If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Indiana Daily Student)   ACLU sues school because boy who chose not to participate in reading class feels left out. Maybe the Old Testament gives him nightmares?   (idsnews.com) divider line 997
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

18271 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Oct 2006 at 12:19 PM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



997 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-10-18 02:25:07 PM
That is a false binary choice. Christians should not be "[doing] good things" in pursuit of an eternal reward. Rather they should be doing what God commanded them because of the sovereignty of God, not because they believe that doing those things will get them into heaven. In fact, the Bible is explicit that just performing good acts and being good is not what will get you into heaven. Rather, Paul notes that Christians should do good acts because it is what God commanded.

You ask which is morally superior. Yet, by comparing the morality of the two, you implicitly adopt a standard of 'goodness' with which to compare the two. However, the definition of what is good and how to measure it is different between an atheist and a Christian.


Okay, then let me restate:

Assuming an opportunity for theft with no possibility of anyone ever finding out, who is morally superior: The Christian who does not steal because God told him so, or the Atheist who does not steal because he empathises with the victim?

If that's not a good enough question for you, then I give up. :)
 
2006-10-18 02:25:20 PM
Bender The Offender

I don't have my NRSV in front of me right now, but I'm pretty sure the text was explicit in so far as stating the bears were female. Get your Bible straight.

*coughs*

Adultery, that's a killin'
Incest, that's a killin'
Fornication, that's a killin'
Rape, that's definitely a killin' (1)
Having the ghey, that's a killin' (2)
Problem child, that's a killin'
Sabboth working, yup, that's a killin'
Sex on period, that's a killin'

And my personal favorite. Making false prophecies, that's a killing. Just think how few televangelists would be around today if that one were enforced.

(1)Only if the women is engaged, otherwise she has to marry you
(2) Only if both of you are men, lesbians you're safe
 
2006-10-18 02:25:20 PM
untrustworthy: I think the intent of the founding fathers was pretty clear, and the Supreme Court seems to agree.

Is it?

They didn't teach the bible in public schools in the time of our founding fathers?

Why is there a senate chaplain? Do you think if the senate formed with today's interpretation of the 1st amendment they'd create such a post?
 
2006-10-18 02:25:31 PM
According to some of you folks it should be okay for me to go into the school cafeteria during lunch time, sit on the floor, and start chanting nam myo ho renge kyo.
 
2006-10-18 02:25:39 PM
i dont have any problem with parents deciding what to put inside their kids head during school. Life punishes dumbasses who teach the wrong thing. I have heartburn with taxing me to pay for your dumb ideas about education. Leave me alone, let me keep my money to spend on my own kids education, the way i and like minded engineers and entrepreneurs and mathematicians and scientists like. in fact i hope u waste your kid's mental energy on memorizing scripture (excuse me "Scripture", the "Holy Words" from a "Burning Bush" some guy saw after "Wandering Lost In The Desert for 40 Years!"); that way my kids have an unfair advantage in the job market and in life. thats exactly what i want.

hey! you kids get out of my school!
 
2006-10-18 02:25:51 PM
fuhfuhfuh

There were income taxes in existence before 1913

And the Supremes kept chucking them. Including Lincoln's after the war ended.
 
2006-10-18 02:26:00 PM
Tyee: (i hate you. yes, you.) Your profile, who is creepy?

oh wow! i love it when people try and insult me for my profile! wow! thats so cool! you are so cool to come up with something that amazing instead of something relevant! wow!
 
2006-10-18 02:26:13 PM
heap: hmmm...well...apply his question to how you have phrased it.

is someone morally superior for doing good things because they feel that is what god commands, or simply doing it because it's a good thing to do?

i'm not asking how an atheist or a christian would answer that question, i'm curious how you would.

just kinda struck me ya never really answered, and it's a somewhat interesting question


First, I really hate the term "morally superior." I really am trying not to avoid the question, but, as a Christian, I think that it is very hard to say one person is "morally superior" than another considering the sinful nature of us all. Furthermore, for there to be a morality with which to judge between the two, there must be a source of that morality. I believe that the source of that morality is God. With that in mind, God commanded us to follow his laws and instruction, thus your choice boils down to the question of, which is more moral (i.e. following the laws that God commanded us to follow): (i) doing something God commanded because you obey his sovereignty or (ii) doing something God commanded, not because you respect or follow God in anyway, but because you have your own reasons for doing so. By my phrasing it should be obvious that I think that (i) is the "morally superior" action.
 
2006-10-18 02:26:27 PM
What about if Muslims need to take time out to pray to Mecca, will they stop that too?

Christians are not forbade prayer.
 
2006-10-18 02:26:30 PM
Catracks

The question?
I really don't understand why a lot of people in this and similar threads call anyone with a religious belief a "fundie."

