Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Log Cabin Democrat)   Christians are being persecuted in Arkansas again. Religious groups told they cannot preach during lunch at public schools any longer   ( thecabin.net) divider line
249
    More: Asinine, Ayn Rand, religious denomination, Freedom From Religion Foundation, New Life Church, middle schools, elementary schools  
•       •       •

3458 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Jan 2013 at 6:55 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



249 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
grimlock1972
2013-01-19 07:20:45 PM  
Good this type of prayer at school is a clear violation of the separation of church and state.

/i have no desire to live in a Christan version of a theocracy.
 
skullkrusher
2013-01-19 07:22:11 PM  

grimlock1972: Good this type of prayer at school is a clear violation of the separation of church and state.

/i have no desire to live in a Christan version of a theocracy.


despite the lack of details of what's happening, you feel comfortable making that declaration huh?
 
orclover
2013-01-19 07:24:23 PM  
My sophomore year of high school I lost all my friends to a church, what little I had in the way of friends, 3 boys and 2 girls. One girl convinced her boyfriend to go, he convinced 1 of the other guys then the other to go over the course of a month. I politely refused, not really grasping what was happening till it was too late. Five weeks after it had all started they all told me that they could hang out with me any more and see my soul damned, then they got a lot less polite about it. I was pretty much a pariah until my Junior year when I started hanging out with the stoners, who honestly couldn't given a fark if I was in church or not.

Probably should have just shot myself at the beginning of my freshman year and saved myself the 4 year headache.
 
vrax
2013-01-19 07:24:32 PM  
"They are just supporting kids who go to their church," Clements said. "They are not trying to recruit other kids."

Umm, sorry. Unless they are there to participate in a comparative religion course, they shouldn't even be on campus. They can support the kids who go to their church at their farkin' church, FFS!
 
ricochet4
2013-01-19 07:24:44 PM  

SkinnyHead: Solon Isonomia: Good, you're moving to authority - unfortunately, you're citing only dicta and the authority is factually distinguishable. Milford involved an after-hours program and a religion-specific regulation. In this case, you're dealing with visitors during school hours, thus the "limited public forum" situation does not apply. Further, Milford cites three specific cases where establishment clause was violated because religious activities occurred - two of which were during school sponsored events (football game and graduation) and the other was during school hours (prohibition of evolution being taught in class). If you want to use Milford, you need to explain why constitutional protections of free speech, association, or expression should be expanded and the establishment clause's protection should be decreased in light of Milford and the relevant cases cited by the court.

On the issue of whether lunch hour visitation constitutes a limited public forum, I would cite Prince v. Jacoby, 303 F.3d 1074, 1090-1091 (9th Cir.2002) as a case the recognized a "limited public forum" during school hours for purposes of free speech analysis, within the meaning of Good News Club v. Millford.

Prince v. Jacoby also answers the Establishment Clause concerns (1092-1094.)  "Like the Good News Club, the World Changers seek nothing more than to be treated neutrally and given access to speak about the same topics as other groups. Id. There is no question that requiring that the School District grant religious groups access to the ASB forum would ensure neutrality."  (1092)

Prince v. Jacoby

deals with the Equal Access Act, which covers secondary schools which receive federal money. this is an elementary school. further, the EAA only covers school activities that are not directed by outside parties...in this case, the religious groups are from outside the student body.
 
Solon Isonomia
2013-01-19 07:26:02 PM  

SkinnyHead: On the issue of whether lunch hour visitation constitutes a limited public forum, I would cite Prince v. Jacoby, 303 F.3d 1074, 1090-1091 (9th Cir.2002) as a case the recognized a "limited public forum" during school hours for purposes of free speech analysis, within the meaning of Good News Club v. Millford.


