Showdown in the park. School District attempts to stop Christain lunches.... .

[Ntharotep]

Both sides have bullies. And this shouldn't be going on and these parents know it.

Their claim was that their kids felt uncomfortable discussing their religion at school and they wanted to share their beliefs with other students. It grew so they continued it. Why? There was no reason to continue it if it was obvious that their kids weren't some minority that should feel uncomfortable talking about religion with their friends, in an appropriate time and place, not during school, at least not with adults leading it.

This is not completely accurate. When I was going to school and I doubt times have reversed all that much since, you were picked on for being religious far more than being, say a metal head, punk rocker, or athlete (I'll draw the line at nerd). I know this because I'm ashamed to say that I did some of the picking on.
I can very easily see kids not feeling comfortable discussing religion in school especially with the divide that has erupted in more recent years to ever widen that gap.
And it has never been and I can't see it being "cool" to pressure your peers in HS to go to your Christian gatherings.

Part of the controversy is that not only is there question as to whether the school actually does have control over that property at least when students are on it, but the school is also responsible for those students during school hours, including lunch.

But it is only a "safety issue" with this group and not kids running off to Subway or other lunch destinations.
I find this bogus. I also find it petty whether it is "legal" petty or not is really moot to me in this case. It falls under just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

My gut feeling is that this is not a case of those poor non-Christian kids being pressured into the evils of Christianity. I think its someone lodged a petty complaint because they could and just couldn't let these kids do something that wasn't hurting anyone because they were "oh so offended".

I'm not a Christian but I'm also not part of "Oh no! We might catch Christianity like a virus!" crowd either.

 

[roguenuke]

This is not completely accurate. When I was going to school and I doubt times have reversed all that much since, you were picked on for being religious far more than being, say a metal head, punk rocker, or athlete (I'll draw the line at nerd). I know this because I'm ashamed to say that I did some of the picking on.
I can very easily see kids not feeling comfortable discussing religion in school especially with the divide that has erupted in more recent years to ever widen that gap.
And it has never been and I can't see it being "cool" to pressure your peers in HS to go to your Christian gatherings.


But it is only a "safety issue" with this group and not kids running off to Subway or other lunch destinations.
I find this bogus. I also find it petty whether it is "legal" petty or not is really moot to me in this case. It falls under just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

My gut feeling is that this is not a case of those poor non-Christian kids being pressured into the evils of Christianity. I think its someone lodged a petty complaint because they could and just couldn't let these kids do something that wasn't hurting anyone because they were "oh so offended".

I'm not a Christian but I'm also not part of "Oh no! We might catch Christianity like a virus!" crowd either.

The other high school students lodged the complaint, including some Christian students, because of how some of those who are regular attendees of the lunch have been acting (the students have in fact made a video describing their feelings on it). The other students, those not attending these lunches for whatever reasons are facing peer pressure and ostracism for not being Christian or Christian enough.

 

[roguenuke]

Why is it so vitally important that the protected speech of this group be stifled by a governmental body?

They are not protected in their speech during this particular time, in the manor they are attempting.

 

[Moon]

They are not protected in their speech during this particular time, in the manor they are attempting.

They absolutely are. They are on their own time and away from school property.

 

[roguenuke]

no they don't have a leg to stand on. their lease prohibits them from interfering with public use of the park.
the parents have every right to be at the park according to the lease.

there is no question about the rules. the rules of the school allow for students to leave campus for lunch.
you are simply making stuff up.

you seriously need to be more tolerant of peoples religious beliefs.

They do have a leg to stand on because their lease allows them at least some ambiguous say over how the park is used during the school day. It is likely a legal question as to what extent the school rules apply here and the intention of those running the lunch. The school is still responsible for the welfare of those teens, even while they are off campus, at lunch.

I'm not making anything up. I actually went to various sites looking into this.

People need to stop trying to push their beliefs into children.

 

[roguenuke]

They absolutely are. They are on their own time and away from school property.

No they aren't. Again this concerns school children (teenagers), and an ambiguous lease concerning property that is directly attached to the school. These parents could not do this on school property and other groups would almost certainly have already been stopped from doing something like this.

 

[Moon]

No they aren't. Again this concerns school children (teenagers), and an ambiguous lease concerning property that is directly attached to the school. These parents could not do this on school property and other groups would almost certainly have already been stopped from doing something like this.

It's not school property and the lunch group pays rent each week for the use of the pavilion. You seem pretty desperate to deprive these students of their constitutional rights.