It's a little more than ignorant.


and the answer
I'll pray wherever the fark I want to and so will my kid.

You feel somehow you're particular magic sky fairy gives you a moral right to violate established laws. Idiot fundie.
 
2006-10-18 02:26:33 PM
untrustworthy: Bush has packed the Supreme Court

Bush appointed more Justices than vacancies? Weird, I thought FDR was the only one to do that.
 
2006-10-18 02:27:05 PM
Are you pasty-skinned?

No, sorry if it doesn't fit your stereotype, I spend way to much time outdoors for that.

And guess what, I smoke, drink, lust and sin in many other ways too.
 
2006-10-18 02:27:14 PM
untrustworthy
That's not the point. The point is that my tax dollars are going towards sponsorship of unconstitutional religious studies.

Bummer. Can't teach much about History or Government or Law without mentioning religion. It's funny that people pretent that this country and western civilization in based on the Judeo-Christian heritage.
 
2006-10-18 02:27:17 PM
FlashLV: What about if Muslims need to take time out to pray to Mecca, will they stop that too?

If they stop class for an hour and ask little Timmy why he's not praying to Mecca too, then yes.
 
2006-10-18 02:27:42 PM
Magorn: Here go read this:
Findlaw's annotation on First amendment Cases concerning "released time programs"
then read the acutal cases linked inthe footnotes.


The cases you cite are not the same. The students are not being compelled to go to the class. Attendance is not being kept by the school. I've already agreed that having the teachers take permission slips is wrong. What are you blathering about?

"Access of Religious Groups to Public Property.--Although government may not promote religion through its educational facilities, it may not bar student religious groups from meeting on public school property if it makes those facilities available to nonreligious student groups"

Exactly the case here.

"Similarly, public schools may not rely on the Establishment Clause as grounds to discriminate against religious groups in after-hours use of school property otherwise available for non-religious social, civic, and recreational purposes"

It makes no mention of classes that take place during hours or free time. If no classes are being taught, it may even very fall under the category of "after hours". (Although it would be a stretch.)

Scooby is it really to much to ask that you have a basic understanding the subject before you go lecturing people on the proper interprestation of a Constitutional amendment?

Asked and granted. I have a very good understanding of the English language. Despite all popular opinion, the constitution was written in English. Those words mean something. The words in the constitution are quite plain. My argument is that the current interpretation is wrong.
 
2006-10-18 02:28:24 PM
Another one: I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. (Thomas Jefferson, as President, in a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 369)
 
2006-10-18 02:28:54 PM
Maccus


Why can't people be more tolerant of other people's beliefs.
I will pray for all you Farker's out there who are so angry.
May God grant you inner peace.


I am quite tolerant of others beliefs, not real angry and any inner peace I am enjoying is due to my personal choices in life and you can pray till you are blue in the face and it has absolutely no effect on me or my life. What is so hard to understand about that ? So go and pray to your favorite god all you want to ease your own guilt.

And if your praising your god works so well, I am missing out on the tangible results. To much war and starvation and torture and disease going on in this world plus, all the priests molesting little boys. So, STFU and have a nice day
 
2006-10-18 02:28:57 PM
wylkyn

You left part of the question out. Will the person you steal from be directly hurt by your theft?

Regardless your question is flawed because you are equating emotion with morality. Doing the right thing is an act of will, not emotion. Making a moral decision on how you feel about something is an irrational way to decide.

Emotions by there very nature are irrational and an insufficient reason to do good or bad.
 
2006-10-18 02:29:40 PM
Chameleon

uhghhh...Thanks for your support?
 
2006-10-18 02:29:46 PM

They didn't teach the bible in public schools in the time of our founding fathers?


Public schools in the time of our founding fathers were operated by the Church, so yes, they did.
Public schools run by the state didn't happen until the early 1900s.

The more you know.
 
2006-10-18 02:30:20 PM
smeegle: According to some of you folks it should be okay for me to go into the school cafeteria during lunch time, sit on the floor, and start chanting nam myo ho renge kyo.

That is okay, if you go to the school. But if you are not a student and go in to chant to the kids, encouraging them to join you, no. And if you stop classes to gather up kids to chant with you, then also no.
 
2006-10-18 02:30:45 PM
Catracks: Bummer. Can't teach much about History or Government or Law without mentioning religion. It's funny that people pretent that this country and western civilization in based on the Judeo-Christian heritage.

I never said you couldn't mention religion. I said you can't teach one specific religion over another. This class is a farking bible study, not a class on religious studies.
 
2006-10-18 02:30:46 PM
smeegle According to some of you folks it should be okay for me to go into the school cafeteria during lunch time, sit on the floor, and start chanting nam myo ho renge kyo.

That is okay isn't it by law? Unless you mean you, you literally mean you and that could be trespassing? ;)
 
2006-10-18 02:30:48 PM
Tyee: And guess what, I smoke, drink, lust and sin in many other ways too.

you did sya that you would take anal from jesus, so i think all of that was really implied.
 
