Ill. Moment-Of-Silence Law Ruled Unconstitutional

[Bob Hubbard]

No matter what they rule, there will always be prayer in school, before, during and right after exams are given. And just before lunch, that the items provided will be edible. And by every nerd and geek just prior to any encounter with the jocks.

You don't need a mandated moment for that. You want to put aside a few minutes? ok, fine. Call it HomeRoom and let me read if I want to, don't make me sit there and have the option of praying or sitting still staring straight ahead. I'll be praying, but not in a positive manner.

 

[redantstyle]

If a community says that they want prayer to start the day so be it. If you don’t like it move out of the district

yeah right.

i could care less who my neighbors decide to pray to, or not. or how many of them there are. no way in hell some local consensus is going to subject my kids to someone else's worldview.

and i hate to break it to you, but to me, and many others, prayer is indeed a 'waste of time'.

if you think it is sacred, that's fine. but dont try and push your agenda on others.

go to mass, sing hosanas, and contemplate grace to your heart's desire, but keep it off my wave and dont think to subject my family to it.

 

[Archangel M]

If someone is going after the "moment of silence" because it just irks them that some kids choose to pray during it is one thing.

Having an issue with a school rule that mandates teachers teach about prayer during that moment is another.

Perhaps I would like to do a bit of non-religious meditation to focus my thoughts on the upcoming day....or oogle the girl I have a crush on.

 

[tellner]

There will be prayer in school as long as there's algebra

--Anon, Ibid and Op Cit

Prayer isn't the issue. The State throwing its considerable power and influence behind enforced prayer is the issue. When the participants are children and the prayer is led or enforced by teachers it's particularly tough. Protestations that it's "voluntary" are mere semantics. When it's a public group activity and participation requires that you go against what all your peers are doing there's a very strong coercive element. It takes more courage than most kids have, courage to be different, courage to follow their conscience even though it means going through the hell of ostracism and harrassment to walk out or refuse to participate.

Been there. Done that. The scars on the outside are gone. The ones on the inside are getting better.

 

[jetboatdeath]

No problem redant I agree with you but AGAIN this guy was going for the constitution and well he could not..
But it seems to be ok to teach the liberal agenda in schools.
The law should be the seperation of government and school...

 

[jarrod]

well jarrod I can see by your post that you would do the same as Sherman did back down and not reply, because you seem to not notice the jabs that he put in his post.
Let me quote a few...
"waste time praying"
"so that religious kids could waste time praying "

But i understand it's ok to bash on someone who you don't agree with and stick up for the ones you do.
Just try to remember that it has two sides.
He is the one who brought up relegion, he is the one who wanted to take it to that level. He is the one who insulted me, but again I know you kind of missed that.

BUT the point is he could not show that it was Unconstitutional, so he had to take it to that level, thats cool I can do that as well, but when I do please don't "blame" me.

this is kind of what i'm talking about. you seem very emotional on this subject. if i were corresponding with someone who became progressively emotional & obviously wasn't going to change his mind on the subject, i'd probably drop it. i didn't direct any sort of personal attacks at you, & you think i'm blaming you & bashing you, which i'm not.

i did in fact notice his jabs, & they were followed by your hooks & crosses. huh, what would jesus do?

anyway, as i addressed in my previous post, even if it cannot be proven to be unconstitutional, that does not make it right.

look, this isn't even about christians vs. atheists. it's about freedom vs government involvement. even if you are religious, why do you want the government telling your kids when to pray? when schools are for education, why should we be paying teachers to stand around & moniter student silence? there are no "moments of silence" in college or the work place.

jf

 

[Archangel M]

When I was in HS many moons ago we did the pledge of allegiance followed by a moment of silence... as I recall it was never explained what the moment was for.

