Young atheist needs support

[fangjian]

Hehe Funny story. I've only been to the northern most part of Texas near Ft Sill Ok.

In fact, it's kinda medieval, but it's okay, if you're capable of being tolerant, the way we expect other people to be.....

Sounds interesting. Nothing wrong with churches on every block and dry counties. I encourage freedom of expression and blah blah blah. I don't like either of those things which is obvious but wouldn't deny people from doing that. Just as much as I hate drinking or even looking at Heineken. An awful beer with a terrible aftertaste. Another delusion that people are under the spell of. I wouldn't deny anyone from drinkin it though. I guess all I want is for things that go on, on state and gvt property to not endorse a specific....beer? Like Heineken.

 

[fangjian]

Yeah, using their freedom is creepy...

Hehhehe
Some people just do creepy things with their freedoms. That's cool. I'm sure some people think grappling with other guys is creepy. Cool.


When I was in Iraq, the imam's would pray everyday over those loud intercoms. All of my friends were so creeped out by it on a daily basis. I really liked it. Sounds cool. Definitely more entertaining than what Christian mythology has to offer.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

In fact, it's kinda medieval, but it's okay, if you're capable of being tolerant, the way we expect other people to be......

Community standards. They have ordered their local society the way they wish it to be, and they do not violate anyone's constitutional rights to do it.

Do I want to live there? NO! By the way, NC was much similar for me.

But it is what it is.

Those folks; or folks very much like them, complain bitterly about the local community standards in San Francisco on "Let's be creepy gay guys in leather thongs rubbing on people in our 'in your face parade Day'," and it's the same thing.

And everyone complains about the Hispanics living their non-assimilating lifestyles in their own small communities in the US, who are ALSO setting their own standards that no one except them likes but which also violate no constitutional rights.

This freedom thing is a *****. We expect others to tolerate our foibles, we think theirs are not only weird, but wrong, and not covered under the concepts of 'freedom'. (present company excepted).

 

[fangjian]

Community standards. They have ordered their local society the way they wish it to be, and they do not violate anyone's constitutional rights to do it.

Do I want to live there? NO! By the way, NC was much similar for me.

But it is what it is.

Those folks; or folks very much like them, complain bitterly about the local community standards in San Francisco on "Let's be creepy gay guys in leather thongs rubbing on people in our 'in your face parade Day'," and it's the same thing.

And everyone complains about the Hispanics living their non-assimilating lifestyles in their own small communities in the US, who are ALSO setting their own standards that no one except them likes but which also violate no constitutional rights.

This freedom thing is a *****. We expect others to tolerate our foibles, we think theirs are not only weird, but wrong, and not covered under the concepts of 'freedom'. (present company excepted).

It's not an issue of just feeling like you are not part of the community. Like a gay area of San Fran or a fundy town or Spanish Harlem. (like in your examples) If that's the case then you can take Carol and TF's advice and just move.

The issue is religious endorsement on state property, no? And where the line is drawn. What property? What people? etc.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

The issue is religious endorsement on state property, no? And where the line is drawn. What property? What people? etc.

That's the question that the courts wrestle with. The fundamental question (sorry, no pun intended) is not what property, but whether or not the display, function, symbol, etc, infringes on the 'establishment' clause and they simultaneously juggle whether or not outlawing that same display, function, symbol, etc, would infringe on the 'free exercise' clause.

That's where community standards are often considered by the court. And they are different in different places and times.

No one is ever satisfied by this compromise. The only solution that would make one group happy would utterly alienate another. But that's how many people understand democracy - be reasonable, do it my way.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

An example of the ongoing struggle over what is and what is not 'establishment of religion' by the state, and what is and what is not acceptable to community standards. The cross, through all of this, has not moved (except when it was burned and later stolen). It is the minds and hearts of the people who live here that have changed, it is the court's interpretations that have changed. The cross has remained where it was. Legal, illegal, public, private, loved and hated. All this over a small symbol deep in the heart of the desert. People are strange, IMHO. But that's just me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojave_Memorial_Cross

