is understandably hard when you're told that it's an abomination. Hell is for bad people and gay people are going to hell. It doesn't take a huge leap in logic to get from that to being outright mean or maybe even more subtly oppressing gay people. 

Edited August 8, 2016 by joshblade

[Haiku]

Of course very few people publicly state that bullying is hunky dory. That doesn't stop them from doing it, though. It happens every day. Anyone who doesn't admit this is being willfully ignorant.

 

Some people have very warped ideas about what constitutes kindness and compassion.

[Paige]

Which is what people keep saying is happening, and you keep saying it isn't.

 

Kids evangelize at school. It happens. Non Christians are told they are going to hell at school. It happens.

 

And it is what kids are taught to do. It's what Christian literature is teaching adults to teach kids. Because teachers are not allowed to proselytize, kids are being trained at church to do it in place of them. Kids are being trained and encouraged to convert their classmates, and if you don't believe it or don't think it is common, then you are obviously not part of churches who do that or you aren't aware of what is being taught. It doesn't mean it doesn't happen- I've seen it my whole life. I was taught to do that in the 90s, and I see the same things being taught now. It's pretty common to hear that you shouldn't homeschool because the world needs Christian kids in public schools to reach the other kids who aren't from Christian homes.

 

Kids are not taught to bully other kids. They are taught to be kind and loving. The thing is, on the other side- kids who aren't Christian-the kindness that the kids are being taught in church, feels bullying. Truth in love feels not so loving if you don't have a shared understanding of truth. 

[TranquilMind]

I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone that says bullying is okay. Most people don't realize what they are doing is bullying. It's easy for bigotry to be expressed as bullying though. Imagine your bigotry is sanctioned by the creator of the universe, to whom you pray and you think of as perfect. 

 

• It's okay to not only own other humans, but beat them as long as you don't beat them too much.
• Non matrimonial sex should be punishable by being stoned to death by the community (sure sounds like judge/jury/executioner is commanded here...) 
• Women are beneath men - a precept from the very beginning in Genesis where women are punished with the pain of child bearing. Women are unclean during menstruation. Women cannot hold authority over men. Women should be subordinate to men.
• A man lying with a man is an abomination. 

We've mostly overcome those first three bullets in spite of the bible. The last couple of decades, we have been working hard on overcoming that last one. That's what Dan Savage is calling bullshit - the blatant bigotry that we should be able to see is ridiculous, but people condone it because of what some bronze age men had to say several thousand years ago. We know that despite what the bible says, we shouldn't own people, women are equal to men, and sex is okay. Some people are still having a hard time accepting homosexuality and it is understandably hard when you're told that it's an abomination. Hell is for bad people and gay people are going to hell. It doesn't take a huge leap in logic to get from that to being outright mean or maybe even more subtly oppressing gay people. 

 

I'm only going to address the third bullet point here, because we will go way afield of this thread, but just for the record, the 4th one is a moral law and remains as do the proscriptions against incest, bestiality, infidelity and other sexual sin: it does not change, regardless of what man does.  That's all I will bother to say about that, as it is pointless.

 

Regarding your third bullet point, women are not and never have been "below" men.  They are and have always been equal to men, as they are interdependent.  The daughters of Zelophehad were given equal right to inherit along with men in the Old Testament.  Jesus spoke to women in public, which was completely impermissible, because he was showing the leaders that they didn't understand that there was no male or female (Jew nor Greek, free nor slave) in Christ.  The Bible instructs us to submit ourselves one to another first, not merely be subservient to your husband.

 

At one point Paul actually mocks that idea in First Corinthians 14, stating, "What?  Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached?" (in essence, are you crazy, he is asking?)

 

Women are never "punished" by God with the pain of childbearing; that is inaccurate.  The same Greek word is used to denote "toil" when man now has to "toil (work hard, not scream in pain)" to bring forth his fruit of the ground, just as women will "toil" (same word) to bring forth her fruit of the womb, after the fall where man gave up his dominion in this world. 

Man moved from having it all completely available to him, to having to work for it after handing over his authority.  Too bad.  Bad decision. 

 

 

26What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you (NOT MEN ONLY) has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up. 27If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.

29Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace—as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people.

34Women^f should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.^g

36 What?  Did the word of God originate with you or are you the only ones it has reached? 37If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. 38But if anyone ignores this, they will themselves be ignored.^h

39Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

 

[TranquilMind]

And it is what kids are taught to do. It's what Christian literature is teaching adults to teach kids. Because teachers are not allowed to proselytize, kids are being trained at church to do it in place of them. Kids are being trained and encouraged to convert their classmates, and if you don't believe it or don't think it is common, then you are obviously not part of churches who do that or you aren't aware of what is being taught. It doesn't mean it doesn't happen- I've seen it my whole life. I was taught to do that in the 90s, and I see the same things being taught now. It's pretty common to hear that you shouldn't homeschool because the world needs Christian kids in public schools to reach the other kids who aren't from Christian homes.

