post by DestroyYouAlot at Jan 27,2012 8:19am edited Jan 27,2012 8:19am
DEY TERKA PREYR
post by yummy at Jan 27,2012 1:19pm edited Jan 27,2012 1:20pm
Except for "Our Heavenly Father" and maybe(but I would disagree with) "amen" this has no Catholic faith basis and excludes it from being a religious prayer because it's not an excerpt found in any bible and promotes equality, not a plea to a higher power. We could've saved a lot of money had someone gone down to a hardware store, bought some duct tape, and covered "Our Heavenly Father"/"amen".
I find those florist businesses are being thrown under the bus. Think about it, small business where the delivery driver makes shit for wages.
Now, they have to worry about getting harassed from this foundation in Wisconsin and others because they made a personal business decision. The same rights this group helped this girl fight for are being stripped from these small businesses and casting them out as being bible thumpers.
I think this girl puts more in the way of her own cause. Jessica said she had stopped believing in God when she was in elementary school and her mother fell ill for a time. She says, “I had always been told that if you pray, God will always be there when you need him,” she said. “And it didn’t happen for me, and I doubted it had happened for anybody else. So yeah, I think that was just like the last step, and after that I just really didn’t believe any of it.”
That is really pathetic on way too many levels. Her mom eventually got better...
However, they caved to community pressure. You can't have it both ways.
post by black folks at Jan 27,2012 1:30pm
Brittany Lanni, who graduated from Cranston West in 2009, said that no one had ever been forced to recite the prayer and called Jessica “an idiot.”
“If you don’t believe in that,” she said, “take all the money out of your pocket, because every dollar bill says, ‘In God We Trust.’”
pretty much. this "prayer" is about as inoffensive as it gets.
GRAVESIDESERVICE IS TRYING TO GET ON A TOTAL SUPPORT SHOW FOR THIS GIRL BECAUSE SOME FRIENDS OF OURS KNOW HER PRETTY WELL AND OUR ENTIRE MESSAGE IS ANTI CHRISTIAN, ANTI RELIGION.
PS: Cool professional picture taken at Garden City, bro. Your one stop shop for old lady clothing and other really boring shit straight out of Cranston
'This country was founded to be a secular country. We’re supposed to keep church and state separate so people can have their rights and their freedom to choose. And I think that this lawsuit is a reflection of that.'
So, somehow this banner being at the school stripped her of her freedom to choose and made her feel left out. She had the freedom to feel secluded so she did. Join a fucking pottery class.
I totally agree with you DYA. Obviously, those shops live with the consequences of their decisions. But, the group described in Wisconsin doesn't care about anybody's freedoms but their own. Now I feel left out because I want my $13,000 check for being an athiest.
GRAVESIDESERVICE IS TRYING TO GET ON A TOTAL SUPPORT SHOW FOR THIS GIRL BECAUSE SOME FRIENDS OF OURS KNOW HER PRETTY WELL AND OUR ENTIRE MESSAGE IS ANTI CHRISTIAN, ANTI RELIGION.
In this country you have the right of freedom of religion. Which apparently means you have the right to choose one of a few different acceptable religions to practice.
This is actually the last place I'd imagine anyone arguing FOR prayer in schools
Probably because this is a complete waste of time and taxpayer money. The parents should make this kid get an after-school job rather than spending her time hand-wringing and teeth-gnashing over some stupid words on a wall.
all of the points above aside, this was a prayer in a public school, which has no place. i do not care if "heavenly father" wasn't specifically "Lord Jehovah", it is a direct reference to a deity. that is unacceptable. there is a lot of nonsense about "wasted money" on lawsuits like this, i for one commend and applaud this girl for standing up. sure, she is young, her methods are fiery, but she stood up for what was right, not just what she believed. people need to stop looking over "just this one thing" because that alone is how equality and freedom are eroded away, bit by bit. Religion has a place, and it is within, not without. a prayer is a prayer, no matter how benign. i hope for more of this in the future.
A prayer, a prayer in a public school??!! GOD HAS NO PLACE WITHIN THESE WALLS!
Or maybe the genius superintendant could've seen the writing on the wall and just taken the stupid gay prayer off the wall when first asked and saved everyone a lot of time and money. NO JEW ZOMBIES!!!!!
In this country you have the right of freedom of religion. Which apparently means you have the right to choose one of a few different acceptable religions to practice.
