So if I decide to change my birth day to New Year's day because then everyone could celebrate my birthday that wouldn't seem like a marketing job to coopt a popular holiday? You acknowledge it but downplay the fact that apparently Christians didn't consider it important enough to establish when Jesus was actually born but instead decided to take over a popular pagan holiday. That seems fairly relevant when considering the sacredness of this particular holiday. As others have noted many call it Winter Break. Yet when 4th of July, New Years and other secular holidays fall on a Sunday usually the following Monday is given off. That is what the government does. As opposed to continuing to insist the holiday is primarily religious when recognizing the cultural and commercial importance of it? I am willing to say that yes there are religious aspects to it but that doesn't mean that Christmas, or should I say X-Mas, is important to our society to Christians and non-Christians because of secular reasons. And will you not put up a Tree, Yule Log, Santa and Reindeer so you focus strictly on the Christian aspects of it? And are there are lot of non-Muslim symbolism and practices associated with Ramadan? Does Ramadan always come near another major holiday? Anyway you seem to fail to grasp the basic point of this argument. Christmas is celebrated in our culture for more reasons than religion. Your argument about the keeping religion in the public sphere by citing Christmas ignores that the secular reasons why Christmas is considered a major holiday whereas Easter isn't even though Easter is more important to Christianity. Others have explained it already. Anyway I am with you on that I am fine with Christians displaying a Nativity as long as Satanists and etc.. can display their religious symbols on public grounds. You and I know that want happen. Does not displaying a Nativity on public ground constitute suppressing Christianity? Is your view of religion that unless religious symbols can be displayed anywhere that is suppressing the religion? I never said it wasn't. I am saying there are reasons besides Christianity for why it is celebrated going back to when it was started.
No, it's not, and it's such a moronic example that it doesn't really require debate. Oh, really? Let's look at that. I suspect you're talking about the following: In two landmark decisions, Engel v. Vitale (1962) and Abington School District v. Schempp (1963), the US Supreme Court established what is now the current prohibition on state-sponsored prayer in schools. While the Engel decision held that the promulgation of an official state-school prayer stood in violation of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause (thus overruling the New York Courts’ decisions), Abington held that Bible readings and other (state) school-sponsored religious activities were prohibited.[5] Following these two cases came the Court's decision in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), a ruling that established the Lemon test for religious activities within schools. The Lemon test states that in order to be constitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment any practice sponsored within state run schools (or other public, state sponsored activities) must adhere to the following three criteria:[6] 1. Have a secular purpose; 2. Must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and 3. Must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion. At no point have I talked about "state sponsored prayer" in schools. I ask for a moment of silence so that children have an opportunity to pray on their own - which is of course still too much for you, crosses and vampires and such. And I can't seem to remember exactly when I ever said I wanted state-sponsored Bible readings... Perhaps before we do that you should educate yourself on what that interpretation actually is? That's your problem. There is no rational reason for it. You yourself said it makes you "uncomfortable". un·com·fort·a·ble [uhn-kuhmf-tuh-buhl, -kuhm-fer-tuh-buhl] adjective 1. causing discomfort or distress; painful; irritating. 2. in a state of discomfort; uneasy; conscious of stress or strain. So, what about it exactly causes you discomfort or distress? What about it is painful or irritating for you? As I said earlier a rational, appropriate response from you would be "What a bunch of idiots, wasting their time praying to nobody". Instead, you're... uncomfortable. Since I suspect it doesn't cause you physical pain or irritation, it causes you distress. What are you afraid of? Blah, blah, blah. I'm not gonna sit here and pretend that your position is rational when it is not, or that your intentions are anything other than shutting down all religious activity in public life. Cry to someone else about the injustice of it all. They cause you discomfort. Why? That's not a rational reaction from someone looking at a depiction of a baby in a manger post-birth. No one is pressuring ANYONE to adopt any religion. If the other person feels that someone is then the fault lies with them. I believe that we already agreed on this. Or they can all get a moment to use how they wish. As I said, the atheist kids can update their Facebook or whatever. Do you think most of them would turn down this opportunity? I doubt it. But at least the school would be providing them all with the opportunity to exercise their religious preferences, and not restricting everyone in violation of the Constitution. Exactly one paragraph up, you say "That is true in the PRIVATE domain." You want it kept in the private domain, you don't want to see it because it causes you discomfort. You want to keep it in the closet. I am merely rephrasing your words, the meaning is the same. If you are not afraid, then explain in more detail what "uncomfortable" means. If there is no physical pain or irritability, then that means that the problem is mental/emotional. Explain to me the nature of this discomfort, because it is usually associated with fear of something. "Uncomfortable" is your word. Do you deny this? And my question back to you is why do you feel it is appropriate to make accommodations for the handicapped but it is not OK to make accommodations for everyone else as well? Do the handicapped occupy a preferential role, or by making accommodations for them are we not simply leveling the playing field for them? Hell yeah! Now we're talking! :grin: Please. You think it's a waste of time and money, others don't. Look here and then come back and talk to me about wasted taxpayer money. (really, look, it's entertaining, if disheartening) http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/30-stupid-things-the-governemnt-is-spending-money-on Oh I believe in it very much - and know that the reason the founding fathers wrote it the way they did was because they were all too familiar with religious persecution. And for many of them, not being able to hang a cross in a courtroom was the whole point of coming to America - to escape being persecuted for who they were.[/QUOTE] I find it fascinating that you can write those two sentences given what you have been arguing for this entire thread. Really, just fascinating.