 

Kids are not taught to bully other kids. They are taught to be kind and loving. The thing is, on the other side- kids who aren't Christian-the kindness that the kids are being taught in church, feels bullying. Truth in love feels not so loving if you don't have a shared understanding of truth. 

 That's always been a very specious argument to me about sending kids to do that kind of thing. 

 

You go out in the world and take on spiritual battles when you are seasoned and prepared.   That would be like me going out today to compete in Boxing at the Olympics.  Let's just say I am unprepared for that level of fight, to put it mildly. 

 

Your 5 year old or 8 or 10 year old is not prepared to convert anyone.   So I don't really get that. 

 

Yes, we need a shared understanding of Truth, and that's the problem today.  Once we had it, mostly, in terms of religious principles.  Now we do not.

[MercyA]

I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone that says bullying is okay. Most people don't realize what they are doing is bullying. It's easy for bigotry to be expressed as bullying though. Imagine your bigotry is sanctioned by the creator of the universe, to whom you pray and you think of as perfect. 

 

• It's okay to not only own other humans, but beat them as long as you don't beat them too much.
• Non matrimonial sex should be punishable by being stoned to death by the community (sure sounds like judge/jury/executioner is commanded here...) 
• Women are beneath men - a precept from the very beginning in Genesis where women are punished with the pain of child bearing. Women are unclean during menstruation. Women cannot hold authority over men. Women should be subordinate to men.
• A man lying with a man is an abomination. 

We've mostly overcome those first three bullets in spite of the bible. The last couple of decades, we have been working hard on overcoming that last one. That's what Dan Savage is calling bullshit - the blatant bigotry that we should be able to see is ridiculous, but people condone it because of what some bronze age men had to say several thousand years ago. We know that despite what the bible says, we shouldn't own people, women are equal to men, and sex is okay. Some people are still having a hard time accepting homosexuality and it is understandably hard when you're told that it's an abomination. Hell is for bad people and gay people are going to hell. It doesn't take a huge leap in logic to get from that to being outright mean or maybe even more subtly oppressing gay people. 

 

Just a point of clarification: quite a lot of what you've mentioned here is derived from the law given to the Israelites and not the instructions given to the Christian church. They are two separate things, and that is a common point of misunderstanding. As a Christian, I'm not under Jewish law, which is why I'm free to eat shellfish and wear clothing of mixed fibers, among other things.  :)

 

This is not to say that the New Testament doesn't speak to the relationship of men and women, homosexuality, and slavery. The New Testament says slaves should be treated justly and fairly and should try to obtain their freedom if possible. Women are equal to men in Christ; however, they have distinct roles in marriage and in the church. Homosexuality is a sexual sin, like adultery or fornication--but the Christian is *commanded* to be kind toward all and to not judge those outside the church.

 

I watched the video LucyStoner/Katie linked, and hearing what Terry experienced was incredibly sad. However, I literally can't imagine how any sane Christian adult could consider punching someone, defacing their car, physically abusing them, or cruelly mocking them either Biblical or part of their "religious freedom." 

 

One more note: if I don't come back to this discussion today, I'm not ignoring you. I am taking antihistamines [ETA: Not because of mold! No mold problems in this house or any other in which I've lived. ;) ] and literally feel like I can't put two thoughts together, but I did want to respond to this.

 

Peace to all.

Edited August 9, 2016 by MercyA

[hornblower]

 

Yes, we need a shared understanding of Truth, and that's the problem today.  Once we had it, mostly, in terms of religious principles.  Now we do not.

 

I don't understand what this means. What truth? Where and when was it all shared? 

[TranquilMind]

I don't understand what this means. What truth? Where and when was it all shared? 

 

So many things were once generally held in common.  Honor God or at least the general principles (Golden Rule?  Ten Commandments?) that others hold dear.  Get married and stay married; no, the grass isn't greener.  Honor your spouse.  Be respectful to elders.  Treat your children like jewels (but competent ones, not ones you have to shelter).  Take care of others wherever possible.  Help the neighbors. 

Watch a Frank Capra movie!  ;)  You will see what I mean. 

[hornblower]

So many things were once generally held in common.  Honor God or at least the general principles (Golden Rule?  Ten Commandments?) that others hold dear.  Get married and stay married; no, the grass isn't greener.  Honor your spouse.  Be respectful to elders.  Treat your children like jewels (but competent ones, not ones you have to shelter).  Take care of others wherever possible.  Help the neighbors. 

Watch a Frank Capra movie!  ;)  You will see what I mean. 

this is by no means universal and hasn't been historically.  And even if it did exist in some little pockets of community, we NOW live in a pluralistic multicultural society. 

 

There are atheists and people who believe in different gods and different principles. The 10 commandments mean nothing to many people.  

 

I think it's a good thing but even if you don't think it's a good thing, people need to accept this is reality.  

 

This is really what this thread is about.  There's this group of people who refuse to accept that their judeo christian view of the world is not the only one & doesn't deserve any special protections. 

