OK folks a lot has been made about whether or not students are allowed to read Scripture in their respective schools. I beg to differ and the link to the letter from the Rutherford Institute will explain the severity of this situation.
Letter from Rutherford Institute
fyi: The link above will transport you to a website not affiliated with the Rutherford institute. The content of the letter at this link is taken verbatum from the institute's email message of information. Clicking the links included in this message WILL take you to the official site of the Rutherford Institute. Thank you - R&C for America Admin
IT'S TIME TO WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
Jun 15, 2005
THE BIBLE IS UNDER ATTACK!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
70 comments:
Oh no, not The Bible (©)!!!!
Send in the national guard!
extremely hillarious Anon (if that's your real name...)
FYI - Comments from an anonymous reader were deleted here. These comments insinuated that the posting of the link included here was somehow meant to mislead the readers. Please see disclaimers both on the post and in the link for more information.
Thanks for fixing the link. All I really wanted to do was read it......
Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it one of you "anonymous" commenters who suggested that kids were allowed to read their Bibles on school premises? The purpose of my posting was to show just how wrong you are, and the situation is only going to get worse!
To sesamestreetwatcher: I like the way you think--Draw a line in the sand and dare those "ninny's" to cross it.
(anon 2)
Bowie. I go to High School. Reading of Bibles is not forbidden. You are not in high school, so stop pretending you know what you're talking about.
You lost this argument already, so why not move on and protect what's left of your credibility?
Dave, I'm not defending you - I'm defending all of us "FOAGGIES"...
Anon 2 - Sit down and shut up. If you're in high school you are between 15 and 18 years old - What makes you think you have any clue about anything yet? Experience my young friend is the best and only teacher about anything and I can assure you we've got tons of it on you. I suggest that you actually live more than 2 decades before you start questioning anyone people who have owned cars longer than you've been alive.
This is what makes me so sick of teenagers! - The old saying that children should be seen and not heard... Commandment #11
badsign42 I will have to assume you aren't in high school either.
The thing you fail to understand is that the faculty at my school- and every other school I've ever visited or heard of- does not care what kids read as long as they're not dealing drugs or painting profanity on the walls.
and pa-c- experience has taught me enough to know that you can't make generalizations and not have them shoved back down your throat afterwards, which is what I've done with your argument.
and sesamestreetwatcher...don't patronize me. I get enough of that from my own parents. I embarass nobody unless you choose to think in universals which is what you're doing here. At least I have the benefit of not being a cynical middle-ager so stuck in his ideological views that he refuses to consider or even see the opposition's argument.
And as to your suggestion of taking a bible into school...I think I'll do that next year just to prove you wrong. We don't have "moderators" and we don't write book reports.
And one more thing-
Why do you assume that just because something gets squeezed through legislation that it will actually be that way in practice?
The constitution guarantees freedom of speech and right to a speedy trial and the Patriot Act pretty much contradicts that.
Fancy its not that they risk ridicule - its that they risk disciplinary action. I'm only going to assume that from Anon2's argument that his public school choses to ignore the law - MORE POWER TO THEM!
To Anon2 - You've presented no substantial evidence other than you words... I've had to swallow nothing since you've made no point other than in your VAST experience every public school YOU'VE been to or seen has allowed religion (or at least bible reading) - how many has that been exactly - Regardless its futile to argue this any further with you.
Thank GOD for a voice of reason.
Badsign, I find it troubling to see that a "President of three school districts" fails in the simplest of grammatical situations (it's you're, not your). How about a name to go along with all those credentials?
and Pa-c, how about getting past my age. Have you even been to a public high school? Ever?
You'd think a "President of three school districts, a primary solicitor for 6 others over 20 years of practicing law and as a prosecutor for my city of 200,000 + residents" would have better things to do than argue with a 17 year old on an amateur blog site...
The Equal Access LAW Exists (Mr. Lawyer you should know this) This law was heavily promoted by Chrisitan Concervative groups and made a LAW in 1984. "The estimated number of Chrisitan Bible clubs in high schools rose from 100 to 15,000 by 1995."
www.religioustolerence.org
Get off the kids' back.