Better, but bear in mind you're relying on a single court's authority - try to spread out your sources lest someone sandbags you with a standard followed by four other circuits. You're also running into some of the same problems as before - you're citing something that can be distinguished on factual grounds.  Prince involved student led groups and a broad policy by the school to allow access to groups, thus creating a limited public forum. In the school in the article, you have informal visitors in the lunch room without an explicit mention of a similar policy. Citing  Prince is a step in one direction, but you need to articulate what  Prince stands for, how it applies to this particular case, and how supports your argument to expand the constitutional protection.

Prince v. Jacoby also answers the Establishment Clause concerns (1092-1094.)  "Like the Good News Club, the World Changers seek nothing more than to be treated neutrally and given access to speak about the same topics as other groups. Id. There is no question that requiring that the School District grant religious groups access to the ASB forum would ensure neutrality."  (1092)

Again, the quoted text directly references the ASB (Associated Student Body) club policy - the facts at hand in this article do not necessarily discuss such a policy. You need to apply the rule articulated in  Prince to the situation at hand to make your point. Sometimes it's akin to arguing from analogy, but that's a fast way to explain it. You're finding the authority, but you're not using it properly. To use an analogy, you're holding a gun and are throwing it like a rock instead of firing it. The later takes time and skill, but is much more effective and productive.
 
Solon Isonomia
2013-01-19 07:29:31 PM  

shamanwest: Solon Isonomia: BronyMedic: Well, it's a good thing you're not Supreme Court Justice SkinnyHead, otherwise your opinion - which is factually incomplete - would mean something.

Forget facts, it's incomplete in a legal sense. Like I said, if he wants to go down that line of thought he needs to step up his game. Someone as well known as him should have some standards.

Are people selling Fark accounts on e-Bay now? WTF? No one whose been on Fark for more than a day should have Skinnyhead and Standards in the same post...unless standards is modified with none, low, or the like.


Eh, it's a way to kill a Saturday afternoon/evening... and sometimes, just sometimes, when you see someone do something offensive you get fed up and want to at least see them do the offensive activity  well.
 
Gyrfalcon [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 07:30:17 PM  

Apos: Who would want to endure raucous proselytizing and tasteless gruel simultaneously?


And on the flip side, do they really imagine the kids are even listening to them drone on and on while they shovel down their lunches and hurry out to recess?
 
Pincy
2013-01-19 07:31:32 PM  
Good for the FFRF.
 
shamanwest
2013-01-19 07:32:30 PM  

Solon Isonomia: shamanwest: Solon Isonomia: BronyMedic: Well, it's a good thing you're not Supreme Court Justice SkinnyHead, otherwise your opinion - which is factually incomplete - would mean something.

Forget facts, it's incomplete in a legal sense. Like I said, if he wants to go down that line of thought he needs to step up his game. Someone as well known as him should have some standards.

Are people selling Fark accounts on e-Bay now? WTF? No one whose been on Fark for more than a day should have Skinnyhead and Standards in the same post...unless standards is modified with none, low, or the like.

Eh, it's a way to kill a Saturday afternoon/evening... and sometimes, just sometimes, when you see someone do something offensive you get fed up and want to at least see them do the offensive activity  well.


That's what I Can Haz Cheeseburger is for. :) Honestly, you'd get better conversation from Bevets.
 
No Such Agency
2013-01-19 07:35:55 PM  
lh6.ggpht.comView Full Size
 
Dan the Schman
2013-01-19 07:36:34 PM  
Oh great, the douche with a GED in trolling is here.
 
SN1987a goes boom
2013-01-19 07:38:22 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: weird


Reminds me of some of the behavior Sandusky was accused of before his ass got tossed in jail.
 
SilentStrider
2013-01-19 07:39:01 PM  

SilentStrider: Hugh.


WTF?

I typed huge. I know I did.
 
mayIFark
2013-01-19 07:39:22 PM  
Pastor misses his former lover? Why else he would want to go there?
 
SilentStrider
2013-01-19 07:39:59 PM  
goddammit.

HIGH, not HUGE.

