Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: mauser on July 16, 2002, 11:50:40 PM
-
I just heard in my local news today that a sophomore at my high school alma mater has filed a federal lawsuit against the principal and the board of education here because "God" is in the Code of Honor. This code dates back to the 1920's... the school began in the 1800's. Countless generations have gone through McKinley High's halls without complaint.. until now. I myself do not go to church, but it didn't bother me, nor the thousands of others who have graduated from there. This, added to the removal of the Pledge of Allegiance, is another defining moment of our times. Geesh isn't there anything else for that kid to worry about???
(venting)
mauser
-
Is your alma mater in Hawaii?
If it is... I like the irony.
EDIT: This story is seven months old. http://www.lava.net/~hcssc/mckinley.html... and AFAIK, McKinley is in Hawaii... (Gotta love Google). :)
-
Yep Sandman, that's the place. I didn't know about that attempt in 2001 by a teacher. This time it's a student (heard just an hour ago in the evening news). Still... yeah, you'd think a place like this would be relatively free of such things.. but ppl can surprise you!
mauser
-
Doh... two different stories, same school.
Still... kinda funny. American Missionaries and sugar industry all but destroyed Hawaiian culture.
They should have taken this fight up 100 years ago. :)
-
Ah... that's what you meant by irony. Yeah, that's true.. the Hawaiians (the more vocal ones usually) are still angry. There are more ironic things along those lines too, but I'm not gonna get embroiled in that. Just want these ppl to leave good enough alone.
mauser
-
People like to dismiss God. Its very easy to do in our highly advanced (sic) culture.
Funny thing is though, when people see that telephone pole racing towards us at 60 miles per hour we all say the same thing, religious zealots and athiests alike: OH GOD!!!!!!!IM TOO YOUNG TO DIEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!
Its funny really.
-
God is nothing more than ancient mans attempt to explain and understand the world around him. Man made him up, there is no evidence otherwise. People write/interperet/modify religous text. It's all faith. Just think if we went back in time to 2-4000 BC with our current 'technology'. We'd be God's in ancient man's eye's.
Looking back through history, it's these 'faith's' and beliefs that start most conflicts. One man pushing his belief's on another or judging him based on his belief's.
I niether believe or deny God exists, or existed. You are free to believe whatever you wish, just don't expect me to always agree with yours, and I don't expect you to agree with mine.
This stuff about the Pledge of Alligence is pure crap. Wasn't it originally written with out reference to God, untill someone decided it needed to be re-written? Par for the human course through out history. It's up to the parents to teach children these values anyway, not our public education system. There should be no religion what so ever in government orginizations or public schools. Like I said, it's up to parents to teach individual value's. Could you imagine catering to all religous belief's in schools with our country's 'tolerance for all religions'?
Can't we all just get along? :D
ts
PS Yeager, that's more of a language/culture thing than a belief thing IMO. Personally, I would say "SON OF A squeak!!!!!!! I'M TO YOUNG TO DIEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!! All though Golly-geemit is one of my favorite sayings hehe.
-
I niether believe or deny God exists, or existed.
Indeciveness is a sign of weakness.
-
Originally posted by fdiron
Indeciveness is a sign of weakness.
So is putting a bet on a place in a horse race instead of a win.
:)
-
" when people see that telephone pole racing towards us at 60 miles per hour we all say the same thing, religious zealots and athiests alike: OH GOD!!!!!!!IM TOO YOUNG TO DIEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! "
Do we?..how do you know?.
Daff
-
My high school in Canada was one of the first in the country to get rid of "The Lord's Prayer".In it's place over the PA,our principle would read quotes of famous people of all different races and religion and follow it with a minute's silence so you could say a little prayer to yourself if you so desired.
Keep the "our God" mentality out of "our classrooms".
"You can't run a country by a book of religion
Not by a heap or a lump or a smidgen
Foolish rules of ancient date
Designed to make us all feel great
It's just dumb all over..
It says in the book that God made us to be just like him
So if we're dumb,then God is dumb
And maybe even a little ugly on the side..."
(Chorus)
"Dumb all over
A little ugly on the side(repeats)"
Frank Zappa;"Dumb All Over" from "You Are What You Is"
-
Originally posted by Daff
" when people see that telephone pole racing towards us at 60 miles per hour we all say the same thing, religious zealots and athiests alike: OH GOD!!!!!!!IM TOO YOUNG TO DIEEEEEEEEE!!!!!! "
Do we?..how do you know?.
Daff
Didn't you see it in the movies ? :D
Hey, mauser, is that school public ?aka, does taxpayer's money fund it ?
-
Sad... now every nutjob with an itch to see his or her face splashed across the news will sue their local school. Sad.
My concern of course is in part on behalf of religion, which is being pushed out of society hand over fist... but also the attack on our culture. We are headed to the place where it will be illegal to even say "God" out loud, for fear someone will be offended and sue you. I can't wait to see what moral values replace the ones being taken out of schools for being so corruptive. :rolleyes:
-
What do you mean by that kieran? Only religious people have "acceptable" or "good" morals?
-
Originally posted by Yeager
...we all say the same thing, religious zealots and athiests alike: OH GOD!!!!!!!IM TOO YOUNG TO DIEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!
Wouldn't it be a bit presumptious on your part to say so? Do you believe that God is misinformed and presume to dispell His ignorance about when you are supposed to die?
Or do you think He knows that you are about to die but His judgement is unsound and must be corrected?
If your God is so great and you are about to die, shouldn't you be smiling and thanking him for what whatever life you've had and for what you have coming?
Of course you did not specify what kind of imaginary friend cult you subscribe to. If your God is an incompetent indecisive nincompoop who's actions can be affected by mere mortals and there is no afterlife reward (provided you are a good boy), your before-death statement would make perfect sense.
But such beliefs about God would be very contrary to main tenets of christianity - which is usually the God which is suposed to be "driven" from our schools and "dismissed" from our culture. Are you talking bout the same One?
miko
-
I understand that the final words heard most often on cockpit voice recorders are, "oh toejam".
-
When are people going to realize it is not anti-God to want a separation of church and State.
-
This stuff about the Pledge of Alligence is pure crap. Wasn't it originally written with out reference to God, untill someone decided it needed to be re-written?
It was added in the mid-50s, along with adding 'In God We Trust' to our money, at the instigation of Senator Joseph McCarthy (of HUAC fame), to distinguish America from the 'godless communists'.
Frankly, though, I don't think we went far enough with the money. After 'In God We Trust', we should have added 'All Others Pay Cash'.... ;)
-
"You can't run a country by a book of religion
Not by a heap or a lump or a smidgen
Foolish rules of ancient date
Designed to make us all feel great
It's just dumb all over..
It says in the book that God made us to be just like him
So if we're dumb,then God is dumb
And maybe even a little ugly on the side..."
(Chorus)
"Dumb all over
A little ugly on the side(repeats)"
Frank Zappa;"Dumb All Over" from "You Are What You Is"
"He's got twenty million dollars in
His heavenly bank account.
And you suckers ain't gettin' nothin'!
TAX THE CHURCHES
-
I used to be a public school teacher. Part of my job was to teach societal values and the difference between right and wrong. In spite of being raised as the son of a preacher-man, however, I never hinted at my religious beliefs. I firmly believe in separation of church and state. My students looked up to me and learned values from me. It was my duty to teach a student that stealing is wrong, even if their parents told them that it's OK "as long as you don't get caught". But, I would never counter a parent's religious beliefs (or their absence of beliefs). As a public school teacher (and government representative), I had no business undermining parent's rights to teach and raise their children according to their own religious beliefs (or absence of beliefs).
I think the kid was right to challenge the school.
One thing that I often asked myself was,
"If I lived in a predominately Muslim community, what would I want my daughter's teacher and school system to teach my daughter about Islam?" "How would she feel if Islam was pushed on her?"
It makes you think...
eskimo
-
Originally posted by Yeager
People like to dismiss God. Its very easy to do in our highly advanced (sic) culture.
Funny thing is though, when people see that telephone pole racing towards us at 60 miles per hour we all say the same thing, religious zealots and athiests alike: OH GOD!!!!!!!IM TOO YOUNG TO DIEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!
Its funny really.
Hmmm. It was at the moment I really expected to die that I stopped believing. My emotion at the time swung away from "Why me, Lord?" to "Wait a minute! If there were an all powerful loving entity this wouldn't be happening!" Now for the " Don't try to comprehend God's will" replies.
-
Religion is the biggest joke in modern society.
-
fdski: Yep, it's a public school - so there's nothing stopping him from challenging it.
I don't go to church either, and am not baptised - my parents left it up to me to decide. I never felt the Pledge of Allegiance nor our high school code were pushing religion on me - the kids in bible study groups (not school-sponsored) were far more pushy. There have probably been a lot of kids who've gone through our school who were not Christian/Catholic/etc. but were Buddhist, Taoist, etc... most ppl here are asian and quite a few are immigrants. My friends and I weren't religious and never gave the code or the pledge a second thought. There were other things to worry about. This kid should have other things to worry about... why waste his time/other ppl's money on a lawsuit when he's still in high school and has a lot of growing up to do still? Sure it's good for kids to have more mature concerns like attempting to take college level courses, vote, take part in the community. Those activities can further richen one's social and academic skills and increase one's future value in society. However, this to me sounds more like increasing litigation in society...
mauser
-
Let me see if I understand. If there is a compassionate and loving God, he would not allow our valuable selves to be killed by a telephone pole in an automobile crash. He would punish all child molesters, prevent all life-threatening house fires, hunt down all terrorists, prevent famine and starvation, end pollution and close the hole in the ozone layer, and in general clean up all of our mistakes and punish those guilty of crimes against humanity.
That about it?
He gave us a world to live in and a code of conduct to live by which would prevent many of these problems. Why should he clean up our messes and wipe our snotty noses? We have freedom of choice in whether or not to follow His code of conduct. If we choose not to we are left to stew in our own juices.
