Forum: Arts / Debates

Page:
Page 2 of 3: 1 2 3
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By Incarnadinemember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sat Feb 27, 2010 06:11 PM
From Dictionary.com:
prej•u•dice [prej-uh-dis] (noun, verb,-diced, -dic•ing.)
1. an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
2. any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.
3. unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.
4. such attitudes considered collectively: The war against prejudice is never-ending.
5. damage or injury; detriment: a law that operated to the prejudice of the majority.

dis•crim•i•na•tion [dih-skrim-uh-ney-shuh n] (noun)
1. an act or instance of discriminating.
2. treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination.
3. the power of making fine distinctions; discriminating judgment: She chose the colors with great discrimination.
4. Archaic. something that serves to differentiate.

in•tol•er•ant [in-tol-er-uh nt] (adjective)
1. not tolerating or respecting beliefs, opinions, usages, manners, etc., different from one's own, as in political or religious matters; bigoted.
2. unable or unwilling to tolerate or endure (usually fol. by of): intolerant of very hot weather.
–noun
3. an intolerant person; bigot.


* * * Must speak carefully as to not Godwin myself * * *

I understood what you were saying. But your clarification only solidified what I was saying… you chose the most “literal” translation because doing so allows for maximum discrimination against a certain group of people. I take this leap because you stated you don’t even agree with the “American sentiment” of “freedom of religion” and you’d go a step further and not even allow people to identify their religious affiliation publically (via head scarves, stars of David, etc.).

Why not just outlaw religion all together if you’re going to state that people must hide their religious beliefs from the public sphere? I mean- for the sake of total fairness, of course.

The whole “freedom FROM religion” idea comes from a place of prejudice, discrimination and hatred. It implies that people must figuratively and literally “hide” their religion from public view. What other purpose would this serve other than to appease prejudice and to discriminate?

That brings me back to the point of my original post…
Ignorance and intolerance, I say.
Preventing others from practicing their religion is DISCRIMINATION. It’s not affecting you (Oh, I know “It offeeeeends you” and “Makes you uncommmmmfortable.” Pfffft.) If a religious person is not causing harm or the threat of harm to others in their public practices- then get over it and quite being a tool about it.

“Waaaaah… people are doing religious things within my vicinity and I can see/hear them!!! And even when they’re not doing it in front of me- it bothers me that I’m in the building with them when they’re doing it!!! Wahhhhh Wahhhhh… I’m so offeeeeenddded!!! I’m so uncommmmmmfortable!!!”

So much for honoring and valuing diversity and embracing tolerance for others, huh?
The only push for this would be because it comes from a place of intolerance.

This isn’t directed only at you Heart- but those of you calling for “freedom from religion” are no better than homophobes, racists and misogynists. They, of course, hold the same sorts of attitudes…just about other groups of supposedly “egregious” people.

One last thing:
Having a religious event take place at a school - which is run by the government - is a form of the government mandating said religion.

No, no it’s not. Not at all. If the government said “We will only allow Religion X because that’s the only religion we recognize as valid” or “All citizens must participate in Religion X. Those that refuse are subject to punitive measures.” THAT’S mandating.

A government that allows its citizens to "live and let live" (and that includes one's right to practice their religion in the way they see fit; so long as it isn't causing harm or the threat of harm) is a FREE SOCIETY.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By Heartmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sat Feb 27, 2010 07:59 PM
So is the country of France full of prejudicial, discriminatory, intolerant bigots? Because basically, I just follow their concept of laïcité. I believe in a secular republic. I do not think that this is unreasonable. I do not make a distinction in favor of or against religious people. I have no problem with religion and in fact have a tendency to practice it myself. If believing that religion has no place in public spaces; that is to say, state and federal buildings and public schools, then by all means, feel free to call me that. The fact that I am perfectly fine with religious expression in all other areas on the planet and in all other aspects of society obviously has nothing to do with anything.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By Incarnadinemember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:16 PM
Edited by Incarnadine (15186) on 2010-02-27 22:29:54
Heart wrote:

So is the country of France full of prejudicial, discriminatory, intolerant bigots?


Yes and no. But yeah, pretty much.

Yes, France as a country has embraced bigoted laws.
(Not that we in the U.S. aren't guilty of this as well; but nevertheless, just answering your question.)

No, not all of France is prejudice, but the people there who supported the ban of religious expression and practice sure as hell are. By definition. (I expressed this view years ago on this very board when we debated their ban of religious attire in public.)

Just like how Californians who supported the ban of gay marriage (via Prop 8) are homophobes. (And just to be clear for the record, I voted NO on Prop 8.)