This is actually the last place I'd imagine anyone arguing FOR prayer in schools
That's not what I'm doing at all. It's a discussion.
I don't think this was a religious issue until she mentioned she was an athiest. I think it's more than that to other people, myself not included. It could be interpreted that this girl vehemently opposes any idea that we should all be good sports regardless of the outcome. Or maybe she read into it that we shouldn't treat all people how we want to be treated.
Who knows there could be a huge majority that think, hey you know what, I don't believe in god so I'm completely uncomfortable about everything from In God we Trust on money to swearing the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I just think everybody is uncomfortable. Myself included.
I don't want prayer taught in school. This is not an example of that.
she is young, and very naive to the connotations of the word "atheist". the whole "In God We Trust" on money is preposterous, however that is pretty much impossible to reverse. where victory can be found, victory can be found.
In this country you have the right of freedom of religion. Which apparently means you have the right to choose one of a few different acceptable religions to practice.
Similarly to the florists being chastised for not delivering the girl flowers, her demonstration of her rights has social consequences. She apparently lives in a predominantly Christian community. I don't understand what you mean by this point because I don't think her rights have been denied.
Yeah if anybody's wasting taxpayer money, it's the public school for 1) putting a prayer on the wall 2) not taking it down when that shit was pointed out that 3) letting it go to court and 4) appealing the decision. Come on.
agreed. the supreme court made a correct unanimous decision. i applaud them and the girl. the prayer may have been harmless but nonetheless clearly unconstitutional. it's a public school, and not a private christian school.
the waste of taxpayer money is kind of a strawman argument. it would have been wasted somewhere else.
the issue isn't so much that the prayer was there, but you know damn well there would have been an uproar if a muslim or even an atheist creed was put on the wall. the florist issue and all that is irrelevant. a prayer posted in a public school is inherently exclusive to other faiths and does not belong.
all of the points above aside, this was a prayer in a public school, which has no place.
No, dumbass, it was a document on a wall. No one forced her to read it, no one read it TO her, there was no mandatory prayer time for all to read it
There's no mandatory PORN time either but if someone put a Playboy centerfold on the wall, that shit would've been taken down immediately, even though no one was forced to look at it.
Think before you post next time
agreed. the supreme court made a correct unanimous decision. i applaud them and the girl. the prayer may have been harmless but nonetheless clearly unconstitutional. it's a public school, and not a private christian school.
the waste of taxpayer money is kind of a strawman argument. it would have been wasted somewhere else.
the issue isn't so much that the prayer was there, but you know damn well there would have been an uproar if a muslim or even an atheist creed was put on the wall. the florist issue and all that is irrelevant. a prayer posted in a public school is inherently exclusive to other faiths and does not belong.
The irony is that the school hung this shit up THE VERY NEXT YEAR after prayer in schools was declared illegal. Intentionally unconstitutional, much?
And the girl has stated that she wished it hadn't come to this, and that she intends to give any money she gets to the school. But, of course, they should've just taken the thing down in the first place. So now it's a big thing.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
having that posted on the wall, one could infer that the school was a christian organization and therefore would indirectly prohibit other faiths from "feeling comfortable." or at least that's the jist of the supreme court argument. a public school isn't and shouldn't be exclusive to any race or creed. this chick happened to remind them of that.
all of the points above aside, this was a prayer in a public school, which has no place.
No, dumbass, it was a document on a wall. No one forced her to read it, no one read it TO her, there was no mandatory prayer time for all to read it
There's no mandatory PORN time either but if someone put a Playboy centerfold on the wall, that shit would've been taken down immediately, even though no one was forced to look at it.
Think before you post next time
Not even the same thing.
My point was that a prayer hanging on a wall is not prayer in school. RECITING the prayer on the wall is prayer in school. Without drawing such attention to it, it's simply a piece of school history.
Porn on the wall violates indecency/obscenity laws, not a constitutional right to free choice of religion.
I could also object that any history book with reference to roman catholic expansion, or any art class featuring religious works, is just as offensive as this hanging non-denominational "prayer" was.
Really Josh, you're as dumb as they say you are. Think before you post, next time.
LOL. A judge at New Haven Superior Court sentenced a guy to death today and said "May God have mercy on your soul." Double standards in the judicial system? FAGGETABOUTIT.
This prayer was written by a seventh grader. Sure, the point being that the school should've never put it up nor allowed it to stay up I agree with. However, people consider things like this part of the fabric of their society. I was most intrigued by this whole issue because for both sides it's a right of entitlement where nobody wins. The ones with the most empathy?