 

[jarrod]

besides, public prayer is against scripture:

matthew 6:506

"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you."

jf

 

[jetboatdeath]

Jarrod..
My issue is not with relegion it is with the constitution and people misusing it to advance their personal agenda. These are the same people who will use it for both sides of the fence. No one will tell my child to anything.
And that is what the law said you have to do nothing. A moment of silence to me is what the teacher starts the day with,"hey kids take your seats and shutup" nothing more. How can silence be religious? And if it is is silence now bared from schools?
Here in Illinois the state now famous for our politics, things are a bit on edge, our right are being faught for every day. No I don't think that this law was that big of a deal, the big deal for me was the way this guy attacked it saying it was Unconstitutional and offering no proof, and geting it stricken....
But thats just the way we do things here in Illinois and that's what has me so fired up...
This guy claimed that the teachers HAD to teach prayer nothing in the written law states that. If his kids teacher did she/he was wrong and deal with it on that level....

 

[Marginal]

No problem redant I agree with you but AGAIN this guy was going for the constitution and well he could not..
But it seems to be ok to teach the liberal agenda in schools.
The law should be the seperation of government and school...

If it's not religious, why are only Christians clamoring for laws like this? Why is getting "secular" prayer periods into school so incredibly important?

 

[jetboatdeath]

Marginal
Read the law.

If it's not religious, why are only Christians clamoring for laws like this?

It is not important, and beleive me in a liberal state like Illinois for this to pass it had to written in a way that would favor no religion and it was. And it did pass.

Sherman claimed the law said teachers had to teach prayer, again the law never stated this in fact it made it ileagle to do so....

He also claimed it was Unconstitutional and could not show me that it was either on the state or federal level..

that is all....

 

[jetboatdeath]

Think about it this way maybe it will help to explain my stance...

This has now been ruled Unconstitutional in the state of Illinois.
What if another case like this or any other case for that matter go before SCOUTS. They use the case from Illinois to get the law overturned.

The constitution has now been re-written on a case that was not Unconstitutional in the first place..

That is not how the constituion should be re-written is it?

 

[Marginal]

Marginal
Read the law.


It is not important, and beleive me in a liberal state like Illinois for this to pass it had to written in a way that would favor no religion and it was. And it did pass.

It favors the dominant religion of the area by default. Christian groups know this, so they constantly lobby for laws like this to be passed. If they thought for a second that most kids would be sitting around contemplating Buddha, then they're raise a public stink equal to your atheist friend.

 

[Empty Hands]

And I've never called anyone "Cracker." :lol:

That's our word.

 

[redantstyle]

No problem redant I agree with you but AGAIN this guy was going for the constitution and well he could not..
But it seems to be ok to teach the liberal agenda in schools.
The law should be the seperation of government and school...

my apologies if i took you out of context, i didn't read the exchange thoroughly, and just picked up on that particular remark.

the coercive element , that the more eloquent here have touched on, was what i was responding to.

and yes, i agree that political agendas are also a matter of 'home schooling' and dont belong in the classroom.

 

[Archangel M]

I think it should be illegal for teachers to talk about any politically sensitive issues...global warming, evolution, the evils of republicans and Rush Limbaugh, etc. etc. etc.

If they get so offended over religion why should we accept indoctrination?

 

[Marginal]

I think it should be illegal for teachers to talk about any politically sensitive issues...global warming, evolution, the evils of republicans and Rush Limbaugh, etc. etc. etc.

If they get so offended over religion why should we accept indoctrination?

Any time a teacher is reported making such comments, there's tons of public pressure to punish and/or fire the teacher in question.

Well, except for global warming and evolution. Hard to avoid teaching reality.

 

[jetboatdeath]

Any time a teacher is reported making such comments, there's tons of public pressure to punish and/or fire the teacher in question

Oh PLLLLLLEEEAAAASSSEEEE.
You must give me examples...

 

[Marginal]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11648765/

Even thought it's supposed to be unpossible, there you go.

 

[Tez3]

And on that note... if this Ruling is Correct, and this Separation exists...

Is it ok to tell some kid he can't wear a hat in school but allow an Indian girl to wear her hijab? (I believe that is the term, perhaps I am wrong) Or a that a government worker can't carry a knife but a Sikh woman can have a Neck-knife because it's mandated by her order?

Lets face it... if we are going to be religious intolerant, because of this separation, it has to happen ACROSS THE BOARD, or be thrown out.

Think you're a bit confused there. Muslim women wear the scarves not Indian women per se. There are of course Indian Muslims but the majority are Hindu, Christian or Buddhist.
Sikhs http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/sikhism/customs/fiveks.shtml