 

[roguenuke]

It's not school property and the lunch group pays rent each week for the use of the pavilion. You seem pretty desperate to deprive these students of their constitutional rights.

And the school has a lease with the park that could very well limit the use of that pavilion when it comes to activities directed towards students, during school hours. This is not something that has been an issue before, but it certainly is a conflict of laws and interests here, which could see a court battle, with both sides having their rights balanced for the others.

The fact that this group is targeting children is an issue. It doesn't matter if they are parents of students at the school or not. They are trying to run a school group essentially during lunch time, something that is not allowed, no matter how they want to present it. If it was the students running the events, it would still have to go through staff, but be acceptable so long as they followed the rules. This isn't a student led thing though and the school has a right to take measures to a) keep the kids safe, b) follow rules and regulations on such events/groups, and c) do things that alleviate school tensions (which this is causing).

 

[zyzygy]

They should only be allowed to do this on the condition that they can feed all the kids with two loaves and five fishes.

 

[Moon]

And the school has a lease with the park that could very well limit the use of that pavilion when it comes to activities directed towards students, during school hours. This is not something that has been an issue before, but it certainly is a conflict of laws and interests here, which could see a court battle, with both sides having their rights balanced for the others.

The fact that this group is targeting children is an issue. It doesn't matter if they are parents of students at the school or not. They are trying to run a school group essentially during lunch time, something that is not allowed, no matter how they want to present it. If it was the students running the events, it would still have to go through staff, but be acceptable so long as they followed the rules. This isn't a student led thing though and the school has a right to take measures to a) keep the kids safe, b) follow rules and regulations on such events/groups, and c) do things that alleviate school tensions (which this is causing).

You aren't interested in balancing anyone's rights. All you've argued doing is eliminating the 1st Amendment rights of the students and parents involved in exercising their rights to free speech and exercise of religion. At least try to be honest here.

 

[roguenuke]

You aren't interested in balancing anyone's rights. All you've argued doing is eliminating the 1st Amendment rights of the students and parents involved in exercising their rights to free speech and exercise of religion. At least try to be honest here.

The students have a right to organize their own religious organizations, in accordance with school policies, but that right does not extend to parents organizing such school events, per federal law. And the parents have a right to teach their own children whatever they wish. They do not have a right to attempt to bribe other people's children during school hours into listening to their religious dogma. If they want to invite the children to church on the weekends or gatherings after school, go for it. There shouldn't be an issue if the students want to participate then, with their friends or schoolmates. This should not be taking place though during school time. And there is a lot of information out there about this and how this really is an attempt by some few mothers to push their religion onto other people's children. Plenty of students and parents of students in this school are concerned and complaining about this.

 

[Moon]

The students have a right to organize their own religious organizations, in accordance with school policies, but that right does not extend to parents organizing such school events, per federal law. And the parents have a right to teach their own children whatever they wish. They do not have a right to attempt to bribe other people's children during school hours into listening to their religious dogma. If they want to invite the children to church on the weekends or gatherings after school, go for it. There shouldn't be an issue if the students want to participate then, with their friends or schoolmates. This should not be taking place though during school time. And there is a lot of information out there about this and how this really is an attempt by some few mothers to push their religion onto other people's children. Plenty of students and parents of students in this school are concerned and complaining about this.

It's not a school event. You are not being honest.

 

[Goshin]

I think this is most likely going to end with the parents leaving to find another place. This is not nearly as benign as they are making it out to be. They are basically bribing teens during school hours to preach. And they are using grants as a religious organization to do it.

If it is voluntary and without coercion, how is it "not nearly as benign"?

 

[roguenuke]

It's not a school event. You are not being honest.

It is during school hours and on property that is leased by the school under an agreement that those using the property will abide by certain school policies. It is specifically targeting the high school students (there is absolutely no invitation to the general public to attend these events).

We won't even get into the fact that if they really have 400 students attending, as they claim, they are over the capacity of the largest rental pavilion available within the park in the first place.

 

[roguenuke]

If it is voluntary and without coercion, how is it "not nearly as benign"?

Bribing teenagers with food is coercion.

 

[Lutherf]

If it is voluntary and without coercion, how is it "not nearly as benign"?

It's Christian based and therefore a grave and immediate threat to mankind as a whole!!!!!

You have to understand, Goshin, that if we don't teach kids which things to learn and which things to avoid then we'll all be just like those nasty religious zealots who teach their kids which things to learn and which to avoid.