Does she empathize in any way with members of her community who want the prayer to stay?
See, it goes back and forth. All the meanwhile members of the community say it's not faith based, the moment it comes down people in the community act like Satan took over Cranston. Which, not for nothing is overdue.
I would love to go back to 1963 and find that 7th grader. You listen here fuckstick! That's a beautiful little hymn you got there. It ain't goin up on that wall. After all the money in legal fees it will be nothing but a thorn in this schools' side. Not to mention the impact on florist shops. Get it the fuck outta here!
My point was that a prayer hanging on a wall is not prayer in school. RECITING the prayer on the wall is prayer in school. Without drawing such attention to it, it's simply a piece of school history.
this is the worst argument i've heard yet.
post by Yeti at Jan 27,2012 5:25pm edited Jan 27,2012 5:25pm
This prayer was written by a seventh grader. Sure, the point being that the school should've never put it up nor allowed it to stay up I agree with. However, people consider things like this part of the fabric of their society.
my cousin said the same thing, but then followed up with the fact that if it's a part of town history, put it in a town museum.
and all the points about if this was a Muslim or Atheist document are spot on, it would have been taken down before the last tack was put in.
my cousin said the same thing, but then followed up with the fact that if it's a part of town history, put it in a town museum.
What town are you from that has it's own museum? Never seen a "town museum". Good reason not to put it in the town museum, don't you think? RETARD. At least your cousin proves, it's not your fault - it's a family trait.
Meanwhile it's part of school history, so they kept it in the school. More specifically, it was a class gift from a departing class. Most likely did not consider it a "prayer".
I'm an atheist.
I would be that twat to make sure this shit was taken down as well. Fight me about it.
Be religious if you want, but if you put it in my face or in the face of others in a public place paid for by tax payers, it is a fucking violation. Written, posted, spoken, whatever, it's a violation of Separation of Church and State. PERIOD, end of story. Moving on...
Any person who thinks this or any other prayer has a place in a public school, whether spoken or posted, understands nothing about the separation of church and state.
My town has a TELEPHONE museum. Not joking. Possibly the most boring thing humanly possible to create. I've never been as there are no drugs/booze strong enough to make that trip fun.
All the butthurt Cranstonian's should just where the fucking t-shirt with the prayer on it. Express your religion within your rights that no atheist can take away from you. Problem solved.
I love that this girl who did the correct thing, whether she is an atheist or not, and fought for what is just and protected, is receiving death threats and needs protection from the public for which she stood up to defend. Awesome. Some douche should get on their knees and pray for more people to do what she did and stand up. Without the proper protections provided by the separation of church and state your churches will have to pay taxes, claim their income with the federal government as income, and justify tax exemptions like all other businesses. That happens and say good-bye to your organized religious organizations.
Damn these people need to educate themselves.
FWIW, this girl didn't do all that much from the way the article reads. She was the poster child of the suit. She didn't say anything at first. A parent submitted a complaint to the ACLU. Girl speaks at the hearings. ACLU asks girl to be plaintiff of suit. Done deal. Just a poster child.
FWIW, this girl didn't do all that much from the way the article reads. She was the poster child of the suit. She didn't say anything at first. A parent submitted a complaint to the ACLU. Girl speaks at the hearings. ACLU asks girl to be plaintiff of suit. Done deal. Just a poster child.
The original complaint came from someone that was neither a student at the school nor a parent of one.
The girl may just be a borderline fascist for all we know. A panel of arguably corrupt experts on American law decided it for us, so that's that. A lot of anonymous fucking coward going on in this thread.
It seems she got up and spoke at each hearing on the case and was a plaintiff. Doesn't matter if she spearheaded removing the thing, she has now become associated with the case so much that she needs protection from others.
The point is that separation is there to protect churches, not really atheists or agnostics. If these morons understood what is truly being protected, they would shut up about prayer in schools. Or put it in schools and be prepared for government intervention in religion.
The point is that separation is there to protect churches
You think separation of church and state is intended to protect churches? Did you miss history class? It's meant to keep the CHURCH from interfering with the government, not the other way around.
You also keep bringing up separation of church and state like it's interchangeable with out constitutional right to freedom of religion.
Two different things, retard, as close as they may be.
post by Samefag at Jan 27,2012 7:39pm
Nevermind, someone pointed out to me you're a woman. I now understand your stupidity.
