Louisiana Student Sues School Over Prayer

[Meriweather]

That's what I just said. Therefore don't conflate the two.

Shrug. I'm not the one conflating anything. I am saying there is nothing wrong with offering religious philosophy as an elective. This is very different from praying, preaching, or treading on the imaginary "state mandated religion".

 

[Taz]

That's what I just said. Therefore don't conflate the two.

Shrug. I'm not the one conflating anything. I am saying there is nothing wrong with offering religious philosophy as an elective. This is very different from praying, preaching, or treading on the imaginary "state mandated religion".

Religious philosophy = mind control through force if necessary.

That's really all you need to know. A+

 

[Windparadox]

`
In academic circles, Religious Philosophy (which doesn't exist as such) is called; The Philosophy of Religions...plural. It studies many different religions; Aztec, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Islamic, Jain, Jewish, Sikh. etc. Not just ONE religion. Public prayers are NOT a part of that teaching curriculum.
`

 

[featherlite]

That's what I just said. Therefore don't conflate the two.

Shrug. I'm not the one conflating anything. I am saying there is nothing wrong with offering religious philosophy as an elective. This is very different from praying, preaching, or treading on the imaginary "state mandated religion".

Religious philosophy = mind control through force if necessary.

That's really all you need to know. A+

A religious philosophy elective class does not equal mind control through force. It might, only if a diversity class on transgenderism also count as mind control?

 

[Pogo]

That's what I just said. Therefore don't conflate the two.

Shrug. I'm not the one conflating anything. I am saying there is nothing wrong with offering religious philosophy as an elective. This is very different from praying, preaching, or treading on the imaginary "state mandated religion".

Once again --- "offering religious philosophy as an elective" is in no way the issue here. Never has been.

 

[featherlite]

Go in your closet and pray.

Unfortunately, there is no one in your closet to teach religious philosophy.

Become a preacher and preach in a church. Public schools are not the place for prayers.

Actually PS is the place for prayer ( depending on your beliefs) but not to be"taught" in a class setting.

 

[Penelope]

Go in your closet and pray.

Unfortunately, there is no one in your closet to teach religious philosophy.

Become a preacher and preach in a church. Public schools are not the place for prayers.

Actually PS is the place for prayer ( depending on your beliefs) but not to be"taught" in a class setting.

How do you figure??

 

[Taz]

That's what I just said. Therefore don't conflate the two.

Shrug. I'm not the one conflating anything. I am saying there is nothing wrong with offering religious philosophy as an elective. This is very different from praying, preaching, or treading on the imaginary "state mandated religion".

Religious philosophy = mind control through force if necessary.

That's really all you need to know. A+

A religious philosophy elective class does not equal mind control through force. It might, only if a diversity class on transgenderism also count as mind control?

All religious philosophy boils down to my simple equation. I'm like the Einstein of Religion.

 

[featherlite]

Go in your closet and pray.

Unfortunately, there is no one in your closet to teach religious philosophy.

Become a preacher and preach in a church. Public schools are not the place for prayers.

Actually PS is the place for prayer ( depending on your beliefs) but not to be"taught" in a class setting.

How do you figure??

Meaning if a student wants to pray obviously that should be allowed, but it shouldnt be taught by the school. Your wording could be taken a couple different ways.

 

[Penelope]

Go in your closet and pray.

Unfortunately, there is no one in your closet to teach religious philosophy.

Become a preacher and preach in a church. Public schools are not the place for prayers.

Actually PS is the place for prayer ( depending on your beliefs) but not to be"taught" in a class setting.

How do you figure??

Meaning if a student wants to pray obviously that should be allowed, but it shouldnt be taught by the school. Your wording could be taken a couple different ways.

Establishment Clause

The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion.

Establishment Clause

Yes schools can teach about religions, but not teach religion.

Is it legal for students to pray in public schools?
Most states changed their statutes with regard to school prayer in order to comply with the 1962 Supreme Court ruling. Federal law required schools to permit only voluntary, silent, and non-disruptive prayer. ... But not all states changed their laws.
Details on State Prayer in Public School Laws - FindLaw

In my opinion this separation of church and state is not be honored.

 

[Pogo]

Go in your closet and pray.

Unfortunately, there is no one in your closet to teach religious philosophy.

Become a preacher and preach in a church. Public schools are not the place for prayers.

Actually PS is the place for prayer ( depending on your beliefs) but not to be"taught" in a class setting.