From what I have read in the above posts, many of you wouldn't have it any other way. Death is the closing act of life in a natural world that God has largely left to run itself. Most major monotheistic religions see Him as being concerned mainly with the development of mankind's spirit. Unfortunately, that view has been overshadowed by the use of religion to hide the deeds of the corrupt and the savage.
"Religion is the opiate of the masses!" (Lenin)
For those of you who do not wish to believe, no amount of debate or evidence will be sufficient to sway you. The same can be said for those of us who do believe. I choose to believe in a higher moral authority who will hold me accountable for how I treat my fellow man. Personally, the belief that someone is "looking over my shoulder" at times has caused me to pause before taking certain actions.
Regards, Shuckins
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Personally, the belief that someone is "looking over my shoulder" at times has caused me to pause before taking certain actions.
That's called a conscience. You have it regardless of whether you're religious or not.
-SW
-
AKSWulfe,
A conscience and the "fear of divine retribution" are not the same. I sometimes ignore my conscience, because it is a flawed thing. If I am tempted to do something that I believe is against God's will I have divine retribution to consider.
Many of our criminals have no conscience. Therefore, outside of the legal system, there are no restraints on their behavior. Yet there are many examples of criminals who have been rehabilitated by religion alone.
Whether you believe personally or not, God has played a valuable part in the lives of untold millions of people, providing strength and comfort to help them in their daily lives.
If you can make it without it, more power to you. I prefer to think that I have a guide in life and a should to lean on when I need it.
Regards, Shuckins
-
I guess, whatever floats your boat.
I can't see myself worshipping a mythical figure head invented by much simpler people in much simpler times as a means to explain life.
Hell, for thousands of years man kind believed the firmament was the atmosphere.. and, well, I forget the exact diagram but it was basically taking earth and breaking it up into various things for religious persons to explain the world.
For all you know, you're getting duped by some couple hundred thousand year old simpletons...
-SW
-
Originally posted by mauser
fdski: My friends and I weren't religious and never gave the code or the pledge a second thought.
Obviously, most folks are not offended by the code. That's not the point. Some are offended, and should not have religion forced upon them by the state, even to the slightest degree.
Originally posted by mauser
There were other things to worry about. This kid should have other things to worry about... why waste his time/other ppl's money on a lawsuit when he's still in high school and has a lot of growing up to do still?
Because it's wrong in his eyes. How can you blame someone for wanting to fix something that is wrong? The vast majority of people are willing to simply put up with things that they see as being wrong. People like this kid are the only chance that we have to correct ingrained flaws in our government. This is a brave kid. He's standing up to his principal, his school, his school system, many of his peers and possibly his government. In doing so, many people will end up despising him. Many religious people who claim to be tolerant of other religions, are.... but they openly hate anyone who is not religious!
Most kids want to change the world. They want to right wrongs, both big and small. Perhaps he could have chosen something more important to fight, so? There are thousands of service groups in the U.S. that are not addressing the most important issues in America... so? People take on whatever gets to them for a variety of reasons. Why does it matter?
If any money is wasted in a lawsuit, it will be wasted only by the school. They are both morally and legally in the wrong. They should recognize this and change the code before this goes any further.
For Hawaii to get caught up to the mainland, it needs more people who are willing to take a stand and demand change.
eskimo
-
Shuckins:
"For those of you who do not wish to believe, "
If it were as easy as "wishing to believe" it would be silly not to. You look at the information, process it, and (at least somewhat dependent on your level of indoctrination at a young age) either believe or not. Ain't no "wishing" to it. (The door's now open to "open your heart" rhetoric).
-
Nifty-
Never said anything of the kind. I said religion is being pushed out of our society- did you read the responses to this thread? I said morals are being replaced in our schools- with what?
Separation of church and state is a must, no question. However, it is foolish to think that part of the moral fiber of this country is not based on a religious foundation. Now this is considered passe', and more and more often the effort is made to remove it from public consiousness. Now here's the ironic part- the same people that strive to remove any vestiges of religion from society are also in many cases the same people that cry "tolerance" for pet issues.
Did the pledge of allegience actually corrupt anyone? Is it a threat to society? Are you kidding me?
Yes, I am a nut. I do believe the morals of this country are in decline. I do see things as much worse than even 10 years ago. I am afraid of where we are going- and it isn't the religious zealots that are taking us there.
-
Eskimo-
Aren't there enough frivolous lawsuits?
Have you read the studies on the change in society with reference to the "hair-trigger" phenomena? Everyone is so concerned about their personal rights they are ready to explode on anything that infringes in any minor way upon those rights. Examples include heightened cultural awareness, frivolous lawsuits, and road rage. It seems few people are left that can handle even a small slight. Everyone has a point to make, and seem willing to go to the most ridiculous lengths to do so. Back in the ol' days, people just let stuff go. I'm not so sure it wasn't better.
Was this really keeping the boy up at night? Was it really that big of a deal?
I work for a fellow that is alright, but once in a while I see he makes a decision I wholeheartedly believe to be foolish. Now, I can advise him to the contrary but if he decides to follow his course, that is the end of it... unless I go over his head. I can do this any time, but common sense says I'd better have a good reason to do so before I do, because I have ruined the working relationship. As you might guess, I pick the battles carefully, and don't sweat the small stuff. It means once in a while I have to live with a situation. It means having input doesn't mean I get my way.
-
Only four to six percent of the population are atheists. For the sake of six percent of the population we change our laws? Our country is based on tolerance, yet we are caving in to the intolerant? Just once I'd like to see a judge tell one of these litigants to find their own solution. If, they can't accept public education as it is, then they are free to find an alternative.
You don't make the masses conform to the individual.
-
Originally posted by Voss
Only four to six percent of the population are atheists. For the sake of six percent of the population we change our laws? Our country is based on tolerance, yet we are caving in to the intolerant? Just once I'd like to see a judge tell one of these litigants to find their own solution. If, they can't accept public education as it is, then they are free to find an alternative.
You don't make the masses conform to the individual.
for the last 10 to 20 years the liberals have been trying like hell too ...
and if you don't you are a bigot and/or a racist :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Voss
Only four to six percent of the population are atheists. For the sake of six percent of the population we change our laws?
The courts cannot change laws - only legislative branch of our government can make laws - by majority vote.
The courts can repeal illegal unconstitutional laws - even a concent of majority does not give anyone right to break existing laws.
It is perfectly within your rights to try and make another amendment to the Constitution - repealing the First Amendment and establishing a religious state or whatever majority decides.
Majority may decide to violate the speed limits while minority may be concerned for their safety and appeal for stronger enforcement. Untill a law is enacted raising the speed limit, the minority is right, not majority.
miko
-
Originally posted by Kieran
Eskimo-
Aren't there enough frivolous lawsuits?
Since when has separation of church and state been considered "frivolous"?
Originally posted by Kieran
Was this really keeping the boy up at night? Was it really that big of a deal?
If its not a big deal, then it shouldn't be a big deal to change the school code. It does not matter if most people don't think it's a big deal or not. The school is forcing religion upon public school students. This is unconstitutional, and wrong. The issue is becoming a big deal because BOTH the principal and the student are not willing to back down. Since the principal is in the wrong for not making a change to the school code when first asked by the student, I think that the principal is the one who's responsible for letting this issue get so big.
A few words may seem minor to you or I, but that does not mean that there is not a wrong that needs to be righted.
Ask yourself, if the school code said "...and I will forever love Allah.", would this bother you? Would you want it changed? How would you feel about a child who fought against THIS school code?
eskimo
-
So how many people here would have a problem with adding "Heil Hitler" at the end ?
If you don't like it, just don't say it. What would it ever bother anyone ?
-
Voss wrote:
Only four to six percent of the population are atheists. For the sake of six percent of the population we change our laws?
Voss, if it was any arbitrary law, perhaps public consensus should be the guiding light.
This, however, is a constitutional matter. Separation of church and state was of great concern for the founding fathers.
If 90% felt it would be OK to remove the right to free speech, it couldn't be done.
In the case of religion in school, it's not a case of changing a law - it's a matter of rectifying an offense - someone have done something unconstitutional, and are now being hold accountable.
Our country is based on tolerance, yet we are caving in to the intolerant? Just once I'd like to see a judge tell one of these litigants to find their own solution. If, they can't accept public education as it is, then they are free to find an alternative.
Tolerance is NOT showing a religious preference down someones throat. Tolerance is respecting others faith, or lack thereof. The solution is already there - and it's been there since the founding fathers wrote the constitution. It is more modern individuals who've created the problem. And other individuals see the problem and are trying to fix it.
I take it you wouldn't be pleased if the Taliban version of Islam was taught in all public schools, alongside encouragement to experiment with drugs, and instructions in how to have sex orgies. If you have the funds, you can send your child to private school. if you do not, you'll either have to educate it yourself or send him to that public school. I don't this to be a 'love it or leave it' situation, especially as the school IS public.. if it had been a private school, it'd been a different matter.
You don't make the masses conform to the individual.
And you don't let the masses ignore the constitution. :)
For heaven's sake - watch your government. And protect ALL constitutional matters, even those that you might disagree with, for it is your constitution that laid the foundation for where you are today.
Kieran, around 5% of the world population are atheists. In Denmark, most aren't atheists, but rather totally indifferent to religion - perhaps there is a god, perhaps there isn't, doesn't help me decide what ice cream to buy.
If anything, organised religion is expanding world wide. For some, there's been a shift from the religion of their parents to another one, and it is perhaps this you are referring to.
Or are you talking about less Christian influence in the media?
-
Originally posted by Voss
Only four to six percent of the population are atheists. For the sake of six percent of the population we change our laws?
Our laws were written ESPECIALLY to protect "six percent of the population". A law is not being asked to be changed here. The student wants a school code to be changed because it defies the law.
Originally posted by Voss
Our country is based on tolerance, yet we are caving in to the intolerant?
I don't see this as "caving in" at all.
