School Prayer...

[zappasguitar]

Then you need to tell that to my English professor, she says otherwise.

You are wrong, you were proven wrong, and now all you can do is claim I am wrong. Too bad, so sad... you lose again jarhead!

Hey everybody...hear that??

Dix consulted with his old English teacher. she said he is right...so that's the end of the debate!

Of course, if she's one of the educators responsible for Dix's pitiful level of education, then her word shouldn't be trusted in the first place.

 

[NOVA]

Sure, one cant use a public forum, paid for by the government, (graduation ceramony) to promote religen. But if the kids wanted to sit and pray silently in the seats.. no problem. If they wanted to gather before of after the ceramony and pray... no problem.

Jarod says....
Byrds Amendment prohibited schools from writing a set prayer....

Reagans Amendment allowed schools to write a set prayer.

That was the issue and the reason for the two sepperate Amendemnts.

So, because Reagans Amendment does not mention schools writing prayers, you insist that it IS ALLOWED....

Byrd's amendment...You claim you agree with it....

Constitutional Amendment - Declares that: (1) to secure the people's right to acknowledge God according to the dictates of conscience, neither the United States nor any State shall establish any official religion, but the people's right to pray and to recognize their religious beliefs, heritage, or traditions on public property, including schools, shall not be infringed; and (2) neither the United States nor any State shall require any person to join in prayer or other religious activity, prescribe school prayers, discriminate against religion, or deny equal access to a benefit on account of religion.

By your logic...Byrd states that the people's right to pray and to recognize their religious beliefs, heritage, or traditions on public property, including schools, shall not be infringed.

Then you claim...
Sure, one cant use a public forum, paid for by the government, (graduation ceramony) to promote religen. But if the kids wanted to sit and pray silently in the seats.. no problem. If they wanted to gather before of after the ceramony and pray... no problem.

Which is it...you can't have it both ways...

Byrd didn't say anything about praying silently

Byrd didn't say anything about a "public forum", only public property, including schools

Byrd didn't say anything about the venue being paid for by the government or not paid for by them....

Obviously, even you see the conflict above and how your claims of omission in Reagans Amendment don't hold water...

IS this where you start to tapdance?

 

[Timshel]

I am sure Dixie and Bravo fully supported the teacher in Burlington who lead children in singing praises to Obama.

 

[NOVA]

I am sure Dixie and Bravo fully supported the teacher in Burlington who lead children in singing praises to Obama.

The liberal brainwashing of school children is now the norm, from grade school well into college....
-----------------------------------------------

I have not expressed a stand on the issue one way or the other....other than to say I really don't give a shit..

My sole purpose in this thread was to point out the obvious mistake in Jarods very first post stating Reagan was trying to mandate prayer in schools....
As the thread evolved, Jarod expressed support for Sen. Bryds Amendment proposing essentially the same points as Reagan and what he says is now the law...pointing out the conflicting issues....

My concern is with the Courts rulings...and the far reaching prohibitions imposed on the citizens by torturing one simple, 10 word phrase in the First Amendment..."Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"....

Thousands of words have been written in recent years to explain to the people what these 10 simple words mean...personally I call it liberal bullshit....what was meant to prohibit establishing a state religion is now used as club to promote a liberal agenda....

 

[Timshel]

The liberal brainwashing of school children is now the norm, from grade school well into college....
-----------------------------------------------

I have not expressed a stand on the issue one way or the other....other than to say I really don't give a shit...

Alright, then maybe just Dixie. The right argues that teachers should be free to espouse religious views but complain bitterly when they express political views. They have even gone so far as to propose legislation against political biases entering the classroom.

http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=188

 

[NOVA]

Alright, then maybe just Dixie. The right argues that teachers should be free to espouse religious views but complain bitterly when they express political views. They have even gone so far as to propose legislation against political biases entering the classroom.

http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=188

You mis-read my post.. not expressing a stand on the issue one way or the other, refers to the establishment clause...my concerns are as stated.
-----------------------
The right no more wants teachers to espouse religious views than you do.... and ALL OF US should complain bitterly when they express political views.

If legislation against political biases entering the classroom is what it takes, then so be it....the brainwashing of young children to religious views, political views and yes, even sexual tolerance, should be outlawed.....some things have always been and should remain the right of the parent to raise their children as THEY see fit, not as government sees fit.....

 

[Timshel]

You mis-read my post.. not expressing a stand on the issue one way or the other, refers to the establishment clause...my concerns are as stated.
-----------------------
The right no more wants teachers to espouse religious views than you do.... and ALL OF US should complain bitterly when they express political views.

If legislation against political biases entering the classroom is what it takes, then so be it....the brainwashing of young children to religious views, political views and yes, even sexual tolerance, should be outlawed.....some things have always been and should remain the right of the parent to raise their children as THEY see fit, not as government sees fit.....

