 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Separation of church & state lessened
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Peg Date: 14 Jun 01 - 01:36 AM Religion does not belong in the schools!!!! It just doesn't. What the fuck is happening to this country???
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Sorcha Date: 14 Jun 01 - 01:36 AM I suppose this could be considered an aside: Wasn't there also something about the Christian Group had always been allowed the building about 7 PM but not immediately after school hours (i.e. 3:15 or so)?
Didn't they sue to get the building immediately after school so they could "snag" more kids? (That's what's scary..)
What a conundrum........it's tempting to start a Pagan/Bhuddist/Muslim/Whatever instruction or prayer group here in Small Town, Wyoming just to see what would happen, and insist that it be held at 3:15 PM (school is out at 3:10).
I had Darwin from primary school through college, and only had Comparitive Religion in college/university. Never ANY religion in primary/secondary school; not even prayers at school events,(not even gospel songs in music class) except the Baccalaureate Service which was on a Sunday morning and optional. I didn't go. I was educated in Kansas............. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: wysiwyg Date: 14 Jun 01 - 01:36 AM I suppose to be fair I should say this may be a rant, so, wearily I say, "Rant On." I suppose even so, some of you may choose to take my coments personally. (I don't mean them that way, but that's up to you!) Perhaps taxpayers simply desire to use what their tax money has helped to build and maintain, like everyone else in the community. What is the alternative? Separation of school and community. This is not about church and state, IMO, it is about what a community chooses to do with tax dollars and how people decide to work with or against one another. And about whether a school belongs to the community. The WHOLE community, warts and all. I worked very hard to get a difficult referendum passed that raised taxes significantly in support of an excellent and diverse school system. The decisions that were made as it passed meant that taxes for other public works could not then be raised higher. The pockets had been tapped to the max. The Park District found that it had to "make do" when it had hoped to increase community buildings for public use. So it was hard, in that community, to find places to meet. In fact at Village Hall the staff often had to yield business meetings to community groups so groups could meet in the Village Hall's various conference rooms. But everyone cooperated, and that was what made it work. There was a recognition that a healthy community generates all kinds of groupings and activities. We are after all a social species. We express ourselves in community, in all our diversity. That was true in nearby Skokie, where Nazis were free to march in the midst of Holocaust survivors... it's the same old debate, "where do you draw the line on rights?" We have a good Constitution, not a perfect one. Certainly not an EASY one. Some of you might also be surprised to know that at a lot of churches, there is little or no meeting space. Ours makes it facilities open to a wide variety of groups, many of which we might not agree with doctrinally. New church committees, etc. wanting meeting space often find that everything in the heated main buliding, which is quite small, is booked. (We do not charge groups for use unless they are charging a fee, either... it's part of our ministry in the community to make the space available, so in this case, we are paying for non-church use of our building. Including-- gasp-- town committees if they wanted, or-- gasp-- school groups! *G*) The Sunday school is in a separate wing which costs a fortune to heat-- so you do not heat a whole wing to get one room warm enough in the winter. That wing stays a cozy 50 degrees, weekdays, so the pipes don't freeze. So you meet in someone's home. Or you meet in another location. Sometimes in schools. I also have worked with a tiny church that had no meeting space other than an unfinished basement full of mold, and no toilet anywhere in the building. And a fortune to heat the worship space. Meetings in school would have made sense-- especially with no parents at home in that dead mining town after school. It would have been nice for the kids club to have a clean place to meet, with supervision and activities. Unfortunately in that town, there no longer was a school-- eddication had been moved to the Big School in Town where the mining kids were treated like scum, by the teachers themselvs, segregated into classes in the lunchroom because those kids were "unteachable," it was said, being so poor and so untaught and so DIRTY. Yes. In our nice, NICE town. Well, the kids had to go home to their cold empty houses on the bus, so even if they had wanted to spend another minute in that school, it would not have been possible to run a late bus for the sever or eight kids left in that town by the time we moved here. I am not commenting about this particular court case because the little I have heard about it differs enough from all the things said here that now I do not pretend to know enough to comment. And a lot of the comments are about RELIGION, not this case. But a lot of assumptions about churches are being made by people who do not know what the workings of a church actually ARE. And I think people ought to know what they are railing against, if only to rail (or work) against them accurately. To do otherwise is just sloppy. I would also like to comment about the lack of discrimination against Christians. It does exist, and it is as invisible to those perpetrating and condoning it as most discrimination is to peple not affected by it personally. Here in our town if you express certain forms of Christianity you can get your kids taken away, and I am not talking about discipline or medical treatment. People's valid and personal spiritual expreinces are being evaluated by a secular system that labels it delusion. I would just observe though that I can't recall ever coming to the Mudcat and finding a thread titled, "Pagans of any stripe, yucch." And if I did I would post in it the same as I did in the one running now that ends in that word. Is it "discrimination" that I sit here with unexpected tears rolling because "my" Mudcat