Seriously, dude, I am not going to engage in such a ridiculous argument. No one with a brain and a shred of integrity is going to buy that Christmas is not primarily a Christian holiday. Sorry, but that is a complete waste of time.
I find it fascinating that you can write those two sentences given what you have been arguing for this entire thread. Really, just fascinating.[/QUOTE] Uncomfortable because the school is allowing prayer in a place that I am required to go and I don't want to pray. This is putting people a child in an awkward position of having to basically show they are either an atheist or also pretend to be in some form of prayer. Your own guidelines show they can not do this. You can not promote a religion and having a "moment of silence" is just a way to get around sanctioned prayer. If you want your moment of silence, go ahead. Do it, but don't make the entire class do it. Like I said, if you make one moment of silence, make it for every religion. We need 5 a day to accomodate Muslims. Why not just have a city-wide moment of silence? Why limit it to school? You refuse to address this. Stop spreading these lies about me being disgusted with religious symbols. Just because I don't want them in public places doesn't mean I want it in the closet. That's crazy. I already told you I don't mind symbols on private property which are more than visible. If a church wants to buy a billboard and put a cross on it, that's fine! I am not against that. But if you force me to sit and watch you pray, yes, that's weird and uncomfortable. Maybe you need to really think about what I am saying instead of just attacking. Again, show humility. I believe what the founding fathers stood for in creating a gov't free of religious influence, and think it's a shame people like yourself want to undo that so you can push your beliefs unto othes. There is no valid reason to put religion into the classroom except to gain access to the young minds who are not followers of your religion. none whatsoever. Nice try though.
And where you are not forced to pray. You can't even stand to see it. I want to know why that makes you uncomfortable. No, no one would begrudge a kid checking their Facebook while others are praying. No one would care. It's not "promoting" a religion. It is making an allowance for the individual practice thereof. Your own insecurity prevents you from seeing this distinction. Then don't stay silent. Talk to your friends while the other kids pray. This really isn't that complicated. Which I already said I agree with. If we agree then why do you keep trying to argue this? Sounds good to me. Well,m this is the first time you've brought it up... But it's a pretty easy one to address. We don;t have a city-wide moment of silence because most of the city is privately owned and run and is not mandated by the First Amendment to accommodate for religious practice. They are merely restricted from outright discrimination. They have much more freedom than the government does in this regard. See? That wasn't so hard. Spreading lies? What, I'm on Facebook telling everyone you're an atheist douche who throws up when he sees people pray? Immature much, do we? I'd simply like you to explain the nature of your discomfort. It might even be therapeutic for you. But YOU are the one who said he wants it kept in the PRIVATE domain. Can't have it both ways. Again, Why? I am going to keep asking until you explore your feelings and answer. Agreed. Wait, I thought we weren't putting words into each other's mouths? And anyway, did you get that from me when I said this: I know the Great Commission says that I am supposed to try and convert non-believers, but frankly, I am a "to each his own" sort of guy, and it's not worth the effort to me. I believe you're free to believe whatever you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else Or this: We all get that the State needs to stay the hell out of the religion business. I am on the same page as you as far as that goes. Or this: I completely agree that the govt should not endorse any religion over another. Or this: They can pray to whoever or whatever they want. Or not pray. Play a freaking video game of check their text messages. I've said it repeatedly: I couldn't care less what you believe. Believe what you want. I make no attempt to force my beliefs upon you, and I wouldn't condone a school doing it either. NO ONE is trying to force their beliefs upon you. That is in your head. And because you have that idea stuck in your head you are willing to infringe upon others' right to exercise their religion. You're paranoid. Paranoia often leads people to strange places. Stalin was paranoid about religion, too. The valid reason for it is to allow them the freedom to exercise their religion that they are granted in the First Amendment.