I love that this girl who did the correct thing, whether she is an atheist or not, and fought for what is just and protected.
Get off your high horse. For some it's one little girl picking over trivial bullshit to get attention.
Hahaha! High horse.
Sorry, she should get these threats and need security. Yeah, that makes total sense. Especially over "trivial" issues like separation of church and state.
You are false.
Nevermind, someone pointed out to me you're a woman. I now understand your stupidity.
Haha! That's old news.
But seriously, learn your history.
post by Samefag at Jan 27,2012 7:43pm
Comprehension help for you: I edited your comments to focus on the HIGH HORSE. Note I took out the whole part about the threats, retard.
The girl doesn't deserve to be threatened and harmed, you're right. However, she's established her agenda and stepped on a lot of toes, and for what gain? So the four hours a year the students spend in the Auditorium is spent watching the talent show instead of being threatened by the big bad in your face prayer in school?
Oh shit, logic and facts. I'm in a corner, and my vagina can't figure a way out of this one. MAYBE IF I POST A NONSENSICAL ATTEMPT AT A MEME IT WILL ALL GO AWAY
You shouldn't be so transparent.
post by Fake ARIL at Jan 27,2012 7:53pm
Stop talking shit about Hlrie, I've met her and she's cool.
(I'm not really aril, but I figured I'd go ahead and post what he normally would about right now)
Ugh, bored.
It was first used as a term in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802, specifially, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
He talked about this a lot in his opposition of government intervention in religion and its practice.
In the 1st amendment it says this... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
In no place is it written we shall protect the non-believers. There is only reference to the freedom to practice beliefs without the government being involved.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
You don't consider the government ruling to remove a written display of a non-denominational prayer to be a law prohibiting the free exercise of religion?
Keep explaining how this protects ANYONE but the sensitive, misguided atheist that had to view this abominable and oppressive prayer during school assemblies.
Really, continue, I'm interested in your vagina's stance on this.
Some vagina telling me that I've been saved and protected by this sniveling twat complaining about a big fat non-issue while thumbing her nose disrespectfully at all who complain. And trying to twist the word and intent of the constitution to do so.
"The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.'" 330 U.S. 1, 15-16.
yep this is a waste of time and resources but shes right according to this judicial decision. yeah probably goes too far in scope, but whatever.
post by eddienli at Jan 28,2012 6:59am
I take that back, kinda
"Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church" - didn't happen
"Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another" - didn't happen
"Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." - didn't happen. i could see a very loose argument that this might influence a person to go to church? but i'm curtain that not the point of this sentence.
"No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion." - did the school pay anything for it? seems to be a gift from a seventh grader 50 years ago. more information is needed.
" Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa." - didn't happen
So they don't have a town museum, why not divert their Christian attentions away from harassing and threatening a teenage girl and take five minutes to move the banner to their church instead?
Then they wouldn't be able to make sure all the poor atheists and gays saw it.
post by iteY at Jan 28,2012 6:05pm
despite the obvious inflammatory statements, i think Samefag brought a lot to this argument. he/she/it reminds me of why i fight the battles i fight, and support the battles i choose to support. whether i'm a dumbass, faggot, twat, cunt, or stinkypants, he/she/it has yet to prove one single point that makes this girl's fight not valid. in fact, he/she/it has done nothing but prove that this is a fight worth fighting.
post by gafemaS at Jan 28,2012 6:15pm
Howard Johnson is right!
post by Samefag at Jan 28,2012 9:59pm
Teacher is wearing a crucifix - she's an employee of the state
BURN HER!!!!!
Sonnet refers to shakespear! PRAYER IN SCHOOL! MUST CENSOR ENGLISH CLASSES!
This is such a bad precedent.
Go get em with your atheist vagina, girl. The world needs saving. Protect our right from offense by whitewashing everyone. Freedom through restrictions, yay oh yay oh yay.
Over three words on a wall, taken completely out of context. PRAYER IN SCHOOL, FORCED WORSHIP, OH BOY OH BOY WE'RE SCREWED
There's the letter of the law, and the spirit of the law. Only a few retards here don't actually understand what actually happened here.
post by Samefag at Jan 28,2012 10:00pm
"sonnet refers to shakespeare" should say "sonnet refers to GOD"
So they don't have a town museum, why not divert their Christian attentions away from harassing and threatening a teenage girl and take five minutes to move the banner to their church instead?