suddenly feels cold and unsafe for me, despite a good effort to bring about rational discussion? No, not legal discrimination. Is it the same unaware but hurtful pattern of our society as racism and sexism? Only the fear I have about pointing it out gives a clue that indeed, it may be. I just want to know why we debate politics here, at a distance, when we all have our own communities to get involved in, our own neighbors to know and be concerned about, our own local allies and struggles where reality might actually present a check against our fears and biases. What I would really enjoy would be a vacation from attacks on religion.... for Mudcat to be a break from that as much as some of you find it provides a break from the other cares of our world. The whole time I have been a Mudcatter it has not let up. How about freedom from attacks on religion, too. Yes, I know, religion has done horrible awful icky violent things. But we never apply a whine fee to people whining about THAT. It is PC here to go on and on about it... how about if we expected people to get over that and do something IRL to make a difference? Rant Off. ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 01 - 02:10 AM WYSIWYG, I going to assume that you are not intending to sweep any of the legitimate concerns of the people who have posted here under the carpet with your post. There are legitimate concerns and complaints. And if they are not addressed, that's when hatred toward religious groups begins to fester. And sometimes it helps for them to be addressed in a forum like this. Sometimes it's the only place some of us have. I hope you can find some good in any attempts people make to try to find common ground on difficult issues, either here in the Mudcat or elsewhere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Amergin Date: 14 Jun 01 - 02:12 AM the church of nathan tompkins and latter day nymphs is the only church that should be allowed in public buildings..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Ringer Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:51 AM I can't resist a smile. Here in England, the C of E is the established church: it can't even change its form of worship without sanction of an Act of Parliament. And it doesn't make a bit of difference. A more secular country than mine you couldn't wish to find. Separation of church and state, it seems to me, offers little, guarantees nothing, and serves only to stir up arguments like the above. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Peg Date: 14 Jun 01 - 10:39 AM WYSIWYG: of course your concerns are legitimate, but it is also true that some (not all) Christian evengelical groups are very AGGRESSIVELY trying to infiltrate schools and recruit children to their way of thinking (some as young as 5). If Jewish or Muslim or (gasp!) Pagan groups tried to do what this group in question has done, I think the response (and resulting legislative deciison) would have been quite different. Pagan and other groups who see this as a warcry to start their own prayer or study groups are approaching this in a wrongheaded way, I believe. This violates our separation of church and state and is therefore unacceptable, and THAT is what our response should be. I am thinking of the 12 year old girl who committed suicide earlier this year because, as a pagan and aspiring witch, she was teased by her classmates, soem of whom sang Christian hymns to her in the hallways at school until she cried. 12 years old. Hung herself because she was teased because of her wacky, fringe religion. If prayer is allowed in schools, all the religious diversity our communities have embraced will be destroyed, because in some areas, the dominant faith is Christianity, and allowing these religious activities to take place on school grounds sanctions and gives tacit approval to these parctices, and this will irrevocably alter the social fabric of those schools, such that kids who practice other, less mainstream, religions will feel left out, ashamed, threatened, or worse. Peg
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Gary T Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:18 AM In reading these comments, and reflecting on past experiences, I think that what really worries people is proselytizing. I doubt anyone really begrudges allowing a church group or religious organization to use the school's physical facilities. The problem is that this all too often incorporates exploiting the overall set-up to foist a religious point of view on everyone. When teachers and other school officials participate, even to the small degree of handing out permission slips in class, there is an implied endorsement of and a subtle (sometimes not so subtle) pressure to join with the group. In many cases, the peer pressure among the kids to join is intense. Most people don't want some church that they haven't selected trying to teach religious views to their kids. They particularly don't want to have to guard against that in a public school, which the great majority of folks are legally and economically compelled to send their kids to. If a group would just have their meeting and leave others alone, I bet there would be no opposition. When they try to recruit kids to their beliefs and essentially shove those beliefs down their throats--and believe me, that happens a lot--people are going to squawk. People feel they have a right to be free from religious proselytizing in government sponsored institutions. Too many religious groups seem all to willing to trample on that right and then moan about their rights being violated when they are denied access to such places as a public school. When the government facilitates their activities, say by allowing them to use schools to hold their meetings, it becomes a partner in establishing (partially) a religion. "Your right to swing your arm around ends at my nose." These folks don't seem to care about anyone else's nose. If they did, I don't think there be any uproar.