Teachers forced to 'hide in closets' to pray

[nebula]

I'm inclined to have the opinion that if a Christian feels that strongly that the "word of their testimony" is being stiffled by this law...then maybe they shouldn't work in gov't areas that require them to take money from taxpayers.

Yes, the silent persecution of believers -

Believe whatever you want, but you are forbidden from this job, that position . . . unless you compromise.

I disagree. The Pace High School Teachers Manual tells teachers not to smoke on campus or in the view of students...wonder why? Could it be because they don't even want to have the appearance of promoting such a dangerous habit to kids? I also think you are mistaken that the teachers aren't trying to promote praying. I think the teachers are trying to innoculate and impress upon the children their religious values. I think that has been going on at the school and i think thats why they admitted guilt without a trial.

And you don't think being forbidden from displaying religion is influencing the students?

By making it illegal for teachers to display religion, they are preaching Atheism.

About the emails...I don't think I would have an issue with it...until I started getting Wiccan greetings, or yogic expressions, or any number of other pseudo-religious, or politically ideological things in the emails from a teacher. Then suddenly...it makes sense.

No, it does not make sense. The Christian teacher was stating that she could not hit the "reply" button to respond to an e-mail that contained religous items in it.

Really, you are acting like you are so afraid of other religions that you are embracing humanism and atheism.

I don't view this as a christian only thing...this applies to all teachers of all religions...and in light of that it makes sense to me.

I'll believe that when people of other religions start complaining.

But in this case, the teachers weren't praying with the students, were they?

Yes, they were.

I did not see this in the OP.

[nikki1]

Blessings,Axxman

Apparently, this is the final end of a series of religious arguments between the ACLU, Pace High School, and the individual employess, where the ACLU overstepped their bounds.

I think that has been going on at the school and i think thats why they admitted guilt without a trial.

No that is not the reason alleged "guilt" was admitted. The school employees, according to the order had no say and no legal representation in the case to protect their rights.

Following the school board

[Axxman]

Yes, the silent persecution of believers -

Believe whatever you want, but you are forbidden from this job, that position . . . unless you compromise.

So you believe that all believers from all religions should be able to use their religious habits in gov't positions. You are okay with that? You are okay with muslim teachers promoting and inculcating their morals and religious practices on children at all times?

And you don't think being forbidden from displaying religion is influencing the students?

By making it illegal for teachers to display religion, they are preaching Atheism.

Nope...they are not allowed to preach atheism either. Nor are they allowed to act atheist...lol. The point is that the gov't cannot be in collusion with religion. If that is influencing students, and it may be, it is not by the gov't promotion of religion...which is what the Bill of Rights protects us from.

No, it does not make sense. The Christian teacher was stating that she could not hit the "reply" button to respond to an e-mail that contained religous items in it.

Really, you are acting like you are so afraid of other religions that you are embracing humanism and atheism.

Well, I believe in God..therefore by definition I cannot embrace atheism. However, humanism is what the Bill of Rights is all about. Humanism centers on humans and their values, capacities, and worth. As taxpayers we are ALL a part of the gov't...therefore the gov't cannot hold your values, capacities, and worth above those of another person. In order for the system to work it must maintain neutrality. Its not about being afraid of other religions...its about maintaining a balance of freedoms for ALL members involved.

But in this case, the teachers weren't praying with the students, were they?

Yes, they were.

I did not see this in the OP.

Well, the OP is biased and one-sided. Both of the contempt of court cases came about because the Principal and the Assistant had given/approved prayers, during school functions, in an official capacity...in the presence of students.

[Guest shiloh357]

So you believe that all believers from all religions should be able to use their religious habits in gov't positions. You are okay with that? You are okay with muslim teachers promoting and inculcating their morals and religious practices on children at all times?

But that is not what this is about. The issue raised in the OP has nothting to do with teachers dictating reliigous views on to their students in the classroom, or asking students to pray to God or some other deity or whatever. Again, you are trying to spin this as something it is not.

