On 12 Nov 2004 09:00:59 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

I hope you aren't putting anyone who has a conservative bent into the
'fundie' category. Most of us are not 'fundies' and have no problem
with the illegality of requiring prayer in a public school.

Then the shoe doesn't fit, so don't try to wear it.

A couple of traits often exhibited by "fundies" can include:

1) insisting the the United States is a "Christian" nation.........(makes one
wonder whether professing Christianity will become a prerequisite for
citizenship or voting......)

This country was founded by and became the predominate home to
Christian following people. That's a matter of fact, not a statement
of religious intent. Sort of like saying that this is a English
speaking country. The predominate language is English. You can speak
something else, but it's not our problem if you can't follow the
majority.


2) an assumption that if the "majority" follows a certain faith then that
majority should be allowed to include formal religious ceremonies or
observations as part of secular government functions like public education-
without restriction from the constitution and without worrying about the equal
rights afforded to folks who believe differently.

Majority rules should apply in all public ceremonies or traditions
religious or otherwise. No town's traditions should be held hostage to
whims of the minority.


3) a generous concession that those not willing to recite a prayer are
absolutely free to suffer the embarassing stigma of the "odd man out" while all
the good little girls and boys who will be going to heaven recite some
impersonal, memorized, dogmatic statement and consider it a prayer.

That is entirely a perception issue. So now you would have the strong
arm of government preventing the majority from practicing their faith,
so that the minority can avoid feeling "uncomfortable"?


I know of some (Christian) folks who pray by handling live rattle snakes. They
theorize that if their faith is strong, they won't die from snakebite. Heck,
just think of the fabulous scene in your substitute math class when one of the
students pulls out a live rattler to get closer to God during the moment of
silence. Now that *would* get the school day off to a memorable start. :-)

Once can cite extreme examples of practically anything to try to make
a point. Such is known as a strawman argument. But that point isn't
relevant. In no case has prayer been denied based on the handling of
snakes or other off-the-wall practices. It was simply a matter of the
minority silencing the majority against the principle of majority
rules.


Dave

And equally the illegality of preventing prayer in a public school.

Can you give even a single example where a student has been prevented from
praying, as an individual, in a public school?

What is unconstitutional is for the teacher to lead the class in prayer as a
part of the school day, or to require that students recite a particular prayer
in unison.

Many schools even allow the formation of bible study groups that meet before or
after school. Outside of the normal school day, there isn't a problem with a
teacher serving as the advisor to such a group.

Most people who feel it's important for kids to pray in school and who believe
their kids will get a better education if everybody they are in school with
follows the same religion send their kids to private school. No problem. They
can pray for 45 minutes and study for 15 every hour, if they so choose.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
And equally the illegality of preventing prayer in a public school.

Can you give even a single example where a student has been prevented from
praying, as an individual, in a public school?



And prior to the ban can you cite any examples of students being forced to
pray against their will?

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:29:29 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:04:18 -0500, JohnH
wrote:


Who are you calling 'fundies'?

Anyone with traditional values and morals. A label the left hopes to
tarnish.


I hope you aren't putting anyone who has a conservative bent into the
'fundie' category. Most of us are not 'fundies' and have no problem
with the illegality of requiring prayer in a public school.

And equally the illegality of preventing prayer in a public school.

The prevention of prayer in a public school is an impossibility,
whether legal or not. The prevention of *public* prayer in *public*
schools is the correct thing to do.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On 12 Nov 2004 16:50:43 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

And equally the illegality of preventing prayer in a public school.

Can you give even a single example where a student has been prevented from
praying, as an individual, in a public school?

What is unconstitutional is for the teacher to lead the class in prayer as a
part of the school day, or to require that students recite a particular prayer
in unison.

Many schools even allow the formation of bible study groups that meet before or
after school. Outside of the normal school day, there isn't a problem with a
teacher serving as the advisor to such a group.

Most people who feel it's important for kids to pray in school and who believe
their kids will get a better education if everybody they are in school with
follows the same religion send their kids to private school. No problem. They
can pray for 45 minutes and study for 15 every hour, if they so choose.


All of the above is true. The "study for 15 minutes of every hour" is
probably wishful thinking.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

A couple of traits often exhibited by "fundies" can include:

1) insisting the the United States is a "Christian" nation........


This country was founded by and became the predominate home to
Christian following people.

Thanks for proving my point.



Sort of like saying that this is a English
speaking country

No, it isn't. A common language is different than a common religion. A common
language provides a means for sharing thoughts and ideas- a common religion
requires that all those thoughts and ideas will be essentially the same.



Majority rules should apply in all public ceremonies or traditions
religious or otherwise. No town's traditions should be held hostage to
whims of the minority.