Brain not working. Caffeine no longer helping. Nap time.
 
Solon Isonomia
2013-01-19 07:41:06 PM  

shamanwest: That's what I Can Haz Cheeseburger is for. :) Honestly, you'd get better conversation from Bevets.


True, but the guy is putting some actual effort in this time and I've had a vain hope for seven years that maybe real discussion can come from others observing the exchange and start said real discussion on the side.
 
cchris_39
2013-01-19 07:41:58 PM  
Why is it that being atheist requires you to be a whiny litigious obnoxious asshole?
 
Darth_Lukecash [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 07:45:40 PM  

GAT_00: Solon Isonomia: Incomplete analysis.

Yes, it was a SkinnyHead post.  Now punch yourself for quoting one of the most known trolls and taking it seriously.


It's not a troll if he believes it.

He's being somewhat Reasonable. Using actual cases.

The problem is that the 1st amendment specifically says the government cannot establish any religion. So no preaching is allowed. However, if the school allows visits then they should limit it to only family or allow it for others.
 
KWess
2013-01-19 07:46:34 PM  

fusillade762: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Bring in some Pantheistic believers and let the kids decide for themselves.

"Alright kids, would you like to listen to Pastor Mark talk about Jesus or Berzerker Erik talk about channeling the warrior spirit of the gods?"

Indeed. If this was ANY religion besides Christianity being allowed exclusive access to children during the school day people would FLIP THE F*CK OUT.



There is a United States Congressman currently flipping his lid about a post-secondary school using a $627 grant to buy some books about Islam. You just can't make this shiat up.
 
Darth_Lukecash [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 07:47:09 PM  

cchris_39: Why is it that being atheist requires you to be a whiny litigious obnoxious asshole?




Because overbearing pompous Christians feel entitled to their way in everything.
 
RyogaM
2013-01-19 07:47:13 PM  

cchris_39: Why is it that being atheist requires you to be a whiny litigious obnoxious asshole?


And why are religious folks so insecure that they can't go a week without going to the young people in their church and proselytize, especially in a school setting where all the other children are forced to be in the same room? Go to their house after school, fer fark's sake. If religion was true, you'd only have to teach it once, and it would be self-evident from that point on.

School probably needs to rethink their policy regarding all visitors. Seems their just asking for trouble.
 
vrax
2013-01-19 07:49:25 PM  

cchris_39: Why is it that being atheist requires you to be a whiny litigious obnoxious asshole?


There's certainly no requirement nor is it very common. The better question is, why to religious idiots keep pushing things to the point where they have to be addressed in such a manner?
 
mr intrepid
2013-01-19 07:49:31 PM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Bring in some Pantheistic believers and let the kids decide for themselves.

"Alright kids, would you like to listen to Pastor Mark talk about Jesus or Berzerker Erik talk about channeling the warrior spirit of the gods?"


Invite some Pastafarians. Cafeteria probably has mac n' cheese on any given day. They could call it communion.
 
Lenny_da_Hog [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 07:49:47 PM  
If it's truly as the school district describes it -- that these are visits from the brainwasher to the children authorized by parents, with equal open access to other visitors -- there's no violation. It's no different than the little mind-victims gathering around the flag-pole to pray away their sense of reason before it develops.
 
Virtual Pariah
2013-01-19 07:50:45 PM  
Seems that this could be solved by opening up the lunch discussions to all religions and non-religious views.

If the school can't agree to do that, then they should not allow it at all.
 
Solon Isonomia
2013-01-19 07:54:06 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: GAT_00: Solon Isonomia: Incomplete analysis.

Yes, it was a SkinnyHead post.  Now punch yourself for quoting one of the most known trolls and taking it seriously.

It's not a troll if he believes it.

He's being somewhat Reasonable. Using actual cases.

The problem is that the 1st amendment specifically says the government cannot establish any religion. So no preaching is allowed. However, if the school allows visits then they should limit it to only family or allow it for others.