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Fibula Mattock Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:21 AM Hmmm, I can remember getting slapped in school for having the wrong type of bible. The only reason I had any bible was that my mum had given me her old King James version as we were told we HAD to have bibles at school. It was noticed and frowned upon that my sister and I did not attend Sunday School. This was only about 17 years ago, in a state (i.e. government-run) primary school in Northern Ireland. Oh, and I got slapped again for writing my name and address in the bible. Apparently that was some form of desecration. We seemed to spend a fair amount of time every day on bible studies. Some of them were good fun. I remember doing an excellent project on Moses! When I attended a state run grammar school (i.e. secondary level education) it was compulsory to take Religious Education. It did me no harm at all, but annoyed me that there was no alternative. We had to sing hymns and pray in assembly. I do remember organised visits from other religious groups. These were more of the "don't join them" type though (e.g. ex-Jehovah's Witnesses bewailing stories of horror). A lot of my co-pupils didn't take too well to a local priest visiting and I got a slagging then too. By then I'd been labelled the "token Catholic" (because my parents are a mixed religion marriage) when I was quite sure by that stage that I was an atheist. Perhaps I'm lucky - my Other Half went to a Christian Brothers run school. That put him right off education and religion being mixed. I know when I have children that I want them to learn about different religions, but I don't want it forced upon them. It's a personal choice. I am happy for a school to teach religion objectively, but I've never seen it happen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: MMario Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:26 AM In the long run I think we should ENCOURAGE religious teachings - of ALL faiths - in our schools. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Peter K (Fionn) Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:28 AM Great post, Sophocles. Alex, you seemed to be saying there was little religious influence in your education (a long way back up the thread - sorry if I've got it wrong). But in that case how could the school nearly be closed down by the baptists, for teaching non-Cristian religions? How could the baptists have any say at all in what a school teaches? Also this doesn't square with another thread we had, where it was fairly widely agreed that some US schools teach creation rather than evolution under pressure from religious factions. John Gray in Australia, when are all you like-minded people finally going to get your act together, bury the minor differences, and finally sort out that wretched constitution? The UK's (unwritten) constitution isn't great either. Contrary to what Bald Eagle said, the continuing "established" status of the C of E does still exert a baleful influence. For instance, why the hell should bishops be able to vote in parliament on issues like the age of consent, or anything else? The UK is nothing like as secular as he thinks. France and Sweden are far ahead of us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Mark Clark Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:40 AM The first ammendment to the U.S. Constitution actually begins:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;... You can read the U.S. Senate's annotated document on the First Ammendment and see what was intended by the framers and how it has been interpreted. - Mark |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: wysiwyg Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:42 AM That girl killed herself because she was treated badly and didn't have tools to deal with it, not because she was any particular faith and others were a different one. The problem there is the awfulness people can indulge in, not the mask it wore. How about some accountability for her parents? The teachers? The girl herself? There are lengthy debates at www.beliefnet about proselytizing and what it it, and is not. At least the people engaged in those debates are trying to understand something. They hang in and get into it. I have learned a lot there. Some of you have indicated privately that this has made me a "better" Christian to be around. (A better token?) I sure haven't learned much fom the threads here that have attacked religion. I don't see anyone here trying to understand. I see people trying to express rigid opinions about things they find rigid. A faith that is based on service to others sometimes is proselytizing and sometimes is not. I think some of you feel that Christians sit around in a smoky back room like old-fashioned Chicago Democrats, plotting how to make numbers, and that is not at all what is in the hearts of even the most rigid people you are referring to. I don't agree with a lot of the things you also don't agree with, but at least I know the people I am dealing with. Hating them, whatever your estimation of them, is not going to move you very far toward any goal of improving anything. Try getting to actually know, as a friend, just one of the people you write about. Come from your own belief system to do it. Or does your belief system endorse attacking what you do not know and stirring up upsets? And it's so ironic. Is anyone else doing anything for those kids after school? If there are language barriers clouding the situation, is anyone working with the parents to raise their language skills and awareness of what their kids are doing? Are these the same families we will all be complaining about when one of the lonely kids in pain takes a gun to school, "Where were the parents?" "Why didn't anyone DO something?" "Where were the churches?" "How come there is so much drug activity?" THERE IS STILL NO SUBSTITUTE FOR GETTING TO KNOW ANOTHER HUMAN BEING. ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: MMario Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:44 AM well - because it is a state religion - and the head of the government is also the head of the church? (I'm not saying this is right - but it is logical given a state supported denomination.) |
|
Subject: ADD: There's a Hero From: wysiwyg Date: 14 Jun 01 - 01:15 PM OK. I've spotted what it was that got my knickers so twisted that I entered into negativity. (Thanks, God, and thanks, Bert.) It's that fear tends to beget fear. And I fell in too. I am hearing a lot of fear in this thread. Concern can become action, but fear can become hatred. Fear makes us pull in to the safe spots, alone if necessary. People forget how much power is in their positivity. I know I do. Here is how I prefer to see people, especially fearful ones. Especially Mudcatters.