Damn that pesky Consitution, anyway.
What were the founders thinking? Just because the colonial immigrants to
America came here to *escape* a society where the majority assumed religious
dominance, formalized relationships between church and state, and informally or
formally persecuted dissenters, what made them think the exact same system
wouldn't be a rousing success in another society?

That is entirely a perception issue. So now you would have the strong
arm of government preventing the majority from practicing their faith,
so that the minority can avoid feeling "uncomfortable"?

Does your faith require you to begin every gathering with a formal prayer, and
does your faith require you to pressure those who don't agree with your
doctrine to join in- or be ostracized by their silence? When you conduct a
sales or board meeting in the workplace, do you lead your fellow employees or
managers in prayer? When you take your family out to dinner in a restaurant, do
you all bow heads and say "grace" aloud for other diners to hear?

I wouldn't presume to know what sort of religion you personally observe, but
certain
Christian groups hold the personal teachings of Jesus to be just about the
final word in matters such as this. Were you a member of such a group, you
might be familiar with two passages from the sixth chapter of the book of
Matthew, where Jesus himself commented on "public" prayer. Here they are, in
case they are new to you:

"When you pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites, for they love to stand and
pray in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen
by men. Most certainly, I tell you, they have received their reward."

[remember that "the synagogues" were the
primary place of public instruction in those days]

"But when you make your prayer, go into your private room, and, shutting the
door, say a prayer to your Father in secret, and your Father, who sees in
secret, will give you your reward."

Suppose Jesus meant to say go into "your public classroom", rather than "your
private room"? Did he misspeak?

Then there is the example of Jesus praying in the garden prior to his arrest.
Not only did he go to an empty garden, in the middle of the night with just a
few close followers, but withdrew even from them to be by himself during
prayer.

These passages may be meaningless to you, and I apologize if it was
presumtptive to bring them up. As you insist that this is a Christian nation
and that all citizens should accede to the will of the numerical majority in
spiritual matters, I believe you are recommending that our kids be coerced into
reciting Christian prayers rather than those of another religion. If that's the
case, then the opinion of your major religious figure, (as recorded in the
Bible), would have some relevance in this discussion, would it not?

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:58:38 -0500, JimH wrote:


And prior to the ban can you cite any examples of students being forced to
pray against their will?

How about after the ban?

http://www.americanvoiceinstitute.or...y-June%207.htm

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:38:14 -0500, Dave Hall wrote:


This country was founded by and became the predominate home to Christian
following people. That's a matter of fact, not a statement of religious
intent. Sort of like saying that this is a English speaking country. The
predominate language is English. You can speak something else, but it's
not our problem if you can't follow the majority.

I don't buy it. You lump all Christians together like they are
homogenous, but that is not the case. While 52% of this country is
Protestant, they are not all the same religion. Roman Catholics are
another 24%, but according to this site, they are clearly not Christian.

http://www.born-again-christian.info/catholics.htm

Personally, I would think Catholics are Christian, but use the site to
show there isn't an easy way to lump religions together.

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:27:29 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:38:14 -0500, Dave Hall wrote:


This country was founded by and became the predominate home to Christian
following people. That's a matter of fact, not a statement of religious
intent. Sort of like saying that this is a English speaking country. The
predominate language is English. You can speak something else, but it's
not our problem if you can't follow the majority.

I don't buy it. You lump all Christians together like they are
homogenous, but that is not the case. While 52% of this country is
Protestant, they are not all the same religion. Roman Catholics are
another 24%, but according to this site, they are clearly not Christian.

http://www.born-again-christian.info/catholics.htm

Personally, I would think Catholics are Christian, but use the site to
show there isn't an easy way to lump religions together.

Hell, the Pope isn't infallible.

I'm infallible.

Just ask me.

Later,

Tom

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:27:29 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:38:14 -0500, Dave Hall wrote:


This country was founded by and became the predominate home to Christian
following people. That's a matter of fact, not a statement of religious
intent. Sort of like saying that this is a English speaking country. The
predominate language is English. You can speak something else, but it's
not our problem if you can't follow the majority.

I don't buy it. You lump all Christians together like they are
homogenous, but that is not the case. While 52% of this country is
Protestant, they are not all the same religion. Roman Catholics are
another 24%, but according to this site, they are clearly not Christian.

http://www.born-again-christian.info/catholics.htm

Personally, I would think Catholics are Christian, but use the site to
show there isn't an easy way to lump religions together.

I've never known a Catholic who considered himself a "born-again"
Christian. When I was a kid, I was taught that Christians encompassed
two main groups - Catholics and Protestants. Protestants were
Christians who had 'protested' against one or more teachings of the
Catholic Church and broken away to form their own.

As your site shows, some broke further away than others. Lutherans, as
an example, hold many of the same beliefs as Catholics, and their
services are much the same.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!