Nope...they are not allowed to preach atheism either. Nor are they allowed to act atheist...lol. The point is that the gov't cannot be in collusion with religion. If that is influencing students, and it may be, it is not by the gov't promotion of religion...which is what the Bill of Rights protects us from.

Allowing teachers to What we are protected from is the government mandating a state-run church.

However, humanism is what the Bill of Rights is all about. Humanism centers on humans and their values, capacities, and worth.

Humanism is far, far more than that. It is in effect, an usurpation of God's authority over man.

In order for the system to work it must maintain neutrality.

No, it doesn't. There is no reason that the United States cannnot be a Christian nation, while at the same time protecting the rights of those of others faiths who are its citizens as well.

Its not about being afraid of other religions...its about maintaining a balance of freedoms for ALL members involved.

Except, that we have here is is another case of the Anti-Christian Litigation Unit trying to quash the freedoms of individuals to privately exercise their religious freedoms.

Well, the OP is biased and one-sided. Both of the contempt of court cases came about because the Principal and the Assistant had given/approved prayers, during school functions, in an official capacity...in the presence of students.

From where are you drawing your information about exactly what events did or did not take place???

[nebula]

** spliting my response because I'm having quote function issues **

Yes, the silent persecution of believers -

Believe whatever you want, but you are forbidden from this job, that position . . . unless you compromise.

So you believe that all believers from all religions should be able to use their religious habits in gov't positions. You are okay with that? You are okay with muslim teachers promoting and inculcating their morals and religious practices on children at all times?

I'm OK with teachers saying, "This is what I believe." In fact, when I was in school, we preferred teachers state where they stand.

Teenagers are not stupid. Yet our society treats them like they are.

Teenagers are not children. Yet society treats them like they are. That's one reason we have so much rebellion because biologically and mentally they are young adults, yet we treat them like old children.

[nebula]

And you don't think being forbidden from displaying religion is influencing the students?

By making it illegal for teachers to display religion, they are preaching Atheism.

Nope...they are not allowed to preach atheism either. Nor are they allowed to act atheist...lol.

By taking God out, they are promoting atheism.

Imagine your child coming home with a t-shirt that say, "God is dead." When you ask about it, she says, "They taught us about Nieche in school last week, and I agree with him."

No, it's not usually so blatant, but athiestic philosophies and perspectives are taught non-stop in schools.

The point is that the gov't cannot be in collusion with religion. If that is influencing students, and it may be, it is not by the gov't promotion of religion...which is what the Bill of Rights protects us from.

That is a misinterpretation of the Bill of Rights. Taking away teacher's rights is not protecting students from anything.

What happened to "shall not prohibit the free practice thereof"?

No, it does not make sense. The Christian teacher was stating that she could not hit the "reply" button to respond to an e-mail that contained religous items in it.

Really, you are acting like you are so afraid of other religions that you are embracing humanism and atheism.

Well, I believe in God..therefore by definition I cannot embrace atheism.

But you are embrasing atheism in the classroom:

"atheism" = "without God"

You are agreeing with kicking God out of the classroom.

However, humanism is what the Bill of Rights is all about.

And after corporate prayer was removed from the classroom, we saw a wonderful improvement in students' performance and behavior, didn't we?

Not!

Humanism centers on humans and their values, capacities, and worth. As taxpayers we are ALL a part of the gov't...therefore the gov't cannot hold your values, capacities, and worth above those of another person.

Yes, they are. The gov't is putting the worth of the elimination of God about belief in God.

In order for the system to work it must maintain neutrality. Its not about being afraid of other religions...its about maintaining a balance of freedoms for ALL members involved.

There is no such thing as neutrality.

And there is no freedom if a teacher is not free to practice their religion.

What would Jesus say to this were He walking this earth today as He did 2000 years ago?

And what will He say in Heaven?

Will He say, "Well done good and faithful servant. You kept your silence well!" ????