It's a non-denominational "prayer". The town is full of churches. Which does it belong to? Exactly which god-awful faith was this oppressive prayer pushing on these students?
Who gets it? The dirty jews? The muslims? How about them douche Mormons, or the Baptists? How about the local Unitard church? They accept anybody, right?
Exactly which god-awful faith was this oppressive prayer pushing on these students?
They should ask their little gods to give them a sign
The banner can be stored in a dumpster somewhere while they wait for their answer
Oh look, another clever vagina that doesn't understand the issue, or the implications. Good for you, sweetheart.
Again, let's discuss what difference there is between this "prayer" and a teacher wearing a crucifix, or a poem or sonnet in class or the library referencing god or worship? You vaginas keep skipping right over that point, like you are avoiding it or something.
Dangerous precedent indeed.
post by ark at Jan 29,2012 11:35am
the difference is personal freedom of expression and literary analysis, versus a school-wide mission statement.
Even though the prayer in question is very vague it's still to a heavenly father regardless of which one. Similar to the prayers associated with the 12 step program.
I would side with the federal judge on this one. Freedom of religion should also mean freedom from religion. It has it's time and place for people to worship freely without anyone interfering. Public school is not one of them. Keeping these seperate protects both the whiny butthurt atheist and the whiny butthurt people of many various religions from getting more butthurt.
post by frankovhell at Jan 30,2012 3:37am
I love how samefag thinks he is smarter than all the supreme court judges. Also i bet if this wasn't a GIRL he wouldnt be so amazingly fired up over this, all 2 inches of him. Its apparent your deep seeded issue seems to be the fact that you hate girls because you are probably a fucking loser and can't get layed. End of discussion. I'm going to stick around and wait to be called a "vagina" now.
Personally I am militantly against all promotion of religion in a school setting. Go to a catholic school if you don't like it. Religion should be taught as fairy tales and myths in history class. No reference to it should be displayed in school unless it is to be mocked.
let's discuss what difference there is between this "prayer" and a teacher wearing a crucifix, or a poem or sonnet in class or the library referencing god or worship? You vaginas keep skipping right over that point, like you are avoiding it or something.
The difference being the school itself should be neutral on the subject of religion and not have an official school wide prayer regardless of which god it falls under, while an individual such as a teacher or student should be allowed to wear a necklace of their desired faith to express themselves individually.
The slippery slope comes when someone gets offended by the necklace and tries to play the dress code card and have an individual remove such offending material. I used to get asked all the time in high school to turn my offensive metal band shirts inside out. Not sure why it wouldnt apply to a Jesus shirt if one were to find it offensive.
Personally I am militantly against all promotion of religion in a school setting. Go to a catholic school if you don't like it. Religion should be taught as fairy tales and myths in history class. No reference to it should be displayed in school unless it is to be mocked.
aye. keep it in the church, they don't allow public knowledge just the same.
The slippery slope comes when someone gets offended by the necklace and tries to play the dress code card and have an individual remove such offending material. I used to get asked all the time in high school to turn my offensive metal band shirts inside out. Not sure why it wouldnt apply to a Jesus shirt if one were to find it offensive.
Yes, this is exactly the kind of thing this whole story reminds me of. To keep the risk of offense down, it becomes easier to start removing things or not putting them up in the first place. So something inoffensive to most gets removed pre-emptively to keep any squeaky wheels quiet.
I much prefer a stance of "this exists, and I disagree with it" over "I disagree with this, it should not be allowed to exist".
Again, if it were being forced on them - making them recite it or such, I would 100% agree it was offensive and should be removed. I just disagree with making such a stand over something nostalgic, well intentioned, and pretty inoffensive.
I love how samefag thinks he is smarter than all the supreme court judges. Also i bet if this wasn't a GIRL he wouldnt be so amazingly fired up over this, all 2 inches of him. Its apparent your deep seeded issue seems to be the fact that you hate girls because you are probably a fucking loser and can't get layed. End of discussion. I'm going to stick around and wait to be called a "vagina" now.
Personally I am militantly against all promotion of religion in a school setting. Go to a catholic school if you don't like it. Religion should be taught as fairy tales and myths in history class. No reference to it should be displayed in school unless it is to be mocked.
First, I don't think I'm any more (or less) smart than the supreme court. It doesn't have anything to do with smart. I disagree with the decision, but understand the technical aspect of the ruling quite well, Frank. As I said earlier, there's the letter of the law, and the spirit of the law. I argue this does NOT follow the spirit of the law at all.