You can't be like, "Oh, sorry gay people, I totally voted against your civil rights and stuff... but I love gay folks- swear! No hard feelings, mmmk?!"

Prejudice is prejudice is prejudice.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school? (karma: 1)
By SammyAnnmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:02 PM
I believe that religious clubs and groups are fine in public schools. The difference between mandatory prayer at school and a club like Fellowship of Christian Athletes is that nobody is forcing anyone to join. AND, although in my experience the majority of these clubs are based on Christianity (since it is, after all, one of the more prominent religions in the US), any religious group can have a club of their own. If someone is offended because a club exists at school that is not their religion, well frankly I think that person needs to grow up a little bit. By condemning these clubs, you (not referring to any one person here) are spreading intolerance, which is what the freedom of religion thing is trying to avoid in the first place. A Jewish student may want to meet other Jewish students, a Christian may want to meet other Christians at school, and please enlighten me to what is the harm in that? Furthermore, I think religious clubs are refreshing - maybe its just me but I think its really great when kids are passionate about their beliefs.

As far as mandatory religious observation in public schools goes, that blatantly goes against our freedom of religion. In my school we've had a "moment of silence and reflection" for several years now and it seems to work pretty well as a compromise.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By panicmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Feb 28, 2010 09:37 AM
Why not just outlaw religion all together if you’re going to state that people must hide their religious beliefs from the public sphere?
That is not at ALL what ANYONE is saying.

I've worked in the public school system for like 20 years teaching extracurricular activities, and I can tell you the services (especially insurance) provided by the school to student clubs are VERY expensive. They are nothing close to incidental.

And hell yeah, I object to my tax dollars being used to promote Christianity. Even one dollar is one dollar too many. I don't think that makes me petty, but if it does *shrug*.

That said, I have absolutely no problem with students expressing religious views at school. If the kids want to wear a crucifix or a head scarf or erect a nativity, that's fine. Free speech. But I'll be stuffed before I pay for it with my own tax dollars. Not gonna happen.

And for the record, I actually fought against the school administration in order to let a dance team I was teaching conduct a prayer before each performance. But there is a HUGE difference between students freely expressing their religious views and a teacher promoting one specific religion.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By Incarnadinemember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:06 AM
Edited by Incarnadine (15186) on 2010-02-28 10:11:26
panic wrote:

Why not just outlaw religion all together if you’re going to state that people must hide their religious beliefs from the public sphere?
That is not at ALL what ANYONE is saying.

I've worked in the public school system for like 20 years teaching extracurricular activities, and I can tell you the services (especially insurance) provided by the school to student clubs are VERY expensive. They are nothing close to incidental.

And hell yeah, I object to my tax dollars being used to promote Christianity. Even one dollar is one dollar too many. I don't think that makes me petty, but if it does *shrug*.

That said, I have absolutely no problem with students expressing religious views at school. If the kids want to wear a crucifix or a head scarf or erect a nativity, that's fine. Free speech. But I'll be stuffed before I pay for it with my own tax dollars. Not gonna happen.

And for the record, I actually fought against the school administration in order to let a dance team I was teaching conduct a prayer before each performance. But there is a HUGE difference between students freely expressing their religious views and a teacher promoting one specific religion.

I was being tongue and cheek with the “outlaw all religion” thing… ;)

Honestly Panic, I don’t think our views are all that different. You and I clearly see the club thing differently, but otherwise I think we hold roughly the same views. And really, my main issue wasn’t about clubs at all- I just used that example and went with it because that’s what others were talking about.

The main topic here is “prayer in schools” and THAT’S the bone I’m ready to pick with “Freedom FROM Religon-ers” all day long.

I think I’ve made it clear how I feel so I won’t repeat myself.

P.S.
As for "promoting Christianity"....I just want to be clear in stating once again I'm NOT suggesting schools fund clubs for religions! However, I'd be ok with schools funding clubs for any group in general- if that includes any and all religions (assuming it's equally includive) or belief systems eh- whatever.

But really- I don't care either way and don't have strong opinons on that point regardless.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By dancemomtoo
On Sun Feb 28, 2010 03:53 PM
First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

In interpreting this clause the Supremes ruled that

The justices, in a 6-3 decision, ruled that government agencies cannot discriminate against groups that embrace religious viewpoints because religious speech deserves the same constitutional protections as do other forms of free speech.