The Mojave Memorial Cross is a cross formerly on public land in the Mojave desert that was at the center of the Salazar v. Buono legal case before the U.S. Supreme Court.[1][2][3] The original cross was erected in 1934 to honor those killed in war.[4] The cross has been maintained by volunteers[5] and was reconstructed after being destroyed.[5] It was boarded up after lower court rulings declared it illegal because of separation of church and state constitutional concerns.
On April 28, 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled on Salazar v. Buono in a 5-4 decision that the cross may stay but also sent the case back to a lower court.[6] The high court ruled there was no violation of the separation of church and state when Congress transferred the land surrounding the cross to a veteran's group.[6] Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, "The goal of avoiding governmental endorsement [of religion] does not require eradication of all religious symbols in the public realm".[7]
As of May 10, 2010, the cross is no longer in place atop Sunrise Rock. It was stolen on the night of May 9–10, 2010.[8][9][10] National Park Service spokeswoman Linda Slater said a $125,000 reward has been offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the thieves. The VFW promised that the memorial will be rebuilt."This was a legal fight that a vandal just made personal to 50 million veterans, military personnel and their families," said National Commander Thomas J. Tradewell.[11]

 

[LuckyKBoxer]

well if the Rapture happens today, the young Athiest really wont need any support will he?

 

[granfire]

well if the Rapture happens today, the young Athiest really wont need any support will he?

Or protection?

 

[SensibleManiac]

I don't know if anyone else has mentioned this as I didn't read completely through all the posts, but I do take my hat off to the kid for standing up for his rights and acting on what he feels is right, thinking for himself instead of just going with the herd. Which is a difficult thing to do at any age. It's easy to go along with everyone and try to fit in, it's alot harder to say this is the way I see things and there is merit to that because the law states this and I know it's right.

I'm not saying that he is right because the best action would be to speak out for what you see as right and at the same time take others rights and views at this time into consideration. A moment for everyone who is graduating is not wrong.

I do respect the actions of a kid who is taking action on what he thinks is right, and not being a follower, I just think he may be handling it wrong.

 

[Carol]

It's not an issue of just feeling like you are not part of the community. Like a gay area of San Fran or a fundy town or Spanish Harlem. (like in your examples) If that's the case then you can take Carol and TF's advice and just move.

The issue is religious endorsement on state property, no? And where the line is drawn. What property? What people? etc.

In Mr. Fowler's own words, it is (also) a matter of feeling like he is part of the community.

• "That's when the s(p)itstorm rolled in"
• "everyone hates me...kind of worried about attending graduation now. Its attracted more hostility than I thought"
• "my reasoning...is that it's emotionally stressing on anyone who isn't Christian"
• "I'm one of maybe three atheists in this town"
• "One of the others is afraid to come out of the (atheist) closet."
• "Wish me luck at graduation."
• "They refuse to listen."
• "The whole town hates me, aside from a few atheists that are silently supporting"
• "If anyone would like to offer support..."
• "Thanks for the support. It’s really helping. This has just gotten sickening."

These comments are not about constitutionality, black letter law, majority opinions, or the like. These are comments about acceptance.

 

[Carol]

Found this online, thought it was interesting to read about.

SCOTUS: Abington School District vs. Schempp, 1963

Facts of the Case:
The Abington case concerns Bible-reading in Pennsylvania public schools. At the beginning of the school day, students who attended public schools in the state of Pennsylvania were required to read at least ten verses from the Bible. After completing these readings, school authorities required all Abington Township students to recite the Lord's Prayer. Students could be excluded from these exercises by a written note from their parents to the school. In a related case -- Murray v. Curlett -- a Baltimore statute required Bible-reading or the recitation of the Lord's Prayer at open exercises in public schools. Murray and his mother, professed atheists -- challenged the prayer requirement.



Question:
Did the Pennsylvania law and Abington's policy, requiring public school students to participate in classroom religious exercises, violate the religious freedom of students as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments?



Conclusion:
The Court found such a violation. The required activities encroached on both the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment since the readings and recitations were essentially religious ceremonies and were "intended by the State to be so." Furthermore, argued Justice Clark, the ability of a parent to excuse a child from these ceremonies by a written note was irrelevant since it did not prevent the school's actions from violating the Establishment Clause.



Decisions

Decision: 8 votes for Schempp, 1 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Establishment of Religion

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1962/1962_142

 

[fangjian]

In Mr. Fowler's own words, it is (also) a matter of feeling like he is part of the community.

• "That's when the s(p)itstorm rolled in"
• "everyone hates me...kind of worried about attending graduation now. Its attracted more hostility than I thought"
• "my reasoning...is that it's emotionally stressing on anyone who isn't Christian"
• "I'm one of maybe three atheists in this town"
• "One of the others is afraid to come out of the (atheist) closet."
• "Wish me luck at graduation."
• "They refuse to listen."
• "The whole town hates me, aside from a few atheists that are silently supporting"
• "If anyone would like to offer support..."
• "Thanks for the support. It’s really helping. This has just gotten sickening."

These comments are not about constitutionality, black letter law, majority opinions, or the like. These are comments about acceptance.