But indoctrinating a school of robots with mandatory power-trip submission exercises isn't "teaching". It's just coercion. The point of it has nothing to do with religion or, in the case of the Pledge of Allegiance, with patriotism. It has everything to do with psychology. It's a tactic to create obedient robots who will not dare to question.

As one earlier poster called it ---- "contrary thought". Oh the horror. Well you can't have students or the public thinking for themselves if you're going to preside over a race of obedient robots. Hence the mandatory automaton gestures. Makes them nice and pliable so that when the time comes, they do what they're told.

What does all this lead to? Why is it important to resist robot-think? Here's why.

​

 

[BULLDOG]

Stop right there.

NOTHING was ever used to teach me about spirituality. I had to go get that on my own. Catholic school of the 1950s didn't teach spirituality. It taught conformity, it taught mob mentality, it taught robot thinking and you damn well better memorize that prayer. And the Pledge of Allegiance right there with it, a distinction without a difference.

I too went to Catholic School, not in the 1950s, of course, much later. Your experience was not my experience and certainly not the experience of teens today.

Here's my experience with spirituality, and why I don't like organized religion.

My mother married a dude who was a heavy duty Catholic, and for a year or two, I had to go to Catholic school, where we were FORCED to go to church services, as well as had morning prayers. Didn't much care for that kind of indoctrination.

Then............I became an orphan and lived with my Aunt and Uncle in Libby for a year, nobody was required to go to church or pray. Then, I lived for a couple of years with my Grandparents, and again............same thing. They just said to believe in God and try to be a decent person. Incidentally, during those times I was in public school. Yes, we said the pledge, but no, prayer was strictly left out of it.

Then...............I went into foster care for a few years, and every where I went the people would tell me that I now had to believe as they did, and if I didn't get "saved" (whatever that is), I was going to hell. That is a fairly heavy trip for a kid, especially when I've already been through several religions along the way.

Then, I ran away from foster care and spent my Senior year with my Grandparents. Again, was told just to believe in God and try to live a decent life.

When I got into the Navy, I was finally able to explore whatever kind of belief system I wanted. So, I started to check out everything from Judaic beliefs, to Taoism, to Buddhism, and believe it or not, a bit more of an investigation into Christianity.

Know what I learned? All religions are pretty much the same. They have a version of Heaven and Hell, they believe that what you do in this life determines what happens to you in the next, as well as all have some form of the Golden Rule. As a friend of mine once said, if I looked for where religions were similar rather than different, I'd get a hell of a lot further in understanding a Higher Power. He was right.

Now? I don't think that it is right to force a person to believe one way or the other, they should make up their own minds about who or what they believe in. I also believe that all paths lead to the top of the mountain. Doesn't matter if you come from the north, south, east or west, because eventually, you will get to the top of the mountain. Same thing with religion. Doesn't matter what vehicle you use to get to a belief in a Higher Power, just matters that you get one.

My belief system right now? I'm a Taoist, but also like to listen to Jewish rabbis and scholars. Not so much into listening to Christian preachers, because they seem to get too wrapped up in their dogma and forget what they are supposed to be talking about. Same thing with Muslims. I do like learning about Sikhism though, they seem to have a pretty good handle on things.

First, calling it "indoctrination" adds nothing to your argument, just displays bias. Clearly you were not indoctrinated, and clearly you did not care for the form of teaching. But all that aside...

The argument seems to be, "I did not like it, so no one else should have to endure it." There are many things we dislike as children, but the whole purpose of childhood is to be exposed to many different things. Then, as we mature, we tend to choose things in which to specialize.

For many, faith opens up a whole new world, with a whole new approach to life, and whole new experiences. To take this away from children would be like taking math from Einstein because half the children in his class were bored and did not care for math. I teach a lot of math. An amazing amount of students tell me their parents tell them, "Never used it once I graduated."

I am not saying that Religion should be a requirement. I am saying there should be no problem in offering it as an elective at middle school and high school levels.

Offering it as an elective has never been a real problem, has it? The problem is requiring it for those that didn't pick it for themselves.

 

[Penelope]

Stop right there.

NOTHING was ever used to teach me about spirituality. I had to go get that on my own. Catholic school of the 1950s didn't teach spirituality. It taught conformity, it taught mob mentality, it taught robot thinking and you damn well better memorize that prayer. And the Pledge of Allegiance right there with it, a distinction without a difference.

I too went to Catholic School, not in the 1950s, of course, much later. Your experience was not my experience and certainly not the experience of teens today.

Here's my experience with spirituality, and why I don't like organized religion.

My mother married a dude who was a heavy duty Catholic, and for a year or two, I had to go to Catholic school, where we were FORCED to go to church services, as well as had morning prayers. Didn't much care for that kind of indoctrination.

