Give 'em an inch...

[jimnyc]

**This is really getting out of hand! Since when is there a "Law" stating separation of church and state?**

''God Bless the U.S.A.,'' a patriotic anthem made popular by singer Lee Greenwood during the 1991 Gulf War, ignited a war of words between some parents and officials when it was learned an upcoming school performance would substitute the words ''I love'' for 'God bless.''

The show's directors decided to substitute ''I love the U.S.A.'' during rehearsals for the performance at Pacifica High School in Ventura County, California, when someone on the committee suggested the word ''God'' might be a ''problem.''

When angry parents found out about the change, some withdrew their children from the 'Cinemagic' program, while others wrote protesting e-mails to the school board and district leaders, reports the Ventura County Star.

''It's OK for you to say 'God,' '' parent Kaila Kaden told the paper. ''It's not a religious issue. It's a freedom of speech issue.''

The show's sponsor, the Pleasant Valley Education Foundation, provides support for bands, speech programs and choruses. Because it's not officially affiliated with the district, committee members decided to check with school officials to make sure the word ''God'' would not violate laws separating church and state.

The school board OK'd the original lyrics.

According to the paper, School Board President Ron Speakman said the situation was a misinterpretation of state law and district policy. While schools cannot advocate any certain religion, Speakman said laws do not forbid reference to God. ''It was a misguided attempt to be politically correct, and it has been rectified,'' Speakman said.

Committee chairwoman Peggy Smith said words have been changed before in the show's three-year history.

''We didn't want a lawsuit," Smith told the Star. "It could lead to the demise of Cinemagic and arts programs ... because of one word."

Sheila Myers was among the parents who wrote e-mails disagreeing with the words "I love the U.S.A."

She says she was moved to tears when she heard the children sing the song with "God" in the lyrics again.

''It just really moved me,'' she told the Star. ''It's one area in our lives not being tainted by political correctness.''

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35998

 

[jimnyc]

The Myth of the Separation of Church and State

Anytime religion is mentioned within the confines of government today people cry, "Separation of Church and State". Many people think this statement appears in the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution and therefore must be strictly enforced. However, the words: "separation", "church", and "state" do not even appear in the first amendment. The first amendment reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." The statement about a wall of separation between church and state was made in a letter on January 1, 1802, by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut. The congregation heard a widespread rumor that the Congregationalists, another denomination, were to become the national religion. This was very alarming to people who knew about religious persecution in England by the state established church. Jefferson made it clear in his letter to the Danbury Congregation that the separation was to be that government would not establish a national religion or dictate to men how to worship God. Jefferson's letter from which the phrase "separation of church and state" was taken affirmed first amendment rights. Jefferson wrote:

I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. (1)

The reason Jefferson choose the expression "separation of church and state" was because he was addressing a Baptist congregation; a denomination of which he was not a member. Jefferson wanted to remove all fears that the state would make dictates to the church. He was establishing common ground with the Baptists by borrowing the words of Roger Williams, one of the Baptist's own prominent preachers. Williams had said:

When they have opened a gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the Church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broke down the wall itself, removed the candlestick, and made his garden a wilderness, as at this day. And that there fore if He will eer please to restore His garden and paradise again, it must of necessity be walled in peculiarly unto Himself from the world...(2)

The "wall" was understood as one-directional; its purpose was to protect the church from the state. The world was not to corrupt the church, yet the church was free to teach the people Biblical values.

http://www.noapathy.org/tracts/mythofseparation.html

 

[Moi]

The stupidity will never end. Why choose a song, written by someone else, that you want to sing only to change the lyrics? I couldn't care less if these people sang the song or not but if you choose the song, sing the words.

There are tons of patriotic songs with no reference to a deity to choose from- what was their need to bastardize someone else's tribute to his country.

Finally, as I digress, liberal arts should be removed from public schools anyway. What a waste of resources.

 

[DKSuddeth]

The stupidity will never end.

It will someday. I have to be embarassed for my fellow liberals who continue to press this issue. It is such a non issue. The bottom line is if you don't want to say it, don't say it. otherwise, leave well enough alone. There are more important things to deal with.

liberal arts should be removed from public schools anyway. What a waste of resources.

what should we have moi? nothing but war college, military schools for training and tactics? finance and economic schooling?

really, there needs to be a balance. Otherwise we, as a people, will never grow or progress.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
It will someday. I have to be embarassed for my fellow liberals who continue to press this issue. It is such a non issue. The bottom line is if you don't want to say it, don't say it. otherwise, leave well enough alone. There are more important things to deal with.



what should we have moi? nothing but war college, military schools for training and tactics? finance and economic schooling?

really, there needs to be a balance. Otherwise we, as a people, will never grow or progress.

I didn't say that arts should not be taught, I said that they should not be the responsibility of the public school system. I do not think it's one of the responsibilities of government to give someone exposure to their hobbies such as music, art, theatre and sports? The public school system is failing at the fundamental levels: reading, writing, arithmetic, computer studies, etc. It's seems quite wasteful to spend money on arts and sports when our children aren't graduating with skills enough to get jobs.