Don't you see, Axx - this is spiritual warfare - and anything that keeps our children and young adults from the Kingdom of God is a victory for Satan.

And yes - humanism is Satanic. Humanism is a false religion without the organization.

And really, history shows time and time again whenever one religion is removed, another takes its place. This happened in Ancient Greece with the Greek philosophers, they rejected the Pantheon, but replaced it with a new kind of spirituality down the road. And this is what is happening in America. Christianity was muzzled in the classroom, and now other forms of spirituality are taking its place among our young people.

[Axxman]

Apparently, this is the final end of a series of religious arguments between the ACLU, Pace High School, and the individual employess, where the ACLU overstepped their bounds.

How can you accuse the ACLU of overstepping their bounds when the school district admitted in court that the ACLU was right and that they were guilty? There was no religious argument. The case was filed and the defendants admitted guilt? How is that an argument? The only "argument" came after school employees continued to break the law and the order of the court. The court did drop the charges on those cases...but only because the court accepted that the defendants forgot about the law.

No that is not the reason alleged "guilt" was admitted. The school employees, according to the order had no say and no legal representation in the case to protect their rights.

Really? I wonder who those legal guys are who signed the admission of liability. It would appear that the legal representation was Robert Sniffen, J. David Marsey, Paul Green, and David Leibenhaut.

The fourteenth amendment was never at all applied in the case as you are trying to imply.

Well...that would make sense since this case never made it to the Federal level...

Following the school board

[Axxman]

By taking God out, they are promoting atheism.

Imagine your child coming home with a t-shirt that say, "God is dead." When you ask about it, she says, "They taught us about Nieche in school last week, and I agree with him."

No, it's not usually so blatant, but athiestic philosophies and perspectives are taught non-stop in schools.

Wow...extreme examples much? I noticed you completely side-stepped my question...kinda odd coming from somebody who will freak out if they don't receive prompt answers to their questions.

My kids are more than welcome to learn about Neitzsche, or Buddha, or Muhammad, Jesus Christ at school...what is not allowed is the teacher promoting or coercing those ideologies as truth. They may certainly teach about those topics. If my kid comes home from school and proclaims that Neitzsche is the truth...I'm gonna find out what the teacher said to cause that belief.

Do you think that Muslim teachers should embrace every opportunity to inculcate, by precept and example, the principles of truth...and the practice of every Islamic virtue? Because thats what you are supporting.

That is a misinterpretation of the Bill of Rights. Taking away teacher's rights is not protecting students from anything.

What happened to "shall not prohibit the free practice thereof"?

Do teachers work for the gov't (read: taxpayers) or not? Do they work for the whole gov't or just the ones they like? If a person takes a taxpayer supported job they are in effect limiting their own religious freedom...it is not the taxpayers fault that someone took that job...and the taxpayer should have to be faced with ANY gov't employee's religous ideology, in any way.

But you are embrasing atheism in the classroom:

"atheism" = "without God"

You are agreeing with kicking God out of the classroom.

I agree with kicking any personal ideology, religious or political, out of the gov't funded classroom. It doesn't belong there and I don't want it. Neither does atheism. God is in plenty of classrooms, and is taught in plenty of classrooms...privately owned classrooms. Not gov't funded. There is a big difference. God isn't being taking out of ALL classrooms...God and prayer is still perfectly legal in classrooms...just not in gov't funded classrooms.

And after corporate prayer was removed from the classroom, we saw a wonderful improvement in students' performance and behavior, didn't we?

Not!

Yes...if only we had kept forcing religion on people the world would be so much better. I can think of about 100 things that have had a negative effect on classrooms...forced "canned" prayer is way down on the list.

There is no such thing as neutrality.

And there is no freedom if a teacher is not free to practice their religion.

Teachers are free to practice their religion...just not as agents of the gov't. The gov't is to be free of religious endorsement. Neutrality is something to strive for...I don't believe it is attainable...but like we strive for perfection...we can strive for neutrality and fairness in gov't.