Of course he will feel isolated. He is just looking for other like minded people to know about the issue so he doesn't feel so alone. I don't see the problem.
The main issue is of a legal one, and not him just feeling lonely.

It's like if a black dude was living all by himself in some white town. Some legal issue of racial discrimination pops up and he sues. It's real iffy because the racist peoples' actions may actually be legal. Now he feels isolated cause of the s(p)it storm, and asking for some support online from around the country, so he doesn't feel so alone.

Nothing wrong with asking for support. The real issue is the legal one. Telling the black guy to just move away is no good. It would be good advice if their was no possible legal issue and he just felt lonely. Just like Damon Fowler.

 

[elder999]

.

It's like if a black dude was living all by himself in some white town. Some legal issue of racial discrimination pops up and he sues. It's real iffy because the racist peoples' actions may actually be legal. Now he feels isolated cause of the s(p)it storm, and asking for some support online from around the country, so he doesn't feel so alone.

I'm sorry; as "a black dude" who grew up in the only black family in some white neighborhood, I gotta say it's nothing like that at all.

Guy didn't have to out himself as an atheist, and no one would have known. Kinda hard to hide your skin color.

 

[fangjian]

I'm sorry; as "a black dude" who grew up in the only black family in some white neighborhood, I gotta say it's nothing like that at all.

Guy didn't have to out himself as an atheist, and no one would have known. Kinda hard to hide your skin color.

What's the matter with saying 'black dude' ?

Anyways, when forming an analogy, you're not gonna get a situation that is exactly like the other.

Yes you can hide what's going on in your cerebral cortex but, it is analogous.

Fine. No matter. Substitute the Damon Fowler story with a christian living in a muslim area in the USA. If muslim mythology was enacted in the same way on state property and time, and the christian made a big deal about in questioning its legality, the said christian would have my full support.

Is that not analogous either, because it's not exactly the same thing?

 

[elder999]

What's the matter with saying 'black dude' ?

Nothing.

Anyways, when forming an analogy, you're not gonna get a situation that is exactly like the other.

Yes you can hide what's going on in your cerebral cortex but, it is analogous.

It's not analagous because I haven't figured out a method of discerning whether or not a person is an atheist other than their telling me as much.

On the other hand, you usually just have to open your eyes, and you can clearly see that a black dude is, in fact, a "black dude."

In one instance you've offered, the the aggrieved party, Damon Fowler, is pointing out an offense-legal or social-that the offenders might not even be aware of.

In the other instance, the aggrieved party (the hypothetical "black dude") is pointing out a deliberate-though, as posited by you, possibly legal-offense, that the offenders simply have to be completely aware of.

 

[fangjian]

Nothing.



It's not analagous because I haven't figured out a method of discerning whether or not a person is an atheist other than their telling me as much.

On the other hand, you usually just have to open your eyes, and you can clearly see that a black dude is, in fact, a "black dude."

In one instance you've offered, the the aggrieved party, Damon Fowler, is pointing out an offense-legal or social-that the offenders might not even be aware of.

In the other instance, the aggrieved party (the hypothetical "black dude") is pointing out a deliberate-though, as posited by you, possibly legal-offense, that the offenders simply have to be completely aware of.

Completely analogous in Damon Fowler's case though. It's out now, and everybody knows it, just as they know he is a 'white dude'.

Person is in isolation in their community. Also, the community is partaking in activities that are legally questionable. The person brings it to the attention of the law. The person is now in a bit more fear and asks for support from others around the country that may have interest.

Analogous.

 

[elder999]

Also, the community is partaking in activities that are legally questionable. .

This is debatable-in fact, in most cases where it has been legally debated, it has been decided that the activity in question is legal. This may have as much to do with the community's hostility toward him as anything-he essentially bluffed the school superintendent into making the wrong call, for fear of litigation. The superintendent should have told the little **** to go ahead and go to the ACLU, and left the ceremony alone-in fact, it's the superintendent who's due more than a little bit of the hostility.

And it's not as though they're hostile towards him because he's an atheist and he's going to hell-they're hostile towards him for screwing up their ceremony.

And you should consider the word, "ceremony." Once again, from the Merriam Webster English Language Technical Manual

cer·e·mo·ny

noun \ˈser-ə-ˌmō-nē, ˈse-rə-\
plural cer·e·mo·nies
: a formal act or series of acts prescribed by ritual, protocol, or convention <the marriage ceremony>

2
a : a conventional act of politeness or etiquette <the ceremony of introduction>
b : an action performed only formally with no deep significance
c : a routine action performed with elaborate pomp

3
a : prescribed procedures
b : observance of an established code of civility or politeness <opened the door without ceremony and strode in>

Kid's reaping what he sowed.

