This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Transgender
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Skreeran
Whoever said that people have a right to make people pray who do not wish to?
Exactly. Who said that? I don't see anyone saying that in this thread.An employee of the government should not lead children in prayer anymore than they should lead them in mass, or lead them in Ṣalāh.
Post by
HiVolt
Nobody is saying that teachers can't pray either, just that they can't lead their
ENTIRE CLASSROOMS
(which includes students) in prayer.
That's still controlling religion.
If you mean controlling in the sense that it prevents the religious indoctrination of the youth within state-funded programs, then yes, it is controlling.
However, controlling in the sense of infringing upon the right to religious practice of anyone, no. The teachers and students have the right to practice as they see fit, whether they're in a state-funded school or not; but should the school begin making the religious practice a part of the normal agenda, that control ensures the mutual freedom of everyone.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
If I send my child to a public school, I should be able to do that without worrying that a government employee is indoctrinating them with public, classwide prayer. And I should not have to worry about them being alienated and sent out of the classroom while everyone else prays either.
If I send my child to a public school, I should be able to do that without worrying that a government employee is lecturing while my kid is trying to pray. And I should not have to worry about them being alienated and sent out of the classroom while everyone else studies either.
Oh, look, it works the other way.
You ever seen the poor Muslim kids being made fun of for their prayers? Why can't they throw a hissy fit like atheists want to?
Post by
Skreeran
If I send my child to a public school, I should be able to do that without worrying that a government employee is indoctrinating them with public, classwide prayer. And I should not have to worry about them being alienated and sent out of the classroom while everyone else prays either.
If I send my child to a public school, I should be able to do that without worrying that a government employee is lecturing while my kid is trying to pray. And I should not have to worry about them being alienated and sent out of the classroom while everyone else studies either.
Oh, look, it works the other way.
You ever seen the poor Muslim kids being made fun of for their prayers? Why can't they throw a hissy fit like atheists want to?We send children to school to study. We send them to church to pray. That's why we keep them separate.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
An employee of the government should not lead children in prayer anymore than they should lead them in mass, or lead them in Ṣalāh.
Why not? If you claim a separation of church and state, being a government employee should have no bearing on what he can and can't do religiously. Obviously as an employee (government or not) he is required to achieve a certain standard, so a teacher who doesn't teach (whether due to religious reasons or not) can and will be fired.
If you mean controlling in the sense that it prevents the religious indoctrination of the youth within state-funded programs, then yes, it is controlling.
No one's indoctrinating anyone. If atheists in the class can't respect the teacher and other students' beliefs, why should you expect any respect back?
However, controlling in the sense of infringing upon the right to religious practice of anyone, no. The teachers and students have the right to practice as they see fit, whether they're in a state-funded school or not; but should the school begin making the religious practice a part of the normal agenda, that control ensures the mutual freedom of everyone.
This seems to contradict everything you've said before. Either the teachers are "allowed to allow the students to pray with them" or they aren't. Make up your mind.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
If I send my child to a public school, I should be able to do that without worrying that a government employee is indoctrinating them with public, classwide prayer. And I should not have to worry about them being alienated and sent out of the classroom while everyone else prays either.
If I send my child to a public school, I should be able to do that without worrying that a government employee is lecturing while my kid is trying to pray. And I should not have to worry about them being alienated and sent out of the classroom while everyone else studies either.
Oh, look, it works the other way.
You ever seen the poor Muslim kids being made fun of for their prayers? Why can't they throw a hissy fit like atheists want to?We send children to school to study. We send them to church to pray. That's why we keep them separate.
I teach my kids to always pray. Who are you to tell me when my kids can and cannot pray?
Post by
Monday
Let's look at it this way.
The government cannot promote any religious belief. Atheism is a religious belief, in the sense that it is a lack of one. Thus the government is promoting a religious belief (that there is no God/Allah/What-have-you). How does that work out?
Post by
Skreeran
Why not? If you claim a separation of church and state, so being a government employee should have no bearing on what he can and can't do religiously. Obviously as an employee (government or not) he is required to achieve a certain standard, so a teacher who doesn't teach (whether due to religious reasons or not) can and will be fired.The way it works is this: You can believe whatever you want, but the minute you begin imposing your beliefs on others, you will be penalized.
Leading your students in prayer is imposing your beliefs on them. We're not talking about you observing your own religion in private, we're talking about you forcing students to observe a custom they may or may not believe in.