By the way, I'd put money on it that you are not a lawyer. Is business bad?
Let's play a little game. It's called Show Some Statistics!
That's right folks, our contestant badsign42 holds that he has presented "facts" in his posts. Let's kick this up a notch and show some supporting evidence- maybe even a name to go along with all the flashy titles.
First-to badsign42--SAVE YOUR BREATH, I already cited various Supreme Court decision on religious issues, and you'll turn blue before you can convince anyone that this is a very religion hostile country. And just for the record-I'M NOT A LAWYER, but I have researched this issue for a very long time. BTW-Anon 2 you are right about one thing-badsign42 isn't a high school student he/she is AN ATTORNEY, with far more knowledge and experience of the LAW than you will ever have. And in case you aren't aware of it, you are embarrassing someone-YOURSELF, with your impetutious and disrespectful attitude. This whole discussion is not about winning an argument BTW: you didn't mention whether you go to Public or Private Cathlic/Christian School, the latter being the exception NOT the rule. And another thing-WHO DO YOU THINK INTERPRETS THE CONSTITUTION? OUR COURTS-such as they are. Here's another question for you--HAVE YOU EVER READ THE U.S. CONSTITUTION? Maybe you should learn more about the issues before you attempt to engage in any kind of debate on them.
PA-Thanks for the defense anyway-from one foggie to another (ha ha)
SSW-I honestly like your thinking-short, sweet and right to the point (well not so sweet, but you know what I mean)
Fancy underpants--Lay off indeed. This kid needs a lot more than just being berated, perhaps something taken across the seat of his/her pants. (Oopps we can't do that! Wouldn't want to get sued for child abuse!! I hope badsign42 isn't listening--yuk yuk). You are right about one thing-the purpose of this blog site is to educate, but some folks are so short-sighted and/or just plain closed-minded that they refuse to accept the facts when they are presented.
Do lawyers really say (and I quote):
"oo um...yeah"?
What's that i HEAR?..........
Could it be.......
Yes I think it is..........
Pulpit Puonding!!!!!!!!!!
Bowie, Did you beat your kids when they disagreed with you?
I think you need to read the posts a little more carefully. Yes, I did say that I go to public high school.
And yes, I have read the entire U.S. constitution and all its amendments.
Where is your argument? I never said there weren't laws against reading the bible in school. The only thing I said on this subject was that my school isn't like that, and the school I came from isn't like that either.
And I'm going to completely ignore anything that "badsign42" has to say until I see a name. I have the luxury of being anonymous because a high school student's raw opinion doesn't carry any more weight than anyone else's, but you can't come on here and say you've been the president of 3 school districts and not back it up with a name. It just doesn't work that way.
And in the future, try criticizing my arguments, not my age.
INNOCENT BYSTANDER-PLEASE GET OFF THE PULPIT-POUNDING NONSENSE, you are making youself look really bad, not to mention the fact that you just don't know what you're talking about. The Equal Access Act does not apply to activities in the classroom. The Act as passed by Congress,and signed by the President addresses the use of public facilities, schools included, by community organizations. Our Courts have consistently held that Christian organizations must have the same access to these facilities as do secular/non-religious organizations.
So what's your point?
http://www.aclj.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=769
Read it.
In addition, read this Speech by U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley if you're still unsure about the whole subject.
I challenge you to find a reliable source that says kids can't read the bible in school.
Here's something for you to think about.
I'm also a student at a public high school. Believe it or not, part of our English curriculum involved reading and interpreting... gasp!... a book of the bible. That's right, my public school system actually required that I read Ecclesiastes in my studies of literature. I just can't picture a teacher taking an assigned read away from a student.
Another point to think about:
When you hear about a school forbidding the reading of a bible, it makes news because it is an abnormality. The majority of high schools are entirely apathetic about students' religious affiliation. The notion that a teacher would tell a student to put a bible away in itself violates the separation of church and state. Quotation from anonymous 2's link:
"The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment does not prohibit purely private religious speech by students. Students therefore have the same right to engage in individual or group prayer and religious discussion during the school day as they do to engage in other comparable activity. For example, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray before tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable non-disruptive activities. Local school authorities . . . may not structure or administer such rules to discriminate against religious activity or speech."
