I don't disagree with the ruling. I just don't really understand why she wanted the banner removed. I guess I'm trying to figure out what she needed protection from and/or how this was offensive to her. I'd fully understand if she was forced to recite the prayer or acknowledge it in any meaningful way. I guess I'm just saying I wouldn't have been upset over a Jewish/Muslim/flying spaghetti monster prayer or even a 'there is not God' message when I was in HS. And, I've never understood the point in mocking religion or the lack of. I've never seen it from intelligent/mature adults in "real life", maybe it's just an internet thing.
Atheists are highly intolorent people. Anything, no matter how big or small, which mentions a higher being tends to offend them.
Or they just believe that a relationship between someone's deity and that someone should just be between themselves. Shoving that stuff in front of your face can be annoying. You are looking at this through your own eyes and not theirs. Assuming you hold Christian believes you are at an advantage where majority of the places you go the majority religion is Christianity. If you see no problem with this than you better not have a problem if you are ever in a situation where you are forced to be in a prayer held by a different religion... lets say a Muslim prayer. The school is a public school. That means it is required by the state that she attends this school. She has no choice unless her parents want to pay for a private school. But then again she has the right to free public schooling up to grade 12. So the safe way for a public school to run is to be religious neutral. As in no religious slogans no school held religious prayers unless it is private after school club that is optional. This way no one is singled out or put in an awkward situation.
All this is, is a poster which mentions a higher power. Nobody is forcing her to read it or pray (as prayer in public school is not allowed for the reasons which you mentioned and that is fair). It is just there. Don't get me wrong I do agree that it is the right call to take it down, I just don't understand why it is such a big deal/why it is so offensive to her. The intent of the people who put up the poster is not to offend anybody or put anybody in an awkward position. The 7th Grader who created it felt it in her heart, the people who put it up in the school put it up there because they found it beautiful. It just seems to me that the fact that she is so against it comes from hatred in her heart (which I see in pretty much every Atheist I know when it comes to this particular matter). It is true, I can not relate. I went to a school which did not have any mention of God anywhere. BTW (not that it really means or changes anything), I am Muslim. I have grown up in a mostly Christian society. I don't get angry/offended/excluded when people around me mention Jesus (if anything, I think that a person's faith is a beautiful thing as many teachings of Christianity are similar to that of Islam).
I am a firm believer in the separation of church and state. But this seems a bit much. I can't see how this banner infringes on this girl's rights. Is "In god we trust" written on money then unconstitutional? She isn't being forced to pray. She isn't even being ostracized (prior to the removal of the banner). There was no discrimination, intimidation, or suppression. No pressure or push for her to change her beliefs. I am an atheist. But I am able to respect others beliefs. Religious symbols do not bother me, nor references to god - no more so than references to Santa Claus or the tooth fairy. Point is, I am not treated differently in my day to day life because of that. Nor was this girl. As an Atheist, I want tolerance for my point of view and the space and freedom to be so without anyone bugging me about it. And in exchange, I let others practice their religion. It's one thing if the banner said, "Christianity is your only way to salvation, and if you don't know it you will go to hell". That i could see as unconstitutional. But this? Really? It's a shame people are reacting the way they are to her. She is only 10 years old. Adults should be ashamed. She's a kid. But the court system messed up here. I don't believe that banner is unconstitutional and the courts should be the ones being roasted, not this girl.
But that's just it: you don't have to understand. It truly doesn't matter whether you understand or not. Having government-endorsed religious dogma and symbols on the walls is wrong. Period. Regardless of which faith it is, whether or not the community is mostly Catholic, or Protestant, or Hindu, or Muslim, or whatever. It's not right. It's forcing a viewpoint down people's throats (just because she's not forced to read it doesn't mean a thing - it's there for a reason: to be read and taken as "gospel"). Their intent is completely immaterial. The content is what matters, and the content is religious in nature, and thus, has no business in a government-run facility. Wow. Amazing. You can actually see what's inside her heart! From miles and miles away! How did you come across this amazing power of perception? Perhaps the "hatred" you are perceiving is coming from within yourself and is directed at those who have the courage to take a stand for their rights as a citizen of this country. See, I can jump to conclusions, too! When I see an Atheist take a stand for religious neutrality, I don't see it as hatred. I see it as a bold and personal attempt to fight for the rights of EVERYONE in our nation to live in a country where we are not forced to follow a prescribed system of belief, but rather explore our own personal faith journey. To me, that isn't even remotely hateful.