 

[Psychoblues]

It's been my experience that employers are not really looking at non-critical skills such as "art, theatre and sports" but on more fundemental measures as "commitment, goal-objectives and abilities to achieve. To intimate otherwise is unwise and un-called-for.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
It's been my experience that employers are not really looking at non-critical skills such as "art, theatre and sports" but on more fundemental measures as "commitment, goal-objectives and abilities to achieve. To intimate otherwise is unwise and un-called-for.

To not utilize your brain while posting is what's uncalled for.

And where did you gain such valuable experience, towing cars from the local trailer parks?

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
It's been my experience that employers are not really looking at non-critical skills such as "art, theatre and sports" but on more fundemental measures as "commitment, goal-objectives and abilities to achieve. To intimate otherwise is unwise and un-called-for.

I don't think it's a secret that the children attending public schools today are being graduated with less than proficient skills such as reading, writing and arithmetic not to mention such job related skills as computer readiness, typing or even basic life skills like being able to make a budget and/or balance a check book. There are literally thousands of studies being conducted every day whose results indicate that our public schools are failing our children.

Additionally, most graduates of inner-city and poor community schools quite rightly believe that they are not going to be accepted at top colleges. I don't blame them or think that they are incapable of learning. Schools with no books, computers, internet connections or even simple typewriters are too common. A government which diverts funds to art, theatre, music or sports is doing their citizens a disservice. Are these children to relegate themselves to being drug dealers or flipping burgers if they have the natural intelligence and desire for more? Are they to resign themselves to feeling inferior in today's work place because they weren't afforded an education which allowed them to continue with higher education?

Contrary to the utopia that I wish our country was, today's employers have myriad places from which to get their workers. Those with real skills, work experience and the ability to prove themselves will rise to the top. Those that don't, too frequently, fall to the bottom and become society's problem forever.

Since there are limited resources for schools, it's my opinion that those resources are better served equipping each student for success...as an administrative assistant, as a book keeper or to continue on to higher education.

 

[Psychoblues]

I can't help but agree, Moi

But at this juncture I reserve further comment. Some dig it, some don't. I will say, however, that THERE ARE NO MORE IMPORTANT THAN OUR KIDS. Some intend to help them and some intend to hinder them. It's not just a political choice.

 

[Isaac Brock]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
It's been my experience that employers are not really looking at non-critical skills such as "art, theatre and sports" but on more fundemental measures as "commitment, goal-objectives and abilities to achieve. To intimate otherwise is unwise and un-called-for.

Rubbish, even as a student of one of the most practical and pragmatic studies, engineering, I can't help but disagree with you. Math, Writing, History and Science allow you to develop the fundamental skills to relate and work in the world and they are no doubt important. However it is Sports, Arts, Music and Literature truly allow you to appreciate the world and the part we play in it.

If it weren't for my days in the school band and my experiences as a competitive rower, I daresay, my life would be terribly blands.
Literature allowed by the experience times in which I could never be a part.
Music allowed me to express myself and be expressed to in a universal language that is understood by all members of the human race regardless or race or relgion.
Sports allowed me to find out how strong and how devoted I can be and always tested my limits. It also taught me how to stay fit and eat healthy.

I daresay the liberal arts are essential in well rounded human being. To say otherwise is live in an Orwellian world devoid of passion. I say this not belittle or insult, but because I feel our education is leaning to hard away from what defines us as unique individuals into an education that makes us, well, drones.

 

[Psychoblues]

Your comments are well taken, at least by me, Isaac Brock. The dittoheads that comprise the large majority of the republican party might not, probably not, take you as credible. There is a reason for that, I just haven't figured it out yet.

Even centuries of intellectual thought and examination hasn't been able to define or begin to explain the phenomenon other than to say it is akin to some false belief in the supernatural and a certain comfort that is found in particular discrimination from those that one might consider "less" than one self. Even here in this most wonderful United States Message Board, the ridicule and discrimination runs rampant.

Don't you agree?

 

[Isaac Brock]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Your comments are well taken, at least by me, Isaac Brock. The dittoheads that comprise the large majority of the republican party might not, probably not, take you as credible. There is a reason for that, I just haven't figured it out yet.

Even centuries of intellectual thought and examination hasn't been able to define or begin to explain the phenomenon other than to say it is akin to some false belief in the supernatural and a certain comfort that is found in particular discrimination from those that one might consider "less" than one self. Even here in this most wonderful United States Message Board, the ridicule and discrimination runs rampant.

Don't you agree?

Indeed. Though with two caveats. I do not believe the majority of republicans are "dittoheads". As a liberal (at least apparently I am in the American sense, in Canada I would be centrist), I certainly believe much of their ideology is regressive and at times reactionnary, but as always, ideology is open to debate and is not enough to label a person less intelligent.

As for the discrimination on the board, i might say agree that this board certainly has an rightist edge, which intrigues me to no end. However you will find that if you post with a neutral tone and civility, that your posts, even if they are liberal such as mine, can be met with an intelligent and polite response. You might even have some fun.