Originally posted by Voss
Just once I'd like to see a judge tell one of these litigants to find their own solution.
Move to Sweden and sit in Hortlund's courtroom, you may be pleasantly surprised.
Originally posted by Voss
If, they can't accept public education as it is, then they are free to find an alternative.
No they are not. Public education is for everyone, and is free so that all may attend.
If the principal at your kid's public school was making all the kids pray to Allah, should YOU accept it as it is? After all, you can always find an alternative... right? Or would you expect your public school to abide by the constitution ?
Originally posted by Voss
You don't make the masses conform to the individual.
Likewise, you don't make the individual conform to the masses.
eskimo
-
The true measure of a democracy is not how well it serves the majority, it is how well it protects the minority.
-
there's a huge difference between personal faith/belief and organized religion.
-
Originally posted by fd ski
If you don't like it, just don't say it. What would it ever bother anyone ?
Just like speed limits - let's all teach our children to disrespect the laws and ignore them if they do not like them. Simple solution, can't be detrimental to society - can it?
miko
-
Omigosh... comparing "under God" to "heil Hitler"?
Thanks for making my point, ski.
Eskimo-
You say you were a teacher, but you couldn't have been one long. If you had been, you would know there is no way the principal could have changed the pledge. Had he done so, there would have been umpteen phone calls from parents upset about the change, then umpteen calls to the superintendent, then umpteen calls to the school board members. A decision like this gets made in only one place; the school board. That principal may have been left out hanging to dry by his administration, but he certainly didn't have the power to say "yes" or "no" to the boy's request.
You'd be surprised by how many requests a principal gets from individuals to stop serving this type of food, don't let kids this age drive, don't have that book on your shelves... can it be a surprise the principal would deny such requests, at least intitially?
Our principal recently declined a senior's request to receive his diploma while wearing his sailor's uniform (supposedly in support of 9/11). The principal declined, because it would set a precedent he was not willing to follow later, that is, people wearing whatever outfit they desired to the ceremony. As it is a traditional ceremony with a traditional dress, and since there had been no prior discussion (it was two days before the ceremony), the principal decided it was better to say no. What happened? The boy's mother called the news crews, snuck the boy in with his outfit under his gown, then had him rip off the gown when he was seated. The cameras were rolling, just hoping the administration would try to remove the boy. They let it ride. I was thinking to myself, "What happens when that boy disobeys a direct order in the service, and calls news crews to record the results?"
Our principal was put between a rock and a hard place, all because a boy would not respect a decision made in good judgement. The boy used the disagreement to get his 15 minutes of fame. I'm sure in his mind he made some great statement, and that his life means something as a result. In reality all he proved is that, in our society, if one doesn't agree with the decisions of those above us, all we need to do is scream loud enough.
I wouldn't be a principal for a million bucks a year.
-
Be in a life or death situation and I promise you even THE TOUGHEST(in their own minds) will cry out to God, now,,,,,,God may be in different flavors for any one person, but to say there is NO God is very foolish. And eskimo public schools are NOT FREE...someone pays for it(tax payers wheather they have children or not), free means without price/value. So now in some schools they teach about same sex marriages, dont celebrate mothers day or fathers day(cause some children dont have both, may have two of the same but not both) . Is this the kind of society that WWI and WWII veterans shed blood for to preserve and defend????????NO this is the society that took advantage of their sacrifice and now will twist the laws to suit themselves. Time will tell...............
-
Funny as this may sound- but LaGuerre- "God" wasn't in our Pledge during WWII but after it, and had just arrived on our money during it.
-SW
-
The true measure of a democracy is not how well it serves the majority, it is how well it protects the minority.
True, though in ways you can't imagine.
I used to teach elementary. With the advent of wholesale mainstreaming of mentally disadvantaged students into regular ed classrooms teachers were faced with unimagineable problems. The teacher had to prepare the regular ed students for standardized tests (which BTW in large part determine the funding a school receives every year) AND follow the IEP (Individual Educational Plan) of all the special needs students in his or her class. If, as in my case, a teacher had 30 students and five of them are IEP'd, that could require up to five hours a day for those five students. No, I didn't receive any aid, I had to do it alone. The school day is five hours, forty minutes. Guess those other 25 students can make do with what's left, right?
Oops, America is slipping compared to other countries...
...however, that minority is happy as can be. Their children are showing a difference. Is that difference significant enough to be worth dragging down the majority? And before you think I am a heartless bastard, try to imagine your son or daughter as one of the regular ed students. And again, before you think I am a heartless bastard realize I have a mentally retarded brother. I see it on both ends, from all angles, and I think we are screwing up by focusing on the minority(ies). There is too much to do, too much ground to cover, and too little time. It is a brutal truth that we must face.
Ah, I must be a heartless bastard... except you must recognize we had programs before, and that needs were being met. It came down to a vocal minority pushing an agenda through our government while the majority slept... and now I can pretty much assure you the majority's needs are ignored in lieu of the minority's desires...
-
Originally posted by LAGUERRE
Is this the kind of society that WWI and WWII veterans shed blood for to preserve and defend???????? NO...............
YES!
They shed blood for the society that did not have God on its money and in The Plege - contrary to the Constitution.
miko
-
Dang Kieran,
I bet that darned conservative press had a field day with the "liberal" principal..... no wait, reverse that... no wait. ;)
But seriously. Civil disobedience is OK, as long as you are willing to pay the consequences. That kid should have been made to pay, although I can't figure out how.
I guess that should read "Nonviolent Civil Disobedience".
LAGUERRE:
I was a single Father and the "Mommy and Me" day they used to have at our elementary school on Mothers Day was very upsetting to my daughter. Sure Fathers were invited, but that doesn't make it OK. I was instrumental in changing it to a "Parents Day" and I think for good reasons. PC ain't always a bad thing.
-
Originally posted by Kieran
Eskimo-
You say you were a teacher, but you couldn't have been one long. If you had been, you would know there is no way the principal could have changed the pledge.
Could he or she change the school code? Sure. Ive been on school committees that have basically done the same thing. Its really not hard to do. Could there be backlash against the principal for making such a change? Sure. Parents and many people from the community would be upset... so?
Originally posted by Kieran
You'd be surprised by how many requests a principal gets from individuals to stop serving this type of food, don't let kids this age drive, don't have that book on your shelves... can it be a surprise the principal would deny such requests, at least intitially?
I wouldn't be all that surprised. I was a public school teacher... remember? It should have gotten the principal's attention when "separation of church and state" and "constitution" were brought up.
Originally posted by Kieran
In reality all he proved is that, in our society, if one doesn't agree with the decisions of those above us, all we need to do is scream loud enough.
I see no correlation between the example of kid wearing the sailor suit, and the topic of this thread. You may think that these two kids are the same, but I see their thoughts and actions as being very different.
Personally, I see the principal (in Hawaii) as the one who "doesn't agree with the decisions of those above us".... the constitution.
eskimo
-
Yep AKS you are right, but I dont see how money or the pledge reflects on the soldier at all. Take a look at this and read the last paragraph, it may shed some light.......
-
Midnight I think you misunderstood.....I am a single father of two girls ages 4 and 6 also and can see where the mothers day can be trying. I said that mothers AND fathers day was NOT celebrated because of homogenious parents. Neither, no parrents day either. This happens in Vermont and othe NE schools.
LAGUERRE
-
Okay, your point is?
AFAIK, there isn't any mention of the word "God" being struck out of anywhere but the Pledge and schools.
Becomming a Godless nation, or is it that when you don't see/hear the word God you THINK it's becomming a Godless nation?
This nation isn't changing for the worse because the word God is being removed from anything... fer chrissakes, it's just a word.
Howsabout this, instead of expecting people to ignore or accept the word God... the people who WANT to pray/talk to "God" can do it on their own free time.
Seems to me that's the simple way of doing it, rather than going "just ignore it, or get the hell out of my country" blah blah blah.
-SW
-
Originally posted by Kieran
True, though in ways you can't imagine.
I used to teach elementary. With the advent of wholesale mainstreaming of mentally disadvantaged students into regular ed classrooms teachers were faced with unimagineable problems. The teacher had to prepare the regular ed students for standardized tests (which BTW in large part determine the funding a school receives every year) AND follow the IEP (Individual Educational Plan) of all the special needs students in his or her class. If, as in my case, a teacher had 30 students and five of them are IEP'd, that could require up to five hours a day for those five students. No, I didn't receive any aid, I had to do it alone. The school day is five hours, forty minutes. Guess those other 25 students can make do with what's left, right?
Oops, America is slipping compared to other countries...
...however, that minority is happy as can be. Their children are showing a difference. Is that difference significant enough to be worth dragging down the majority? And before you think I am a heartless bastard, try to imagine your son or daughter as one of the regular ed students. And again, before you think I am a heartless bastard realize I have a mentally retarded brother. I see it on both ends, from all angles, and I think we are screwing up by focusing on the minority(ies). There is too much to do, too much ground to cover, and too little time. It is a brutal truth that we must face.
Ah, I must be a heartless bastard... except you must recognize we had programs before, and that needs were being met. It came down to a vocal minority pushing an agenda through our government while the majority slept... and now I can pretty much assure you the majority's needs are ignored in lieu of the minority's desires...
I feel for you. What you are saying contributed to why I quit education. I don't think this is comparable to the topic of this thread, however. How is changing the school code going to hurt any child's education or create more work for teachers?
eskimo
-
Can't help you, Eskimo, if you don't see a connection. There is a little truth and a little out of context in any situation you care to discuss where schools are concerned.
Sure, there is separation of church and state. Sure, there is a bureaucracy that has to be navigated to make any such change in school. You choose to pick the former and overlook the latter. You also fail to recognize the impact such precedents have upon the daily operation of schools. You choose to focus tightly on the issue ignoring the repercussions. It isn't just about whether the rule gets changed sometimes; it also has to with HOW the rule gets changed.