Case in point.
OK - EVERYONE....
This argument is getting out of hand. Anon 2 - I think you've presented yourself as maturely as you can and frankly badsign he does have a point in regards to why you would waste your time.
Please don't take that the wrong way. We don't need to respond to him in any way if he continues in this manor
Bowie, Pa and Lawyer(?):
An "egotistical snot"? My,my, Mr. Lawyer. Approach the bench.........
You really don't sound like an adult to me, much less a lawyer. What we have here are retired/semi-retired and just plain old tired males crying for attention in a sad, sad forum.
The above message was from Judge Judy.
As tired as it is then we can assume you'll be moving on to more exciting venues.
Bad - Nice to see someone besides Bowie and me taking heat for a change - sorry :)
I agree, PA this whole debate has unfortunately turned into a train wreck,and this was not my intention. So before we DO need the national guard, I think we should move on. So here's my final word on this debate. Since Engel v. Vitale, Abington v. Schempp, Stone v. Graham, Santa Fe ISD v. Doe, and others the United States has been in a moral free-fall and it's not getting better. These are just the cold hard facts, and I'm sorry that some folks just refuse to accept that this is the state of the Law in the United States. BTW-The U.S. Supreme Court will soon be deciding the case of McCreary County v. ACLU Kentucky which is the first time that the High Court has considered the constitutionality of publicly posting the 10 Commandments in our public schools since 1980, and I'm not optimistic about the outcome of this decision.
To all those who commented on this posting-Thanks for a enlightening debate (most of the time that is).
Hey bad, that actually brings up a conversation that DB and I had a while back... what is the "Legal" definition of when a persons' rights are established? -
PA--Maybe that should be a topic for another posting?????
Anonymous2? - Please take this as it is intended - purely constructive criticism - but I would suggest that you need to tempor your enthusiasm for your argument and concentrate on how your coming across - believing strongly in what you are arguing is fantastic - ignoring the experience of others is just wrong. Pick your words a bit more carefully considering your age and more people will take you seriously.
OK - Now can we get back to the plight of the SQUIRREL WORSHIPPERS! - I'm concerned....
How long have you been practicing law BAD? - and you haven't heard of Squirrel worshippers? - Shame on you....
LMAO - :)
Well, I'm glad I'm not the only dummie who didn't hear about squirrel worship. LOL!
ManyVOICES - The members of our military who have taken up the cause of defending our country have my complete and full respect and honor ( and I'm sure I can speak for all posters here in that statement as well )
Your attempt to mask us as unappreciative of young military men and women is a crime... It's interesting how people take off on a subject without any provocation
Expressing yourself well in the face of being wrong is still wrong.
You know what, I had this long drawn out explanation of what I've acheived, less any college education at all but frankly you're not worth it.
Yes I do have an intollerance... its for ignorant people who, having spent 18 of their 24 year of life in a classroom, eating the crap they are feeding you in academia today without question, can't grasp the fact that those who are out LIVING and sweating real problems might have just a wee bit more of a handle on how things REALLY work. -
As far as the kid is concerned - he's wrong - not just because I say so, but because 4 lower courts, and the supreme court of the United States say he is -
IF his school is allowing school prayer, and structured prayer groups during school hours and on school grounds with the backing of the district... it is against the law -
How I got on this side of the issue in these conversations is beyond my meager intelligence (that's what you think right ManyVoices - just because a person doesn't attend a college - they must be less of an intellect than you) -
IT IS MY BELIEF THAT ALL SCHOOLS SHOULD ALLOW THIS - UNFORTUNATELY IT IS CURRENTLY AGAINST THE LAW!