So, we have paranoia and mental/emotional discomfort at the sight of others praying. Do we have any shrinks here?
Wait, you haven't been trolling this whole thread? Huh. It's disingenuous at best to think that displaying christian (or any other) iconography in a public, government building isn't endorsing that religion. You can't be that obtuse, can you?
The sight of people praying isn't an issue - this is getting ridiculous. I just wouldn't want to reveal my religious beliefs to an entire classroom. You are basically forcing people to show their own beliefs. If you go on to FB or chats then everyone knows your personal and up until then private beliefs. That is not right. Not the point of school. If people can keep talking during prayer then it's not a moment of silence is it? And why not just let the teacher keep on teaching. If a kid wants to take a break and pray he can do that, why does the gov't need to get involved to create a "moment of silence" that isn't even silent and one that everyone can ignore. Great - you don't need it. Teacher teaches and kid can pray while teacher teaches. Ok? And a city could put into effect a moment of silence. Every gov't building and worker could be told there is a moment of silence 5 times a day. There you go. And for the 30th time I don't have any problem with people expressing their religion anywhere so long as it is not on public institutions or in places people are required to be like school or the DMV. Want to do it on the sidewalk - go right ahead. Want to do a march! Awesome! Want to put a big cross on your lawn, I applaud that. But it doesn't go into courtrooms, schools, or gov't buildings. Why do you need it there - there's plenty of places to show it otherwise. Put it on the blimp! It doesn't bother me there. Just not in the class room. Why? Why in school? Again, to put pressure on kids. Let's not be naive here. You know what your agenda is.
Well, I don't think it's an endorsement. I'd say that if they make you stand and listen to a reading of the 10 Commandments before court proceedings begin, then that is an endorsement. I believe that if they use school funds to set up a nativity scene, then that is an endorsement. I believe that if a teacher leads the prayer, then that is an endorsement. Otherwise, no, it's not. This isn't that complicated.
Disingenuous or (intentionally?) obtuse...not sure which. You'd be fine with a pentagram or portraits of satan hanging up in a courthouse? Would you feel you'd get a fair shake as a christian in that setting? Tell the truth. Do you know one of the most hated groups in America? Atheists. That kid you want playing video games or updating facebook (they tweet, instagram, vine, and snapchat these days, btw) would be a pariah quicker than you can say, "hail mary!" Atheist students are more reluctant to come out than gay ones, especially in Texas. I see it every year. To think otherwise is blissful ignorance.
So Treeman you are okay with halting class three times a day so that Muslims can pull out their rugs and perform Salah, while everyone sits in silence and waits?
Oh come one now, I did apologize... Well, that is the first time you mentioned that. It's almost like you just thought of it... Why are you embarrassed about your non/religious beliefs? No I'm not. Sit there and do nothing if you don't want to. No one will know what your beliefs are then. How so? Are you posting your personal and until then private beliefs on Facebook, where everyone can read them? Moment of silence is just a term. Call it a "moment of freedom" if you want. That would be a more accurate description, anyway. Oh, he can, cane he? Really? So he can just get up any old time and say "Ms. Robinson, I am going to pray", and he gets a pass? LOL, I doubt he gets that pass in most classes. Because it is obligated to refrain from restricting exercise of religion and needs to make accommodations for such exercise. Come one man, we've been over this repeatedly. I know you can read. I'd like to see that happen. Really, it would be quite entertaining. 1) how long do those City Council members keep their jobs afterwards, and 2) just seeing the city try to enforce that would be hilarious. Sorry, but your example is dumb. Right, because if they do it on public land then it has the magical effect of forcing you believe in it - sort of like hypnotism, or something, I suppose. Whereas if it's done on private land there is no such effect. Magic! Does it not make you feel uncomfortable staring up at it? I mean, I could see how that could cause some neck pain and discomfort. Or does the discomfort of arching your neck cancel out the mental/emotional discomfort of seeing the message? Because attendance is mandatory for children. If they have no choice about being there then you have make accommodations for their right to freely exercise their religious preferences. Well of course I do. I know it better than you because I can actually read my own thoughts. My agenda is to get people lie you to stop trying to infringe upon others' rights. Alas, the struggle for civil rights is a neverending one. I'd still like for you to explain this discomfort you feel. I think it's at the root of this whole discussion. I think if we could eliminate that discomfort then others would be allowed to exercise their Constitutional rights without making you physically or emotionally ill. Win-Win for everybody.