In other words, schools cannot censor religious speech
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By panicmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Feb 28, 2010 03:59 PM
Right. And they can't pay for it either.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school? (karma: 1)
By Anon1234567890member has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Feb 28, 2010 05:01 PM
I don't get this thread on so many levels. Firstly America is supposed to be a secular country and Britain is supposed to be a Christian country, yet we universally allow so much stuff that would be unthinkable over there.

But mainly I don't get it because of this:
Public schools are just that--public, and the public in our country has the freedom to practice any beliefs they want, including agnosticism and atheism. In order to successfully respect ALL those beliefs, you can't pray in school. It's "respecting all beliefs"...except agnostics and atheists, which means it's not actually respecting all beliefs.

What sense does that make? Seriously? You're accepting of every belief, but in order to prove that you're accepting of every belief, you have to ban outward showing of all beliefs? WHAT?! You're accepting of the fact that everyone does/should have the freedom to practice their beliefs...but not practice their beliefs in school? If I didn't know better I would honestly think you'd typed that statement solely to be provocative.

Don't get me wrong. I'm an optimistic agnostic from an officially Christian country. A Christian country with an Islamic extremist population who want Sharia law to apply to ALL of us without exception. I object to headscarves of all description. But I only object to extremism in religion, not religion itself. If a belief in fairies, deities, flying cows or any type of God gets you through the day, fine.

If your belief system requires you to pray at certain times of day then to hell with everyone else (pun fully intended). You CANNOT tell someone else when they can or cannot pray. Seriously, you go home offended because someone knelt to east a few times a day? It is THAT important to you? You see someone respect their belief system and you actually feel the need to protest against it? What the hell is the matter with you? In my world, if you're not still pissed off at something 20 minutes later then you shouldn't ever have been pissed off about it in the first place. Try that, next time you see someone doing something that they believe is vital to their lives/immortal souls.

Wow.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By Kekoamember has saluted, click to view salute photos
On Sun Feb 28, 2010 06:29 PM
Wow, this has gotten really intense!

I have no problem with an individual praying quietly or silently to themselves. After all, how could you stop it? I actually don't even have a problem with Muslim students sneaking off at lunch time to a quiet, unused classroom to pray. What I meant by not agreeing with students praying was that I do not think a student should have the right to leave class to pray. During lunch, during passing, as long as they're not bothering other students, no big. And by "bothering" I don't mean "boohoo I'm offended," I mean pressuring the other students.

When it comes to clubs, even school sponsored, I would be okay with them being sponsored by school if it could be guaranteed that all religions/thought groups were guaranteed to be treated equally, but we don't live in a perfect world. I just don't think that there is a need for religious clubs in schools. Why can't churches host FCA or bible study groups? It would just be much easier to make it a non-issue by leaving religious groups in churches, since there is no guarantee that non-Christian groups would get equal treatment. If students in my school had tried to start a "Free Thought" club for atheists and agnostics, it NEVER would have been approved. Just starting a Gay-Straight Alliance was a huge ordeal, and even that wasn't approved in the end.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By panicmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Sun Feb 28, 2010 06:52 PM
I object to headscarves of all description.
I have been friends with a LOT of Jews, German Baptists (similar to Amish) and Catholics (just off the top of my head) who also wear religious head coverings. Do you object to these as well? Or only to the Islamic hijab?
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By Anon1234567890member has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 02:34 AM
Now that you've called me on it, I realise I didn't actually mean that. My bad. I object to full facecoverings, not actually "headscarves of any description" as I originally stated. Although to be honest, I'm unsure that I've ever come across someone from another religion that wears a headscarf.

It's not the religious symbol that bothers me, as I have been known to wear crosses. It's the fact that the person wearing certain types of headscarf is cut off from the rest of us. It hinders communication.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By dancemomtoo
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 07:40 AM
If a school accepts ANY group meetings it must accept ALL. An agnostic free thought meeting must be accepted in the USA. SO must a gay straight alliance. At our public high school we have a bible study, gay straight alliance, and humanist society (as well as chess, motorheads, amnesty international , cooking and so on.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school? (karma: 1)
By Heartmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 09:20 AM
Edited by Heart (21721) on 2010-03-01 09:21:34
You don't like burqas and niqabs, Louise. A headscarf or hijab is just the head covering. (To make it more confusing it's also the general term.) Burqas are the full-body covering, and a niqab is the covering that only shows the eyes.