THERE IS A RIGHT AND A WRONG - Unfortunately from the past 30 years of wishy washy socialist bullshit being shoved down throats by you liberal dolts - people have swallowed that in order for everyone to get along - nobody can be better than anyone else competition is bad - You don't want to make other's feel bad because they're not as good at something as you are so dont try your best- we all have to be equally inept
THATS WHAT I'M INTOLLERANT OF - I'll teach my children that they should strive to be the best they can - and if that means they have to gently jump over someone who isn't as good - HELL YES
BTW ManyVoices - NO one forces you to come here and listen to my vantagepoint on any of the issues - feel free to not take the time. Every comment you've made since arriving here has been a slam against me or Dave. - You can disagree with anything you like but we're not allowed? Feel free to move on.
Yes and I'm sure you're well aware of the hurt from the fall. I've spent enough energy on you.
Oh and funny - you don't sound conservative IN THE LEAST
To question a person's humanity, because they disagree with you on a given issue is a cheap shot--Shame on you Wise Old Owl!
Fine - Then you'll have to live with it - I'm here to discuss issues - if you don't like how I present them or how CONFIDENTLY I explain them then you are free to not participate
Humanity - After the comments that were made yesterday you question MY humanity?
Owl and voice: No one would know your position on anything.
Voice: Have you explained a position on anything? All I've seen are cheap shots and defamation
OK VOICE: Lets here your story - fair is fair right?
OWL-If that's the best you can do, then maybe it's NOT ME who should shut up???
BTW OWL-from the other comments that have been posted, I'm not the only one who thinks you were "out of line." Maybe you should use some of the wisdom you claim to have before you speak?????
Ok - Wise you've shown exactly the type of rancor that you accuse me of using against people who disagree with you - must be nice to be holier than thou
There you go folks - name calling and cheap shots - no political arguments or rational thoughts.
"Whatever..." what a wonderfully elliquent retort -- almost the brightest comment you've made yet.
VOICES: Still waiting for your BIO.....
OK - you believe you are right and ignore the reality and we'll just let it go at that.
Can't agree to disagree obviously. The evidence has been well explained. Move on Anon
First of all Anon2, when you come across with arrogance and disrespect, you can't cry foul when it comes back on you-Your delivery needs a little work.
Second you touched on an excellent point about praying to one's self. In 1965 a District Court in Michigan ruled that a child was allowed to say grace before lunch, so long as no one could tell he was praying (Reed v. VanHoven). A critical point to remember is that it would have been unconstitutional for the same student to pray out loud. Talk about a ridiculous ruling.
That's the problem I have with the rulings thus far... It’s been ok for the Supreme Court and congress to start sessions with a prayer for centuries. But our school kids can't do the same? - Its just ludicrous
Well Anon...you haven't cited any legal argument that has overturned that ruling so it is still law as far as we all know... which means that even if a student wanted to say a prayer to start the day - they'd have to do so without making any indication that they are doing so... correct? which in turn infringes on their right to religious expression.
Anon2-I'm not putting you on the defensive, you're doing that all by yourself. Case Law on this subject speaks for itself and it affects the entire country. The only exception to this is private Christian and/or Catholic schools, but I stress again, this is the exception NOT the rule.
OK Anon2--You want supporting evidence-here it is: Roberts v. Madigan (1989) 702 F.Supp.1505 United States District Court in Colorado-921 F.2d 1047 10th Circut Court of Appeals. The Courts ruled that a 5th grade teacher had to remove two religious books from the classroom, and to quit reading his Bible during a silent reading period. How's that for supporting evidence? I really didn't want to have to cite the various court decisions to prove that this country is very hostile to religion and religious expression of any kind. But apparently this the only thing that gets your attention.
BTW Anon2--Here's the full citation of that vague case from the 1960's.
REED v. VANHOVEN 237 F.Supp 48-United States District Court Western District of Michigan.
And just to keep the record straight, unless and until a case has been reversed by the appropriate Court of Appeals or the United States Supreme Court rules on the subject, it remains the state of the law in the United States.
Have you actually read the case?
Final word Anon2-I have already read some but not all the information on the religious tolerance website, and quite frankly, I'm not impressed by it.
Second I am well acquainted with the American Center for Law and Justice. Their Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow is known as one of the top constitutional attorney's in the country, and has argued several cases before the United States Supreme Court. I have used several of their resources in past writings.
Well the last one you'll just have to live with won't you
Post a Comment