BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

On 11 Nov 2004 17:18:08 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

It is not illegal if the majority of public school attendees want to
cite a prayer in school.

Anyone can pray in school, at any time. No problem.

According to the courts, (but what do they know?) it becomes illegal when that
prayer becomes an official part of the school day.

Define "official"? Is it official if the teacher makes time for it?

Why do you fundies

I'm not a "fundie" I don't even attend regular church services.

think its necessary to throw your religion in everybody
else's face? Would God refuse to listen to you if you gathered all the kids
who felt they needed to pray, aloud, (and in the schoolhouse) in the gymnasium,
or the auditorium, or the lunchroom 15 or 20 minutes before the beginning of
the actual schoo ldayandprayedNothingstopsyourkidsfromdoingsonow.
No, what you guys all seem to want is for the official school day to begin with
not only the Flag Salute (which is appropriate in a public school) but the
Lord's Prayer as well.

And if that's what the majority wants, then they should be allowed to
have it, despite those who cannot respect this and want to bitch about
it.

If you think the majority of kids want to pray before the actual school day
begins, fine. Give th emapalceandanopportunitytodoso.Evenifonlyone
kid wants to pray before school begins, give him or her an opportunity to do
so. Just don't make a religious ceremony part of the official, taxpayer funded,
school day.

If that's what the majority wants..... I know I'm sounding like a
broken record here, but you keep missing the point.

And before you get all cranked on about the majority, ask yourself how you'd
feel if you were a Protestant Christian in a neighborhood where the "majority"
of residents were Catholic Christians. Would you be excited about somebody
handing your kid a rosary at the beginning of first period and then instructing
the class to repeat, "Hail, Mary, full of grace......."? Sure, your kid could
make a big nasty scene by refusing to go along.....but how many kids will just
buckle under to peer pressure and pray as instructed?

If it bothered me that much, I'd move to an area which more closely
matched my own beliefs. Otherwise I'd either go with the flow out of
respect, or politely refuse. I would NOT make a scene about it, or
demand that it be stopped.

Do you feel its the job of the school to teach religious values, or is that the
responsibility of the family and the church.

I don't believe it's the job of the school to "teach" religious
values, but I do believe that they owe the majority of the citizens to
provide a place and time for the observance of prayer if that is what
the majority wishes.

Does the answer to that question change when the school is teaching *your*
specific religious values rather than some others?

Not applicable.

If the local town wants to put up Christmas decorations and the
majority of the town is in agreement, then they should be allowed to
do so.

Once again, your opinion is different than the top legal minds in the US, but
what do they know?

They can be biased. That's why the left is so punch drunk about the
possibility that Bush might bring in more conservative value judges
into the supreme court.

A town can put up snowmen, Santa Claus,
candy canes, and even decorated trees.
The government cannot establish or promote a religion, and at the point where
the decorations begin broadcasting a religious message about angels, virgins,
and etc the decorations are promoting an offshoot of Christianity.

They can certainly accommodate it if that's what the majority of
residents want. It is THEIR town after all. The government answers to
the people you know not the other way around.

Christmas isn't really Christian. It was never celebrated by Jesus

Well duh! It was the day of his birth. He couldn't very well,
celebrate it. It became something of a celebration after his death as
did most of Christianity. When he was alive, he never considered
himself as anything more than a Jew with a different attitude.

But all that is irrelevant. The majority of the people have their idea
of what Christmas is and how they want to celebrate it. So who has the
right to deny that?

To the degree that Christmas isn't Christian, I could go along with the manger
display in city park. Unfortunately, Christmas becomes Christian when 99% of
the Christians in town assume that it is.

You accept the majority rule on this but would deny that same majority
the right to observe it as they saw fit?

You probably have some people in your town who think it's extremely religious
to dance naked around a pole on the First of May.

No, not to the best of my knowledge. Then again, when some people
drink too much, they're bound to do that on any given day.

Would you support the
expenditure of town funds to put up the pole? Would you say it's fine to allow
this celebration to
use up all the space in the public park? How about naked people dancing around
the pole for several weeks prior to May First, as it is the "season"? Should
you send your kids to school naked on May First?

It that's what the majority of the residents wanted, then that's what
should be.

From a legal perspective, in a nation where
we have equal rights under the law, what makes the manger display and the
loudspeakers blaring "Hark the Herald Angels Sing" in City Park any more
acceptable than a bunch of naked people pounding on drums and dancing around a
pole or a fire?

There is no difference if that's what the majority wants.

If 80% of a graduating class of a typical suburban high school is
white, then it stands to reason that the top candidates for college
admission would follow this demographic. Should a portion of the
majority of this class be denied their earned place in the college
admission because of some slanted minority "quota"?

College admissions officers should not be allowed to inquire about the race of
an applicant. When an application is received,
the data should be transferred into a file where the sudent is referred to by a
number, so there could be no subconscious impulse to approve or disapprove
Tyrone Johnson, vs. Heather Goldstein, vs. Loc Nguyen Hoy or Miguel Hernandez
based on assumptions one might make based on name alone.

I agree, but that is not the case. I assume you are aware of the
"number" system in use in MIchigan?

The law offers "equal" protection, not "special" protection for those
in the minority.

Yes, yes! The minority cannot prevent the majority from doing something it has
a legal right to do. By the same token, the majority cannot simply presume a
right that is unconstitutional, and the majority cannot prevent the minority
from exercising any and all legal rights.

I have presented nothing which is unconstitutional nor anything which
has not been part of our tradition for over 2 centuries. The minority
has legal rights, but as a matter of weight, their rights should not
outweigh the rights of ther majority

They can choose to either play the game, watch from the sidelines,
start their own game, or go home. But they have no right to make the
game stop.

If the game is unconstitutional, it has no right to begin in the first place
and should be stopped.

What is unconstitutional, and how is it so?

How about a lynching, Dave? There have been plenty of instances where the
"majority" of citizens in a town have supported lynchings. Should those who
oppose lynching just

Lynching is addressed by law, and as such is an illegal practice. On
the other hand, years ago people were burned at the stake, and the law
condoned it.

The law and society's viewpoints are relative to the times in which
they are in common practice. It was once legal to own slaves. While
the practice is considered appalling today, the feeling was not that
way 200 years ago.

Consequently, it is disingenuous to present an act from the past, and
judge it with the viewpoint of today, unless that same act is still
valid and followed.

If your point is that Christmas traditions are old and outdated, you
could make that case, but I believe the majority of the citizens would
disagree with you. The percentages may not be as overwhelming as they
once were, but they're still a majority.

That's why Bush is still president, and not just on 4 out of the 7
days with Kerry taking up the other three.

Dave