Political Correctness is the new narrow-mindedness. This is all just stupid bull****. How does this banner infringe on her rights as a citizen? That is just dumb.
How is that banner even remotely offensive? It is only offensive to the people who cringe when they see the word "God" And that is hatred
How many of you would be outraged if there was a banner in a public school that said---"Kids, don't worry, there isn't a God?" political correctness is blah blah blah, but I am willing to bet some people who are for this school prayer, would censor the aforementioned banner. the country has never had the foot on the other side. I just find it incredibly hilarious how all of a sudden Christians are a "vulnerable, attacked" group. Guess they're not used to intolerance when it is applied to them. Reminds me of how Christians have an overt agenda against the "secret" homosexual agenda (???). It's a bit funny, really.
Crappy analogy. That banner does not call out atheists. It doesnt say "you will go to hell if you dont believe in god" This is too much. There are religious symbols in the public arena everywhere. I see crosses on churches, bibles in courtrooms, refernces to god on money. I agree with banning a moment of prayer in school. Or not requiring people to suffer other peoples expression of religion. But what this girl is doing is fairly intolerant and uncultured and only serves to give atheists a bad name. Its like a black person decrying a picture of the mona lisa in a museum. Why wouldnthis banner bother her? The goal of separation of church and state isnt to prevent people from being offended. Its to prevent people from using religion as a weapon to intimidate, coerce, or exclude. This baner doesn't do any of that. This girl just has a distaste for religious symbols. Being upset by something doesn't mean it is the problem. If something is offense or disturbing, that doesn't make it wrong. Taking this banner down is gross intolerance. As an atheist growing up in Texas I never said the under god part to the pledge of alligience. No one noticed and no one cared. If they did, yeah, that would be a problem. If everyone prayed and I was forced to sit there and twiddle my thumbs..then yeah, that would be wrong since it was wasting my time and serving to bring out my religious beliefs into the open. But teachers wore crosses around their neck. It did not bother me. Nor would this banner. Unless it resulted in some kind of behavior. If i was on a foot ball team and everyone prayed after scoring - that would be wrong. But a lot different than someone donating a banner to the team saying I hope the lord gives you strength and leads you to victory.
Its some poster on the wall. Its not like they were making her pray. As long as they aint shoving it down your throat why bother.
There should also be consideration for where it came from (written by a child in the 50s). People should view it more as a positive message from a child's mind in the past, rather than the current school trying to impose God-belief on the students. Its really nothing to be offended about.
Truly. The logic on this board would be hilarious, if it wasn't so very disturbing. "I don't find it offensive or invasive, therefore it's not offensive or invasive". Whether or not you are bothered by it DOESN'T MATTER IN THE SLIGHTEST. If you are for religious freedom, which includes freedom FROM religion being endorsed and/or advertised by the govt, then there is absolutely no reason NOT to support this girl. What I see in this thread is a whole bunch of posters who aren't opposed to theocracy, as long as it's their theocracy. Voltaire got this one right in 1755. Jeebus, it's like the Enlightenment never happened!
FYI - the banner in question. Now, tell me again: how is this not the school forwarding a religious agenda?
It implies the existance of God. As KingCheetah showed, the message would be perfectly fine without the relgious solemnity attached to it. The banner woould just be a contrapositive. If you like, it could have the same message, except at the end it would say "we don't need a God to accomplish these things.".
To be honest, I'm all for religious expression in the right contexts, and I don't even think this is a case where action being pursued is totally right, but it's just intresting to think about the perspective of "defensive" Christians who are all jumping on the "political correctness is bs" train as soon as that correctness verges on narrowing the rights of Christians, instead of say, how it has historically been used to oppress (and still does to some degree) gays with their "unnatural lifestyles" or athiests, or name any vulnerable minority.