THERE'S A HERO ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: MMario Date: 14 Jun 01 - 01:20 PM yup - fear causes a lot of problems - so do ignorance and misinformation. all the more reason to TEACH. And as much variety as possible. When I was young - when we went camping - sundays Mom would take us to whatever church was closest. This usually meant a different denomination each week throughout the summer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: mousethief Date: 14 Jun 01 - 01:41 PM Okay, all you pagans: moment of honesty. If this were a Wiccan group instead of a Christian group which was allowed to use the school after suing, what would your response be? Be honest. Brutally honest. You'd be dancing in the streets, right? Throughout my time in public school in this country I had atheism and agnosticism preached at me by teacher after teacher after teacher. A Christian girl was attacked by an english teacher for her "stupid" beliefs right before my eyes; she was in tears. (This is before I became "religious" in any sense, so I was (to my shame) one of her tormentors.) I never saw non-christians attacked by Christian teachers. If I didn't ask my teachers about their beliefs, I would never have known they were Christians. But, even though an obnoxious atheist, at least I was open-minded enough to want to hear what other people had to say, so I asked my teachers (when it was safe to do so) what they believed. They would only speak about it unofficially and off-hours, so to speak. The Christian ones said if they were to mention anything related to religion in their classes, they could risk being fired, so they didn't. Yet the atheist teachers spewed their hatred for religion with impunity. Oh yes, separation of church and state. So now there are groups of Christian kids who want to do something on school grounds, immediately after school, like every other extracurricular group on campus. It's okay if you're anything else; chess club, D&D club, mythology club, African American Students, Asian American Students, whatever. Just not a Bible club. Not those nasty, evil, rude, crude, unsophisticated kids who just want to meet around the flagpole and pray. Are they intimidating their schoolmates? Hardly. They get yelled at and cursed at and people throw things at them. (My daughter is one, that's how I know.) Oh yeah, they're going to take over the whole school with their unfriendly and xenophobic religion. Sure. I'm sorry I'm not as sensitive as I could be. But from my experience, you people are talking through your hats. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: DougR Date: 14 Jun 01 - 01:42 PM Rigidity? On the Mudcat? Surely you jest, Susan. :>) SeanM: If in your post you are referring to conservatives as extremists, I think you are dead wrong. I do believe there are extreme conservatives, just as there are extreme liberals. IMOH, of course. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: mousethief Date: 14 Jun 01 - 01:53 PM On the 12yo pagan: Some of you may not remember being in junior high school. At that time of life, anybody who is different is considered bad, and ostracised (or worse). Remember? The fat kid in a school of skinny kids. The black kid in a school of white kids. The white kid in a school of black kids. The kid with glasses. The kid with funny clothes. The girl who is too late a bloomer. The girl who is too early a bloomer. The boy who is too tall and skinny. Anybody who is at all different is the object of scorn, or worse opprobrium, or worse harrassment, or worse assault. (With me it was assault; although I didn't know the word at the time.) The example of a 12yo pagan being picked on isn't about religion. It's about adolescents and their values rigidity -- that is, the difficulty that kids have at that age in coping with people who are different. This shows nothing about "religion in this country" (except that pagans are a minority religion, which we already knew). I'm willing to bet that less than 20% of the kids at that girl's school even go to church on anything like a regular basis. Few of them, I'm sure, self-identify as "Christian." IT'S NOT ABOUT RELIGION. Now, if you can come up with a way to teach adolescents to accept people who are different, I'm all ears. It's an uphill battle, though. Good luck. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Don Firth Date: 14 Jun 01 - 02:34 PM What I notice here is that just about everyone (with the possible exception of Kat) is using the word "Christian" as if it denotes one monolithic group with one belief system. In the real world, that is not the case. I belong to Central Lutheran Church on Capitol Hill in Seattle. This church does a lot of social service: provides free meals, seeks out housing for the homeless, visits prisoners at the Monroe State Reformatory (not to proselytize, but to conduct Alternatives to Violence workshops), headquarters for the Pacific Northwest chapter of the Lutheran Peace Fellowship. Lots of activism. Our pastors (a young woman and a very large black man with an ear-ring) have been known to get themselves arrested at demonstrations. One of our former pastors (now retired) did six months in the slammer for picketing at the Bangor Trident Submarine Base. There are some passages in Matthew 25 (about "the least of these") that these folks take pretty seriously. Evangelize? Button-hole people, drag them in, and try to save their souls? No. The best form of evangelism is by example. The congregation is burgeoning — lots of young people who join because they figure "these people are not full of hot air, they're actually doing something." Also, a few years ago, Central incorporated the "Affirmation of Welcome" (look it up "Advanced Search" on google.com). Boy did we get flak about that! From several other Christian denominations. One the other hand, the Seattle area often has to put up with people like "the Redmond Rednecks." Same general stuff as the Southern Baptist Leadership Conference folks: trying to infiltrate the school system, demanding that certain books be removed from school and other libraries, the usual Fundamentalist blather. A few years back, they sued the University of Washington because the English Department offered a course called "The Bible as Literature." I took the course. The Prof treated the Bible as a collection of short stories, novellas, poems . . . in general, as literature. He made a point of saying that any religious interpretation was strictly up to the individual student, and we would not be discussing that part of it. That was the problem. The Redmond bunch objected because it was not being taught as the "revealed Word of God." There are some huge gaps between various people who call themselves "Christians" As I mentioned in another thread, Fundamentalists give Christians a bad name. For myself, I may actually be a Pagan. I'm still working that out. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: katlaughing Date: 14 Jun 01 - 02:37 PM Alex and Susan, the majority of my family and friends are Christians; that's just the way the Western world is made up. Many Mudcatters are Christian and do not seem to feel the way you do. Also, I seriously doubt that you would ever hear of any Mudcatter, Christian or not, who would be as nasty as you think they would be or as you have seen others be. Those of us who have different experiences or feelings will not be silenced by stridency and blanket accusations. I do not hold rigid beliefs and I had tried to ask that the tone of this thread be civil. Please everyone remember that. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Amergin Date: 14 Jun 01 - 02:46 PM well katdarling, you can be one of the Latter Day Nymphs in my church..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 01 - 02:51 PM "I sure haven't learned much fom the threads here that have attacked religion." --WYSIWYG
I would just like to point out that most of the people who have expressed concern about this issue are not attacking religion. Most of them have religions of their own. What they are voicing concerns about is not being able to practice their own religion without interference.
When you say that someone who has a religion and is concerned about members of other religious groups prosletyzing, is attacking or protesting religion, what people hear you are saying is that your religion is the only religion.
I am not a member of any organized religion. But I do have strong spiritual beliefs. I have spent a lifetime being told that my beliefs are wrong, that they will land me in hell, and any number of other horrible things. Some of this has come from my own family. All of it has come from people who call themselves Christians. Maybe Christians have experienced the same kind of thing from non-Christians. The hard truth is that what these experiences have taught me is to keep my spiritual beliefs to myself, and to not talk about them with anyone who is not of like mind. Works pretty well for me. P.S. Alex, I suggested that Pagans might look at this thing in a positive light and see it as an opportunity to use the schools themselves. The Pagans who have posted to this thread don't seem to think it's a good thing even when seen in that light. So I think your premise that they would be dancing in the streets is probably faulty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: catspaw49 Date: 14 Jun 01 - 03:13 PM I really hate these threads. Under normal conditions, we are all caring and compassionate individuals here and as a group we often display that same kindness. Yet we often cannot see past the obvious. Those old farts who wrote the and adopted the Constitution were reaonably bright men. Over 200 years later, this is one of the most religious countries on earth and it is because they were smart enough to deal us a two-edged sword. Rights for all means rights for one. With almost 200 various "religions" the beauty inherent in the First amendment and it's two parts insures that though we can argue to our wit's end, the simple line still holds the key: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." There are two parts here........The "establishment" part requires a strict separation of church and state and the "free exercise" part mandates that we are all free to practice any form of religion without government interference. In combination they protect our religious freedom. Period. Dot. End. No, it's not of course as we all seem to have to personalize it to mean whatever we think will support OUR religion or belief system. Why? If you take it at face value, that right to belief is already protected without additional interpretation. It can only assure the rights of all by insuring the rights of one. Yeah, I don't like the Klan erecting a cross on Fountain Square in Cincy at Christmas, but unless I allow them their belief and their particular icon, I cannot allow a nativity scene, a menorrah, a Christmas tree, or anything else. It's very simple............but nothing eats into us more does it? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Donuel Date: 14 Jun 01 - 03:17 PM CarolC , OK , instead lets discuss the weather. Nice weather weve been having ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: catspaw49 Date: 14 Jun 01 - 03:17 PM Two things..... Good post Carol. and That's 2000 religions, not 200. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: Bill D Date: 14 Jun 01 - 03:21 PM *wondering what I am...am I a pagan?...an atheist?...a scoffer?...never really bothered to work out a label..* in any case, I would NOT be dancing if a wiccan group were refused meeting space...same rules apply to all as long as the Wiccans weren't trying to recruit. I think the awkwardness for me, and some others, is that many Christian denominations are EXHORTED to recruit. IF you truly believe, then saving other souls is a high calling. Some people take literally the idea that those without a certain experience are going to hell for eternity, and that anything they can do to reduce the number of those doomed ones is *good*.....They use pschology, peer pressure, appeals to guilt, low-key inducements, (yes, even wonderful music) to get the 'message' out. It is a fine line where fairness ends and pressure begins in tactics, and we all have different tolerances and sensitivity to it. I have not been a member of an organized religious group for 35 years, but I still am VERY aware of the many levels of pressure to believe, conform, recruit and 'witness'. I do NOT go out and stop people on the street ot knock on their doors to get them to STOP believing anything, but I get MY door knocked on, and I preached at from street corners, and when a group of admitted evangelicals wants to hold meetings, I ***KNOW*** that they are always looking for new members, and that they have GREAT difficulty understanding why there must be limits put on what they are SURE is a good and holy mission. It is not easy being a country that both allows freedom of worship, and still limits how & when that worship can take place. I will fight for YOUR right to meet and worship as you please, but I will fight YOU if you seem to be imposing and/or pushing your beliefs on those who did not seek them. *end of rant* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: CarolC Date: 14 Jun 01 - 03:25 PM (Thanks Spaw) A bit hot an muggy here, Donuel. What's it like where you are? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: Mary in Kentucky Date: 14 Jun 01 - 03:33 PM Even though I sense a troll...I'll bite... As Gary T said, I think the thought of proselytizing is the real fear here. As Susan said, it's about taxpayers and community and how people choose to work with or against each other. In my community there are three school systems: city, county, parochial. There are constantly questions about school buses serving the parochial schools, etc. These are not always easy issues, and there can be subtle discriminations concerning scheduling, etc., but cooperation makes it all work. Concerning the issue of separation of church and state...I theoretically and idealistically come down on the side of as much separation as possible. (translated: I don't want anyone to influence my children in any ideas that I don't hold) But as a classroom teacher I usually saw a complete and total void of any influence at all. The real problem in my experience is APATHY. (and peer pressure) Let's remember the children, look at what's really happening in the schoolyard and community, get involved. School (like life) ain't what it was when we were there. (no comments, Amergin, about how long ago that was!) Kids and schools need lots of help. So all of us with grand idealistic ideas about how things should be, get in there. Your presence is needed. whew, all kinds of posts come in while I'm trying to write.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: katlaughing Date: 14 Jun 01 - 03:39 PM Nymph it is then, Amergin! Thanks! Gosh, BillD, I should just follow along and post "what he said!" Spaw, I am sorry. Bad timing and a thick head.. they both got in the way.:-) kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separtion of church & state lessened From: M.Ted Date: 14 Jun 01 - 03:48 PM For what it's worth in this discussion, the religious persecutions that have occurred down through the ages. at least in Western "Civilization" have been mostly perpetrated by the religious majority onto some religious minority--Kat's point that "Last time I checked, Christianity was still in the majority and not really suffering from any inquisitions", is well taken, but overlooks the fact that Christians have periodically cast out and even exterminated groups of other christians, often in a dispute that revolves around the meaning of a few words in text-- Many religious groups have a deeply ingrained thread of contempt and dislike for certain other religious groups, and often enough, in reality the people and their beliefs are not that different--when push comes to shove, however, this doesn't matter, and the blood is spilled--and blood is blood-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: SeanM Date: 14 Jun 01 - 03:56 PM Doug; Actually, you did get my point - not all conservatives are extremeists, nor are all liberals, but both 'wings' have got a significant number of assholes parading around in costumes of various designs, all carrying the banner of intolerance. I tried making a point earlier, but I believe it may have been lost in my stating - but others have come close to it as well. I'll say it again. I'm not christian. I am probably just plain ol' agnostic. BUT, I also think that FOR THE ISSUE AS I HAVE SEEN IT PRESENTED IN THE COURT BRIEFS, the Supreme Court made the correct decision. AS I HAVE BEEN LED TO BELIEVE, the question asked was NOT whether the club should be allowed to proselytize, flyer, sacrifice, martyr or do anything else. The question that the court decided on was whether it was correct for the school to exclude this club from meeting on campus by virtue of the faith they profess. If this is in fact the question (and it is, as I understand the briefs I've read), then the court made the VERY right decision. As has been said before, by defending the rights of the unpopular and minority groups to do the same as other more 'mainstream' organizations do, you empower ALL groups. Now... It DOES appear that there are satellite issues attendant on this case that while related to the main question, are not integral to the central issue that was decided. I consider this quite similar to the brouhaha over the 'medicinal marijuana' decision - which I also feel was correct GIVEN THE QUESTION ASKED (Not 'should marijuana be legalized' or any variant - the question asked was 'should state legislation take precedence over directly conflicting federal legislation', and their answer was 'no'). Now... For anyone getting emotional over this, PLEASE try to take a step back and breathe. Then consider... This decision did NOT legalize prayer in classroom, establish a religion, condone the dissemination of religious materials - or even permission slips - in class or any of the like. The decision simply said it's wrong to discriminate against a group holding meetings in a public facility that is used by other groups for meetings as well. This isn't even a groundbreaking decision. It's a fight that groups like the various gay/lesbian support clubs, the various ethnic support groups, and a host of other 'clubs' have fought over the years. If you STILL think the court made the wrong choice... strip religion out of the equation entirely (after all, at no point was the Supreme Court asked to rule on religion). Replace Christian with "NAACP"... or "Young Republicans"... or "Red Cross"... or any of a number of other organizations. Pick one that you personally identify with. Now, tell me. Is it still wrong that the court would defend their using the school after hours for meeting purposes? M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: mousethief Date: 14 Jun 01 - 04:11 PM Thank you, SeanM. Kat, I'm not sure what you mean about Mudcatters being mean; that was Sue's bailiwick, not mine. The majority of my family and friends are agnostic or atheist. THIS is the America I know. At my high school when I was there, and at my daughter's junior high school now, Christians are a persecuted minority. I know because I persecuted them; she knows because she is one. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: katlaughing Date: 14 Jun 01 - 04:33 PM Sorry, Alex. SeanM, FWIW, it is my understanding that children had been given permission slips to take home to their parents, in order to attend this particular club which was in this case, that is the Good News Club. MTed, thanks for pointing that out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: chip a Date: 14 Jun 01 - 04:36 PM Well said Sean M. :) Chip A. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: mousethief Date: 14 Jun 01 - 04:40 PM Kat: um, I forgive you. What are you apologizing for? Oh by the way, Kat, a sincere "thanks" for your efforts to keep this thread on a civil keel. *I* noticed, and I'm glad you have done what you have. Turning back to the court case in question: It seems to me that people are looking at this not as a court case abuot a group meeting on school grounds, but as a symbol of something large and sinister: pushy prosetylization by conservative Christians. Which is, no doubt, obnoxious. I have mused about affixing a big icon on my front door (of Mary of course!), and when the prosetylizers come to the door, listening to them a bit, then looking at my watch and excitedly chirping "Excuse me! It's 4:17!" (or whatever the actual time is) -- then kneeling and prostrating before the icon, and kissing it, then standing up, brushing off my knees, and saying, "Now, where were we?" I forget who said it, but it's true: How come nobody who wants to "share their faith" with me, wants me to "share my faith" with them in return? alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: wysiwyg Date: 14 Jun 01 - 04:55 PM Hearts are not political. They're soft and fuzzy. To communicate with one is to leave agreeing or disagreeing behind as a goal or a way of communicating. A heart is something you hold gently in your hand when someone gives it to you to hold for a bit. It's usually a trade... one hopes the other holds one's heart as gently. Precious things. Good to hold. Good to have held. Hearts usually turn out to be much the same, regardless of what the tongue spouts when connected. When you hold one, and yours is held, that becomes quite clear, and simple. It causes a sort of awe-filled feeling of curiosity and privilege. And gratitude. Hearts hide when politics hold sway, and shouting is the communication in force. Miss the heart and you miss the human being living beside you. Look around yourself... I know there are a lot of them to see. When you do, tell me what you see. Hearts can be open even when minds slam shut. They are much, MUCH harder to close. ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: Mary in Kentucky Date: 14 Jun 01 - 04:59 PM ...but Alex, why would you want a picture of me on your front door? ;-) My hubby tells those door-to-door types that they are welcome to come back anytime, just don't bring their religion with them. No takers so far. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: catspaw49 Date: 14 Jun 01 - 05:19 PM Hell Mary, you can be on my front door. I have a few doors open for icons as I only worship either at the "Shrine of the Immaculate Emmylou" or the "Church of No Redeeming Social Value." All we need is a name for your church and you're on your way to pin-up land! I haven't had any dash statuary either, but since acquiring Cleigh's nemesis, "The Little Pissant," I've seriously thought of putting him on the dashboard of my Astro. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: GUEST,GUEST Date: 14 Jun 01 - 05:41 PM In an earlier post, someone made the statement that all Xtianity is not monolithic. To which I can only answer: bullshit. All of Xtianity's agenda, which is blatantly exposed in the court case that led to this thread, is SALVATION. Deno That is to say, it sees its job as promulgating itself in order to gain as many adherents as possible |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: mousethief Date: 14 Jun 01 - 05:46 PM What's "Deno"? alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: catspaw49 Date: 14 Jun 01 - 05:52 PM Little dinosaur, 'bout yea tall.....kinda' spotted............. Or maybe it's Enzo Ferrari's kid....or Dean Martin's................ Maybe he meant DEVO and in that case, I've never had any idea what they were. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: mousethief Date: 14 Jun 01 - 05:56 PM Well they're certainly not Men. Says so in that song. ALex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: GUEST,Guest (again) Date: 14 Jun 01 - 05:56 PM In an earlier post, someone made the statement that all Xtianity is not monolithic. To which I can only answer: bullshit. All of Xtianity's agenda, which is blatantly exposed in the court case that led to this thread, is salvation (a rather nebulous concept, IMHO). Denomination be damned, Xtianity sees itself as having a divine mandate to promulgate itself in order to gain as many adherents as possible. Now, work with me on this. If you're going to claim that: 1. you have legal rights and standing based on those rights that stem from your belief in an entity that has absolutely no observable, overt, physical manifestation, and 2. you demand that other folks accept the validity of your belief structure simply because it is a matter of longstanding tradition, 3. Then I would respectfully submit that you have to accept the church of bonky the clown (just made that up) -- or the ravings of a clearly psychotic individual -- as deserving of the same rights as yourself. The problem with Xtianity is that it wants points 1 and 2 and doesn't want to grant point 3 to others. The widespread existence of Xtianity is a testament to its own internally-consistent memes that preach promulgation at any cost rather than any sort of altruism or actual peace or love. That's what the Xtian group that won the ruling has won -- ultimately, it's the right to promulgate itself through a captive audience. Consequently, I don't see this ruling as at all correct. In like fashion, I wouldn't see ANY numinous-focused group as having legitimate standing in this sort of a case. If fewer people subsumed solving problems now for pie in the sky later, we'd all be better off. Religions, IMHO, provide nothing more than a rather limited range of solutions to the complex problems of existence. They do provide some good ethics; the ten commandments, at least those that don't demand that [Gg]od be worshiped, are a fairly useful code. But so are the teachings of the Buddha (when not nattering about nirvana), Shinto, and other religions. But on the whole, they provide ways for folks to avoid looking squarely at problems and having to think their way through to a good solution. end of rant. Thanks