That's the real trick, isn't it? Schools become limited public forums in certain situations which creates a whole mess of which element of the First Amendment overrides the other elements. Me, I think there's a real discussion in where the visitors are allowed to be. Do you limit them to the lunchroom? The main office? Only when escorted?
 
KWess
2013-01-19 07:54:13 PM  
What kind of person wants to go down to a school to hang around with kids they're not related to during lunch? It's pretty creepy.
 
gameshowhost
2013-01-19 07:54:39 PM  

cchris_39: Why is it that being atheist requires you to be a whiny litigious obnoxious asshole?


Because equal and opposite reaction.
 
JohnnyC
2013-01-19 07:55:33 PM  
Apparently Christianity isn't compelling enough on its own unless Christians can constantly hammer the young and impressionable with their religious views.
 
ScaryBottles
2013-01-19 07:57:46 PM  

skullkrusher: grimlock1972: Good this type of prayer at school is a clear violation of the separation of church and state.

/i have no desire to live in a Christan version of a theocracy.

despite the lack of details of what's happening, you feel comfortable making that declaration huh?


Irrelevant period. Whatever this individual's intentions or motives are it is a privilege that can be exploited too easily. Furthermore once you allow it for one it is very difficult to say no to another. Let us say for the sake of this discussion he is benignly visiting these children, I don't know maybe he just really likes the hot dog cart across the street and just drops in out of sheer boredom. I have nothing against that but like I said once allowed that might encourage others to do the same and how can we be certain of their reasons for visiting. That is of course the best case scenario and as you pointed out we don't have all the facts its just as likely this guy has set up his own little ministry in the lunchroom. This guy is crossing a line and the school board knows it. I know you're a troll and a kinda bad one if you ask me, you come off as too dumb. A true believer would had scored himself some quality talking points from Rush or Beck at least before provoking us libs.
 
Britney_Spears
2013-01-19 07:58:06 PM  
and on a pro homo website no less

count on very bad things to happen to these schools. kick God out and suffer the consequences
 
ScaryBottles
2013-01-19 07:58:58 PM  
Sorry everyone I'm new and I gotta reach for the low hanging fruit ya know
 
vrax
2013-01-19 08:00:01 PM  

Virtual Pariah: Seems that this could be solved by opening up the lunch discussions to all religions and non-religious views.

If the school can't agree to do that, then they should not allow it at all.


I agree with the idea in general, however, in practice, in their area, I'm betting that kids who might support other religions, or no religion, would be ridiculed, abused, etc.
 
Lenny_da_Hog [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:00:34 PM  

JohnnyC: Apparently Christianity isn't compelling enough on its own unless Christians can constantly hammer the young and impressionable with their religious views.


Children don't have enough factual information to overcome the religious emotional trauma. They don't understand anything about the universe, and if you install the fear of eternal punishment and admonition, those emotions will rule them for life. They're easy pickings.

Next comes people who have screwed up lives -- the impoverished, victims of disasters, and the self-destructive -- because market demographics says they're emotionally ripe for the picking and susceptible to manipulation. Self-loathing is easy to turn into religion.
 
cchris_39
2013-01-19 08:02:45 PM  

gameshowhost: cchris_39: Why is it that being atheist requires you to be a whiny litigious obnoxious asshole?

Because equal and opposite reaction.


Lol you got that right. "YIkes it's Jesus, somebody call a lawyer!:

/pussies
 
red5ish
2013-01-19 08:02:47 PM  
Here's an idea: Don't let any "visitors" on campus. Not family, not friends, not friends of Jesus, nobody but students, faculty, administrators and staff.
I don't understand how this "policy" of allowing "visitors" began in the first place. Shouldn't students be learning how to socialize with other kids at that age? Can't they just eat lunch?
 
phaseolus
2013-01-19 08:03:09 PM  

Kittypie070: Coco LaFemme 2013-01-19 05:02:47 PM

Those poor, poor persecuted Christians. I just don't know how they make it through their endless days of sadness and misery.