Secondly, I have no problems with women. I have problems with the women that post here. 99% attention seeking whores or idiots looking to belong. I'm a troll, retard. We're obligated to troll women here. It's not a deep seated issue, it's a tradition. I was gonna say "goddamned tradition", but I wouldn't want to get taken to the supreme court.
And as for your own stance, I think you're just as extreme as the faiths you hate. I'm also an atheist, as I said, but your desire to eradicate all faith or evidence of faith because you don't like it is EXACTLY the kind of bullshit that our constitution and laws were intended to protect us from. Instead of letting people see it all and make a conscious choice, you'd rather eradicate it all and leave them with the same nothing you live your life on. That's pretty hateful, and not the spirit of the country I live in.
You're not a vagina, by the way. You just think like one.
post by ark at Jan 30,2012 1:26pm
yeah, great, i hate fascists too and i'm far from a militant atheist. i don't seek to eradicate faith. the only argument here is if a school administration hangs a faith-based statement on school grounds. the only thing that matters is the interpretation of the letter of the law. the entity of a public school DOES NOT have the right to free expression.
post by frankovhell at Jan 30,2012 1:33pm
MERICA, WOOO HOOO.
also women post here besides pam?
post by Yeti at Jan 30,2012 1:34pm edited Jan 30,2012 1:35pm
it all boils down to one fact. religion, references to religion, prayer, nostalgic vaguely religious sayings, all have no place within a public school.
i took an English course in high school and part of it was "the Bible Through Literature", and in my uneducated 18 year old ways, i fought against it based on this. the teacher made a good point to me about it, they weren't promoting it, they weren't displaying it for all to see, it was a class studying the impact of the Bible through historical and literary analysis. i had to elect the course, and the course outline was available at enrollment. it was a public school, but it wasn't on display, and ultimately the course further proved to me why i am against religion, but it was fascinating to study it from an objective perspective. that is vastly different than a posting in a traffic artery essentially blessing the school and all within it. again, it doesn't specify a religion, but it specifies a deity. and let's not dance around the fact that "heavenly father" is a direct reference to Abrahamic religion, and i don't mean Islam. but even then, subjective perception isn't a basis for concrete litigation. this is larger than that, "that" being the blessing of a school under religion, no matter how vague it is.
again, as lame as anonymous trolling is, Samefag brought a good counter argument, and lent a lot to this discussion. it could have been a bit more intelligent by avoiding the name-calling, but still, a good argument is a good argument.
post by frankovhell at Jan 30,2012 1:39pm
I don't even call myself an achiest. I believe in a lot of weird shit that isnt scientificly proven, which i think makes me an athiest. I just think that the hippy mentality of "oh lets everyone get along only stifles human evolution and growth. Dogmatic abrahamic religions should be wiped out for the good of the human race and I'm sick of all you supposed bad ass metal people thinking its not so bad maaan. Just let everyone do what they want. ,its cool. Fuck that. I'm not saying beat peoples doors in who go to church either. I know its basicly impossible to get rid of religon the way i WISH i could. Its just a pipe dream. But supporting it is not going in the right direction.
it all boils down to one fact. religion, references to religion, prayer, nostalgic vaguely religious sayings, all have no place within a public school.
i took an English course in high school and part of it was "the Bible Through Literature", and in my uneducated 18 year old ways, i fought against it based on this. the teacher made a good point to me about it, they weren't promoting it, they weren't displaying it for all to see, it was a class studying the impact of the Bible through historical and literary analysis. i had to elect the course, and the course outline was available at enrollment. it was a public school, but it wasn't on display, and ultimately the course further proved to me why i am against religion, but it was fascinating to study it from an objective perspective. that is vastly different than a posting in a traffic artery essentially blessing the school and all within it. again, it doesn't specify a religion, but it specifies a deity. and let's not dance around the fact that "heavenly father" is a direct reference to Abrahamic religion, and i don't mean Islam. but even then, subjective perception isn't a basis for concrete litigation. this is larger than that, "that" being the blessing of a school under religion, no matter how vague it is.
again, as lame as anonymous trolling is, Samefag brought a good counter argument, and lent a lot to this discussion. it could have been a bit more intelligent by avoiding the name-calling, but still, a good argument is a good argument.