I cannot say this school handled this correctly or not, I wasn't there. I can imagine the situation they were in, because my sailor example is indeed very similar. You have a person that wants a change NOW, and will not accept the process needed to make that change. Right or wrong still matters, don't read that wrong, but there has to be structure to change, or it can be made for transient causes (such as this one). Change in our schools, like our government, should be considered for the impact it will have.
Ah, but there I go, being senseless again...
-
AKS: My point exactly it's just a word(to some)and if you dont believe just dont say it. Obviously people who have made the supreme sacrafice to allow you to say "MY COUNTRY" had a different view of things.
LAGUERRE
-
Kieran,
I taught Special Ed. for 5 years here in California, and it may surprise you that I agree with everything you said. Mainstreaming was and has been way overdone. I'm pretty sure California provides Aides for mainstreamed Developmentally Disabled students though. Mainstreaming was an extension of Reagan's dumping of the State Hospital System.
-
Yes, it's true I have religious leanings; that I have to accept when I enter such discussions. I have to recognize religion must be separated from school, and if the pledge must be changed, so be it. However, I stand my ground where the process is concerned. You can never make the public 100% happy where schools are concerned, so you'd best be very sure of your decision before you make it final. Schools not only reflect the law, but the desires of the constituency they serve. Having "God" stricken from the pledge is going to be a lot harder to achieve where I live than it was in California- not because of the school, but because of the community.
-
Who is saying "MY COUNTRY" that "made the sacrifice to be able to say it"?
Seems to me it's less war vets saying, "If you don't like it, get out of my country".. are more just average joe blow citizens.
War vets know they didn't fight for the word God, they fought for our way of life- freedom.
So let me get this straight, if I get a chance to serve in a big war (as in, not these 3 month campaigns, but something that lasts a little longer than that).. then I have more of a right to say this is my country than someone who doesn't?
Not every soldier is religious... does this mean they still fought for the word "God" to be shoved down people's throats?
-SW
-
Seems like alot of PATRIOTS had God on their mind.......Does this look familliar????????
O say, can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hail'd at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, thro' the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watch'd, were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof thro' the night that our flag was still there.
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
On the shore dimly seen thro' the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected, now shines on the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner: O, long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has wash'd out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.
O thus be it ever when free-men shall stand
Between their lov'd home and the war's desolation;
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the heav'n-rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserv'd us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: “In God is our trust!”
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!
“In God is our trust!”
LAGUERRE
-
The Star Spangled Banner has WHAT to do with proving anything?
-SW
-
No AKS being a veteran of a war gives no special right, if it did then I would envoke them as a veteran of the Gulf War spending more then 3 or four months in theater. And who is this that is saying get the hell outta the country????????? And contrary to what you stated veterans didnt fight for "the word of God" but the ability(FREEDOM) to say it if you so wanted, and if you didnt want to so be that also....And in flying medevac for all of my career in the army I can say that YES maybe not all soldiers are religious but from the ones that I had dealings with there were sure alot of converts enroute.......Just my experience.......
LAGUERRE
-
Kieran,
There is a huge difference between the two cases (Hawaii & the sailor suit). The kid in Hawaii went through the proper channels to make a change. The kid with the sailor suit used force and disobeyed. As far as how the kids went about seeking change, the two situations couldn't be much different.
eskimo
-
Not trying to prove anything AKS.....are you???????
Just trying to state that people who shed blood for freedom shouldnt have been made to sacrafice in vein....
LAGUERRE
-
And that's my point LaGuerre... veterans (my dad is one too) fought for our freedoms, our constitution.. the country... but they didn't fight for the word "God".. they fought for the freedom to say it and express it.
Exactly what are you, or anyone else who believes in God, losing when it's taken out of the Pledge (something added recently) or if it is no longer in the education system?
You aren't losing the freedom to say it, you aren't losing anything really... other than free publicity for your religious beliefs.
Is that it? Or is it that you think the education system NEEDS God in it to educate your children? Please excuse me, but shouldn't the PARENTS being the one to instill these values in their children? AFAIK, school doesn't take you to mass on sunday..
And that's my point, there is no outlawing of the word God.. but there's a desire to remove it from certain things that it shouldn't be in, in the first place. It wasn't in the Pledge originally, it wasn't on the money originally...
Does it somehow make this country a bunch of heathens by removing that word from the Pledge? From the money? Yes? Then we are already heathens, removal of that word has no after effect.
But like I said, when you lose free publicity for your faith.. I guess there's a reason to get upset.... this country wasn't founded on Catholicism/Christianity.. it was founded by Catholics/Christians.
BIG difference.
-SW
-
I just re-read the article. I think others should do so as well:
Wednesday, December 26, 2001
McKinley High School student code
preaches "Love for God."
Teacher's complaint triggers HCSSC demand for immediate removal.
Hawaii Citizens for the Separation of State and Church (HCSSC) has filed a formal complaint with the Department of Education after receiving a complaint from a teacher employed at McKinley High School. The teacher's complaint alleges that the school's Code of Honor promotes "Love for God" and is posted in classrooms and published in the student handbook.
McKinley High School student Code of Honor
As a student of McKinley, I stand
For Honesty
In all I do and say;
For Industry
In study, work, and play;
For Purity
In spirit, thought and deed;
For Courage
To meet life's every need;
For Brotherhood
Of races all combined;
And Love
For God and all Mankind.
By including the phrase "Love for God" in its Code of Honor for students, McKinley High School has violated the constitutions of the United States and the State of Hawaii, as well as HAR §8-41-1 which reads in part: "It is the policy of the board of education that there shall be no discrimination in any program, activity, or service of the public school system on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin…."
McKinley High School is a public school and thus it may neither promote nor endorse any form of religious ideology by any means. The Code of Honor amounts to religious coercion and discriminates against students who are atheist, agnostic, secular humanist, or those who follow non-monotheistic religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Shintoism.
In cases such as Abington v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963), Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980), and Santa Fe v. Doe, 168 F.3d 806 (2000), the Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly affirmed that students in public schools must remain free from any school-sanctioned religious activity, coercion, or discrimination.
The three-pronged "Lemon Test," established in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), requires that all government activity must: 1) serve a principally secular purpose; 2) not in effect advance religion over non-religion; or 3) not involve excessive entanglement with religion.
By including "Love for God," the Code of Honor fails all three prongs of the Lemon Test. There is not a secular purpose for including the religious edict; the effect is coercive and discriminatory and clearly involves excessive entanglement.
Setting aside the legal argument, there are serious ethical implications of allowing state-sanctioned religious edicts in Hawaii public schools.
According to figures published in the 2000 State of Hawaii Data Book, only 29% of Hawaii residents belong to any of the Christian sects, while the combined Jewish and Muslim population is less than 1%. Thus only 30% of Hawaii residents hold any form of belief in "God" (i.e., monotheism).
Minority non-monotheist faiths in Hawaii account for approximately 10% of the population; these include followers of Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism, Shintoism, Hawaiian, Polynesian, Native American, Wiccan, Zoroastrian, and others.
However the vast majority of Hawaii residents -- approximately 60% -- can be described as atheist, agnostic, secular humanist, and/or indifferent.
The McKinley High School Code of Honor is similar to the Ten Commandants. It could in fact be argued that the phrase "Love for God" is a paraphrase of the First Commandment: "I am the LORD your God.... You shall have no other gods before me."
The fact that this purely monotheistic religious edict is ascribed to all students ("As a student of McKinley, I stand...for Love for God") makes this civil rights violation particularly egregious and serious.
By publishing the Code of Honor in the student handbook (i.e., official rules for students) and posting it in classrooms or hallways, the school officially sanctions and endorses this particular religious ideology at the expense of all others.
According to one teacher, "...the [Code of Honor] is now sung by the school choir and recited at different ceremonies." No student should ever be compelled to sing, recite, read or listen to any religious edict in a public school.
The Code of Honor sends a clear message that "honorable" students "believe in" and "Love God," while students who do NOT believe in "God" are somehow dishonorable.
Religious belief is never a requirement for honor, ethics or morality. Public school administrators and teachers should never impose their religious ideologies on students for any reason and by any means.
Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson wrote: "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."
The legal arguments and precedence in this matter support the absolute separation of state and church in public schools. Title 8, Chapter 41 prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion.
In letters to Principal Milton Shishido and Superintendent Pat Hamamoto, HCSSC has demanded the immediate removal of the Code of Honor from all public property and materials at McKinley High School.
For more information, please write to HCSSC President Mitchell Kahle at hcssc@lava.net.
Hawaii Citizens for the Separation of State and Church
Email: hcssc@lava.net
Website: http://www.lava.net/~hcssc
_____________________________ ___________________________
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason
is like administering medicine to the dead."
-- Thomas Paine, in "The Age of Reason"
_____________________________ ___________________________
-
Thanx Eskimo. Excellent article.
-
AKS: AHHHHH their it is........Catholics and christians............You see AKS I have only said GOD..........Buddah, allah,mohhamad,native american and druid nature Gods, Jesus,lucifer....Is your problem with or perception of GOD limited to catholics and christians????????? GOD comes in a multitude of flavors and this "Freedom" thing that your father(who I salute)fought for was the ability to worship as you see fit. Nobody is defining the "true" God in the pledge or the National Anthem, or the Orders of the Day commencing D-Day.........All that is being said is that the FREEDOM of relidgion and worship of ones God(whatever God that may be) was a foundation of our country's purpose and conception.
So tell me what are YOU losing by leaving the word God in the pledge???????
I think our country was founded by the Puritan sect know as Separatists, which by confession of faith are non-christian but are often called christians following puritan ways. So I dont think the catholics or the christians had anything to do with it's founding. Just people who believed in GOD and thought that having GOD in their own way brought morals to their community and children .
LAGUERRE
-
"God" means the Christian god, Yahweh... Jehhovah... whatever.
It wasn't added to the pledge or Mckinley's school honor code to be inclusive of all religions. The intent is to exclude.