Then............I became an orphan and lived with my Aunt and Uncle in Libby for a year, nobody was required to go to church or pray. Then, I lived for a couple of years with my Grandparents, and again............same thing. They just said to believe in God and try to be a decent person. Incidentally, during those times I was in public school. Yes, we said the pledge, but no, prayer was strictly left out of it.

Then...............I went into foster care for a few years, and every where I went the people would tell me that I now had to believe as they did, and if I didn't get "saved" (whatever that is), I was going to hell. That is a fairly heavy trip for a kid, especially when I've already been through several religions along the way.

Then, I ran away from foster care and spent my Senior year with my Grandparents. Again, was told just to believe in God and try to live a decent life.

When I got into the Navy, I was finally able to explore whatever kind of belief system I wanted. So, I started to check out everything from Judaic beliefs, to Taoism, to Buddhism, and believe it or not, a bit more of an investigation into Christianity.

Know what I learned? All religions are pretty much the same. They have a version of Heaven and Hell, they believe that what you do in this life determines what happens to you in the next, as well as all have some form of the Golden Rule. As a friend of mine once said, if I looked for where religions were similar rather than different, I'd get a hell of a lot further in understanding a Higher Power. He was right.

Now? I don't think that it is right to force a person to believe one way or the other, they should make up their own minds about who or what they believe in. I also believe that all paths lead to the top of the mountain. Doesn't matter if you come from the north, south, east or west, because eventually, you will get to the top of the mountain. Same thing with religion. Doesn't matter what vehicle you use to get to a belief in a Higher Power, just matters that you get one.

My belief system right now? I'm a Taoist, but also like to listen to Jewish rabbis and scholars. Not so much into listening to Christian preachers, because they seem to get too wrapped up in their dogma and forget what they are supposed to be talking about. Same thing with Muslims. I do like learning about Sikhism though, they seem to have a pretty good handle on things.

First, calling it "indoctrination" adds nothing to your argument, just displays bias. Clearly you were not indoctrinated, and clearly you did not care for the form of teaching. But all that aside...

The argument seems to be, "I did not like it, so no one else should have to endure it." There are many things we dislike as children, but the whole purpose of childhood is to be exposed to many different things. Then, as we mature, we tend to choose things in which to specialize.

For many, faith opens up a whole new world, with a whole new approach to life, and whole new experiences. To take this away from children would be like taking math from Einstein because half the children in his class were bored and did not care for math. I teach a lot of math. An amazing amount of students tell me their parents tell them, "Never used it once I graduated."

I am not saying that Religion should be a requirement. I am saying there should be no problem in offering it as an elective at middle school and high school levels.

You mean teach religions not religion.

 

[Meriweather]

You mean teach religions not religion.

Not really. The basis would be philosophies, which would also entail culture and even some history. Religious writings would be studied, of course, but for philosophy, not doctrine.

 

[hobelim]

You mean teach religions not religion.

Not really. The basis would be philosophies, which would also entail culture and even some history. Religious writings would be studied, of course, but for philosophy, not doctrine.

funny how you strayed from defending prayer in school to debating teaching religious philosophy..

How do you feel about three card monte being taught in public school which would give them the experience to pursue a career in any religion?

 

[irosie91]

Quick question......................granted, she doesn't like saying the Lord's Prayer in public school, but what if she were Jewish or Buddhist, or possibly even Muslim? Saying that prayer would go against everything those faiths believe, because it's uniquely Christian.

If you want to have the schools say the pledge of allegiance, fine, it's part of our culture and country.

However..................being forced to sit in a room while people are praying something that you don't believe is b.s. What's even worse is the crap she's catching from other students for not wanting to pray.

The "lord's prayer" ----is kinda jewish-----unless it ends with "in the name of the father, son and "holey" ghost"
Muslims would object, however

 

[Penelope]

You mean teach religions not religion.

Not really. The basis would be philosophies, which would also entail culture and even some history. Religious writings would be studied, of course, but for philosophy, not doctrine.

Of course I would have no problem with that. A religion class should include all the main ones in a non bias way in college. I just think the parents and church or non church should be in charge of their children's religion and they have a right to send them to a parochial school if they wish.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I am saying there is nothing wrong with offering religious philosophy as an elective.

Or, more appropriately, study of religion itself. I am all for it. If kids are not just indoctrinated by religious dogma at home and church, but also taught about the orogins of the worlds religions and the plagiarism, bad ideas, and common themes, they will make more informed choices about their beliefs.