Image hotlink - 'http://contexts.org/thickculture/files/2009/06/2jpg.gif'

Image hotlink - 'http://contexts.org/thickculture/files/2009/06/1jpg.gif'
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By Anon1234567890member has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 09:25 AM
You got that off the BBC website, no? I have seen that before, I just couldn't remember the names of any of them bar the burqa, and couldn't be bothered to go and check. :P

Hijab, well. I'm not sure I agree with the principle of it (especially on kids) but I can at least see the woman's face, we can interract non-verbally, I know it is in fact a woman, if I had cause to check her identity then it would be possible. So it's way better than the other two which are just fabric prisons as far as I'm concerned.

/hijack
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By panicmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 10:43 AM
If a school accepts ANY group meetings it must accept ALL.
Lol, that's absolutely preposterous! Does your school also have to accept NAMBLA meetings? Aryan Nations meetings? This is exactly the sort of non-thinking, reactionary nonsense that makes my eyes roll around wildly. Please give me a break.


That second graphic Heart posted is kinda misleading. Hijab basically means "modest dress", so a burqua, an abaya, and a turban are all hijab.


In my neighborhood, married Jewish women always wear head coverings. It could be a hat, scarf, or a wig. And all the Jewish men and boys in this community keep their heads covered at all times. There is also a German Baptist community down here, and most of the women wear a cap. Not sure if it has any religious significance or not, but it's practically ubiquitous.

I'm not bothered by any of these, but I agree that covering the face is a separate issue.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By SaNDiMas59member has saluted, click to view salute photos
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:00 PM
slight hijack, but man am I glad that I don't live in a society in which I would need to wear a burka. Wow.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By dancemomtoo
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:01 PM
Well, I had thought of explicitly stating that they were not bound to accept speech that incited hate (not protected by first amendment) or encouraged illegal activities (ditto) but I thought that would be obvious and was in a hurry,
The point is equal access means if you give some lawful groups access, you must give them all access. You may not censor based on the content of the speech 9unless it incites hatred or promotes illegal activities).
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school? (karma: 2)
By Incarnadinemember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:54 PM
Can I just point out that it’s HILARIOUS (ridiculous) they made the woman in the hijab look all shifty-eyed and suspicious? LMAO- seriously?! What the hell?! Am I the only one who noticed this?
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By Anon1234567890member has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:56 PM
^ I actually thought she looked sultry. And that's why they have to wear them, no? In simpleton-speak it's because women are whorelike temptresses who aim only to corrupt innocent men. But, you know, if men can't see their hair then they won't be led astray. It's, um, imaginative, I'll give them that.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By panicmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 02:06 PM
women are whorelike temptresses
That's my favorite kind of woman!

^ I actually thought she looked sultry.
When I first read this, I thought it said "I actually thought she looked SLUTTY." And I was like, "OMG, Weezy is hitting the crack pipe again."
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By Incarnadinemember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 02:20 PM
Edited by Incarnadine (15186) on 2010-03-01 14:25:56
I read it as “slutty” too. heh.

And about MS Paint... got to put that college education to use somehow! ;)
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By panicmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Mon Mar 01, 2010 02:28 PM
^Well, I guess it's obvious which of us have dirty minds, eh? Not that it wasn't perfectly obvious before. But still.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school? (karma: 2)
By Celebrianmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Tue Mar 02, 2010 07:08 AM
Edited by Celebrian (127245) on 2010-03-02 07:09:31 In memory of my aunt who once wore the hijab...
The hijab in Islam is worn to signify your submission to God. The spin that people want to put on that (women being evil temptresses) is an add-on by men who are threatened by femininity, not an original. A woman deciding to wear one is a personal decision. Especially if you come from a country where it's not the law, no one can force you to put it on. Women wearing them are actually encouraged to speak their minds and excel at what they do best so the world can see them for them and their talents and skills, not for outer beauty.

The practice of covering ones head came about way before the origins of Islam. Back in the day, all women of most beliefs covered their head to show their modesty and/or adherence to the word of their deity; sometimes it was just cultural and had nothing to do with a deity. This is an old practice that has still stuck around for some cultures. For most it has not.

/sorry for the hijack.
re: Time-sensitive: Prayer in public school?
By panicmember has saluted, click to view salute photosPremium member
On Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:01 AM
Yeah well "back in the day" women were considered property of their husbands. And in a lot of Islamic countries, they still are.

Women wearing them are actually encouraged to speak their minds and excel at what they do best so the world can see them for them and their talents and skills, not for outer beauty.
Unfortunately, this is simply not true in most of the Islamic world. And that's not even a matter of debate. Just look at the statistics about the percentage of educated women.
Page:
Page 2 of 3: 1 2 3

ReplySendWatch

Powered by XP Experience Server.
Copyright ©1999-2021 XP.COM, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
XL
LG
MD
SM
XS
XL
LG
MD
SM
XS