Oh... and this just in... Freedom of religion also includes freedom FROM religion.
-
And there it is... "Buddah, allah,mohhamad,native american and druid nature Gods, Jesus,lucifer"
My problem is not the perception that it is indeed a direct reference to the Catholic/Christian God (if you try to argue that this was not the exact interpretation when it was added to the money, and to our Pledge, then you should find out what "type" of society it was when they added God to those 2 things)... instead my problem is the reference to a God at all.
Atheists are obviously being segregated against. What about Deists? "Druid nature Gods"<- Plural... see, now we step into the whole realm of monotheistic vs polytheistic. You have one God, Native Americans have multiple... quite a few religions have multiple Gods, and obviously the word "God" is a reference to only one God. This effectively rules them out of following under the singular "God" in our Pledge, on our money, and in many of our government/military institutions.
Where's the freedom of religion now?
-SW
-
The problem is, the public school system is provided by the people through government. Public schools are not government and I don't see the 'separation' issue as being applicable.
Protecting an individual's rights is not the same thing as prefering ones' rights over anothers. Laws cannot be written to protect everyone, and it is not the job of government to protect us, anyway. Government should protect the Constitution, and the sovereignty of our shores. The liberal slant that each and everybody in the country needs to be considered in each and every law, is crazy.
Laws cannot protect you. Laws can only take away individual rights by restricting recourse.
Removing prayer from schools has already set us upon a backward trend. Let's see how bad it can really get.
-
Originally posted by Voss
Removing prayer from schools has already set us upon a backward trend. Let's see how bad it can really get.
Nostalgia is a terrible thing and should not be trusted.
Turn off the television and the media and maybe you'll notice. Life is good! :)
-
Originally posted by Voss
The problem is, the public school system is provided by the people through government. Public schools are not government and I don't see the 'separation' issue as being applicable.
Protecting an individual's rights is not the same thing as prefering ones' rights over anothers. Laws cannot be written to protect everyone, and it is not the job of government to protect us, anyway. Government should protect the Constitution, and the sovereignty of our shores. The liberal slant that each and everybody in the country needs to be considered in each and every law, is crazy.
Laws cannot protect you. Laws can only take away individual rights by restricting recourse.
Removing prayer from schools has already set us upon a backward trend. Let's see how bad it can really get.
Imagine that your child's teacher begins to teach your child Islam and they pray to Allah every day. What do you think about removing THAT kind of prayer from your school? Do you think that there needs to be laws to prevent something like THIS from happening?
"Public schools are not government "
Your kidding, right? Public schools are government.
eskimo
-
Well if you look into the druid relidgion Arawn was their God of gods so to say and all others were lesser Gods. And the native american relidgions all had their supreme being with other lesser gods to boot, so yes this can be twisted and tweaked to fit your purpose. Catholics all believe in the Father, Son and, Holy Spirit all seperate but equal, one in the same......... So your plural God's argument is good attempt but lacks substance. As far as the GOD mentioned in the pledge and money we can all debate "who" this GOD really is but dont you think just the word "GOD" was left that way as not to define which, so just because maybe a catholic or a christian wrote or decided to place this referance in the pledge or on money it dosent specificaly mean any one God. We can argue and twist this all day and you wont change my mind and I will never change yours so just as you state what do I lose if removed,,,,what do you lose if retained???
LAGUERRE
-
you can bet your sweet bippy they do in Islamic countries..
the majority of folk in this country are Christian. I do not see an issue with christian prayer being a standard in this country.
strange how some think this would be a better country if it were a "godless" one ... just like "godless" Europe.
:rolleyes:
Sorry guys, God was here before you showed up & God will be here after you go ... get used to it.
-
Sandman Life is good?????????For some of the lucky ones it is......Im sure the family of the murdered molested child would differ with you, or maybe the some of the families of fallen servicemen, or families of victims of 911.........Is this the famous ostritch act, bury your head in the sand and it will all go away????? Yep ignorance is bliss...
LAGUERRE
-
WELL said EAGLER.
LAGUERRE
-
Actually, you are the only one making the attempt at twisting it to mean something it doesn't.
"God" pure and simple means ONE supreme being. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are interpreted as being what makes up God. So in this case, you can't say "God" and expect it to mean his Son.
In other religions with multiple Gods, you can not twist this to make it fit... well YOU can, and anyone who is on the side of keeping the word God everywhere, however the real believers will have a bit of a problem since they don't pray to only the "supreme" God, but to all of them.
So again, you are the only one twisting it around to make it appear as though it can be used as a reference to not just monotheistic religions... I'm merely showing you can't twist it.
You, and other monotheistic religious people, lose nothing, you are still free to say it as you wish. People who are polytheistic or atheist have to deal with some sort of state supported religion. They are free not to say it if they choose... but they are not free from it, which they should be and is entitled to them in their basic rights.
EDIT: Eagler, so? Most Middle Eastern countries aren't free. You can't compare those countries to the US.. it simply ain't gonna work. The majority of this country might be Christian.. but then again, the majority of this country use to be white and enslaved black people... the majority ain't always right.
-SW
-
Originally posted by LAGUERRE
Sandman Life is good?????????For some of the lucky ones it is......Im sure the family of the murdered molested child would differ with you, or maybe the some of the families of fallen servicemen, or families of victims of 911.........Is this the famous ostritch act, bury your head in the sand and it will all go away????? Yep ignorance is bliss...
LAGUERRE
Are you unhappy Laguerre?
Would it make you feel happy if I spent the rest of my days lamenting the loss of 3,000 people that I don't know?
How about if I just sit at home and cry about the fallen servicemen and murdered children?
I think my family would have trouble with that. I have my own life to live and gawdamnit, I'm going to enjoy it. Otherwise, what's the point?
-
Originally posted by Eagler
the majority of folk in this country are Christian. I do not see an issue with christian prayer being a standard in this country.
But what if it were the other way around?
Please answer the question:
Imagine that YOUR child's teacher begins to teach your child Islam and they pray to Allah every day. What do you think about removing THAT kind of prayer from your school?
eskimo
-
Im not unhappy at all....Get to sit here at work and stir the pot...Hehehehe...watch all the tempers fly...hehehehehe...get to hear some real funny stories..........and in 2 hours I will be sitting back sippin a scotch and cooking up a bowl crawfish bisque, watching blues clues with the girls......What more is there???????
At least I dont need to go dig them damn holes.........
Hehehehehe
LAGUERRE
-
mmmm.... mud bugs. :)
-
Laguerre, thanks for the Eisenhower quote. It's good to see that he also pushed his beliefs on our soldiers well before he pushed them on the entire country! ;)
Eagler, the day Christian prayer (or any religion) is a standard in the United States is the day I look to ex-patriate myself.
Sorry Eagler, but "God", if he even exists, doesn't care about you and there's no "Heaven" for you to go to when you die... get used to it.
-
Hay there ya go....and you probably thought we had nothing in common.........:D
LAGUERRE
-
Hey nifty maybe you can get a ride to ex-patriatism with Alex Baldwin and Babra Striesand, heard they were doing the same if Bush was elected.................Oh... .Hehehehehe ya'll all just talk alot of shi#t.
Dont let the door hit ya in the bellybutton on the way out...
LAGUERRE
-
Originally posted by Nifty
Laguerre, thanks for the Eisenhower quote. It's good to see that he also pushed his beliefs on our soldiers well before he pushed them on the entire country! ;)
Eagler, the day Christian prayer (or any religion) is a standard in the United States is the day I look to ex-patriate myself.
Sorry Eagler, but "God", if he even exists, doesn't care about you and there's no "Heaven" for you to go to when you die... get used to it.
hehe
not looking for a heaven to go to when I die as through my education and studies I don't think heaven is a place nor are we judged for eternity based on a mere 80 years at best ... but that is another thread :)
all you godless ppl, do you celebrate Christmas or Easter?
Isn't that hypocritical on your part if you don't at least partially subscribe to the Christian faith? Or do you look the other way and take the presents and the time off work/school anyway .. :)
-
AKS: Weather you believe it or not the catholic "God" is the Father, Son, and Holy spirit. You can pray to all or one, they are each individual but the same, this is what catholics call faith,,,,they dont try and understand it they just believe....And seeing your lack of knowledge of the catholic relidgion,,,they quite often pray to Mary, and other associated saits in the same way they pray to God....You are trying to TWIST the word "God" into anybody you pray too........Oh well like I said I will never change your mind and you wont budge me so whats the point???
LAGUERRE
-
My family celebrates Christmas and Easter. I don't. I receive gifts, even though I tell them I don't want 'em, so I gotta give them gifts. I would just give the gifts back, but then that just seems like I'm an ungrateful bastard.
It's actually winter break, Christmas ain't no month... so why would it be called Chistmas break?
As far as I'm concerned, they could do away with spring break. I just look at it as a week off, if they got rid of that.. I'd get out of school a week earlier.
-SW
-
Eagler you wont get an honest answer to that one.............
With no God why worry about hypocracy
LAGUERRE
-
AWWWW Hell Eagler AKS is still a student............How old are you AKS????????????
LAGUERRE
-
Apparent lack of knowledge of the catholic religion? Based on what? That I said the 3 are on in the same? You can pray to Jesus Christ- yes, but that ain't God. You can pray to Mary, you can pray to saints, you can pray to the pope... that still doesn't mean they are "God"... when you are praying to God you are only praying to God.. not to the Holy Spirit.
"You are trying to TWIST the word "God" into anybody you pray too"
Uh, no.. you are doing that. I'm trying to point out to you that "God" only applies to one God. It does not apply to multiple Gods, Buddah, Allah or the lack of a God.
Therefore that effectively means that many religions are left out...
I ain't trying to change your mind, I'm simply pointing out the facts and laying them on the table. You are using the Star Spangled Banner, trying to say "God" could mean anything even multiple Gods, and saying that this country was founded on religion (when it was founded on freedoms)...