No one's indoctrinating anyone. If atheists in the class can't respect the teacher and other students' beliefs, why should you expect any respect back?If the students were harassing the teacher about his own priavte prayer, that's one thing. It's an entirely different matter to not want to be
LED
in prayer.
This seems to contradict everything you've said before. Either the teachers are "allowed to allow the students to pray with them" or they aren't. Make up your mind.And how exactly do you suggest that the teachers pray with their students?
After class? Sure. In a Bible club? Sure. But do not force them to participate in your prayer in the middle of class.
I teach my kids to always pray. Who are you to tell me when my kids can and cannot pray?They can pray whenever they like. However, the moment they start to interfere with
my
kid's studies, then we're going to have a problem.
Let's look at it this way.
The government cannot promote any religious belief. Atheism is a religious belief, in the sense that it is a lack of one. Thus the government is promoting a religious belief (that there is no God/Allah/What-have-you). How does that work out?Teachers are not allowed to say "There is no god." either. They can say "I do not believe in God," just as they can say "I am a Catholic," but an atheist teacher is no more allowed to impose his beliefs on others as anyone else.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
The way it works is this: You can believe whatever you want, but the minute you begin imposing your beliefs on others, you will be penalized.
Show me exactly where any imposition is taking place in what I've laid out. You're the only one with imposition (forbidding public prayer).
Leading your students in prayer is imposing your beliefs on them. We're not talking about you observing your own religion in private, we're talking about you forcing students to observe a custom they may or may not believe in.
Beautiful staw-man, but you'll be hard pressed to actually find that in what I've said. You're the one doing the forcing, not me. How does the word "allow" even remotely imply force?
If the students were harassing the teacher about his own priavte prayer, that's one thing. It's an entirely different matter to not want to be
LED
in prayer.
This is just a continuation of your straw-man above. You either don't understand what the word "allow" means, or you're just being a stick in the mud.
And how exactly do you suggest that the teachers pray with their students?However they see fit. What are you doing trying to get me to make the same mistake you keep making time and time again?
But do not force them to participate in your prayer in the middle of class.
Ok, that's it. No one is forcing anyone to pray. Seriously,
read my posts
.
Until you get your head out of the dirt and actually read what I've proposed, you're just arguing nonsense.
Post by
HiVolt
If you mean controlling in the sense that it prevents the religious indoctrination of the youth within state-funded programs, then yes, it is controlling.
No one's indoctrinating anyone. If atheists in the class can't respect the teacher and other students' beliefs, why should you expect any respect back?
If we're speaking of say, a high-school level, it might be possible for both parties to wholly have mutual respect for one another (depending on the surrounding community, the high-school atmosphere of peer-groups, etc.). But, if we're speaking of something earlier, perhaps around middle-school level, daily prayer could easily passively indoctrinate. It's not about the school actively trying to convert students, it's about how those students' peers and community react to the difference in those who don't practice the same religion.
Let me give you a scenario for some context:
You live in an area which most widely practiced religion is Islam. Most of the students are Muslim, and most of the teachers at the local public school are Muslim. You and your family are Christian. Every day in school, your child is one of the only ones in his school who does not participate in the prayer sessions that his teachers hold during class throughout the day.
Do you think that he would not be persecuted in any way, whether by his peers, the school, or community because of his choice not to engage in the normal prayer? Perhaps he wouldn't; there is the chance that there would be no child or teacher or administrator with fundamentalist ideals, who would have some reason to persecute your child or your family. But the likelihood of him being persecuted is far greater. Why? Because he is different.
However, controlling in the sense of infringing upon the right to religious practice of anyone, no.
The teachers and students have the right to practice as they see fit
, whether they're in a state-funded school or not; but should the school begin making the religious practice a part of the normal agenda, that control ensures the mutual freedom of everyone.
This seems to contradict everything you've said before. Either the teachers are "allowed to allow the students to pray with them" or they aren't. Make up your mind.
When the teacher makes daily prayer a normal classroom activity, it becomes the school's problem. In that(italics) sentence I meant them as separate entities, in the sense that the teacher is not leading a class. Perhaps it was just bad wording on my part.
Post by
Skreeran
Show me exactly where any imposition is taking place in what I've laid out. You're the only one with imposition (forbidding public prayer).A teacher is taking time out of my child's study schedule, and exposing him to influences that I might not believe he is ready to be exposed to. That is imposing one's beliefs upon another against their will.
Beautiful staw-man, but you'll be hard pressed to actually find that in what I've said. You're the one doing the forcing, not me. How does the word "allow" even remotely imply force?You folks are oh-so-eager to throw out the word "strawman," but I wonder if you actually know what it is supposed to mean.