Gloom, despair, and agony on me
Deep, dark depression, excessive misery
If it weren't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all
Gloom, despair, and agony on me

Book of Precious Persecutions,
Chapter 1, verses 1-4



Okay --

i1.squidoocdn.comView Full Size


Which one are you?
 
Darth_Lukecash [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:03:23 PM  

Solon Isonomia: Darth_Lukecash: GAT_00: Solon Isonomia: Incomplete analysis.

Yes, it was a SkinnyHead post.  Now punch yourself for quoting one of the most known trolls and taking it seriously.

It's not a troll if he believes it.

He's being somewhat Reasonable. Using actual cases.

The problem is that the 1st amendment specifically says the government cannot establish any religion. So no preaching is allowed. However, if the school allows visits then they should limit it to only family or allow it for others.

That's the real trick, isn't it? Schools become limited public forums in certain situations which creates a whole mess of which element of the First Amendment overrides the other elements. Me, I think there's a real discussion in where the visitors are allowed to be. Do you limit them to the lunchroom? The main office? Only when escorted?





Here's the thing: if you have an open forum, it must be open for all. You cannot prevent a student run group just because it's religious. The school cannot demand students join it, but can't stop people from joining it. The key being the students need to run it.

If the school has open visitation that is not limited to family of the student, then they have to allow in everyone. What will happen is that the school will just not allow visitors.
 
SkinnyHead
2013-01-19 08:03:50 PM  

ricochet4: Prince v. Jacoby deals with the Equal Access Act, which covers secondary schools which receive federal money. this is an elementary school. further, the EAA only covers school activities that are not directed by outside parties...in this case, the religious groups are from outside the student body.


Yes, of course. Jacoby deals with the Equal Access Act in Part III.  It deals with First Amendment issues in Part IV.

Solon Isonomia: Better, but bear in mind you're relying on a single court's authority - try to spread out your sources lest someone sandbags you with a standard followed by four other circuits. You're also running into some of the same problems as before - you're citing something that can be distinguished on factual grounds. Prince involved student led groups and a broad policy by the school to allow access to groups, thus creating a limited public forum. In the school in the article, you have informal visitors in the lunch room without an explicit mention of a similar policy. Citing Prince is a step in one direction, but you need to articulate what Prince stands for, how it applies to this particular case, and how supports your argument to expand the constitutional protection.


I'm not advocating an expansion of constitutional protection.  I am applying existing constitutional doctrine to the facts stated in the article.  The school has created a limited public forum by allowing visitors during lunch hour.  The school cannot deny some visitors and students the opportunity to participate in lunch hour visitation based on viewpoint discrimination.  The burden should be on the school district to articulate a legitimate reason.  FFRF has not suggested a legitimate reason.

Solon Isonomia: ...The later takes time and skill, but is much more effective and productive.


If I put any more time into it, I'll have to start billing the school district.  I've done enough to accomplish my purpose, which was to dazzle Farkers with my mastery of the law.
 
Cataholic
2013-01-19 08:07:23 PM  

red5ish: Here's an idea: Don't let any "visitors" on campus. Not family, not friends, not friends of Jesus, nobody but students, faculty, administrators and staff.
I don't understand how this "policy" of allowing "visitors" began in the first place. Shouldn't students be learning how to socialize with other kids at that age? Can't they just eat lunch?


Sort of like not having prom because you are afraid a same-sex couple might show up. We know how well that worked the last time.
 
Paleorific
2013-01-19 08:09:57 PM  
Change the rules and apply a security standard where kids to not get visitors. Of course an exception would be parents in the office.
 
Lenny_da_Hog [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:11:38 PM  

SkinnyHead: I am applying existing constitutional doctrine to the facts stated in the article.