So basically, I've got a bunch of stuff with substance, while you've got second hand rhetoric.
I ain't trying to change your mind, just proving my point- and you're helping me out.
-SW
-
I think you are all missing the point.. The point is that anything government run sucks.... including public schools. simply offer vouchers and every school can compete based on results and personal taste. Would be nice to have some choice.... for everyone
lazs
-
Once again. You don't have to be Godless to want religion out of the schools.
-
21, but how does my age reflect on anything I've said? Atleast my points have substance and are proven by not only myself, but you too.
-SW
-
eagler. You got my point that what you said was based on your faith.
I don't "celebrate" either. I take any paid day off I can, however. I exchange gifts with the family on Dec 24/25, but it's for the reasons SWulfe said. I've tried the "please don't get me anything" line, but the parents and relatives won't have any of it. Besides, tell me that Christmas is a celebration of Christ and I'll show you all the Santa Clauses and stores out to make a buck and say "yeah right bro, now let's watch some FSU-UF reruns!"
Leg, you totally missed my point. The day ANY religion is 100% endorsed by this country is the day we cease to be The United States of America that our forefathers created. I don't want to be a part of that USA, because if Christianity is the "standard" then obviously the rest of the country doesn't want me, or any other non-Christian. Besides, England has better beer anyways. I'm sure some of our English AHers would find a place for an unwanted, agnostic Yank.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
the majority of folk in this country are Christian. I do not see an issue with christian prayer being a standard in this country.
Eagler, are you avoiding the question?:
Imagine that YOUR child's teacher begins to teach your child Islam and they pray to Allah every day. What do you think about removing THAT kind of prayer from your school?
eskimo
-
You havent proved anything AKS other than your young mind is full of taught ideas......As you grow old and gain worldly experience you will eventually form your own opinions.............
So just to comment,for catholics Jesus Christ is God, who told you he wasnt???The father is God, and so is the Holy spirit.......You got your facts wrong...........And you dont pray to the pope,,,where in the hell did you get that from???????Might pray for him but not too him.........You are right you do have substanance but not factual substanance...
Well the only fact I heard was that I am helping you prove your point..............See first paragraph..........
LAGUERRE
-
Nifty I never said christianity........JUST GOD.......Ya'll cant read....guess you are a student too????? Oh well Im bored with this thanks for burnin up some dead time...Ya'll take care..
LAGUERRE
-
I think our country was founded by the Puritan sect know as Separatists, which by confession of faith are non-christian but are often called christians following puritan ways. So I dont think the catholics or the christians had anything to do with it's founding. Just people who believed in GOD and thought that having GOD in their own way brought morals to their community and children.
Strange I thought they were mostly Deists & Freemasons. ;)
Or are you referring to the Pilgrim fathers?
In which case think again: you're missing all the other Colonists who turned up before your "founders" and all the ones who turned up after - French, Portuguese, Spanish, English, Dutch etc. (who were mostly more interested in profits than prophets) & all the English criminals who were sent to the colonies as mercy rather than being hanged.
Still, as you're religiously inclined, I guess we should expect you to place your faith in a myth replete with glaring inconsistencies and not much historical evidence. ;)
Eagler - before you gloat over godless hypocritical Xmas & Easter celebration, look up the origins of these 2 festivals (tip: try looking for the dreadful pagan festivals of Yule and Beltane - both these festivals have been around long before J.C. & the Xians turned up). :D
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
Nostalgia is a terrible thing and should not be trusted.
Turn off the television and the media and maybe you'll notice. Life is good! :)
I don't watch much television, and never the Communist News Network. Life is good. Politics, the Media, Cities, and Bureaucrats, are all as corrupt as the Roman Senate. The corrupt would have all good things removed from life, including Reverance.
Life is Reverance, family, work, fishing, fireworks, watermelon, camping, hiking, and flying. If, I can squeeze my girlfriend in, well all the better. :D
For the irreverant there is only Hell. Some would say hell is life on Earth. They are wrong. Life on Earth is supposed to be living. Living glorifies our God, but it is our sacred duty to worship Him, and hold all other things second. This Universe and this Life are only an experiment. Only God knows the result, but in a way he has let us in on it. When the test is over where will you be?
-
dead
why do WE celebrate them here in this country? I don't care what came first...
eskimo
I'd think I woke up in the wrong country :)
Then'd I'd send my child to a school where they taught what I believed in. Just as those who do not like what is being taught in the school their kid is in now should do. Why should we bend to the minority? I'm sure there are godless schools/communities/ countries ... if you don't like it, you are free to move to where you do .. don't change my country/community to suit your beliefs
reminds me of cig smokers & how they should be able to smoke inside any/everywhere...
-
Originally posted by Eagler
eskimo
I'd think I woke up in the wrong country :)
Then'd I'd send my child to a school where they taught what I believed in.
You'd give up that easy?
Wow, I figured you would stand your ground and tell them to knock it off.
Would you stand up to anything?
What if teachers were sexually abusing kids in your school... Would you take action, or just go find another school and let them "teach" how they believed?
What if you lived in a small town, and there was only one school?
eskimo
-
You all crack me up.
Taking God out of the public schools isn't "Changing our Country". It's upholding the laws of our Country.
Conservatives tend to support those causes that seem obviously common sense to them, without caring one whit how it affects others or our freedoms. Our founding fathers wanted religion kept out of the government. I stand with Mr. Jefferson.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
dead
why do WE celebrate them here in this country? I don't care what came first...
eskimo
I'd think I woke up in the wrong country :)
Then'd I'd send my child to a school where they taught what I believed in. Just as those who do not like what is being taught in the school their kid is in now should do. Why should we bend to the minority? I'm sure there are godless schools/communities/ countries ... if you don't like it, you are free to move to where you do .. don't change my country/community to suit your beliefs
reminds me of cig smokers & how they should be able to smoke inside any/everywhere...
Nothing could show the importance of why we need a separation of church and state more. The fact that someone would pull their child out of a public school in order to avoid particular religious activity is EXACTLY why religion has no place in public schools.
eskimo
-
Originally posted by LAGUERRE
You havent proved anything AKS other than your young mind is full of taught ideas......As you grow old and gain worldly experience you will eventually form your own opinions.............
No, you just choose to ignore what I'm saying.
So just to comment,for catholics Jesus Christ is God, who told you he wasnt???The father is God, and so is the Holy spirit.......You got your facts wrong...........
*SIGH* I was raised catholic, I no longer accept it or anything religion related. I do know, for a fact, that God includes all 3.. it's not the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit. You don't worship multiple God's, you worship ONE God. Just because it's made up of 3 beings does not mean anything.
The God's in other religions are God's themselves. They aren't a culmalitive group that forms a God, they are God's. Therefore saying "God" is not applicable to these people. Understand yet?
And you dont pray to the pope,,,where in the hell did you get that from???????Might pray for him but not too him.........You are right you do have substanance but not factual substanance...
I know you don't pray to the pope, of course, you failed to take notice of the fact that I said, "It still doesn't mean they're God".. get it? it was sarcasm.
And substanance isn't even a word. Maybe you were going for sustanance?(sp?) which is food... or maybe substance? which is what I typed.
I have a whole lot of good reasons as to why "God" is unacceptable to several types of religions in this country. That's a whole helluva lotta substance right there.
-SW
-
When in the Course of Human Events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the cause which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights...
It would appear that the intent of our Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence was to tie our unalienable rights to an eternal and incorruptible source, unlike earthly rulers who could dispense with the rights of the people if it pleased them. These statements in the Declaration of Independence are an attempt to refute the concept of "the divine right of kings."
Many of the men who wrote the Declaration, or later signed it, were religious men. If memory serves, there was almost no wrangling over the wording of its Preamble. There is almost no mention of religion in the Constitution itself, save in the first amendment.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
If we take the first amendment at face value, then people can exercise their religion in any fashion that they see fit, as long as it does not disrupt our domestic tranquility or the general welfare. If a student wishes to pray in school, even a public school, there can be no law or court ruling that says otherwise. While I would not want to see In God We trust removed from our currency my world will not come to an end because of it.
Ten years ago I spent a semester studying at the American University in Cairo, Egypt. The members of my group had many occasions to observe Egyptian Muslims praying in public. Many buildings, both public and private, were covered with verses from the Koran. The insertion of religion into the government and public life was far more pervasive there than I have ever seen in the United States. With a couple of exceptions, almost every member of my group was Christian. Were they offended by what they saw? No, of course not! We accepted their right to worship in their own fashion without feeling the need to lecture them on the error of their ways.
Americans tend to be the world's biggest busy-bodies and nannies. Both sides of this argument could exercise a little more tolerance for the opposite point of view.
Regards, Shuckins
-
Originally posted by LAGUERRE
Be in a life or death situation and I promise you even THE TOUGHEST(in their own minds) will cry out to God, now,,,,,,God may be in different flavors for any one person, but to say there is NO God is very foolish.
Wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong. Been there, done that (doesn't get much more life and death than RL war), but it is very easy to come to the conclusion that there is no God. In fact, once you get past the fear and guilt thing, it seems "very foolish" to waste one's time with any religion.
-
Conservatives tend to support those causes that seem obviously common sense to them, without caring one whit how it affects others or our freedoms.
Now who's generalizing? ;)
-
Originally posted by Eagler
dead
why do WE celebrate them here in this country? I don't care what came first...
Oh you mean nowadays? Why presents and chocolate of course! :D Ask any child (or advertiser ;) ) - they'll soon set you straight. Hence the 2 big icons are Santa Claus & the Easter Bunny. Same goes with Valentines day, father's day, mother's day... etc etc. The holy message: buy, buy, buy.
Interesting to note that Xmas arrived in the US quite late on, too. The pilgrim fathers banned it in their colony for being a nasty pagan feast. Alabama was the first state to make it a legal holiday in 1836. Oklahoma was the last to make it a holiday in 1907.
