For years now there has been a bully roaming the public schools in America. It’s been harassing students at school sponsored events, graduations, and even in the classroom with impunity. The few who stood up to it were often chastised by fellow students and ignored by faculty.
There is hope though as two brave students took on this bully, known to many as Religion. With the help of the ACLU, a small victory was won in court when U.S. District Court Judge Casey Rodgers ruled that the entire Santa Rosa County School District stop promoting religion and prayer in the classroom and at school events.
Among the First Amendment violations listed in the ACLU suit:
- Elementary graduations and middle school Christmas concerts held at churches.
- Teachers and staff at Pace High School preaching about “Judgment Day with the Lord.”
- Teachers and staff offering Bible readings and biblical interpretations during student meetings.
Rodgers’ order prohibits employees from:
- Promoting prayer at school-sponsored events, including graduation.
- Planning or financing religious baccalaureate services.
- Promoting religious beliefs to students in class or during school-sponsored events and activities.
- Holding school-sponsored events at churches.
Let’s hope this sets a precedent and gives other free-thinking students the courage to stand up and fight.
Religion is a personal choice and should remain as such. Why Christians, Jews, Muslims, and all the others feel the need to spread their “religious seed” is something I will never understand or tolerate. Keep religion in church where it belongs :) It’s just that simple!
Complete story here.
Related posts:
- Are Americans Ignorant About Religion?
- Wahlert Catholic High Adopts Gestapo Tactics
- Sir Elton John Calls For Religion Ban
- Jewish — Race Or Religion?
- The Evolution Of Religion
I may be drunk here, but I don’t believe that religions deserve to be able to congregate in a church. Especially one paid for by the taxpayers; let’s take back our investments and convert them to useful institutions for our communities.
I have a feeling my more fundamentalist friends would read about this situation and be rather upset. I feel like I keep having to remind them that this sort of thing is a good thing. Sure sure, it’s all good (in their eyes) for Christianity to be pushed in public schools, but what happens when those dastardly Muslims take over America (something some of the people I talk to are actually afraid of), and then they start pushing Islam in public schools. The HORROR! ( ;-) )
I don’t want the government involved in my religion any more than absolutely necessary. I don’t want to be told who to pray to, which religious texts to read, etc. The only way I can see to do that is to act upon this kind of government/religion interaction, putting and end to it. Just because my religion is currently the most popular one doesn’t change anything.
I think this is simplistic. Religion has (for better or for worse) played a large role in the shaping and formation of societies. Aspects of it have permeated into everything from government (pledges on holy books) to conversational language (Oh! God!).
I don’t think legislation is going to change this. Trying to stop religious influence cold turkey style is damaging and will probably do more harm than good.
“Trying to stop religious influence cold turkey style is damaging and will probably do more harm than good.”
Funny you mentioned ‘turkey’, as the country sharing thet name did exactly that under Attaturk back in the 1920s? He banned the outrageous displays of religious piety – including islamic dress in government buildings and even the fez hat, so that the red mark so prevalent on mens foreheads (a sign of regular prayer) wasnt such a badge of honour – and look at Turkey today. The most secular of all the islamic countries and with arguably the lowest levels of fundamentalism (i even met atheists!), though in some senses that also makes them more of a target of the fundies lately.
This is a good thing.
And that’s precisely the problem. If you do it the Turkey way, you might be able to go on for a generation or two but it’s going to come back. I don’t have references at hand but I do recollect reading that there is a trend in Turkey that is moving is back towards it’s Islamic roots and away from the Ataturk cult. I’ll check and post them if I find them.
People will move towards what they *like* or atleast feels attractive. If you posture yourself as someone fighting a war, people will fight a war against you. If you posture yourself as someone who’s bringing a better thing which you’re sure will succeed because of it’s own merit, I think acceptance will be higher.
You can use legislation/force to push people one way or the other and there will be a backlash and ugliness. Also, I don’t think it will sustain. On the other hand, if you can (usually by example), convince them that it’s in their best interests (intellectually, economically, spiritually whatever) to be secular, they’ll ‘convert’ without any extra effort from your side. If you can’t do that, well, you’re not going to get many people on your side anyway.
Legislation works for things like crime. For cultural/social things, I don’t think it’ll be very successful.
“If you do it the Turkey way, you might be able to go on for a generation or two but it’s going to come back.”
