Public school prayer

[ludin]

If it's a public school, prayer is not to be allowed. Pretty simple.

the supreme court of the united states disagree's with you 100% but you can continue to think this way.

however this did not stop schools from having islam day and making kids pray to allah in the name of diversity, but for some reason
to mention Christ or God invokes a lawsuit.

interesting how that works.

in any event. just because you are in a public forum you do not give up your rights. this has been set precedent for a while.
Religious Clothing at School | American Center for Law and Justice ACLJ

a list of all cases that support this as well.

 

[American]

View attachment 67158582

Delusional is thinking you are hurt by someone else's prayer. It borders on a belief in witchcraft when one thinks a hex has been put upon them.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

Delusional is thinking you are hurt by someone else's prayer. It borders on a belief in witchcraft when one thinks a hex has been put upon them.

He never said it was hurt. However, for the government to institutional prayer to any religion, is strictly against what the spirit that the first amendment was written for. The point though, is that people who believe they have to pray every day in the morning, are in fact, forcing their views onto their time. I use to be for a moment of silence, but even in that situation, it's not needed and you can pray over breakfast like I did. There isn't an intelligent reason to inconvenience others.

 

[American]

He never said it was hurt. However, for the government to institutional prayer to any religion, is strictly against what the spirit that the first amendment was written for. The point though, is that people who believe they have to pray every day in the morning, are in fact, forcing their views onto their time. I use to be for a moment of silence, but even in that situation, it's not needed and you can pray over breakfast like I did. There isn't an intelligent reason to inconvenience others.

It's not government institutionalizing prayer, it is atheists legal reinterpretation because they don't want anyone doing anything around them that makes them uncomfortable. And it's not about what's NEEDED, it's about people having the right to practice their religion as they see fit as long as it doesn't harm others.

 

[American]

Who would go to school to pray?

The purpose of a school is education.

We all see how that's working out. Prayer would probably work better. At least they wouldn't be ****ing each other in the classroom after learning how to put a rubber on a banana.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

It's not government institutionalizing prayer, it is atheists legal reinterpretation because they don't want anyone doing anything around them that makes them uncomfortable. And it's not about what's NEEDED, it's about people having the right to practice their religion as they see fit as long as it doesn't harm others.

And no one is stopping people from praying in schools. I should I know, I did it a lot. But there is no reason to disrupt school, just for a religious group to have an organized prayer session over the intercoms. If you are a government school, then you can't be establishing religious practices in schools that ALL must participate in.

 

[beefheart]

Delusional is thinking you are hurt by someone else's prayer. It borders on a belief in witchcraft when one thinks a hex has been put upon them.

Delusional that you believe that there is such a thing as witchcraft. Do you feel threatened that some people don't believe in your invisible sky god?

 

[American]

Delusional that you believe that there is such a thing as witchcraft. Do you feel threatened that some people don't believe in your invisible sky god?

Show me where I said that I believe in witchcraft. Wow, what a moderate. Hahahaha

 

[Smeagol]

As I understand the current interpretation of the law: public school faith-based activities including prayer is legal as long as its voluntary, student led and student initiated.

A better idea IMHO is school choice, where a condition of enrollment is no objections to a school's faith-based activities. However, one argument however likely to be given in it opposition is "tax dollars shouldn't be used to promote a faith-based entity" despite precedent established with college level Pell Grants and the GI Bill that not only are used at faith-based colleges and universities but are even used to obtain degrees in theology.

 

[Dittohead not!]

As I understand the current interpretation of the law: public school faith-based activities including prayer is legal as long as its voluntary, student led and student initiated.

A better idea IMHO is school choice, where a condition of enrollment is no objections to a school's faith-based activities. However, one argument however likely to be given in it opposition is "tax dollars shouldn't be used to promote a faith-based entity" despite precedent established with college level Pell Grants and the GI Bill that not only are used at faith-based colleges and universities but are even used to obtain degrees in theology.

I'm not sure if it has to be student led. It does, absolutely, have to be voluntary.

School choice is a great idea, but religion still has to be voluntary and religious activities outside of regular school hours, except in the case of private and privately funded schools. If not, then tax money is being used to promote religion.

 

[Smeagol]

I'm not sure if it has to be student led. It does, absolutely, have to be voluntary.