2006-10-18 02:30:48 PM
FlashLV What about if Muslims need to take time out to pray to Mecca, will they stop that too?

They are not trying to stop the practice. Did you RTFA? In fact they said specifically "We're not attacking religious education release programs. They can be constitutional if they're done correctly."
 
2006-10-18 02:31:35 PM
Chameleon We're definitely on the same page
 
2006-10-18 02:32:33 PM
Lord_Baull: Public schools in the time of our founding fathers were operated by the Church, so yes, they did.

Usually when people say "the Church", they mean the Roman Catholic Church, which most certainly would *not* be having Bible study, since it was still doctrine at that point that it was sinful for lay people to read and interpret the Bible.
 
2006-10-18 02:32:53 PM
2006-10-18 02:22:07 PM SoxSweepAgain

Lighten up Francis. The spittle foaming out of your mouth really doesn't impress anyone.
 
2006-10-18 02:33:10 PM
Sunny Ray: uhghhh...Thanks for your support?

Yeah, sorry to out you, but I'm always highly amused that no matter how many times it happens, people still fall for it in the next thread. In fact, probably most of them still will fall for it in this one.

I also appreciate that usually you don't really say anything offensive, but still manage to get folks riled up. You have a gift, my friend.
 
2006-10-18 02:33:18 PM

oh wow! i love it when people try and insult me for my profile!


I made no attempt to insult you.
I merely suggested that you should hate less and in turn maybe live longer and be happier.
 
2006-10-18 02:33:21 PM
Bender The Offender
"You feel somehow you're particular magic sky fairy gives you a moral right to violate established laws. Idiot fundie."

Again. I am not a fundementalist. When you get offended, you tend to call names and behave in quite a rude manner. Calling God a "magic sky fairy" is intolerant and combative.

Quietly aying grace before a meal at school is not the establishment of a state religion. I can't even begin to imagine why such an act would launch people in to ranting and name calling.
 
2006-10-18 02:33:28 PM
wyckedsmile Yes I read the article. I don't agree that the ACLU should be getting involved with this.

Chameleon That's if you believe what this lady is saying. I doubt they asked her son and I would like to see proof that they asked him.
 
2006-10-18 02:33:53 PM
Kavik

Thanks for taking the time to rationally explain your take on my posts. It is appreciated. However, saying something like, "I will pray you", is not like gettin' all up in somebody's grill and threatening them bodily harm. Seriously.
 
2006-10-18 02:34:07 PM
The parents of the kids in the prayer class don't seem to mind. The class isn't required of all the students. This community is being proactive and trying to instill morals into their children. And yes, religion is a tool that can be used to teach a society's morals. Not the only method but an effective method. I'd much rather prefer this case then having these kids grow-up and going Colombine on us because the parents never bothered to teach right from wrong.

After reading the article its obvious to me the members of this particular community feel its important that this be part of the curriculum for most of the kids. They have also been sensitive enough to have an opt-out option for parents who feel thus.

Of course they missed one minor detail. God forbid a human being make a mistake.

Let ye who hath not maketh a mistake casteth the first stone.
 
2006-10-18 02:34:13 PM
junkevil

if JESUS came to earth and asked both of you for anal, would you do as the LORD JESUS commands or go to hell?

Is he giving a reach around?
 
2006-10-18 02:34:24 PM
Ajakk: I really am trying not to avoid the question, but, as a Christian, I think that it is very hard to say one person is "morally superior" than another considering the sinful nature of us all.

sort of a thin line there, tho...if you don't believe your religious path as superior morally than others...why walk it? i jive on the aversion to the phrase, tho.

By my phrasing it should be obvious that I think that (i) is the "morally superior" action.

kinda why i was pushing you for an answer, really - kinda highlights what i was thinking when i noticed you hadn't answered the first time. it'd be almost counterproductive for a follower of a faith to not see that as the basis for morals, and thus superior simply by that standard.


if i had to answer it...i too would hedge at even the concept of 'moral superiority' as it kinda implies a morality scoreboard.

i'm kinda of the opine that if either (i) or (ii) is the case, and both paths lead you to not being a dick...i don't see the cause of that moral choice as the defining weight in the value of that moral choice.

if you have empathy because jesus says empathy is Rad or if you have empathy because you just have empathy...i'm not seeing a superior stance. i certainly understand why you do, however.
 
2006-10-18 02:34:32 PM
So, potential instructional time is wasted so a special religious service can be provided for some students, all on the taxpayers dime.

The ACLU is more than justified in this.
 
2006-10-18 02:34:57 PM
Anyone care to guess what the vote was in the last SUPREME COURT case on this issue that so many of you are pointing at? 5-4

So anyway..the issue isn't as settled as you think. With the new conservative slant on the Supreme Court don't be shocked if there is a reversal of sorts.
 