I would certainly think it out of place since it had no historical significance in the courthouse. Pretty sure I'd do a WTF doubletake at that. I suppose if the judge showed up wearing a red cape with a pentagram on a chain dangling from his neck I would certainly think I couldn't get a fair trial. Whether I actually *get* a fair trial is a more important consideration than whether I think I am going to get one. If the principles of Satanism are not applied in the judgement or proceedings then I wouldn't worry about it. So? Cry me a river. But perhaps they are disliked because of their continual efforts to silence others and restrict their rights? Just sayin'. Eh, when my kid was in public school for awhile they thought HE was the wierdo because he believed in God. Almost none of them did. Public schools nowadays have that effect on people. Atheism was popular in schools when I was a kid, it's still popular now. It's the highest form of defiance - the hallmark of young people. So I am gonna disagree with you on that one.
Lying for Jesus. Got it. Or we could just be tired of being shat upon? Did you even read the article? Restrict rights? Hah. People can pray to their heart's desires. Public entities sponsoring it? Yeah, I'll help silence that. It has no place there. I think you're still lying for Jesus, but shrug, it's your choice. My experience as a high school teacher for the past 16+ years says otherwise, but I'm sure your kid's few months in school trumps that. Sounds pretty solid.
ill? What are you talking about? Embarrassed about my beliefs? WTF? Dude you are totally out of line here and just getting weird. YOu are being intentionally coy, obtuse, and devilishly warping this conversation into a twisted mess to try to win an argument. It really is machiavellian of you, or would be, if it wasn't so transparent.
Lying? You know my thoughts now? Are you God?!? Honestly, I just saw the top line and skimmed it. I found nothing surprising there. As long as they don't do it on public property, because that automatically denotes sponsorship by the public entity, right? LOL... And as I said several times, when you find a public entity actually sponsoring it, I'll stand shoulder to shoulder to you in opposing it. Until then, you're whistling in the wind. "Lying for jesus". Has a rather atheisticy feel to it. Did you come up with that at an Atheists Anonymous meeting, or something? I trust my own personal experience more than I trust your anonymous internet-y experience, thanks.
I am merely rephrasing your words and taking them to their logical conclusion. You don't want to reveal your religious beliefs to the classroom. Are you embarrassed about them? You said that seeing people pray in school makes you feel uncomfortable. What discomfort is a feeling of physical, mental, and/or emotional unease or illness. I am curious why you have this reaction. Talk about what makes you "uncomfortable" about seeing people pray in school. Really, I'd like to hear about it. I find it fascinating that someone can see others essentially standing there talking to themselves and get a severe emotional or physical reaction out of it. I think we should explore it. I am under no illusion that anyone will "win" this argument. This is the Interwebz. Nothing we say here will make one bit of policy difference. You are not going to relent in your position, and neither am I. I do think it might be helpful for you to explore why you have this reaction when seeing people praying or seeing religious iconography. I was joking when I asked for a shrink earlier, but really... Maybe it's something you should look into? That is not a natural or rational reaction to have.
Prove I'm not. Way to dive deep. Typical? Not sure why it's a laughing matter. It doesn't belong on public property, period, and despite your assertions otherwise, you would most likely be rabidly (actually, you're more passive aggressive...) fight against muslim or satanic celebrations or iconography on government property. You're simply wrong about this. Like you are about god. Freethinker's Pub Crawl. Try it some time! I'll ask former students if they would like to be contacted by you for comments on how they were treated after coming out atheist. How's that?