School choice is a great idea, but religion still has to be voluntary and religious activities outside of regular school hours, except in the case of private and privately funded schools. If not, then tax money is being used to promote religion.

Do you understand this assertion does NOT apply to Pell Grant or GI Bill recipients?

Unlike many people, at least you afford equal access to faith-based groups after ours. Many oppose even that, something I consider atheist activism.

Even under to current elementary and secondary school discrimination, I think allowing privately funded faith-based groups to conduction chapel services and sponsor faith-based clubs during times the schools set aside for extra-curricular activities during school hours should be legal, as long as no kid is required to attend a faith-based meeting if he or his parents object and there are other non-faith-based options available.

 

[Dittohead not!]

[/B]

Do you understand this assertion does NOT apply to Pell Grant or GI Bill recipients?

I hadn't thought of that. Such recipients can opt to spend their taxpayer derived money at a religious institution of higher learning. Is that a violation of the First Amendment?

 

[Smeagol]

I hadn't thought of that. Such recipients can opt to spend their taxpayer derived money at a religious institution of higher learning. Is that a violation of the First Amendment?

Its a voluntary choice of the student. Some people interpret freedom of religion as a constitutional right, not a constitutional prohibition.

BTW: Many of the colleges and universities in America were founded by churches, as were many of America's hospitals. They continue to offer faith related courses, clubs and activities all while receiving government funding. Nobody complains, nor should they.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Its a voluntary choice of the student. Some people interpret freedom of religion as a constitutional right, not a constitutional prohibition.

BTW: Many of the colleges and universities in America were founded by churches, as were many of America's hospitals. They continue to offer faith related courses, clubs and activities all while receiving government funding. Nobody complains, nor should they.

It's an individual choice, then, quite unlike mandatory prayers being broadcast over the intercom or recited in assemblies during school hours.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

My school had a moment of silence. I was ok with that.

 

[disneydude]

I don't have to justify it, just ask for it. But since you asked.

The reality is that most so-called "Christians" that are most vocal about prayer in the school or in the government do not want to pray as is suggested in the biblical verse you posted. They prefer to be like the Pharisees who stand on the corner and shout their prayers in public so that others look at them and see what they are doing.

 

[Smeagol]

It's an individual choice, then, quite unlike mandatory prayers being broadcast over the intercom or recited in assemblies during school hours.

Overhearing a prayer isn't the same thing as praying. I've listened to reggae music but I've never practiced Rastafarianism. Most Americans have witnessed a presidential inauguration on TV, watched the new POTUS take the oath of office with his hand on the Bible and ended it with the words "so help me God." Then, the entire event is finalized by a prayer from Billy Graham. To my knowledge, nobody felt by watching this on TV a forced conversion has occurred.

While I'm at it, I though I'd include a few excerpts from the United States Declaration of Independence, the founding document that established our great nation:

... to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them,
...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights
... Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions
...And for the support of this Declaration,with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence

Which begs the question; is United States Declaration of Independence illegal under the laws of the United States but legal under the constitution of Cuba, Communist China or the former Soviet Union for example?

In fairness however, I can understand how that might make some people uncomfortable. This is one of many reasons I support voluntary school choice.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Overhearing a prayer isn't the same thing as praying. I've listened to reggae music but I've never practiced Rastafarianism. Most Americans have witnessed a presidential inauguration on TV, watched the new POTUS take the oath of office with his hand on the Bible and ended it with the words "so help me God." Then, the entire event is finalized by a prayer from Billy Graham. To my knowledge, nobody felt by watching this on TV a forced conversion has occurred.

While I'm at it, I though I'd include a few excerpts from the United States Declaration of Independence, the founding document that established our great nation:

... to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them,
...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights
... Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions
...And for the support of this Declaration,with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence

Which begs the question; is United States Declaration of Independence illegal under the laws of the United States but legal under the constitution of Cuba, Communist China or the former Soviet Union for example?

In fairness however, I can understand how that might make some people uncomfortable. This is one of many reasons I support voluntary school choice.

It's obvious that this nation was not founded on atheism, but then, it wasn't founded on any particular belief system either.

We might be better off if the new president would swear an oath on the Constitution, rather than the Bible, but then, tradition is important to some people. I know I'd rather our leaders know and believe in what it says in the Constitution than in the Bible.