The much easier solution is to allow for effective school choice.

But, the argument became about whether school employees are permitted to lead prayers. I don't see how one can object to politics and sexual tolerance being promoted in the classroom and not religion.

 

[NOVA]

The much easier solution is to allow for effective school choice.

But, the argument became about whether school employees are permitted to lead prayers. I don't see how one can object to politics and sexual tolerance being promoted in the classroom and not religion.

Not anyone I know wants school led prayer or religious doctrine introduced in the class room....no Catholic wants their kids taught Baptists doctrine...no Jew wants their kids taught Christian doctrine, no Christian or Jew wants their kids taught Muslim doctrine, etc.....
so lets not state your biased beliefs as fact....

Politics, sex, religion...none of it is appropriate in school unless that is the actual subject matter (topic) being taught, and then it must be presented in a FAIR and BALANCED manner....

 

[Timshel]

Not anyone I know wants school led prayer or religious doctrine introduced in the class room....no Catholic wants their kids taught Baptists doctrine...no Jew wants their kids taught Christian doctrine, no Christian or Jew wants their kids taught Muslim doctrine, etc.....
so lets not state your biased beliefs as fact.....

Whatever. Dixie is arguing that school employees have a right to lead students in prayer. I have heard numerous people argue this very position.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Whatever. Dixie is arguing that school employees have a right to lead students in prayer. I have heard numerous people argue this very position.

I think you are being a bit dishonest with regard to what I said. An employee of a school doesn't give up their constitutional rights in order to do their job. IF they feel compelled to say a prayer, and the students wish to voluntarily participate, I don't see where the Constitution prohibits that, but I do see where it guarantees the right to do it. You've not really shown otherwise, you just keep trying to paint an image that doesn't exist, no one is advocating mandatory prayer, or establishing of religion.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Hey everybody...hear that??

Dix consulted with his old English teacher. she said he is right...so that's the end of the debate!

Of course, if she's one of the educators responsible for Dix's pitiful level of education, then her word shouldn't be trusted in the first place.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Typical of this clown, he's railing about something totally unrelated to the thread topic. Acting like it somehow pertains or has relevance!

Pinhead #1 poses an absurd question...
It is proven his question is absurd...
He continues by insisting that Reagan proposed his absurdity...
It is proven he doesn't know what he's talking about...
He argues that MANDATORY means VOLUNTARY!
It is proven beyond any doubt, he has no clue of what he's talking about...

Pinhead #2 enters and tries to save Pinhead #1...
He argues that MANDATORY means VOLUNTARY!
Is called for the second time in the debate on the stark difference...
Argues that the thread topic is regarding MANDATORY prayer!
An absurd and ridiculous argument that no one has made!

Then he wants to jump over and change subjects!
...QUICK, before we realize how "clever" he has been here!

post #77 and #89 makes you out to be a fool and a liar.....as does the chronological order as to how I disprove the rantings of your lapdog Bravo makes this latest maudlin bilge of yours just pathetic. So since you can't logically, factually or honestly discuss the issue, I suspect you'll just fall back on the "pinhead" or "chicklet" or "clarabell" or the other antiquated insults that make you and your fellow neocon parrots feel good. Carry on.

 

[Timshel]

I think you are being a bit dishonest with regard to what I said. An employee of a school doesn't give up their constitutional rights in order to do their job. IF they feel compelled to say a prayer, and the students wish to voluntarily participate, I don't see where the Constitution prohibits that, but I do see where it guarantees the right to do it. You've not really shown otherwise, you just keep trying to paint an image that doesn't exist, no one is advocating mandatory prayer, or establishing of religion.

If a teacher has a first amendment right to lead their classroom in prayer then how is it that a soldier may not simply exercise their right to free speech and acknowledge their sexuality?

The teacher doesn't give up their rights anymore than anyone else. But none of us have a constitutional right to lead our coworkers in prayer at work. If I were to decide that it was appropriate to lead a conference call in prayer, I would get reprimanded or fired.

The student/teacher relationship is not one of equals. It places a certain authority on the teacher. Even with an adult, many reasonable people in the subordinate position are going to perceive pressure to volunteer. Now, add in the peer pressure that would be present in a classroom environment. Consider that the child is compelled to attend school. Then, change the adult to a child who is far less resistant to suggestion and who the law has long held has a limited capacity to consent/volunteer to anything.

The rights of the teacher to practice religion are not infringed by prohibiting them from leading a class in prayer. That position is ridiculous.

In order to protect against abuse of the relationship between teacher/student, school/student or state/student safeguards are necessary.
In order to protect the first amendment rights of the students safeguards are necessary.