2006-10-18 02:34:59 PM
The ACLU getting involed with their anti-christian agenda.

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

http://www.google.com/search?q=ACLU+defends+church&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&c lient=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official
 
2006-10-18 02:35:10 PM
ACLU is clearly right on this one. I can't belive the nerve of red state fundies to ram this crap through and think they can get away with it.
 
2006-10-18 02:36:07 PM
untrustworthy Bush has packed the Supreme Court

Bush is well within his right to do so.
 
2006-10-18 02:36:17 PM
SacriliciousBeerSwiller

Actually the article states that the groups rents the space...your taxes are actually lower because of the rents.
 
2006-10-18 02:36:47 PM
img66.imageshack.us
 
2006-10-18 02:36:57 PM
mcostas ram this crap through

What?
 
2006-10-18 02:37:11 PM
My point here FlashLV, is that in a public school there should be a clear line betwixt church and state. Not all tax payers are Christian and not all tax payers are Buddhists therefore public schools should not be indulging in any religious activity.
It is clear and should be clear to all Americans that once the government favors one religion over another, then certain people remain opressed and the government is vulnerable to influence by religious factions. Now as you know history demonstrates what blood bath and ugliness this leads to.
 
2006-10-18 02:37:16 PM
Leonard Washington: Is he giving a reach around?

the lord shall not giveth the holy reach around.

its all about him, you see.
 
2006-10-18 02:38:31 PM
Scoobys pawn

All they had to do to avoid the appearance of impropriety is release all the kids from school and allow all who want to go to the nearest religious site. Heck all they really had to do was ship all the kids out the door and across the street. Had they done this the ACLU wouldn't have a case because all kids are released from school and attending off-campus on their own time at their own (or their parents) discretion.

Catracks "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Studying religion in a public school doesn't seem to be making laws respecting establishment of religion. On the other hand, making laws to prevent these things seems to me to be prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

I'll pray wherever the fark I want to and so will my kid.


Feel free to pray, personally, whenever you desire. I do not want the schools teaching any version of any religion to my kid. I'll teach my kid about religion at home (and/or Sunday School). Since we can assume this is a State run school, that's where they crossed the line by bringing Bible Study to it. The school is paid for by the state and therein is being supported by the taxpayers. I think that most of the Catholics and Lutherans in my area would shudder at my idea of bible study. I really know I don't want my kid learning their lacksadasical (and hypocritical) values.

Non-Denominational, Christian, Muslim, Santeria, whatever you pick, teach your dang kids at home. Pray when you want, where you want. Invite the government to get involved and we end up with a state run religion, a cure worse than any religious disease. You want proof? Look at Iran or just about any major religious theocracy. Then ask if you'd be considered a member of the right religion, because Christianity is pretty diverse and it won't take long after it becomes "the" religion in the US for the bloodletting on each other to start.

(He's not a real Chrisitan, he's a Lutheran, not an Evangelical like me! -- just an example for you farkwads who think it'd be ok. Don't believe me, look at how Sunni and Shiite clash...)
 
2006-10-18 02:38:34 PM
I just don't understand why it's necessary for the school day to be interrupted so that a portion of the class can leave the building and get religion. The school day takes up 6 or 7 hours during the day, leaving 17 or 18 hours outside of school to do other things, such as learning about their faith.
 
2006-10-18 02:39:01 PM
FlashLV: That's if you believe what this lady is saying. I doubt they asked her son and I would like to see proof that they asked him.

What, like a tape recording? A notarized affadavit? Frankly, I do believe this lady. Have you ever been to Indiana? If you aren't white and Christian, people treat you like you have three heads.

Hell, I grew up in liberal hippieville, and I constantly had adults asking me why I didn't go to church, why I didn't want to say grace, etc. In Indiana? I damn well believe that the teacher put pressure on this kid to attend Bible study.
 
2006-10-18 02:39:23 PM
Good Lord - kids are in school for what - 40 hours a week? They can't go to church on their own time? They gotta interrupt school for it? Somehow us adults manage to work 40 hours a week - with a lot more to do outside of work - without requiring our employers give us time off with pay to go to church whilst the atheists play solitare.

In my HS, they'd have Fellowship of Christian Athletes, See You At the Pole, and devotional groups of various denominations. All on school grounds, and I was fine with all of it. Because they happened before/after school hours.

We also discussed and read from the Bible in class, during class time. But it was in a scholarly/literary environment, NOT a prostelytizing one. That's fine, too.

Folks, the ground rules haven't changed in 30-odd years, and probably aren't gonna change anytime soon. The sooner you quit beating you head against the wall, the better off you'll feel.
 
Displayed 50 of 997 comments

First | « | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report