[Josh Blade]

I'm only going to address the third bullet point here, because we will go way afield of this thread, but just for the record, the 4th one is a moral law and remains as do the proscriptions against incest, bestiality, infidelity and other sexual sin: it does not change, regardless of what man does.  That's all I will bother to say about that, as it is pointless.

 

If I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that you feel that homosexuality is a sin (presumably because the bible says so). Do you not see the bigotry in your position? You are basically stating to all gay people that you think that a major part of their personhood is bad/wrong/sinful/immoral. I know I would not want to associate with someone who thought that my sexual preferences, which I had no control over, made me immoral. It's a hurtful position to have about someone. I'm sure once upon a time, people also held the same position on 'witches', people who wear polyester, and fig lovers, but we've moved beyond that due to empathy, reason, and philosophy.

 

I'm not sure how do have multiple quotes in a post (maybe someone could pm me. ETA: Hornblower pm'd me. Thanks), but in response to women being equal to men in the bible, that is laughable. I've heard the apologetic lines before about toil vs pain in childbirth, but then why do all of our translations read pain? It's obvious that most translators feel that is the appropriate translation. You can dress it up anyway that you'd like to make yourself feel better, but even with modern medicine, childbirth is still painful. 

 

The 1 Corinthians 14:36 line that you included is up for debate whether or not it is even to be read as you are wanting it interpreted (IE him reading/quoting someone else and then responding aghast), but even giving you the charitable reading, that just shows that women were allowed to prophesize with Paul.

 

Also in  1 Corinthians, how about :

 

11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Also the whole bit in 1 Corinthians 11 about it being a dishonor for men to cover their heads while praying, but women MUST have a covering their heads (long hair or an actual cover) followed by this golden bit of equality:

11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of man.

 

or how about Collossian 3:18?

18 Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

 

You also neglected the most infamous 1 Timothy 2

11 A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women[c] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

That last line pretty much summarizes woman's role in the bible - make babies. 

 

The fact that you may be able to tease out something that looks like equality for women in some specific situations of the bible only goes to show that if you try hard enough, you can make the bible say anything you want it to. 

Edited August 8, 2016 by joshblade

[Onceuponatime]

I'm only going to address the third bullet point here, because we will go way afield of this thread, but just for the record, the 4th one is a moral law and remains as do the proscriptions against incest, bestiality, infidelity and other sexual sin: it does not change, regardless of what man does. That's all I will bother to say about that, as it is pointless.

 

Regarding your third bullet point, women are not and never have been "below" men. They are and have always been equal to men, as they are interdependent. The daughters of Zelophehad were given equal right to inherit along with men in the Old Testament. Jesus spoke to women in public, which was completely impermissible, because he was showing the leaders that they didn't understand that there was no male or female (Jew nor Greek, free nor slave) in Christ. The Bible instructs us to submit ourselves one to another first, not merely be subservient to your husband.

 

At one point Paul actually mocks that idea in First Corinthians 14, stating, "What? Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached?" (in essence, are you crazy, he is asking?)

 

Women are never "punished" by God with the pain of childbearing; that is inaccurate. The same Greek word is used to denote "toil" when man now has to "toil (work hard, not scream in pain)" to bring forth his fruit of the ground, just as women will "toil" (same word) to bring forth her fruit of the womb, after the fall where man gave up his dominion in this world.

Man moved from having it all completely available to him, to having to work for it after handing over his authority. Too bad. Bad decision.

 

 

26What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you (NOT MEN ONLY) has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up. 27If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.

29Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace—as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people.

34Women^f should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.^g

36 What? Did the word of God originate with you or are you the only ones it has reached? 37If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. 38But if anyone ignores this, they will themselves be ignored.^h

39Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

Respectfully, those who are not christians (myself included) do not see any reason to take any arguments using scripture seriously. The Bible has no authority for them. In fact the use of scriptures in an apologist's argument is more likely to confirm their disregard for the Bible's relevance. The things that non-believers see in those scriptures are things that are obviously not apparent to many believers.

 

Plus, the daughters of Zelophehad were the exception, because of a lack of male relatives, not the rule.

Edited August 9, 2016 by Onceuponatime

[justasque]

[Dan Savage said:]

 

The Bible is a radically pro-slavery document. Slave owners waved Bibles over their heads during the Civil War and justified it. The shortest book in the New Testament is a letter from Paul to a Christian slave owner about owning his Christian slave. And Paul doesn't say “Christians don't own people.†Paul talks about how Christians own people.

 

We ignore what the Bible says about slavery, because the Bible got slavery wrong. Sam Harris, in A Letter To A Christian Nation, points out that the Bible got the easiest moral question that humanity has ever faced wrong. Slavery! 

 

 

...The New Testament says slaves should be treated justly and fairly and should try to obtain their freedom if possible. ...

 

I am mulling over the thought that MercyA's sentence above seems to be an example of what Mr. Savage is saying in the quote above.