 

[Goshin]

Bribing teenagers with food is coercion.

.... okay.



Well no actually it isn't. It is bribery. Bribery is actually a time-honored way of getting kids and teens to do something. "Do your homework and your chores and you can borrow the car", for instance.


If they're really so gorram HUNGRY that an offer of food counts as coercion, something is seriously wrong with the school's OWN free lunch program... or is that coercion also?





Coercion would be threatening them with something.... like say, bad grades if they don't parrot back whatever passes for education these days.

 

[Goshin]

It's Christian based and therefore a grave and immediate threat to mankind as a whole!!!!!

You have to understand, Goshin, that if we don't teach kids which things to learn and which things to avoid then we'll all be just like those nasty religious zealots who teach their kids which things to learn and which to avoid.

I know right? I mean, heaven forbid someone do something nice like give them a free lunch, and then try to teach them a little something about the guy who said "Love your neighbor as your self", right? Disaster in the making! :roll:

 

[roguenuke]

.... okay.

Well no actually it isn't. It is bribery. Bribery is actually a time-honored way of getting kids and teens to do something. "Do your homework and your chores and you can borrow the car", for instance.

If they're really so gorram HUNGRY that an offer of food counts as coercion, something is seriously wrong with the school's OWN free lunch program... or is that coercion also?

Coercion would be threatening them with something.... like say, bad grades if they don't parrot back whatever passes for education these days.

The school doesn't have to have a free lunch program for students to take advantage of free lunch and take the money their parents are giving them for their lunch to spend on something else. And at the same time, certain groups get to preach to other people's children about their religion during school hours, ostracizing those teens who choose not to participate.

 

[Manc Skipper]

I know right? I mean, heaven forbid someone do something nice like give them a free lunch, and then try to teach them a little something about the guy who said "Love your neighbor as your self", right? Disaster in the making! :roll:

It's a free lunch with no assurance of proper food hygiene in sourcing, preparation or distribution. Food poisoning WOULD be a disaster.

 

[RAMOSS]

It's Christian based and therefore a grave and immediate threat to mankind as a whole!!!!!

You have to understand, Goshin, that if we don't teach kids which things to learn and which things to avoid then we'll all be just like those nasty religious zealots who teach their kids which things to learn and which to avoid.

It is 'faith based' not 'Christian based'. How woudl you feel if it was Muslims pushing Sharia law, or Hindu's, or Satanists, or atheists ?

 

[Lutherf]

It is 'faith based' not 'Christian based'. How woudl you feel if it was Muslims pushing Sharia law, or Hindu's, or Satanists, or atheists ?

Who cares? Some religious group is feeding kids and kids are choosing to attend. Nobody is being forced to do anything and, frankly, it sounds like a damned nice thing for these ladies to do.

 

[RAMOSS]

Who cares? Some religious group is feeding kids and kids are choosing to attend. Nobody is being forced to do anything and, frankly, it sounds like a damned nice thing for these ladies to do.

So, when the guys from Man Boy love assocation go to talk, you won't object.

 

[Sherman123]

The school district allows students to eat off campus, and even allows them the ability to choose where they eat- until too many start to voluntarily chowdown at the local park while listening to Christian themed messages. The butt hurt administrators start to make complaints about food "sanitation", unapproved foods, and possible deadly threats to students with food allergies. It is said that the free lunches subject the students to some kind of mind control and the fact that other students voluntarily choose to participate has led others to break down sobbing.

School superintendent, principal confront moms over 'Jesus Lunch' | Fox News
Religious lunch event causing tension between organizers and Middleton school officials | Local News | host.madison.com

The school does claim to lease the park during school hours, but evidently has not been able to produce a copy of such a lease, let alone establish that the "lease" gives them the ability to bar access to the public park as they see fit.

Unless a very exacting lease is produced, I dont think the school can keep the church group out of the park, and short of forbidding all off campus lunches, they cant forbid students from attending. In short, they are failing their course on the Constitution.

I'm as strong as supporter of secular schools as anyone but I think that the schools will likely not prevail here if it ends up going to court. I'm not sure how they could possibly succeed. I also think that if exposure to this message is the basis for stopping the program there might be a basis for civil suit.

 

[Lutherf]

So, when the guys from Man Boy love assocation go to talk, you won't object.

Now you're trying to equate Christianity with pedophilia:roll:

That's both pathetic and stupid.