uh, yanceducat, there seems to have been some misunderstanding about this case. It is not a question of whether or not one is allowed to pray to God, or whatever. Anyone can pray anyway they want whenever they want, with one important exception:

Teachers who play an instructive role in the lives of students at public schools cannot and should not publicly lead prayers that teach those who accept Jesus will be saved and all others are damned. This was the issue in question, because the school was leading exclusively Christian prayers on occasions such as graduation.

Especially since graduation speeches are specifically didactic, advising graduating seniors on how to live their lives, a spee...

uh, yanceducat, there seems to have been some misunderstanding about this case. It is not a question of whether or not one is allowed to pray to God, or whatever. Anyone can pray anyway they want whenever they want, with one important exception:

Teachers who play an instructive role in the lives of students at public schools cannot and should not publicly lead prayers that teach those who accept Jesus will be saved and all others are damned. This was the issue in question, because the school was leading exclusively Christian prayers on occasions such as graduation.

Especially since graduation speeches are specifically didactic, advising graduating seniors on how to live their lives, a speech that specifically states Christianity is the only valid religion crosses a very reasonable line.

And aren't you shocked by the venom that the community had for the Jewish family that dared object?

On a more personal note, I believe that evangelism and proselytization are disgusting transgressions, fundamentally dehumanizing the victim, and under no circumstances morally excusable.

Very few religions have the tenant that their followers must impose their religion on others. This is almost always invented by petty demagogues and other mechanisms of unjust authority.

Scenario:

Yanceducat, I'm a Buddhist. So every day I light candles and burn incense, and leave an offering of water and flowers before a statue of the Buddha, representing my devotion to the principles of enlightenment, purification, and generosity.

I am also a teacher. What if I taught in a classroom your child attended? What if they asked me why? And then i told them because there was no god and no heaven or hell, but that after we die we are born again as humans, and that by making offerings and prayers in the name of the Buddha, we can stop people from suffering.

Wouldn't you want to stop my from praying in front of your child? Wouldn't I have crossed a line, as a public teacher, by i...

Scenario:

Yanceducat, I'm a Buddhist. So every day I light candles and burn incense, and leave an offering of water and flowers before a statue of the Buddha, representing my devotion to the principles of enlightenment, purification, and generosity.

I am also a teacher. What if I taught in a classroom your child attended? What if they asked me why? And then i told them because there was no god and no heaven or hell, but that after we die we are born again as humans, and that by making offerings and prayers in the name of the Buddha, we can stop people from suffering.

Wouldn't you want to stop my from praying in front of your child? Wouldn't I have crossed a line, as a public teacher, by instructing your child in religious principles contrary to your own? Would I be tolerant to do so? Or intolerant for attempting to impose my beliefs on your family?

I bet you would be just thrilled if you're kid came home one day and set up a little statue and started praying to it, and when you asked why, he or she said because the teachers at school do that, and it helps stop suffering in the world.

Would you defend what you have called my "freedom to pray" or would you demand that I be fired? Or would you and your buddies burn a cross on my lawn?

Yes you did.You said that you are offended by someones prayer and that you approve of force of law to shut the person up.

Excuse me? But where and when did I say such a thing?

What 2 different things? In any case, it is not about school or church; it is about people who want to silence a view by force of law simply because they are emotionally afraid of that view, and claim their fear should trump the other persons freedom.

I see no one making that claim. The article points to actual harassment, not imagine fear. This is a real problem. The problem is that the school should not be in the business of promoting religion, ANY religion. Thats what Sunday school is ...

Yes you did.You said that you are offended by someones prayer and that you approve of force of law to shut the person up.

Excuse me? But where and when did I say such a thing?

What 2 different things? In any case, it is not about school or church; it is about people who want to silence a view by force of law simply because they are emotionally afraid of that view, and claim their fear should trump the other persons freedom.

I see no one making that claim. The article points to actual harassment, not imagine fear. This is a real problem. The problem is that the school should not be in the business of promoting religion, ANY religion. Thats what Sunday school is for, and churches. If you like to pray before a meal, as an individual you have that right, even in the cafeteria, I can not and I would not abridge that right, regardless of my feelings pro or con. But when its the INSTITUTION, one that should not by Constitutional imperative be enforcing a religious view, I have to stand up and disagree, even if I happen to share that particular view. What can be done to others today can be done to me tomorrow.

Graduation is a religious exercise.