I am attacking no straw man. If you lead my son in prayer, and he does not want you to, then you are forcing your beliefs on him.
A teacher is allowed to pray, even in class. Students are allowed to pray, even in class.
However, when the teacher goes "Alright everyone, bow your heads... 'Lord, thank you for this day you've given us...'" as they did before leading prayer in class was banned, that is going beyond being allowed to pray. That is imposing your beliefs on people who may not share them.
This is just a continuation of your straw-man above. You either don't understand what the word "allow" means, or you're just being a stick in the mud.There is a very big difference between being allowed to privately observe your own beliefs, and standing up and making the whole classroom bow their heads and keep silent while you pray.
Ok, that's it. No one is forcing anyone to pray. Seriously, read my posts.
Until you get your head out of the dirt and actually read what I've proposed, you're just arguing nonsense.I am reading what you post, and there's no way I would let my son attend a school where he is forced everyday to pray with the class or be cast out from the group.
Post by
Monday
I am reading what you post, and there's no way I would let my son attend a school where he is forced everyday to pray with the class or be cast out from the group.
I don't see that anywhere in his post...
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
All you just said equates to "my interpretation of what you mean is better than yours."
Until you get your head out of the dirt and actually read what I've proposed, you're just arguing nonsense.
Post by
Skreeran
I am reading what you post, and there's no way I would let my son attend a school where he is forced everyday to pray with the class or be cast out from the group.
I don't see that anywhere in his post...That's how it was when they allowed teacher-led prayer in schools. As far as I'm concerned, as person whose religious beliefs fall into the minority, I want the government to a) keep teachers from putting religious thoughts into my child's head without my consent, and b) give my child a school environment where they are on equal footing with everyone else, and do not have to be excluded while the teacher prays.
Post by
Monday
That's how it was when they allowed teacher-led prayer in schools.
Most schools like that were also in Christian only communities and run by the church. Its like not reading scriptures in seminary and then QQ'ing when the teacher gives you a bad grade.
Post by
Skreeran
That's how it was when they allowed teacher-led prayer in schools.
Most schools like that were also in Christian only communities and run by the church. Its like not reading scriptures in seminary and then QQ'ing when the teacher gives you a bad grade.Eh... That's beside the point. Church and state should be separated no matter where you live.
I don't understand what you guys are pushing for. Teachers are allowed to pray, even in school. Students are allowed to pray, even in school.
What they aren't allowed to do is lead my child in prayer. That's pushing your religious belief from beyond yourself into other people's lives. It seems like you guys are demanding that teachers have the right to express their religious beliefs by making my child bow his head and sit silently while the teacher prays over the class.
Imagine if I became a teacher and began every day by making the students sit silently while I expressed my beliefs by reading a passage from
The God Delusion
aloud? How would you feel?
Post by
Monday
Eh... That's beside the point.
No, its crucial to your statement. Its like saying that if I believed in a religion I'd be shot in the night, when in reality that was in China many years ago. Invalid comparison is invalid.
Teachers are allowed to pray, even in school. Students are allowed to pray, even in school.
Publicly? My problem with the schools is that I'm not allowed to pray publicly, which is why I'm arguing so hard against this. It favors atheism when I'm not even allowed to pray before a test.
And prayer isn't just for church
Imagine if I became a teacher and began every day by making the students sit silently while I expressed my beliefs by reading a passage from The God Delusion aloud? How would you feel?
Sounds kinda like what a lot of science teachers do. While not that obvious, a lot of science classes (especially anthropology classes) basically make you believe in atheism otherwise you fail.
Post by
kattib
Cant believe im getting back into this, I really shouldnt sigh
And forcing them not to pray favors atheism.
Yes because not doing something automatically endorses the negative. Not eating pasta for dinner one night is JUST like being against pasta. Not walking at this very moment endorses sitting all the time right?
No one is forcing students not to pray though as has been said, they just cant lead others/impose their prayer onto others.
Anyway whats the negative on leaving religion at home at institutions of learning (aside from classes of history which learn about different cultures/religions from a purely historical or anthropological standpoint)
Post by
Monday
Anyway whats the negative on leaving religion at home at institutions of learning
Because religion isn't just something you only practice when convenient.
Edit: Also, your comparisons are horrible. Forcing people not to pray isn't
anything
like not eating pasta for one night.
Incidentally I did eat pasta tonight. With a lot of Romano and Parmesan, it was amazing.
Post by
Adamsm
Hoorah for yet another religious thread.....which has nothing to do with the topic at hand....
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.