If anything, mandatory comparitive religion at junior and senior level in HS. Rip that Band-aid off quick, before all the poor christfags have to go to college and get their tiny minds blown.
teaching comparitive religion at a young age is the best way. other people's faith is not my concern. i don't care about the good of the human race. of course dogma is poison, what a waste of energy to forcibly change minds. should dogma be wiped out, yes, will it, no. you can only eradicate faith by promoting education and knowledge. frank, "supposed bad ass metal people" dude please, most people's ideas are trash no matter what you call them. basically impossible to get rid of religion the way you wish it could, yeah, it's already been tried many, many times.
again, as lame as anonymous trolling is, Samefag brought a good counter argument, and lent a lot to this discussion. it could have been a bit more intelligent by avoiding the name-calling, but still, a good argument is a good argument.
You fucking bastard, right when I was about to call you a vagina.
teaching comparitive religion at a young age is the best way.
Agreed. Firstly, give kids the tradition/faith they get from family. But since so many of us ARE atheists or such these days, they should secondly get a good overview of a little of everything else.
Kinda like when I was a kid. We were raised cathlick, but there would be the t.v. episode where the cathlick main character would make friends with some filthy jew kid, so you'd get an entertaining little education of how Hanukkah and penny-pinching works.
Whether this should come from the school is debatable. I don't trust the public school system to something that can be such an important part of a kids life potentially. Like, if you want your kid to learn music, do you let them take the music class in public school, or do you sign them up for private instrument lessons?
I think it's almost unfair to a kid to say "I don't believe, so I will raise you not to believe". They have to learn it somewhere, to be fair.
It's already being wiped out. People are too busy crying to notice.
Had a VERY enlightening conversation with a limo driver and funereal director at a funereal recently. We might not see it, but boy do they! Most people these days eschew the dogmatic traditions of old now. They said that their business is heavily effected by it (moreso the driver), and that even the wedding industry has seen the same effect.
Far more people now than ever skip the churches and marry/bury their dead without them.
i dislike the word "atheist", i don't consider myself atheist, agnostic, antitheist, freethinker, secular, secular humanist, or any nonsense label. i think my stance is far deeper, and far more intelligible than a store-bought sticker.
teaching comparitive religion at a young age is the best way.
Agreed. Firstly, give kids the tradition/faith they get from family. But since so many of us ARE atheists or such these days, they should secondly get a good overview of a little of everything else.
Kinda like when I was a kid. We were raised cathlick, but there would be the t.v. episode where the cathlick main character would make friends with some filthy jew kid, so you'd get an entertaining little education of how Hanukkah and penny-pinching works.
Whether this should come from the school is debatable. I don't trust the public school system to something that can be such an important part of a kids life potentially. Like, if you want your kid to learn music, do you let them take the music class in public school, or do you sign them up for private instrument lessons?
I think it's almost unfair to a kid to say "I don't believe, so I will raise you not to believe". They have to learn it somewhere, to be fair.
I don't think a comparison to music education is necessary, public or private, it's a study of "the arts". Comparative myth is a well-studied subject that falls under history and sociology. It's a failure of a public school if it can't teach mythology from a historical/sociological perspective.
post by Samefag at Jan 30,2012 3:29pm
I get you ark, but I was thinking more like a non-denominational CCD for kids that parents can ELECT to send kids to. Keep it out of the schools altogether.
teaching comparitive religion at a young age is the best way.
Agreed. Firstly, give kids the tradition/faith they get from family. But since so many of us ARE atheists or such these days, they should secondly get a good overview of a little of everything else.
Kinda like when I was a kid. We were raised cathlick, but there would be the t.v. episode where the cathlick main character would make friends with some filthy jew kid, so you'd get an entertaining little education of how Hanukkah and penny-pinching works.
Whether this should come from the school is debatable. I don't trust the public school system to something that can be such an important part of a kids life potentially. Like, if you want your kid to learn music, do you let them take the music class in public school, or do you sign them up for private instrument lessons?
I think it's almost unfair to a kid to say "I don't believe, so I will raise you not to believe". They have to learn it somewhere, to be fair.
I don't think a comparison to music education is necessary, public or private, it's a study of "the arts". Comparative myth is a well-studied subject that falls under history and sociology. It's a failure of a public school if it can't teach mythology from a historical/sociological perspective.
the christian bible should be taught in school, just for the reason that everything you ever read in western civ, western lit, american lit, ect... is going to allude to it. No matter what you or how many laws are passed you are never going to strip Christianity from American culture, its too prevalent in our heritage, art, literature ect...