 

[Psychoblues]

Actually, I've already found that, Isaac. But I'm a hot-head as I notice there are several in this midst, including the moderator. But I'm not disillussioned.

My signature line says as much as I can say to you. Dems Gotta Keep On Truckin'

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
Rubbish, even as a student of one of the most practical and pragmatic studies, engineering, I can't help but disagree with you. Math, Writing, History and Science allow you to develop the fundamental skills to relate and work in the world and they are no doubt important. However it is Sports, Arts, Music and Literature truly allow you to appreciate the world and the part we play in it.

If it weren't for my days in the school band and my experiences as a competitive rower, I daresay, my life would be terribly blands.
Literature allowed by the experience times in which I could never be a part.
Music allowed me to express myself and be expressed to in a universal language that is understood by all members of the human race regardless or race or relgion.
Sports allowed me to find out how strong and how devoted I can be and always tested my limits. It also taught me how to stay fit and eat healthy.

I daresay the liberal arts are essential in well rounded human being. To say otherwise is live in an Orwellian world devoid of passion. I say this not belittle or insult, but because I feel our education is leaning to hard away from what defines us as unique individuals into an education that makes us, well, drones.

Literature, arts, music and sports are important- agreed. I just don't agree that it is the responsibility of the government to hand them to you on a silver platter, no questions asked. This thread started out highlighting a school district's focus on music; focus so pointed that I can't help but wonder why the school district decided to spend so much time and money on such an issue. It's indemic to the system here in the US- are schools so well able to educate their students that all the needs of the students are being met regardless of this waste? I do not believe so and it is my belief that the government, and by extension the schools, has no business supporting music, art, literature, etc. when the vast majority of its students are receiving substandard education.

This "dittohead" conservative (not republican in political sense) believes that those pursuits are not what government $ should be paying for. Gone are the days when only rich white men are educated in this country. If I had to choose between a well rounded, well educated population and a population that is not, my choice would be clearly for the former. However, that is not the choice. There is not an infinite supply of money and too many people being less educated in the things that would bring them the ability to be self sufficient (and, with that, the ability to pursue those other endeavors).

Again, my issue isn't whether studying those things is worthwhile, my issue is whether the government should be paying for them.

 

[Psychoblues]

<Again, my issue isn't whether studying those things is worthwhile, my issue is whether the government should be paying for them.>

Therein lies a fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans. While Democrats hold that as a nation we should ascertain that all are afforded an equal and verifiable opportunity for education, the republicans desire that only those that "can afford it" be educated. Who is the government if it is not the "people"?

We won't answer or solve this problem tonight. It's been going on now for several hundred years. My marker goes down for the education of the populace. I think it improves the lives of all of us. Some disagree.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
<Again, my issue isn't whether studying those things is worthwhile, my issue is whether the government should be paying for them.>

Therein lies a fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans. While Democrats hold that as a nation we should ascertain that all are afforded an equal and verifiable opportunity for education, the republicans desire that only those that "can afford it" be educated. Who is the government if it is not the "people"?

We won't answer or solve this problem tonight. It's been going on now for several hundred years. My marker goes down for the education of the populace. I think it improves the lives of all of us. Some disagree.

Herein lies one of the few instances in which I will resort to name calling: you, sir, are an idiot. You continue to ignore the basic tenents of post and stereotype anyone with whose opinion you do not agree, in the harshest of terms. Furthermore, you also haven't a clue what the "Republicans" as you call them desire rather you take a few examples and hedge your bets. Most probably because you can't get past labeling them to even understand what they say and don't have the maturity to have a conversation instead of a soapbox derby.

Truly, there is a difference between a government affording all of its citizens the pursuit of happiness and treating them equally and guaranteeing that they have every whim, desire and benefit. And, should you snap out of your liberal reverie, you might actually see that some convervative formulas might even work for the benefit of the majority (no system works for everyone) and allow for a progression of that benefit.

- Wasting money deliberating on whether or not a song should be sung
- Debating whether a nativity scene, menorah or whatever should be displayed
- Suing school districts for ridiculous reasons
- Caving in to the demands of unions

All these "liberal" actions have WASTED the very dollars and resources that could have been used to educate our people.

Lastly, as I begin to stop seeing red, you should remember a very important message: you may not agree with the way in which the other person believes things should be done but you ill-serve your argument by attributing the direst of motives to their behavior. Most republicans, and I believe, democrats want what's best for this country. Not all their ideas will secure that goal, but I should think someone who claims such an intelligence could get beyond labels and see that two people can want the same thing - a better, stronger country and more opportunity for its citizens - and go about it differently.

 

[jimnyc]

Hear, hear, Moi!

He 'claims' to be a veteran, and that he was some sort of politician. The only qualification he has is slinging bullshit around as if it were truth.

With so many military awards and friends in government as he so often points out, he is no relegated to driving a tow truck.

 

[5stringJeff]

Moi, excellent post!!! :clap1: :clap1: :clap1: