100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Seperation of Church and State | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Thu 10/06/11 07:41 PM
|
|
I believe it broadly contradicts freedom of religious expression forbidding a mandate toward religion would be seperate forbidding ANY religious expression would be prohibiting which is also a part of what the constitution was trying to prevent just like all speech is not free, as literally worded in the first amendment, all expression, religious or otherwise is not free. religion particularly is forbidden in schools on the basis of the establishment clause. i understand that you and most other folks of faith see it differently but numerous justices who practice christianity disagree with you. they opine that religious expression in school is barred by separation of church and state, states being the government entity that runs public schools. you are perfectly free to have your child educated in religious practices in school. you simply enroll them in a private school that teaches what you want taught or home school them yourself. but to have tax dollars educate your kids along with other kids whose parents may not want religion taught or even exposed to their kids through open prayer must be forbidden. we all have rights. your right to religious expression in schools cannot trump my right to not have it. you can freely shout your religious views on the street but i've the right to walk away. when religious views are shouted in schools my kids cannot just walk away nor should they have to. i pay my fair share of taxes, on which schools depend, just as you do. I understand that , I just disagree with it and my disagreement holds no significance because its the courts decision my feeling is that part of not respecting or prohibiting just requires the government stay out of it period which to me means, just because I am of faith, I cannot dictate no motley crue shirts at school, I cannot dictate no mtv shirts at school, I cannot dictate no secular music at schoools,, and that does plenty to protect freedom of expression for NON RELIGIOUS persons but non religious persons can be the basis that someone dictates my child cannot say a prayer at their high school graduation,, for instance ,, that is unfair and unequal application based in nothing BUT religion,, which I Think is not consistent with the idea of a government which stays out of it and respects all our rights equally,,,, Except there is no restriction for your child to pray in school. The school cannot be involved or advocate for child to pray in school but my understanding of prayer is that it can be done silently any time of day or night with no persecution what so ever. I think school officials broadly interpret things sometimes, just recently my baby cousin was asked for their yearbook to give a 'personal' quote she wanted to be remembered by she simply stated something about turning to God and they made her pick a different quote I think thats a BROAD net to throw out to avoid offending non religious,,,, a 'personal' quote should be a reflection of a person, and not a reflection of any institution, government, or school it feels like the in type of bigotry is anti religion,, people want to express themself and have freedom for what they want to do, but they want to put peoples religious beliefs in a closet and force them to hide I am taken aback that a school can have rainbow days explaining and celebrating homosexuality, but a student at a graduation cannot say a prayer,,,, there is no comparison there at all. Homosexuality is a natural human state of being from birth. Religion is a belief. Not comparable at all. I wouldnt really care , some argue that religion is also hardwired based upon the family we are brought up in some argue pedophilia is hardwired,, that doesnt change the reasons I may not approve of it or want it forced upon me or my kids the point is still that I dont have that same right to not have things FORCED on me or my children that the non religious have |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Thu 10/06/11 07:47 PM
|
|
I believe it broadly contradicts freedom of religious expression forbidding a mandate toward religion would be seperate forbidding ANY religious expression would be prohibiting which is also a part of what the constitution was trying to prevent just like all speech is not free, as literally worded in the first amendment, all expression, religious or otherwise is not free. religion particularly is forbidden in schools on the basis of the establishment clause. i understand that you and most other folks of faith see it differently but numerous justices who practice christianity disagree with you. they opine that religious expression in school is barred by separation of church and state, states being the government entity that runs public schools. you are perfectly free to have your child educated in religious practices in school. you simply enroll them in a private school that teaches what you want taught or home school them yourself. but to have tax dollars educate your kids along with other kids whose parents may not want religion taught or even exposed to their kids through open prayer must be forbidden. we all have rights. your right to religious expression in schools cannot trump my right to not have it. you can freely shout your religious views on the street but i've the right to walk away. when religious views are shouted in schools my kids cannot just walk away nor should they have to. i pay my fair share of taxes, on which schools depend, just as you do. I understand that , I just disagree with it and my disagreement holds no significance because its the courts decision my feeling is that part of not respecting or prohibiting just requires the government stay out of it period which to me means, just because I am of faith, I cannot dictate no motley crue shirts at school, I cannot dictate no mtv shirts at school, I cannot dictate no secular music at schoools,, and that does plenty to protect freedom of expression for NON RELIGIOUS persons but non religious persons can be the basis that someone dictates my child cannot say a prayer at their high school graduation,, for instance ,, that is unfair and unequal application based in nothing BUT religion,, which I Think is not consistent with the idea of a government which stays out of it and respects all our rights equally,,,, Except there is no restriction for your child to pray in school. The school cannot be involved or advocate for child to pray in school but my understanding of prayer is that it can be done silently any time of day or night with no persecution what so ever. I think school officials broadly interpret things sometimes, just recently my baby cousin was asked for their yearbook to give a 'personal' quote she wanted to be remembered by she simply stated something about turning to God and they made her pick a different quote I think thats a BROAD net to throw out to avoid offending non religious,,,, a 'personal' quote should be a reflection of a person, and not a reflection of any institution, government, or school it feels like the in type of bigotry is anti religion,, people want to express themself and have freedom for what they want to do, but they want to put peoples religious beliefs in a closet and force them to hide I am taken aback that a school can have rainbow days explaining and celebrating homosexuality, but a student at a graduation cannot say a prayer,,,, there is no comparison there at all. Homosexuality is a natural human state of being from birth. Religion is a belief. Not comparable at all. I wouldnt really care , some argue that religion is also hardwired based upon the family we are brought up in some argue pedophilia is hardwired,, that doesnt change the reasons I may not approve of it or want it forced upon me or my kids the point is still that I dont have that same right to not have things FORCED on me or my children that the non religious have Except to be tolerant is what black folks want, right? They should understand homosexuals better than anyone. Tolerance involves knowledge to stop the fear and then prevention of discrimination and laws to make it all equal. Having nothing to do with religion since homosexuality is a natural state of humans the same as being black instead of white is. All very natural states of humans. Needing to be taught that there is nothing wrong with any of it. Religion on the other hand is taught and chosen. No comparison. Pedophilia being brought up every time by you when homosexuality is brought up showing your indoctrination and discrimination. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Thu 10/06/11 07:52 PM
|
|
I believe it broadly contradicts freedom of religious expression forbidding a mandate toward religion would be seperate forbidding ANY religious expression would be prohibiting which is also a part of what the constitution was trying to prevent just like all speech is not free, as literally worded in the first amendment, all expression, religious or otherwise is not free. religion particularly is forbidden in schools on the basis of the establishment clause. i understand that you and most other folks of faith see it differently but numerous justices who practice christianity disagree with you. they opine that religious expression in school is barred by separation of church and state, states being the government entity that runs public schools. you are perfectly free to have your child educated in religious practices in school. you simply enroll them in a private school that teaches what you want taught or home school them yourself. but to have tax dollars educate your kids along with other kids whose parents may not want religion taught or even exposed to their kids through open prayer must be forbidden. we all have rights. your right to religious expression in schools cannot trump my right to not have it. you can freely shout your religious views on the street but i've the right to walk away. when religious views are shouted in schools my kids cannot just walk away nor should they have to. i pay my fair share of taxes, on which schools depend, just as you do. I understand that , I just disagree with it and my disagreement holds no significance because its the courts decision my feeling is that part of not respecting or prohibiting just requires the government stay out of it period which to me means, just because I am of faith, I cannot dictate no motley crue shirts at school, I cannot dictate no mtv shirts at school, I cannot dictate no secular music at schoools,, and that does plenty to protect freedom of expression for NON RELIGIOUS persons but non religious persons can be the basis that someone dictates my child cannot say a prayer at their high school graduation,, for instance ,, that is unfair and unequal application based in nothing BUT religion,, which I Think is not consistent with the idea of a government which stays out of it and respects all our rights equally,,,, Except there is no restriction for your child to pray in school. The school cannot be involved or advocate for child to pray in school but my understanding of prayer is that it can be done silently any time of day or night with no persecution what so ever. I think school officials broadly interpret things sometimes, just recently my baby cousin was asked for their yearbook to give a 'personal' quote she wanted to be remembered by she simply stated something about turning to God and they made her pick a different quote I think thats a BROAD net to throw out to avoid offending non religious,,,, a 'personal' quote should be a reflection of a person, and not a reflection of any institution, government, or school it feels like the in type of bigotry is anti religion,, people want to express themself and have freedom for what they want to do, but they want to put peoples religious beliefs in a closet and force them to hide I am taken aback that a school can have rainbow days explaining and celebrating homosexuality, but a student at a graduation cannot say a prayer,,,, there is no comparison there at all. Homosexuality is a natural human state of being from birth. Religion is a belief. Not comparable at all. I wouldnt really care , some argue that religion is also hardwired based upon the family we are brought up in some argue pedophilia is hardwired,, that doesnt change the reasons I may not approve of it or want it forced upon me or my kids the point is still that I dont have that same right to not have things FORCED on me or my children that the non religious have Except to be tolerant is what black folks want, right? They should understand homosexuals better than anyone. Tolerance involves knowledge to stop the fear and then prevention of discrimination and laws to make it all equal. Having nothing to do with religion since homosexuality is a natural state of humans the same as being black instead of white is. All very natural states of humans. Needing to be taught that there is nothing wrong with any of it. Religion on the other hand is taught and chosen. No comparison. Pedophilia being brought up every time by you when homosexuality is brought up showing your indoctrination and discrimination. I think the comparison of blacks to homosexuals is about as ridiculous as you probably find comparing homosexuals to pedophiles,,, but back on point... banning religious expression is anything but 'tolerant' exactly the point I Was making I can be asked to be (And am) 'tolerant' of all the homosexual lifestyle celebrations and support at public schools, but others dont have to be 'tolerant' of an individual STUDENTS choice of words to describe THEMSELF in a yearbook seems like alot of hypocrisy by those who are so often accusing the religous of it,, to me |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe it broadly contradicts freedom of religious expression forbidding a mandate toward religion would be seperate forbidding ANY religious expression would be prohibiting which is also a part of what the constitution was trying to prevent just like all speech is not free, as literally worded in the first amendment, all expression, religious or otherwise is not free. religion particularly is forbidden in schools on the basis of the establishment clause. i understand that you and most other folks of faith see it differently but numerous justices who practice christianity disagree with you. they opine that religious expression in school is barred by separation of church and state, states being the government entity that runs public schools. you are perfectly free to have your child educated in religious practices in school. you simply enroll them in a private school that teaches what you want taught or home school them yourself. but to have tax dollars educate your kids along with other kids whose parents may not want religion taught or even exposed to their kids through open prayer must be forbidden. we all have rights. your right to religious expression in schools cannot trump my right to not have it. you can freely shout your religious views on the street but i've the right to walk away. when religious views are shouted in schools my kids cannot just walk away nor should they have to. i pay my fair share of taxes, on which schools depend, just as you do. I understand that , I just disagree with it and my disagreement holds no significance because its the courts decision my feeling is that part of not respecting or prohibiting just requires the government stay out of it period which to me means, just because I am of faith, I cannot dictate no motley crue shirts at school, I cannot dictate no mtv shirts at school, I cannot dictate no secular music at schoools,, and that does plenty to protect freedom of expression for NON RELIGIOUS persons but non religious persons can be the basis that someone dictates my child cannot say a prayer at their high school graduation,, for instance ,, that is unfair and unequal application based in nothing BUT religion,, which I Think is not consistent with the idea of a government which stays out of it and respects all our rights equally,,,, Except there is no restriction for your child to pray in school. The school cannot be involved or advocate for child to pray in school but my understanding of prayer is that it can be done silently any time of day or night with no persecution what so ever. I think school officials broadly interpret things sometimes, just recently my baby cousin was asked for their yearbook to give a 'personal' quote she wanted to be remembered by she simply stated something about turning to God and they made her pick a different quote I think thats a BROAD net to throw out to avoid offending non religious,,,, a 'personal' quote should be a reflection of a person, and not a reflection of any institution, government, or school it feels like the in type of bigotry is anti religion,, people want to express themself and have freedom for what they want to do, but they want to put peoples religious beliefs in a closet and force them to hide I am taken aback that a school can have rainbow days explaining and celebrating homosexuality, but a student at a graduation cannot say a prayer,,,, there is no comparison there at all. Homosexuality is a natural human state of being from birth. Religion is a belief. Not comparable at all. I wouldnt really care , some argue that religion is also hardwired based upon the family we are brought up in some argue pedophilia is hardwired,, that doesnt change the reasons I may not approve of it or want it forced upon me or my kids the point is still that I dont have that same right to not have things FORCED on me or my children that the non religious have Except to be tolerant is what black folks want, right? They should understand homosexuals better than anyone. Tolerance involves knowledge to stop the fear and then prevention of discrimination and laws to make it all equal. Having nothing to do with religion since homosexuality is a natural state of humans the same as being black instead of white is. All very natural states of humans. Needing to be taught that there is nothing wrong with any of it. Religion on the other hand is taught and chosen. No comparison. Pedophilia being brought up every time by you when homosexuality is brought up showing your indoctrination and discrimination. I think the comparison of blacks to homosexuals is about as ridiculous as you probably find comparing homosexuals to pedophiles,,, but back on point... banning religious expression is anything but 'tolerant' exactly the point I Was making I can be asked to be (And am) 'tolerant' of all the homosexual lifestyle celebrations and support at public schools, but others dont have to be 'tolerant' of an individual STUDENTS choice of words to describe THEMSELF in a yearbook seems like alot of hypocrisy by those who are so often accusing the religous of it,, to me Being discriminated against for their natural state of being is shared by blacks and homosexuals. Very comparable. She can write god all over her own year book if she wants so she is not restricted. She just can't put it in everyones year book which is as it should be. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe it broadly contradicts freedom of religious expression forbidding a mandate toward religion would be seperate forbidding ANY religious expression would be prohibiting which is also a part of what the constitution was trying to prevent just like all speech is not free, as literally worded in the first amendment, all expression, religious or otherwise is not free. religion particularly is forbidden in schools on the basis of the establishment clause. i understand that you and most other folks of faith see it differently but numerous justices who practice christianity disagree with you. they opine that religious expression in school is barred by separation of church and state, states being the government entity that runs public schools. you are perfectly free to have your child educated in religious practices in school. you simply enroll them in a private school that teaches what you want taught or home school them yourself. but to have tax dollars educate your kids along with other kids whose parents may not want religion taught or even exposed to their kids through open prayer must be forbidden. we all have rights. your right to religious expression in schools cannot trump my right to not have it. you can freely shout your religious views on the street but i've the right to walk away. when religious views are shouted in schools my kids cannot just walk away nor should they have to. i pay my fair share of taxes, on which schools depend, just as you do. I understand that , I just disagree with it and my disagreement holds no significance because its the courts decision my feeling is that part of not respecting or prohibiting just requires the government stay out of it period which to me means, just because I am of faith, I cannot dictate no motley crue shirts at school, I cannot dictate no mtv shirts at school, I cannot dictate no secular music at schoools,, and that does plenty to protect freedom of expression for NON RELIGIOUS persons but non religious persons can be the basis that someone dictates my child cannot say a prayer at their high school graduation,, for instance ,, that is unfair and unequal application based in nothing BUT religion,, which I Think is not consistent with the idea of a government which stays out of it and respects all our rights equally,,,, Except there is no restriction for your child to pray in school. The school cannot be involved or advocate for child to pray in school but my understanding of prayer is that it can be done silently any time of day or night with no persecution what so ever. I think school officials broadly interpret things sometimes, just recently my baby cousin was asked for their yearbook to give a 'personal' quote she wanted to be remembered by she simply stated something about turning to God and they made her pick a different quote I think thats a BROAD net to throw out to avoid offending non religious,,,, a 'personal' quote should be a reflection of a person, and not a reflection of any institution, government, or school that's far and away different from silent prayer, mh. the government, school district, sponsors yearbooks. for them to write religious quotes would be 'respecting an establishment of religion' clearly. can't do that. I disagree. ITs a 'quote', its not respecting anything but someones right to express themself the way they choose to. IT only represents the person from whom the QUOTE is taken. She did not take a verse from a bible even,, she said something about how SHE personally turns to God. How could that be so broadly interpreted as the publishers of the book RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT of religion,, as opposed to the publishers giving each PERSON A chance to represent what is important to THEM,, religious or not.?? we can argue this all day nevertheless it's what the courts agree that matters. it would in fact be ruled as the school respecting an establishment of religion regardless whether or not you might agree. we have laws, the courts and a constitution simply because everybody does not agree on what individual rights should be protected and which government should and should not have the power to decide for us. and one issue that the government does not have the power to decide is the issue of religion either for or against. as you say, it must stay completely out of it. for god to appear in a yearbook would not amount to the government staying completely out of religion. it would mean the school district respecting an establishment of religion which is forbidden by the establishment clause. argue against it all day but it is what it is. you certainly have the right to nominate to the president yourself or anybody else who you'd like to see appointed to fill the next federal judgeship or supreme court justice position. then what you think would matter. short of that, the best any of us can do is understand the rulings as they are handed down. but we would not need a judiciary if we could all agree would we? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldnt really care , some argue that religion is also hardwired based upon the family we are brought up in some argue pedophilia is hardwired,, that doesnt change the reasons I may not approve of it or want it forced upon me or my kids the point is still that I dont have that same right to not have things FORCED on me or my children that the non religious have what is or is not 'hardwired' is not the issue in the least. you have every right to protest anything being taught in public schools, pedophilia or whatever, that every other parent does. but we're not talking about what is taught in school that should not. we're talking about what is already prohibited to be taught in school which is religion. you might not want evolution taught in school but the constitution does not prohibit that as it does prohibit teaching creation. you keep wandering off topic, mh. again, separation of church and state is the issue, not what you or i don't want taught in public schools. i think many of the humanities taught in k-12 are a waste of time when it comes to preparing our kids for the job force they'll face as adults. but that was not addressed by the founders nor was pedophilia, which happens to be a crime. religion was. how homosexuality came into the discussion i've not the slightest clue but schools should and do teach an appreciation for diversity of all kinds be it sexual preference, skin color OR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. but an appreciation of diversity in religious beliefs does not mean supporting the practice of those beliefs openly in school whether it be open prayer in the classroom or a quote about god in a yearbook. it seems to me that instead of arguing what the first amendment says you'd be better off arguing that it be abolished and another amendment written without the establshment clause. let it go throught the process and if you can convince thirty eight state legislatures to ratify it you'll have what you want. short of that you'll not get religion taught or even recognized in public school. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
banning religious expression is anything but 'tolerant' indeed. the constitution will not tolerat religious expression within government. so says the establishment clause. anywhere else such expression is a right which cannot be infringed. so says the free practice clause. two entirely different clauses one having nothing whatsoever to do with the other. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
She can write god all over her own year book if she wants so she is not restricted. She just can't put it in everyones year book which is as it should be. just as she cannot pray openly in class where everybody can hear it. we've as much right to freedom from religion as we've a right to freely practice it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe it broadly contradicts freedom of religious expression forbidding a mandate toward religion would be seperate forbidding ANY religious expression would be prohibiting which is also a part of what the constitution was trying to prevent just like all speech is not free, as literally worded in the first amendment, all expression, religious or otherwise is not free. religion particularly is forbidden in schools on the basis of the establishment clause. i understand that you and most other folks of faith see it differently but numerous justices who practice christianity disagree with you. they opine that religious expression in school is barred by separation of church and state, states being the government entity that runs public schools. you are perfectly free to have your child educated in religious practices in school. you simply enroll them in a private school that teaches what you want taught or home school them yourself. but to have tax dollars educate your kids along with other kids whose parents may not want religion taught or even exposed to their kids through open prayer must be forbidden. we all have rights. your right to religious expression in schools cannot trump my right to not have it. you can freely shout your religious views on the street but i've the right to walk away. when religious views are shouted in schools my kids cannot just walk away nor should they have to. i pay my fair share of taxes, on which schools depend, just as you do. I understand that , I just disagree with it and my disagreement holds no significance because its the courts decision my feeling is that part of not respecting or prohibiting just requires the government stay out of it period which to me means, just because I am of faith, I cannot dictate no motley crue shirts at school, I cannot dictate no mtv shirts at school, I cannot dictate no secular music at schoools,, and that does plenty to protect freedom of expression for NON RELIGIOUS persons but non religious persons can be the basis that someone dictates my child cannot say a prayer at their high school graduation,, for instance ,, that is unfair and unequal application based in nothing BUT religion,, which I Think is not consistent with the idea of a government which stays out of it and respects all our rights equally,,,, Except there is no restriction for your child to pray in school. The school cannot be involved or advocate for child to pray in school but my understanding of prayer is that it can be done silently any time of day or night with no persecution what so ever. I think school officials broadly interpret things sometimes, just recently my baby cousin was asked for their yearbook to give a 'personal' quote she wanted to be remembered by she simply stated something about turning to God and they made her pick a different quote I think thats a BROAD net to throw out to avoid offending non religious,,,, a 'personal' quote should be a reflection of a person, and not a reflection of any institution, government, or school it feels like the in type of bigotry is anti religion,, people want to express themself and have freedom for what they want to do, but they want to put peoples religious beliefs in a closet and force them to hide I am taken aback that a school can have rainbow days explaining and celebrating homosexuality, but a student at a graduation cannot say a prayer,,,, there is no comparison there at all. Homosexuality is a natural human state of being from birth. Religion is a belief. Not comparable at all. I wouldnt really care , some argue that religion is also hardwired based upon the family we are brought up in some argue pedophilia is hardwired,, that doesnt change the reasons I may not approve of it or want it forced upon me or my kids the point is still that I dont have that same right to not have things FORCED on me or my children that the non religious have Except to be tolerant is what black folks want, right? They should understand homosexuals better than anyone. Tolerance involves knowledge to stop the fear and then prevention of discrimination and laws to make it all equal. Having nothing to do with religion since homosexuality is a natural state of humans the same as being black instead of white is. All very natural states of humans. Needing to be taught that there is nothing wrong with any of it. Religion on the other hand is taught and chosen. No comparison. Pedophilia being brought up every time by you when homosexuality is brought up showing your indoctrination and discrimination. I think the comparison of blacks to homosexuals is about as ridiculous as you probably find comparing homosexuals to pedophiles,,, but back on point... banning religious expression is anything but 'tolerant' exactly the point I Was making I can be asked to be (And am) 'tolerant' of all the homosexual lifestyle celebrations and support at public schools, but others dont have to be 'tolerant' of an individual STUDENTS choice of words to describe THEMSELF in a yearbook seems like alot of hypocrisy by those who are so often accusing the religous of it,, to me Being discriminated against for their natural state of being is shared by blacks and homosexuals. Very comparable. She can write god all over her own year book if she wants so she is not restricted. She just can't put it in everyones year book which is as it should be. she cant SPEAK it publicly, ,even if its just HER words,, thats great freedom of expression a quote, is something someone has SPOKEN regarding their PERSONAL belief,, but if its a religious belief , its banned,, thats quite ridiculous an its not being discriminated against for a natural state its being discriminated against for ACTIONS,, quite different when was the last time you heard the nursery had three heterosexual babies and four homosexual ones,,,? you dont people just SEE gender or race,, they only SEE sexual preference when people decide to EXPRESS it I cant come to the conclusion Im black, I Cant go through discovery to find out IM black, I cant hide my black in a closet, I cant be race curious, I Cant experiment with my racial identity RACE and GENDER are there from BIRTH, decided by genetic history regardless of how those go on to act or feel sexual preference is not decided when we are in the nursery, it is SELF ASSIGNED by us , based upon how we decide we FEEL and how we decide to act upon it |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Thu 10/06/11 11:23 PM
|
|
She can write god all over her own year book if she wants so she is not restricted. She just can't put it in everyones year book which is as it should be. just as she cannot pray openly in class where everybody can hear it. we've as much right to freedom from religion as we've a right to freely practice it. but not a right to PROHIBIT Its exercise or expression,, so where I See this as conflicting with her right not to be PROHIBITED, others apparently see it more about the rights of others to be FREE from it,,, where I see a need for government not to prohibit her expression others see the need (As posted here) , because its RELIGIOUS Expression, feel government should not permit private individuals to speak it even when representing themself,,,if its on government property,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe it broadly contradicts freedom of religious expression forbidding a mandate toward religion would be seperate forbidding ANY religious expression would be prohibiting which is also a part of what the constitution was trying to prevent just like all speech is not free, as literally worded in the first amendment, all expression, religious or otherwise is not free. religion particularly is forbidden in schools on the basis of the establishment clause. i understand that you and most other folks of faith see it differently but numerous justices who practice christianity disagree with you. they opine that religious expression in school is barred by separation of church and state, states being the government entity that runs public schools. you are perfectly free to have your child educated in religious practices in school. you simply enroll them in a private school that teaches what you want taught or home school them yourself. but to have tax dollars educate your kids along with other kids whose parents may not want religion taught or even exposed to their kids through open prayer must be forbidden. we all have rights. your right to religious expression in schools cannot trump my right to not have it. you can freely shout your religious views on the street but i've the right to walk away. when religious views are shouted in schools my kids cannot just walk away nor should they have to. i pay my fair share of taxes, on which schools depend, just as you do. I understand that , I just disagree with it and my disagreement holds no significance because its the courts decision my feeling is that part of not respecting or prohibiting just requires the government stay out of it period which to me means, just because I am of faith, I cannot dictate no motley crue shirts at school, I cannot dictate no mtv shirts at school, I cannot dictate no secular music at schoools,, and that does plenty to protect freedom of expression for NON RELIGIOUS persons but non religious persons can be the basis that someone dictates my child cannot say a prayer at their high school graduation,, for instance ,, that is unfair and unequal application based in nothing BUT religion,, which I Think is not consistent with the idea of a government which stays out of it and respects all our rights equally,,,, Except there is no restriction for your child to pray in school. The school cannot be involved or advocate for child to pray in school but my understanding of prayer is that it can be done silently any time of day or night with no persecution what so ever. I think school officials broadly interpret things sometimes, just recently my baby cousin was asked for their yearbook to give a 'personal' quote she wanted to be remembered by she simply stated something about turning to God and they made her pick a different quote I think thats a BROAD net to throw out to avoid offending non religious,,,, a 'personal' quote should be a reflection of a person, and not a reflection of any institution, government, or school it feels like the in type of bigotry is anti religion,, people want to express themself and have freedom for what they want to do, but they want to put peoples religious beliefs in a closet and force them to hide I am taken aback that a school can have rainbow days explaining and celebrating homosexuality, but a student at a graduation cannot say a prayer,,,, there is no comparison there at all. Homosexuality is a natural human state of being from birth. Religion is a belief. Not comparable at all. I wouldnt really care , some argue that religion is also hardwired based upon the family we are brought up in some argue pedophilia is hardwired,, that doesnt change the reasons I may not approve of it or want it forced upon me or my kids the point is still that I dont have that same right to not have things FORCED on me or my children that the non religious have Except to be tolerant is what black folks want, right? They should understand homosexuals better than anyone. Tolerance involves knowledge to stop the fear and then prevention of discrimination and laws to make it all equal. Having nothing to do with religion since homosexuality is a natural state of humans the same as being black instead of white is. All very natural states of humans. Needing to be taught that there is nothing wrong with any of it. Religion on the other hand is taught and chosen. No comparison. Pedophilia being brought up every time by you when homosexuality is brought up showing your indoctrination and discrimination. I think the comparison of blacks to homosexuals is about as ridiculous as you probably find comparing homosexuals to pedophiles,,, but back on point... banning religious expression is anything but 'tolerant' exactly the point I Was making I can be asked to be (And am) 'tolerant' of all the homosexual lifestyle celebrations and support at public schools, but others dont have to be 'tolerant' of an individual STUDENTS choice of words to describe THEMSELF in a yearbook seems like alot of hypocrisy by those who are so often accusing the religous of it,, to me Being discriminated against for their natural state of being is shared by blacks and homosexuals. Very comparable. She can write god all over her own year book if she wants so she is not restricted. She just can't put it in everyones year book which is as it should be. she cant SPEAK it publicly, ,even if its just HER words,, thats great freedom of expression a quote, is something someone has SPOKEN regarding their PERSONAL belief,, but if its a religious belief , its banned,, thats quite ridiculous an its not being discriminated against for a natural state its being discriminated against for ACTIONS,, quite different when was the last time you heard the nursery had three heterosexual babies and four homosexual ones,,,? you dont people just SEE gender or race,, they only SEE sexual preference when people decide to EXPRESS it I cant come to the conclusion Im black, I Cant go through discovery to find out IM black, I cant hide my black in a closet, I cant be race curious, I Cant experiment with my racial identity RACE and GENDER are there from BIRTH, decided by genetic history regardless of how those go on to act or feel sexual preference is not decided when we are in the nursery, it is SELF ASSIGNED by us , based upon how we decide we FEEL and how we decide to act upon it there is no discrimination involved. NOBODY is allowed an open expression of religion in school. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
She can write god all over her own year book if she wants so she is not restricted. She just can't put it in everyones year book which is as it should be. just as she cannot pray openly in class where everybody can hear it. we've as much right to freedom from religion as we've a right to freely practice it. but not a right to PROHIBIT Its exercise or expression,, so where I See this as conflicting with her right not to be PROHIBITED, others apparently see it more about the rights of others to be FREE from it,,, where I see a need for government not to prohibit her expression others see the need (As posted here) , because its RELIGIOUS Expression, feel government should not permit private individuals to speak it even when representing themself,,,if its on government property,,, you simply don't seem to understand that the establishment clause exists, mh. you seem to agree that government should stay completely out of relegion and the clause requires exactly that. public schools are government entities but somehow you reason that a school respecting an establishment of your religion should be allowed. you cannot have it both ways. allowing open expression of religious beliefs in public schools indeed does violate the establshment clause. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
She can write god all over her own year book if she wants so she is not restricted. She just can't put it in everyones year book which is as it should be. just as she cannot pray openly in class where everybody can hear it. we've as much right to freedom from religion as we've a right to freely practice it. but not a right to PROHIBIT Its exercise or expression,, so where I See this as conflicting with her right not to be PROHIBITED, others apparently see it more about the rights of others to be FREE from it,,, where I see a need for government not to prohibit her expression others see the need (As posted here) , because its RELIGIOUS Expression, feel government should not permit private individuals to speak it even when representing themself,,,if its on government property,,, you simply don't seem to understand that the establishment clause exists, mh. you seem to agree that government should stay completely out of relegion and the clause requires exactly that. public schools are government entities but somehow you reason that a school respecting an establishment of your religion should be allowed. you cannot have it both ways. allowing open expression of religious beliefs in public schools indeed does violate the establshment clause. Where in the constitution does it give the courts the authority for judicial review or interpretation of intent? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nowhere. it's common law. you won't find anything in the constitution that gives states the authority to issue drivers licenses either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Fri 10/07/11 05:40 PM
|
|
I believe it broadly contradicts freedom of religious expression forbidding a mandate toward religion would be seperate forbidding ANY religious expression would be prohibiting which is also a part of what the constitution was trying to prevent just like all speech is not free, as literally worded in the first amendment, all expression, religious or otherwise is not free. religion particularly is forbidden in schools on the basis of the establishment clause. i understand that you and most other folks of faith see it differently but numerous justices who practice christianity disagree with you. they opine that religious expression in school is barred by separation of church and state, states being the government entity that runs public schools. you are perfectly free to have your child educated in religious practices in school. you simply enroll them in a private school that teaches what you want taught or home school them yourself. but to have tax dollars educate your kids along with other kids whose parents may not want religion taught or even exposed to their kids through open prayer must be forbidden. we all have rights. your right to religious expression in schools cannot trump my right to not have it. you can freely shout your religious views on the street but i've the right to walk away. when religious views are shouted in schools my kids cannot just walk away nor should they have to. i pay my fair share of taxes, on which schools depend, just as you do. I understand that , I just disagree with it and my disagreement holds no significance because its the courts decision my feeling is that part of not respecting or prohibiting just requires the government stay out of it period which to me means, just because I am of faith, I cannot dictate no motley crue shirts at school, I cannot dictate no mtv shirts at school, I cannot dictate no secular music at schoools,, and that does plenty to protect freedom of expression for NON RELIGIOUS persons but non religious persons can be the basis that someone dictates my child cannot say a prayer at their high school graduation,, for instance ,, that is unfair and unequal application based in nothing BUT religion,, which I Think is not consistent with the idea of a government which stays out of it and respects all our rights equally,,,, Except there is no restriction for your child to pray in school. The school cannot be involved or advocate for child to pray in school but my understanding of prayer is that it can be done silently any time of day or night with no persecution what so ever. I think school officials broadly interpret things sometimes, just recently my baby cousin was asked for their yearbook to give a 'personal' quote she wanted to be remembered by she simply stated something about turning to God and they made her pick a different quote I think thats a BROAD net to throw out to avoid offending non religious,,,, a 'personal' quote should be a reflection of a person, and not a reflection of any institution, government, or school it feels like the in type of bigotry is anti religion,, people want to express themself and have freedom for what they want to do, but they want to put peoples religious beliefs in a closet and force them to hide I am taken aback that a school can have rainbow days explaining and celebrating homosexuality, but a student at a graduation cannot say a prayer,,,, there is no comparison there at all. Homosexuality is a natural human state of being from birth. Religion is a belief. Not comparable at all. I wouldnt really care , some argue that religion is also hardwired based upon the family we are brought up in some argue pedophilia is hardwired,, that doesnt change the reasons I may not approve of it or want it forced upon me or my kids the point is still that I dont have that same right to not have things FORCED on me or my children that the non religious have Except to be tolerant is what black folks want, right? They should understand homosexuals better than anyone. Tolerance involves knowledge to stop the fear and then prevention of discrimination and laws to make it all equal. Having nothing to do with religion since homosexuality is a natural state of humans the same as being black instead of white is. All very natural states of humans. Needing to be taught that there is nothing wrong with any of it. Religion on the other hand is taught and chosen. No comparison. Pedophilia being brought up every time by you when homosexuality is brought up showing your indoctrination and discrimination. I think the comparison of blacks to homosexuals is about as ridiculous as you probably find comparing homosexuals to pedophiles,,, but back on point... banning religious expression is anything but 'tolerant' exactly the point I Was making I can be asked to be (And am) 'tolerant' of all the homosexual lifestyle celebrations and support at public schools, but others dont have to be 'tolerant' of an individual STUDENTS choice of words to describe THEMSELF in a yearbook seems like alot of hypocrisy by those who are so often accusing the religous of it,, to me Being discriminated against for their natural state of being is shared by blacks and homosexuals. Very comparable. She can write god all over her own year book if she wants so she is not restricted. She just can't put it in everyones year book which is as it should be. she cant SPEAK it publicly, ,even if its just HER words,, thats great freedom of expression a quote, is something someone has SPOKEN regarding their PERSONAL belief,, but if its a religious belief , its banned,, thats quite ridiculous an its not being discriminated against for a natural state its being discriminated against for ACTIONS,, quite different when was the last time you heard the nursery had three heterosexual babies and four homosexual ones,,,? you dont people just SEE gender or race,, they only SEE sexual preference when people decide to EXPRESS it I cant come to the conclusion Im black, I Cant go through discovery to find out IM black, I cant hide my black in a closet, I cant be race curious, I Cant experiment with my racial identity RACE and GENDER are there from BIRTH, decided by genetic history regardless of how those go on to act or feel sexual preference is not decided when we are in the nursery, it is SELF ASSIGNED by us , based upon how we decide we FEEL and how we decide to act upon it It is good that she was not able to put religion into everyone's yearbook, she can then sing about god and write god all over the book at home, church, skipping down the street, at a friends house, at the coffee shop, at the restaurant while they eat, etc.... Sexual preference is decided before we make a conscience choice on it so it is just as natural as gender and race. No difference. So still very comparable to blacks fight for equality and gays fight for equality. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Removing laws do violate expression. It may not be my individual expression but it is someones. Your going to have to unpack what you mean here, and it would be grand to have an example. Ok for example, the "in God we trust" on the dollar. Someone some where at some time decided to use that as an expression of his or her beliefs. If someone else decides to remove it then fine, but if there is a law stating that it can't be shown then that is a law restricting that persons expression of religion. I mean someone created the art for which the money was designed from. They should be allowed to express their religious views if they chose to. That is just one example. The federal reserve note is not artwork. It is legal tender, made legal by government. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I hear many quote seperation of church and state.........but I ask you is it really seperated? Most of the laws of the Untied States remained based on religious ethical basis, and with in "God We Trust" on money produced by the United States.....how exactly are church and state really seperated?? Sounds like a good reason to take "In God We Trust" off of our money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Except it would cost too much to change the money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nowhere. it's common law. you won't find anything in the constitution that gives states the authority to issue drivers licenses either. haha Drivers licenses? That is because the constitution is the framework of the federal government. Judicial review was debated and purposely excluded by the framers. No one discussed interpretation of intent because the Bill of Rights is worded rather simply that most anyone can understand. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". No one is going to tell me that those words mean or their intent was to keep people from discussing or displaying their own personal beliefs in a school or anywhere else. Those men were very smart, but apparently they never anticipated how stupid this country would become. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Except it would cost too much to change the money. Not at all! Simply wait until the next time our money is redesigned. They did it a few times about... maybe 6-10 years ago; as tech advances they will likely do it again in the next decade or two. |
|
|
|
|