See, there's the thing. We don't know the facts. We are *told* that they aren't preaching to anyone but their own, but there's that little thing about being open to "questions" from kids who haven't had parents signing permission slips.

I'd bet the way the policy is written and the way it's carried out are going to be two different things, otherwise they wouldn't halt the program for review. Missionaries are slimy little bastards, just one step below marketers and advertisers -- they're likely bringing the "review" to find out which witnesses have seen anything damning.
 
HairBolus
2013-01-19 08:15:24 PM  
TFA doesn't mention the latest developments:

The public school district has turned over the handling of the issue to the Liberty Foundation, a right wing Christian group.:"Liberty Institute will also be speak for the district on this issue from now on, Murry and Mateer said. Murry referred questions to Liberty Institute when asked how he decided to hire the group."

So Conway Public Schools outsources their policy decision to a right wing religious group.
 
Gyrfalcon [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:19:12 PM  

phaseolus: Kittypie070: Coco LaFemme 2013-01-19 05:02:47 PM

Those poor, poor persecuted Christians. I just don't know how they make it through their endless days of sadness and misery.


Gloom, despair, and agony on me
Deep, dark depression, excessive misery
If it weren't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all
Gloom, despair, and agony on me

Book of Precious Persecutions,
Chapter 1, verses 1-4


Okay --

[i1.squidoocdn.com image 525x309]

Which one are you?


Those weren't the Gloom & Despair boys.
 
AurizenDarkstar
2013-01-19 08:19:16 PM  

JohnnyC: Apparently Christianity isn't compelling enough on its own unless Christians can constantly hammer the young and impressionable with their religious views.


The biggest reason they go after the young is that when you are aged 5 through about 11 or so, you are still pretty damn impressionable. Once they get you believing everything they tell you, then they start making sure you believe nothing else.

And a lot of 'Christians' need to get over their persecution complex.
 
Urbn
2013-01-19 08:19:34 PM  

red5ish: Here's an idea: Don't let any "visitors" on campus. Not family, not friends, not friends of Jesus, nobody but students, faculty, administrators and staff.
I don't understand how this "policy" of allowing "visitors" began in the first place. Shouldn't students be learning how to socialize with other kids at that age? Can't they just eat lunch?


Not only that, I question the overall mental stability of a person who wants to come preach at kids during their school lunch. This seems like an easy one to win from a safety point of view, too, especially given our current skittishness over school safety. As a parent, I don't want my child's school letting potential child predators or unstable people into the school. If a parent wants to bring their kid a lunch she forgot, fine; even sit with her for a few minutes before heading out, fine too. But some preacher or 'friend' who has no real business coming to the school? Sorry, no.
 
HighOnCraic
2013-01-19 08:19:43 PM  

SkinnyHead: I've done enough to accomplish my purpose, which was to dazzle Farkers with my mastery of the law.


ohwaityou'reseriousletmelaughevenharder.jpg
 
Nina_Hartley's_Ass
2013-01-19 08:24:40 PM  
"I get older, they stay the same age." said Pastor Wooderson.
 
Lenny_da_Hog [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 08:25:16 PM  

HairBolus: TFA doesn't mention the latest developments:

The public school district has turned over the handling of the issue to the Liberty Foundation, a right wing Christian group.:"Liberty Institute will also be speak for the district on this issue from now on, Murry and Mateer said. Murry referred questions to Liberty Institute when asked how he decided to hire the group."

So Conway Public Schools outsources their policy decision to a right wing religious group.


It was probably outside evangelicals who convinced them to write the policy the way it is in the first place. Now that the school is under fire, the administration probably went back and said, "You said we'd be safe brainwashing kids this way, but they've caught us! Help! Help!"
 
Displayed 50 of 249 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

Come for the Total, stay for the Farking.

learn more | sign up

Report
On Twitter

Report
Top Commented
Top Commented ▼
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.
Report