However I was under the impression that your original argument was that Easter & Xmas are entirely Xian festivals, so godless people shouldn't celebrate them. ;)all you godless ppl, do you celebrate Christmas or Easter?
Isn't that hypocritical on your part if you don't at least partially subscribe to the Christian faith? Or do you look the other way and take the presents and the time off work/school anyway ..
According to my admittedly cursory research, the festivals both appear to be pagan in origin - still if you're happy as a Xian to "look the other way and take the presents and the time off work/school anyway" that's not a problem. But to quote your buddy JC "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone". :D
Here's an interesting intro to Mithras (Roman underground cult god of the sun) for your edification:
The entirely unearthly Mithras was worshipped as the 'Good Shepherd', 'the Way, the Truth, and the Light', and as redeemer, saviour and Messiah. Mithras was supposed to have been born to a virgin on (what is now) 25 December, and was visited by shepherds and Magi. He travelled and taught, cast out devils, made miracle cures, held a last supper, was killed, buried in a rock tomb and rose again after three days, at the time of the spring equinox in March (equivalent to the Christian Easter). Mithraism included Sunday worship, with a Eucharist and sacraments. By appropriating features of Mithraism, the early followers of Jesus made their beliefs appeal to pagans. St Augustine even said that the priests of Mithras worshipped the same God as he did.
Source: http://www.humanism.org.uk/jesus.asp (http://www.humanism.org.uk/jesus.asp)
Apparently, Mithras's last supper was with 12 guests (representing the 12 signs of the zodiac), eating mizd, a piece of bread marked with a cross. [mmmm Hot cross bun anyone?]
-
I would just like to add that this is a really long thread, you all probably already know how I feel about this so I'll save you the post and I'm going to bed! ;)
-
hey dead
thanks for the explanation :rolleyes:
I'm sure all ppl who do not believe in a Christian God, has researched it to the point you have and justify there actions accordingly ;)
it's bull, used to be called Christmas/Easter break - now to be PC to the minority & keep the low life lawyers off their back, it's called "Winter/Spring" break.
Just another small "FLUSH" in the big picture ............................. . on our happy & merry way to a Sodom and Gomorrah civilization
-
Originally posted by Eagler
hey dead
thanks for the explanation :rolleyes:
I'm sure all ppl who do not believe in a Christian God, has researched it to the point you have and justify there actions accordingly ;)
it's bull, used to be called Christmas/Easter break - now to be PC to the minority & keep the low life lawyers off their back, it's called "Winter/Spring" break.
Just another small "FLUSH" in the big picture ............................. . on our happy & merry way to a Sodom and Gomorrah civilization
Mmmmm. Sodom and Gomorrah! (best Homer Simpson voice).
-
Originally posted by LAGUERRE
Be in a life or death situation and I promise you even THE TOUGHEST(in their own minds) will cry out to God, now,,,,,,God may be in different flavors for any one person, but to say there is NO God is very foolish.
I can say to myself there is no God.On my death bed I will say the same.When I go,I will go with my dignity.
If there is a judgement day,I also believe one will be judged by their actions...Not their beliefs.
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
If there is a judgement day,I also believe one will be judged by their actions...Not their beliefs.
Very true - the rub is, don't ones beliefs controls ones actions?
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
Ask yourself, if the school code said "...and I will forever love Allah.", would this bother you? Would you want it changed? How would you feel about a child who fought against THIS school code?
eskimo
BTW, noone answer this question.
Anyone?
No?
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Kieran
Now who's generalizing? ;)
Dammit Kieran... get back to work! :p
I should have said "some". I hope Hortlund is at his Ann Coulter fanboi meeting. :eek:
-
Originally posted by Eagler
Very true - the rub is, don't ones beliefs controls ones actions?
Unfortunatley,that is very true...I'm sure a lot of New Yorkers would also agree.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
Very true - the rub is, don't ones beliefs controls ones actions?
Not necessarily. Some believe that to be saved, christened, or whatever is all it takes to get into hebben. All their sins will be forgibben. There's lots of lessons and rules and such, but we're only human, right? (wink-wink, nudge-nudge, say no more say no more!)
-
"A nodd's as good as a wink to a blind bat.."
-
simply give parents a viable choice for their kids schooling. Give them their own money back in the form of vouchers and if the public schools are working then people will continue to support them. If not.... they can just go somewhere else. The reason these arguments about what is done in public schools is so heated is because we are forced to pay for them till we are bled white and unable to pay for an alternative.
If we had vouchers we could simply send out kids to a better school and all the things that the nutso's in public school do would simply be funny not anger inducing. Ebonics, bi lingual and new math would just be funny and.... . Public schools would teach em at their peril
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
simply give parents a viable choice for their kids schooling. Give them their own money back in the form of vouchers and if the public schools are working then people will continue to support them. If not.... they can just go somewhere else. The reason these arguments about what is done in public schools is so heated is because we are forced to pay for them till we are bled white and unable to pay for an alternative.
If we had vouchers we could simply send out kids to a better school and all the things that the nutso's in public school do would simply be funny not anger inducing. Ebonics, bi lingual and new math would just be funny and.... . Public schools would teach em at their peril
lazs
OHHH NOOOO!!!
I agree with laz on sumpin !!! :)
-
Trouble is, Lazs, once you give people vouchers you will have the same thing happen in private schools. The problem with public schools in part is the various directions the constituency wants to go. Private schools work well because to some extent they can ignore that tugging. Drop a larger number of people into those schools, let them put up a few buildings to handle the growth, grow accustomed to the cash flow, and see what happens. You'll either see administrations bending to the will of the people or a lot of fire sales.
You suggest vouchers solve the problem because parents could simply switch schools if they were unhappy.
I say (aside from the fact school hopping is very bad on students) the parents merely carry their problems with them when they go.
As long as we operate in a society where every diverse group needs their demands met NOW, no matter the impact on other diverse groups, you are going to see this kind of problem. Sending them to private school on vouchers only makes public schools out of private schools.
-
Originally posted by Kieran
You suggest vouchers solve the problem because parents could simply switch schools if they were unhappy.
I say (aside from the fact school hopping is very bad on students) the parents merely carry their problems with them when they go.
It's what I did with my son. I was unhappy with the education that he was receiving at public school, so I switched to a private school. It seems to have done the trick.
I can also see your point, Kieran. If it becomes habitual and the kid is hopping from school to school every year or so, one would have to question the quality of education. Going from one system to another is a bad thing.
We're currently debating whether or not to put my son in public school for high school. That's our window for a change. As we see it, whatever we decide will be the route we take for the next four years.
-
Do you really think the Government is going to give you money to educate your kids, without having any control over what or how it is taught? Not likely.
Kieran is dead on on this one. Vouchers will just make public schools out of private schools.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Do you really think the Government is going to give you money to educate your kids, without having any control over what or how it is taught? Not likely.
Kieran is dead on on this one. Vouchers will just make public schools out of private schools.
No argument from me. :mad:
-
kieran... catholic schools turn kids away... they have no trouble with "getting used to the money" not every entity is as wasteful and unaccountable as public schools or government in general.... right now... we are goiing over corporations books with a fine tooth comb to see if CEO's may be doing shiffty toejam with the books while govenment agencies books are so bad that most agencies are incapable of being audited due to their books not being complete enough. The marketplace will eliminate those schools that even get close to the waste that is public schooling with its 67% admistrative staff. You simply cannot do any worse than a government run school. You most certainly can do much better. private schools are doing a whole lot better with a whole lot less right now and that is a proven fact... Soime kids will be unteachable that is also a fact. Why waste time on em? more importantly.... why waste other chioldrens time and other parents money on em?
midnight target.... no one is asking the government to give us it's money to educate our children. What is being asked is that we be given OUR own money back (or a lot of it) to buy our own schooling.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
kieran... catholic schools turn kids away... they have no trouble with "getting used to the money" not every entity is as wasteful and unaccountable as public schools or government in general.... right now... we are goiing over corporations books with a fine tooth comb to see if CEO's may be doing shiffty toejam with the books while govenment agencies books are so bad that most agencies are incapable of being audited due to their books not being complete enough. The marketplace will eliminate those schools that even get close to the waste that is public schooling with its 67% admistrative staff. You simply cannot do any worse than a government run school. You most certainly can do much better. private schools are doing a whole lot better with a whole lot less right now and that is a proven fact... Soime kids will be unteachable that is also a fact. Why waste time on em? more importantly.... why waste other chioldrens time and other parents money on em?
midnight target.... no one is asking the government to give us it's money to educate our children. What is being asked is that we be given OUR own money back (or a lot of it) to buy our own schooling.
lazs
this is getting real scary, I agree with 100% of lazs post again! :)
Yep, and wait til they are through with private corps, with new rules and regs - anyone think it'll be for the better or just another avenue of revenue in the way of contributions for our fat arse politicians..
-
Yea, I'm expecting it to start raining frogs any time now. Me and Kieran, Eagler and Laz, Dogs & Cats LIVING TOGETHER ...MASS HYSTERIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:eek: :eek:
-
Lazs-
You don't seem to understand how the system works. In order for a public school to receive money, it must meet the criterion set forth by both the state and national government. Among the criteria is certain curriculum, a certain number of hours in every subject every week, and a certain length of school day. Students must go to school a set number of days a year. After school programs have to be offered, the school has to fall within predicted ranges on state standardized testing, and a myriad of other items I could mention. In the end, the state has more to do with how a school is run than the community itself.
Now, a community can run a school any way it wishes, to a point; all that happens is they receive no state money if they don't comply. Guess how many times that happens. ;)
Private corporations are in business to make money. If we have learned anything about corporate greed in the last few weeks, it's that where there is money to be made there will be dishonesty. Isn't it surprising to see the number of corporations that can't make an accurate annual report? Do you realize schools have to make annual reports, too? I believe there would be a very good opportunity for unscrupulous schools to capitalize, but that is just my opinion.