Dont bet on it.
There are A LOT of Turks who are very protective of their secular status, that much is assured – the problem is that the fundies are just becoming more vocal. The military has stated outright that they will not tolerate an islamic government and will force a coup if needed. Attaturk didnt ban Islam, but removed it from non-religious institutions. You’d be hard-pressed to find many Islamic countries as prosperous as Turkey is (though they dont have oil like the UAE).
Western society effectively legislated for the seperation of church and state sa a result of the enlightenment post-renaissance and its worked wonders for our culture – i cant see it changing anytime soon, let alone the one or two generations you put forward.
What if (let’s say hypothetically) there are an equal or larger number who prefer a religious state (for whatever reason). What would be the right way to go? Move towards a religious government or pass some kind of legislation that even though a majority *wants* a religious government, they can’t have it?
They will remove a democratically elected government by force because they ‘disagree’ with it? Is that something that will endure? For how long can you keep doing that? Why hold elections at all then? Why doesn’t the army just go ahead and rule?
If you want a democratic country to go towards a secular state, you’re going to have to convince the people that it’s in their best interests to do so (manufacturing consent and all that). If the majority actually want and vote for a religiously conservative party and then the military steps in and kicks them out, you’re asking for trouble.
If the poll numbers on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headscarf_controversy_in_Turkey are true, I think it’s obvious that Turkey’s secularity is something that the government is trying to keep but that the people don’t really want. The Turkish brand of secularism is sounding very much like a bad religion itself.
Turkey’s case aside,the point I’m trying to make before we went of tangentially is that if you want something that affects the roots of people’s lives (like religion, culture etc.) to change, legislation will not be effective. You’re going to have convince the people that it’s in their best interests to change.
One more point. Although I think separation of church and state is a good thing, I don’t think it’s accurate to assume that it’s the only way to go. Many ancient civilisations (eg. Islamic, Indian etc.) didn’t have such a separation and worked wonders in their own times.
“THE JUDGE” Rogers
what a fool!!! a human judging: do not wittness
(whatsoever)
Why does he not forbid: “to testimonialize” for the american dream of life???
he – an arrogant and proud “judge” – is doomed, too!
Let him burn and decay (if that can happen=decay) in hell.
But I guess this “judge” goes every sunday to church and not missing any remebering service – sure with his elegant dressed wife and children!!!
to make sure that our christian sisters and brothers going to vote him judas again.
The sad thing : his children are going to suffer!!!
(if he has any!)
May be it would have been better for him to be homosexual! or to fuck pigs (would be hope for such a kind of fool!)
BECAUSE:
(“… for those who ensare those innocent ones it would be better not to be born or taken a millstone to the neck and putting such a one in a sea…!”
It looks like enough evidence that USA are controlled fully by religious perverts. If you pay attention on American money, you will clearly see wroitten “IN GOD WE TRUST” all over them. Among other weird esotheircal signs.
In case someone missed something, becouse he was born yesterday, AMrica was founded and is still controlled by Religious freaks an weirdos, exactly like Israel or Palestine, or th erest of Europe and Russia.
These idiots are all briandamaged, and live all their life in an uncoscius state thta does not allow them to think free in a conscius state of mind.
Becosue of this, they all think thta religion is the only way to control people and make them obey laws and rules.
I hope that requiring school districts and legislatures across the nation to grow up and enforce the U.S. Constitution will be a rapidly continuing and cumulative trend.
“Bully”?? My pick is that ACLU is the worst. No, take that back, you’ll see a much bigger bully in sharia law when the secularists have had their way and finished trashing the foundations of Western society.
Hiya, I’m really glad I have found this info. Nowadays bloggers publish only about gossips and internet and this is actually irritating. A good website with exciting content, that is what I need. Thanks for keeping this website, I will be visiting it. Do you do newsletters? Can not find it.
Quite authentic: commenting is certainly indeed a brand new art. It is, also, a impressive means for users in a web 2.0 world to contribute. Blog readers can respond with a “thumbs up” comment to point out, in effect, “More posts similar to this.” The commenter, then, becomes the critic who shapes the writer’s next content. Some blogs are sorting comments: a column for in-blog comments similar to this specific just one; another column for references and notes from Twitter along with some other social networking sites. Precisely what if the opinions were sorted by standard?