That's a novel idea, but pure poppy-cock. Princeton wordnet defines religion as:

a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny;

Graduation may be a quasi-religious exercise in the same way as not stepping on crack assures your mother's back won't be broken, but it is in no way a genuine religious exercise. The power that controls the destinies of those graduating, as far as the school is concerned, is the force of the education completed which the ceremony marks; an education which is wholly man-made.

It is an entirely unnecessary event but it serves as a social molding and bonding event. [/quot...

read more»

Graduation is a religious exercise.

That's a novel idea, but pure poppy-cock. Princeton wordnet defines religion as:

a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny;

Graduation may be a quasi-religious exercise in the same way as not stepping on crack assures your mother's back won't be broken, but it is in no way a genuine religious exercise. The power that controls the destinies of those graduating, as far as the school is concerned, is the force of the education completed which the ceremony marks; an education which is wholly man-made.

It is an entirely unnecessary event but it serves as a social molding and bonding event.

In this, I will agree.

It transcends school and the purposes of school as a learning facts and skills institution.

To the contrary, it means nothing tangible in the marketplace. I will not argue that the function of education is to obtain employment, but no employer ever asks "Did you attend the ceremony?", but rather "What school conferred your degree?" It is, in fact, the school celebrating itself and nothing more.

Christian prayers cannot hurt non Christians unless the non Christian is personally insecure about his own beliefs or feels that as a member of less popular group, he cannot compete and so wishes an alternative way to destroy the power of the group he is not a member of.

Which is precisely the reason for not having any sanctioned prayer in public schools. The function of a school is to allow any individual to grow to maximum potential. Defining religious boundaries within the social structure can unknowingly cripple any single individual.

Banning prayer from schools has done vastly more harm to society as a whole than prayer has ever caused. The world is NOT a better place since prayer has been forced out.

Pure opinion with no factual basis to support it. Opinion is great, just remember that it is just that.

Let's say that it is a diverse class. What if a member of the Church of Google wants to see a ceremonial search conducted, too, as recognition of the all knowledgeable God Google. Would you sit still for that? Would you be afraid to hear that view? When the Church of the Spaghetti Monster requests time for their view to be heard, will you make time for them, too? When the native Americans request time for a drum ceremony, will there be time for that? Where will the line be drawn, and by whom?

You can't brush these views under the rug just because they are minority views, or because you don't believe them. They don't believe in your "God Daddy In The Sky", either, but must afford respect for...

Let's say that it is a diverse class. What if a member of the Church of Google wants to see a ceremonial search conducted, too, as recognition of the all knowledgeable God Google. Would you sit still for that? Would you be afraid to hear that view? When the Church of the Spaghetti Monster requests time for their view to be heard, will you make time for them, too? When the native Americans request time for a drum ceremony, will there be time for that? Where will the line be drawn, and by whom?

You can't brush these views under the rug just because they are minority views, or because you don't believe them. They don't believe in your "God Daddy In The Sky", either, but must afford respect for his praise in a public setting because YOU think it is OK for that voice to sing. Bullshit.

The only way to be "fair" is by not acknowledging any group, other than the group the day is about, the graduates. Educational achievement is the order of the day, not holy spiritual mumbo-jumbo.

If Christianity was really being "suppressed", we'd see churches being closed down, restrictions on the publication and sale of bibles and things like that. What we have here is a matter of debating the correct context for religious expression. In church, at home, in a parochial school, it's fine - that's where it belongs.

Private and parochial schools exist for a purpose - to provide an alternative to secular education. Parents who want their children to receive their religious indoctrination at school should simply avoid the public schools. I find it odd that so many people who complain about government interference in their lives still expect the state to conduct religious activities...

If Christianity was really being "suppressed", we'd see churches being closed down, restrictions on the publication and sale of bibles and things like that. What we have here is a matter of debating the correct context for religious expression. In church, at home, in a parochial school, it's fine - that's where it belongs.

Private and parochial schools exist for a purpose - to provide an alternative to secular education. Parents who want their children to receive their religious indoctrination at school should simply avoid the public schools. I find it odd that so many people who complain about government interference in their lives still expect the state to conduct religious activities and legislate personal morality, two of the most personal aspects of human life.

Few children have the maturity to question the validity of what their teachers tell them; even fewer have the temerity to question what they're told. Those who do are ostracized, bullied and otherwise persecuted - these days, possibly even medicated into docility.

Furthermore, it's a fiction that prayer is banned in public schools. It's allowed, but only as a private activity. Any child who wants to pray can - privately. The prohibition only applies to having prayers led by teachers or other school officials, which implies institutional sponsorship. As one wit (whose name I cannot recall) said, "As long as there are exams, there will be prayer in schools".