I do know for certain that once the private schools commit themselves to going for vouchers, they will most certainly have to "court" the parents to get them. As has been stated before, that in itself is a problem. Add to that the fact any voucher money will have to go to an accredited school, and you wind right back where you started- the state calling the shots. It's a change alright, but it won't last. Vouchers are not the educational panacea they are made out to be.
-
Gonna jump in without having read ANY of the posts except for the 1st one:
Either get the federal government out of the schools(which won't happen) or get your kid(s) out of federal schools (which is not practical for most). You'll never win the anti-God fight, court precedents have already been set. Once Mother Government started taking over schools from local governments, the die was cast. Our national education system is worse than it has been in 100 years, and still getting worse. A 12th grade education today is the equivalent of a 9th grade education 50 years ago. In the past 20 or 30 years schools have been transformed into leftist 'citizen' building institutions.
In a way the education system reflects the modern American political outlook: turn to your betters in Washington for collective solutions to all our problems. Our betters in Washington don't like competition from God.
ra
-
Ra,
If our public school systems are in such bad shape, how can it be that the United States maintains a lead over almost every nation in the world in technological innovation and science?
Other nations' students may do better than our own K-12, but statistics suggest that our students tend to catch up at the college level. Free enterprise undoubtedly also plays a part in motivating our college students to excel.
Modern students have more distractions that hinder learning than at any time in the past. Nevertheless, they evidently manage to overcome these handicaps.
Regards, Shuckins
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Ra,
If our public school systems are in such bad shape, how can it be that the United States maintains a lead over almost every nation in the world in technological innovation and science?
Other nations' students may do better than our own K-12, but statistics suggest that our students tend to catch up at the college level. Free enterprise undoubtedly also plays a part in motivating our college students to excel.
Modern students have more distractions that hinder learning than at any time in the past. Nevertheless, they evidently manage to overcome these handicaps.
Regards, Shuckins
But the "majority" of the kids do not go to college so we are left with a bunch of 9th graders trying to run the show ....
1st lazs then ra, if I agree with Orel next, I'll know for certain the end is near :)
-
kieran... I most certainly do know how it works.. Standardized testing would of course be part of a voucher system. I have no problem with that. The fact that more and more "curriculum", "programs" and other trash is added every year is proof that public schools need competion. The programs are added because they can be and public schools are and easy target. sitting ducks. Private schools are operating right now and doing fine with better results than public schools and they can do it with any student better than public schools. that has been proven over and over.
There would be no need to change anything in the private sector... in fact... vouchers would be good for public schools since the buracracies would have to loosen their stranglehold or the public schools would die a deserved death. Once they died somthing better would rise from the ashes.
voucher money would simply go to the parent who would then choose a school. Nothing would change... the "but they would then have to teach ebonics and aura management just like we do" is tripe.... It wouldn't happen.. it doesn't now. It is just a scare tactic and misinformation and defeatism mostly propogated by a very powerful teachers union who's sole purpose is to suck as much tax money up as they can by making people feel scared and guilty.
Public schools and teachers unions have a vested interest in turning out poor students.... it gives em an excuse to ask for more money.... private schools have a vested interest in tuning out good students... it gives em money.
lazs
-
Lazs-
No, you don't get it. The state tells the schools what the required curriculum is. If the school is to receive state money, it must offer and require certain classes, period. Any other curriculum offered is not mandatory in any way. This gives the student (consumer) more choice, but doesn't restrict them. The state sets how many hours are required for a degree, what has to be part of the degree, and what amount of time has to be spent in those classes.
If the state tells a public school it must teach ebonics, you'd better be certain a voucher school would have to, too. Same goes for any other state program.
There is your conundrum, Lazs. Private schools are better because they CAN tell the state to get lost, and this is possible because they don't depend on state money. The minute this changes, the bloom goes off the rose. So, private schools are better, but most people can't afford them. Making them affordable will make them like public schools.
-
Just to offer a little historical perspective:
New York legislature passes the Maclay Bill, which bars all religious instruction from public schools and denies any state money to denominational schools. This decision spreads to most other states and becomes official policy.
in 1842
Not quite the "new idea" some are suggesting.
-
kieran... we both agree that public schools are bad and will just get worse so long as they are run by the government. Slowing the decline is no longer an option... overhauling the present teacher union and government controlled disaster is impossible.
I will admit tho....For a voucher system to work.. the money can not be "state money" it has to be in the form of a refund or voucher directly given to the parent. The parent may then spend the money any way he wishes so long as it is at an accredited school. It is in the best interest of the teachers union to foster the idea that our tax money is somehow "state funds". every parent (in one way or another) pays enough taxes that go to public schools right now that they could be refunded to cover the cost of private schools. The lottery even could be shared on a per student basis regardless of school choice. Sales taxes used for school would be shared on a per student basis not a per school basis. as would the myriad of other hidden taxes that go to our wasteful and bloated joke of an education system.
certainly, some "do gooder" programs would be ushered in by voters wanting to "save the children" as things got rolling. programs such as lunch programs but....
vouchers would be a much needed fresh start. they would not only stop the downward slide but put everyone up at the top of the hill again. Sure.... do gooders could screw up the voucher sytem but it would take em 30-40 or more years to get it in as bad a shape as what we have now.... heck.... maybe people would get used to quality and never allow things to get the way they are now ever again.
lazs
-
I guess to simplify.... The "state" has no problem right now with someone sending their child to a private school so long as they meet academic and health/building codes etc.
if we can seperate the myth of vouchers being "state" money then the whole thing becomes quite simple. Why would the state require more after vouchers than they do now? are they being negligent of their duties to private school children right now by not forcing ebonics or removing religion from private schools?? Of course not.
No... the myth of the state ruining private schools till they are just as bad as public schools if vouchers are passed is just a scare tactic and.... defeatism fostered by (in teachers and "states" cases) self interest.
lazs
-
I wish it were as you paint it, Lazs.
The parent may then spend the money any way he wishes so long as it is at an accredited school.
Bang, you're dead. This is the crux of the matter. Accredited means you follow the state guidelines. The state is allowed to control education, like it or not. Remember, all powers not expressly given to the federal government belong to individual states. States are in competition with one another to produce the best schools (though it is unclear to me what standards are used to define "best"). States do not have to, nor will they relinquish control of the educational process. Blaming it on the teacher union (of which I am not a member BTW) is a red herring. The states follow the mold of the federal government of controlling all areas deemed public welfare- and education is certainly one of those areas.
States have fewer requirements on private education because they don't affect the standing of public schools. The state doesn't fund the private schools, therefore isn't accountable to the parents of the students in those schools. The second the state becomes accountable for private education through supporting them with tax dollars, you bet they will get concerned darned quick.
Vouchers are indeed controlled by the state. The state isn't going to hand them to just anyone for any reason. There will be strings, common sense tells you that. Don't think you're going to get an educational rebate and be told "spend wisely". There's the nasty problem of education being a requirement by law until a certain age, and parents that are irresponsible with checks can wind up costing taxpayers a huge amount of money (guess where they go to school after they blow that check? Someone will pay for that education). There is simply no way the states will ever hand hard cash over to the public, nor will they merely allow people to keep the money and pay for education. Chances are, the public would never even see the money, it would merely pass from state coffers to institutions of choice, and then only if the institution was satisfactory to state mandates.
Getting the picture?
It isn't a myth that vouchers are state money- they are. Right now a portion of your property taxes goes to public education. Vouchers merely take an amount that would have been spent on your child and allow you to spend that money on a private school. It is at best a tax rebate, except with strings. That money must be spent on education, and it must be spent on an institution that meets state standards. Well... there you go, the state calling the shots all around.
-
No... i beleive you are dead. Accredited is what it is right now. private schools are being attended by students without the kind of state interferance you speak of. I am aware of how the govenment gives out money with strings attached but.... I believe that with a new system as important and in the public eye as this one.... Those strings will be scrutinized by the public and.... The state will not risk pushing a majority of them because they can't stand the light of day.
you seem to be saying.... "we can't try vouchers because.... because.. well, if people start attending private schools in numbers the state will just figure out a way to foul it up as bad as what we have right now anyway." Forgive me but that sounds like the protectionist teachers union stand of fear based self interest. You are basically claiming that we better not fight em or because they are only allowing private schools right now because they (private schools) are not a threat.
Vouchers could esily be one of two things... they could be handed out by the state and feds as a rebate with no strings attached and that would work or... schooling taxes could be an enterprise fund seperate from the general fund. ANY money including lotery or indian gambling or gas tax at the pump... that is set asside for "education" would be dispersed on a per student basis and that would work too... public schools could continue to be wasteful and radicalized at their peril. or.....
We could simply allow the same machine that has ruined the public school system to ruin the private sector and give up with a "what's the use, just keep throwing the money at public schools and watch the slide downward... nothing to do about it. it's a terrible sytem but nothing else can work... they are too powerful to fight" .and of course.... you would be right... it wouldn't work
Where our arguement breaks down is.... You feel that a voucher system would simply be an extension of our failed system. The state would just be controling more buildings. I feel it would be a fresh start and each "program" that that the state wanted would have to be scrutinized by the voters and the talking heads on the news AND IN COURT.... I don't think state mandated programs would stand up to that kind of scrutiny. I think people are smarter than you give them credit for.
Again... there is no reason for a voucher system school to be as bad as our current public schools. there is no reason for a voucher school to be open only about half the time or to have 67% or higher "administration" or R.I.P...Retired In Place, teachers. No reason for them to pay full time for part time workers or to have anything to do with the teachers union....least not as we know it.
The voucher schools themselves would publicly and in the legal system fight idiotic programs... It would be in their interest.. as it is... Public school don't fight these idiotic programs they encourage them... It is in their self interest to get more and more money and.... to do a worse job.
and.... once some bright boy crunches the numbers.... the taxpayer is gonna see that he was paying about 5 times more than he needed to in order to "save the children" by giving them an inferior education... That will be the end of the public school machine as we know it.
lazs