You want to create some huge gray area where a teacher can lead this sort of prayer, but not one like that. I mean I doubt you would approve of a prayer such as...

Lord, please show mercy on the heathens who fail to praise you. Their punishment will be handed out in hell.

... It would be virtually impossible to enforce any limits on the teacher or protect the students from abuse.

 

[Jarod]

Not anyone I know wants school led prayer or religious doctrine introduced in the class room....no Catholic wants their kids taught Baptists doctrine...no Jew wants their kids taught Christian doctrine, no Christian or Jew wants their kids taught Muslim doctrine, etc.....
so lets not state your biased beliefs as fact....

Politics, sex, religion...none of it is appropriate in school unless that is the actual subject matter (topic) being taught, and then it must be presented in a FAIR and BALANCED manner....

I want my kids taught all that doctrine listed above... Just not as fact, but as historical relics that are usefull in understanding the world we live in.

 

[Jarod]

Your right to swing your fists ends where my nose begins.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

If a teacher has a first amendment right to lead their classroom in prayer then how is it that a soldier may not simply exercise their right to free speech and acknowledge their sexuality?

The teacher doesn't give up their rights anymore than anyone else. But none of us have a constitutional right to lead our coworkers in prayer at work. If I were to decide that it was appropriate to lead a conference call in prayer, I would get reprimanded or fired.

The student/teacher relationship is not one of equals. It places a certain authority on the teacher. Even with an adult, many reasonable people in the subordinate position are going to perceive pressure to volunteer. Now, add in the peer pressure that would be present in a classroom environment. Consider that the child is compelled to attend school. Then, change the adult to a child who is far less resistant to suggestion and who the law has long held has a limited capacity to consent/volunteer to anything.

The rights of the teacher to practice religion are not infringed by prohibiting them from leading a class in prayer. That position is ridiculous.

In order to protect against abuse of the relationship between teacher/student, school/student or state/student safeguards are necessary.
In order to protect the first amendment rights of the students safeguards are necessary.

You want to create some huge gray area where a teacher can lead this sort of prayer, but not one like that. I mean I doubt you would approve of a prayer such as...

Lord, please show mercy on the heathens who fail to praise you. Their punishment will be handed out in hell.

... It would be virtually impossible to enforce any limits on the teacher or protect the students from abuse.

First of all, let me say, there is this huge gaping difference between a teacher leading school prayer in the classroom, as part of a MANDATORY daily agenda, and a school employee leading a VOLUNTARY prayer. Until you can be honest enough to recognize this huge difference, we can't have anything resembling a civil discussion on the issue. You are determined to draw an example that doesn't exist in the argument and a position I haven't taken, because you have to draw an absurd abstract to support your viewpoint. You know, beyond any doubt, that what I have said is absolute truth, and is reasonable, and you can't find any argument with the truth, so you have to make it into something you can attack and be right on. I'm done playing this game, have fun with it!

 

[Jarod]

First of all, let me say, there is this huge gaping difference between a teacher leading school prayer in the classroom, as part of a MANDATORY daily agenda, and a school employee leading a VOLUNTARY prayer. Until you can be honest enough to recognize this huge difference, we can't have anything resembling a civil discussion on the issue. You are determined to draw an example that doesn't exist in the argument and a position I haven't taken, because you have to draw an absurd abstract to support your viewpoint. You know, beyond any doubt, that what I have said is absolute truth, and is reasonable, and you can't find any argument with the truth, so you have to make it into something you can attack and be right on. I'm done playing this game, have fun with it!

There is a difference, and both are unconstitutional.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

There is a difference, and both are unconstitutional.

No, the 1st Amendment is abundantly clear, prohibiting the free exercise of religion is a violation of it. Until you can present some evidence to the contrary, you can suck my ass, because you're just plain WRONG as usual, Jarhead!

 

[Jarod]

No, the 1st Amendment is abundantly clear, prohibiting the free exercise of religion is a violation of it. Until you can present some evidence to the contrary, you can suck my ass, because you're just plain WRONG as usual, Jarhead!

Not allowing a school employee to break out into prayer at any time they choose is not the same thing as prohibiting the free exercise of religion. The constitution also prohibits limits on free speach, but the school employee will get fired for repitedly screaming "fuck you" at students in the halls.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Not allowing a school employee to break out into prayer at any time they choose is not the same thing as prohibiting the free exercise of religion. The constitution also prohibits limits on free speach, but the school employee will get fired for repitedly screaming "fuck you" at students in the halls.

Wait a damn minute moron! Stop changing what was said! Where did I say a school employee could "break out into prayer at any time?" Why do you have to CHANGE my argument to one I didn't make? Does it just not dawn on you that you keep doing this?