Thread: I pray that people can get 'school prayer' right.

Article from the Vermont based paper

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech

We had a long history when the first clause was more or less ignored until about a generation ago and now the backlash is an overcompensation in the other direction that infringes on kids in an equally wrong way. We should be on guard for both instances. Unless you watch fox of course.

I am going to rant for a moment...

This really pisses me off. The religious right often tends to read the first clause like its a mere suggestion while the left tends to read the underlined part like its a second amendment issue where you determine its ok to do it as long as no one is nearby to get hurt. In a weird kind of way the right has a kind of out, they tend to only watch and read media that says, that makes the absurd claim that "The separation of church and state is a myth!" Which on it's ignorant acceptance is meant to mean that the believer can in fact impose religion with government as its vehicle. But if you live in a world where you only hear this it becomes an 'alternate truth', my sources say and my news says and so on. I don't like the idea that someone insulates them selves from a more robust information base, but hell they do it, and it leads a lot of folks through a door called credulity into the hallway of wrong, which is neither illegal nor should it be protected from counter argument nor a guarantee against, my favorite, ridicule. Separation of church and state is a way of expressing two statements into one outcome, not a myth, an analogy. I don't tear very hard, well as hard as I could at any rate, at those types, ya I will never pass up the opportunity to correct them, to provide a source of information and very base facts while being as snarky as I am apt to be.....but......This is what really, and I mean really gets me hot when a group of educators, people who have no excuse for not knowing better, when its these folks who can't remember that it is a two part statement.

That clause is some of the best use of the English language you will ever read, its clear, its concise, its perfectly lucid while being short. For anyone who has ever tried to write a complex idea you can't help but appreciate how in so few words this statement is made.

But people can't get it right, a public school cannot respect an establishment of religion. A public school also cannot induce the "prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Teacher says pray with me, no go (establishment of). Public school says 'this is prayer time', no go (establishment of). You give a kid the chance too speak and he or she says pray with me in the name of the great God Murdok lord of all creation, can't stop em (the free expression of). The schools responsibility to its first clause ends when that kid picks up the mic or is given a soapbox, it is then his or her right. Its such a clear divisor. I hate the idea that people think that since the religious conservative can't get it right because they just don't wanna gives us license to also get it wrong. Have more character then your advisory and your friends will multiply.

Alright I feel better now.


AMS

I'll be honest. I probably agree with you, but I'm hungry...so...TLDR.

Originally Posted by Pint

But people can't get it right, a public school cannot respect an establishment of religion. A public school also cannot induce the "prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Teacher says pray with me, no go (establishment of). Public school says 'this is prayer time', no go (establishment of). You give a kid the chance too speak and he or she says pray with me in the name of the great God Murdok lord of all creation, can't stop em (the free expression of). The schools responsibility to its first clause ends when that kid picks up the mic or is given a soapbox, it is then his or her right. Its such a clear divisor. I hate the idea that people think that since the religious conservative can't get it right because they just don't wanna does not give us license to also get it wrong. Have more character then your advisory and your friends will multiply.

Alright I feel better now.


AMS

I think you nailed it here. What you describe is a nice balance. I believe this situation falls within this balance. The student could not have been more generic in his words regarding God, nor did he indicate that his belief in god was the result of what he was taught in school, nor did he insist the crowd get on board with God. Even as secular as i am, i do not take issue with students spontaneously praying at a school event. I would take issue with a public school requiring prayer before meal, during homeroom etc.

But you never hear complaints about a school establishing a prayer time, or requiring students to adopt a specific faith because that clearly endorses the establishment of and as you say, induces the "prohibiting the free exercise thereof". I certainly believe there are administrators out there that would love to see (inert faith of choice here) forced into the daily curriculum, but they are silent on the issue or immediately removed from office if they voice their aspirations to do so.

It appears to me that its a case of fearing what one doesn't understand. The lefts reaction to students praying in school of their own accord is akin to the rights reaction of two people who love each other and want to get married, but happen to be of the same sex. Both reactions are equally ridiculous in my mind.

We are supposed to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people. This includes the people we like as well as the people we don't.

Anyway, well said Pint, i certainly do enjoy reading your posts.

Originally Posted by WickedTribe

How is anyone being prevented from exercising their religion here?

**Bangs head against desk**

Originally Posted by SpecOpsScott

I think you nailed it here. What you describe is a nice balance.

The thing is that is what the words mean. It's like its a reading failure, the language is so simple and straight forward it is as close as you can get to a straight jacket of words for such a complex idea, IN ONE SENTENCE. I wish I could draw cartoons because one with a conservative guy holding out his hand so he can only see the second clause, while saying "I guess I can teach creationism after all!" And then some "wicked atheist" doing the same posture blocking out the second clause saying "I guess I can get that Jesus freak kid to shut up during lunch after all!" Would be a visual of what happens with it in the school context.

Originally Posted by SpecOpsScott

The lefts reaction to students praying in school of their own accord is akin to the rights reaction of two people who love each other and want to get married, but happen to be of the same sex. Both reactions are equally ridiculous in my mind.

We are supposed to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people. This includes the people we like as well as the people we don't.

Anyway, well said Pint, i certainly do enjoy reading your posts.

First thank you, I actually don't mind writing out long posts because I tend to get PM's of appreciation for a complete thought (I think I have like 3 PM's saved from toker alone if memory serves)


I read a bunch, I read what the secular folks say who for sure have my bias, if you will. I also read the stuff that the other side says and I have been banned from more Christian forums then I can remember for arguing on different topics, it was always acceptable until either the 'look' counter was doing half the forum business or normal board members were simply trusting me more then the resident forum bully. But a year or so ago I was posting on a rather prestigious atheist board (now defunct), invites were given out for people to discuss in a members only forum kind of like an admin channel. It was a kind of way for closet, say an English teacher, atheists to get some advise with a situation the privacy let them go into enough depth where if you worked in the same place you would be able to pick out the teacher but it was policy not to use names. We had a couple doctors and even a lawyer or two who wanted help with picking out a way to articulate to a patient or client on a religious issue. It was pretty cool and I checked in about once a week for a couple hours. Then that story happened about the kid at a school talent show that was not allowed to sing "my god is an awesome god", the ACLU represented the kid's family BTW and won (this was a while later, we did not know the ACLU was repping the kid). I defended the kid, I pointed out the second clause was clear, no one on the forum was asking for advise or anything, we were just posting about it. A couple of the long time guys teamed up on me, I kept at it the post count went up the reads were twice as many as the posts. I am not one to shut up so I kept it up, I got a couple of the peeps to admit that it was a matter of bias that they wished it said something different that it would be better off not having the second part ect, not an objective reading of it. The guy who gave me the invite started telling me how I was a turn coat, I said "Leave the illiteracy to the religious brother, its a sentence with a comma and a semi-colon and its kicking your ass", Banned. My studies have eaten my dogma. My favorite author of all time is Mark Twain who said "God's mistake was not making the flood complete." He nailed it. I say fuck em all.