EDIT: On the other hand, it is illegal to have a prayer at a high school graduation. The Supreme Court, in Lee v Weisman, decided this back in 1992.

"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.&#8221; Matthew 6:5-7

 

[Carol]

Of course he will feel isolated. He is just looking for other like minded people to know about the issue so he doesn't feel so alone. I don't see the problem.
The main issue is of a legal one, and not him just feeling lonely.

It's like if a black dude was living all by himself in some white town. Some legal issue of racial discrimination pops up and he sues. It's real iffy because the racist peoples' actions may actually be legal. Now he feels isolated cause of the s(p)it storm, and asking for some support online from around the country, so he doesn't feel so alone.

Nothing wrong with asking for support. The real issue is the legal one. Telling the black guy to just move away is no good. It would be good advice if their was no possible legal issue and he just felt lonely. Just like Damon Fowler.

Will you please point to where in my posts I am saying to move away and not take legal actions? Please reference the exact quote.

You as the OP have not framed this discussion as the main issue a legal issue.

The topic of the thread is "Young atheist needs support" Needing support is more about feeling lonely than the matter of law.

This is the few lines of the article you posted. They are quoted verbatim. All emphasis is his.

My graduation from high school is this Friday. I live in the Bible Belt of the United States.

In your own words, what point is Mr. Fowler trying to make with this opening line?

The school was going to perform a prayer at graduation, but due to me sending the superintendent an email stating it was against Louisiana state law and that I would be forced to contact the ACLU if they ignored me, they ceased it.

This means the school did the right thing by deciding against the prayer, does it not? If not, how do you interpret this?

The school backed down, but that&#8217;s when the shitstorm rolled in.

So the school does the right thing, but Mr. Fowler is concerned about the "shitstorm".

Your initial comment mentions the separation of church and state, absolutely. But the discussion was never framed as solely a legal one, there was much that was posited as an emotional one as well.

 

[fangjian]

If such a place is so horrible, then why hasn't he taken responsibility upon himself to leave?

Here is your quote, which I interpret as "Stop being such a beech, and just move away if you feel like you 'not one of them'"

Sometimes moving isn't an option for some people.

You as the OP have not framed this discussion as the main issue a legal issue.

The topic of the thread is "Young atheist needs support" Needing support is more about feeling lonely than the matter of law.

Yes yes. Very true. It is more about emotional support from others that can let themselves be heard and show that town that he is not some freak 'anomaly'.

In your own words, what point is Mr. Fowler trying to make with this opening line?

ummm. That he'll be graduating from school this Friday, and he lives in the 'Bible Belt'. ?
Sorry I don't know. What do you mean?

This means the school did the right thing by deciding against the prayer, does it not? If not, how do you interpret this?

Well, it's the right thing to do, to me. But I am curious if it also did have any legal basis as these things are 'kinda a grey area'. Bill Mattocks was a big help btw, and cleared up a few misconceptions I had about a couple things. So thnx.

Anyway. Eventually the thread became less about 'support for Damon', and more about, well, hmm, 'was it legal'? Is it legal to have this prayer at the ceremony? Is it a big deal? Is it not?

So you are correct. It is about emotional support too. What's wrong with that? Maybe he can't leave yet. Maybe he's got a babymama or something Maybe he's got..............

Atheists are the most hated group of people in America. This is true. Of course it's easy to stay in the closet, if you want. But when it's out, it's a sheet storm, and people get hostile. So I don't blame him for asking others to show his town, that he's not some freak.

 

[fangjian]

This is debatable-in fact, in most cases where it has been legally debated, it has been decided that the activity in question is legal. This may have as much to do with the community's hostility toward him as anything-he essentially bluffed the school superintendent into making the wrong call, for fear of litigation. The superintendent should have told the little **** to go ahead and go to the ACLU, and left the ceremony alone-in fact, it's the superintendent who's due more than a little bit of the hostility.

And it's not as though they're hostile towards him because he's an atheist and he's going to hell-they're hostile towards him for screwing up their ceremony.

And you should consider the word, "ceremony." Once again, from the Merriam Webster English Language Technical Manual



Kid's reaping what he sowed.

I don't completely disagree with any of this. I agree that the superintendent really shoulda' called him out.


.....with no deep significance.

It definitely has deep significance to them, otherwise they wouldn't care.

EDIT: On the other hand, it is illegal to have a prayer at a high school graduation. The Supreme Court, in Lee v Weisman, decided this back in 1992.

ummm oh. So is that our answer? Kind of, at least?