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: wysiwyg Date: 14 Jun 01 - 05:58 PM I do think that passing out permission slips IN class to something (anything) OUTSIDE of class is wrong. The school should not be doing that, and probably is violating some rule when they do. There IS a rule about having to have a slip, in most schools, to skip taking the bus, or to take a bus other than one;s usual to go home with a pal, but the slip is for the contracted bus company to deal with risk management, I believe. A note like that is supposed to come from the parent, directly, not via an activity that requires staying. In other words, part of what sounds messed up here, as far as boundaries and separation go, is that the school has been "helping" with Good News Club publicity. The "draw" to join it should happen outside of school entirely, via community publicity, just like other activities, unless the club is motivated by students starting it on their own, which I think unlikely. Students should have freedom of speech to invite friends to come, and use print materials to do it if they wish, but the teachers should not be involved in xeroxing and distributing the flyers or slips. I know Girl Scouts and Cub Scouts, etc. usually get "school dispensation" to distribute stuff in class, but in that case they supply their own paper and teachers as a rule hate doing it, from what teaching friends have shared with me, because it is ONE MORE THING. But it is really supposed to be school biz only. And that, IMO, is an entirely winnable fight that should be undertaken-- but only if people at the local level want to fight it, and if it's OK with them, then it should not be our biz. ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: Stevangelist Date: 14 Jun 01 - 05:59 PM You know what's really, really funny, GUEST? You don't seem to know ANY real Christians. You seem to know the narrow-minded assholes who can't smile at a person that refuses to listen to their rantings. I am a Christian minister. A PREACHER. A LOUD, JUMP-UP-AND-DOWN, HOLY GHOST, BIBLETHUMPNG preacher. And yet, it's strange... I never seem to find time in my day to PUT DOWN other beliefs. I simply respond to anything anyone says to me in a way that is in accordance with my beliefs. Yet when the word Christian is mentioned, everyone feels perfectly OK about generalizing and making fun. Christianity as the majority? Hardly. Christianity as a 'monolith with a salvation agenda'? Friend, you don't know the first thing about Christians. We don't seek adherents. We ourselves seek to adhere. Ask any REAL Christian and they will tell you that people don't save anything. Most people can't even save coupons. You want to know about salvation? try this: save your breath. Stevangelist
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: mousethief Date: 14 Jun 01 - 06:00 PM The problem with Xtianity is that it wants points 1 and 2 and doesn't want to grant point 3 to others. Speak for yourself. I'm a Christian and I'm willing to grant point 3 to others. Maybe we're not as monolithic as you would have us be. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: mousethief Date: 14 Jun 01 - 06:04 PM PS "Xtianity" would stand for Christtianity, since "X" stands for "Christ." I wonder if Guest has a stuttering problem? Stevangelist: simmer down, boy! Illegitimi non carborundum. Don't lower yourself to Anonyguest's level. Anger breeds only anger. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: Stevangelist Date: 14 Jun 01 - 06:10 PM Alex, GOD (I said it) bless you. Just because I don't believe someone else is correct in their beliefs doesn't mean I can't allow them to have and promote those beliefs. I concede point 3 on a daily basis. If someone wants to believe they can reach relationship with God by hitting themsleves in the head with a frying pan 100 times a day, I say let 'em. Ain't my job to point out their faults... May The Road Rise To Meet You, Stevangelist |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Separation of church & state lessened From: GUEST,GUEST Date: 14 Jun 01 - 06:13 PM Steve and Alex, I'm glad you're willing to grant point three to others. In general, that's not been my experience. It's been my experience that Xtianity, particularly fundamental Xtianity, resolutely demands rights for itself, and demands the right to insert itself into public life in this country, and demands that it be allowed use of public facilities to further its own message because "we're taxpayers." Great argument. I'm also a taxpayer and I don't want to either see my money go to an organization which has no raison d'etre other than self-perpetuation and no basis other than faith. When people tell me to have faith, I tell them I'll wait until the check clears, and then I'll ship....not bloody well before. I also don't want my taxes coming back at me in the form of some publicly-subsidized religious exercise which someone in gov't has decided is sufficiently of merit to be allowed to attempt to instruct me on the error of my ways. I don't like ANY religion in the public sphere. My take is that if you want to believe something, that's fine. But if the belief is based on faith rather than objective reality, it doesn't belong in public policy at any level. There's too much room for abuse in the name of faith....as witness the Crusades, the Inquisition, a variety of Islamic jihads, and certainly a great many others that I can't list. Social policy should be based on close observation of human nature, which I submit is basically as Hobbes described it -- I'm not an optimist -- understanding that we need to adapt to minimize the harm caused by our basic primate urges. Steve, what did you mean by this: "You want to know about salvation? try this: save your breath. "
|