What would Jesus say to this were He walking this earth today as He did 2000 years ago?

And what will He say in Heaven?

Will He say, "Well done good and faithful servant. You kept your silence well!" ????

Don't you see, Axx - this is spiritual warfare - and anything that keeps our children and young adults from the Kingdom of God is a victory for Satan.

And yes - humanism is Satanic. Humanism is a false religion without the organization.

I think this is a bunch of hysteria. You wouldn't want the same rights given to any other religion on earth. I think Jesus was pretty wise. I think he'd throw out 2 options...render unto Caesar what is Caesars..or, give up all you have and follow me. You wanna work for Caesar, then obey his rules...if you don't like his rules then give up what you get from Caesar and follow me. I don't see anything remotely akin to spiritual warfare here. I see a just gov't attempting to reconcile the differences in its members.

[Guest shiloh357]

I gave you the cases...is it so much to ask that you look them up yourself rather than me having to go to each site and copy/paste a link. Go to findlaw.com and type in any of the cases I gave you...simple. Or supreme.justia.com...either will work. Thats a simple courteous request that you look it up yourself.

Is it too much to ask YOU to back up your claims with the link to the specific ruling that applies to the OP??? You claim to "know" things, but then when asked to provide your source, you act like it is up to everyone ELSE to produce the source. That is a rather backwards approach to a debate. If you have a source, then provide it. You are responsible for the assertions YOU make and that includes the responsibility to provide adequate support for those assertions if you are setting forth those assertions as established fact.

My kids are more than welcome to learn about Neitzsche, or Buddha, or Muhammad, Jesus Christ at school...what is not allowed is the teacher promoting or coercing those ideologies as truth. They may certainly teach about those topics. If my kid comes home from school and proclaims that Neitzsche is the truth...I'm gonna find out what the teacher said to cause that belief.

Do you think that Muslim teachers should embrace every opportunity to inculcate, by precept and example, the principles of truth...and the practice of every Islamic virtue? Because thats what you are supporting.

No, she isn't, and she has made no such assertion or implication to that end. That is a value YOU are assigning to her.

Do teachers work for the gov't (read: taxpayers) or not? Do they work for the whole gov't or just the ones they like? If a person takes a taxpayer supported job they are in effect limiting their own religious freedom...it is not the taxpayers fault that someone took that job...and the taxpayer should have to be faced with ANY gov't employee's religous ideology, in any way.

But that is still not material to this issue. These teachers were not promoting or forcing anyone to face their "religious idealogy." You are spinning this to be something it is not. Being a government employee does not mean that you must check your religion at the door. You may be prohibited from actively promoting it on the campus, but it does not preclude anyone praying silently to themselves in or in a private group of like-minded individuals.

I agree with kicking any personal ideology, religious or political, out of the gov't funded classroom. It doesn't belong there and I don't want it. Neither does atheism.

Atheism is the absence of God. Without God, all you have left is Atheism.

There is a big difference. God isn't being taking out of ALL classrooms...

God should not have been taken out of any of the classrooms, at all.

I have old 4th and 5th grade hardback readers that date from the mid 1800's and the days of the one room school house. Those readers used the Bible to teach children how to read. Children ages 8-10 years old were reading words like "concupiscience." The reading comprehension questions pertain asking students (8-10 years old) to discuss in what manner Christ is the propitiation for sin. There was a time when the KJV was considered 5th grade level reading. Compare that with today. Going back further, while Thomas Jefferson was president, the textbook used in the classroom was the Bible. In fact, over 90% of the material contained in the documents dating from our nation's founding came straight out of the biblical text.

The gov't is to be free of religious endorsement.

No, it isn't. At least, not as it pertains to THIS government. The last thing you want is a government that does not acknowledge the God of the Bible as the supreme authority of our land.

You wouldn't want the same rights given to any other religion on earth.

All religions have the same rights in the US so long as none of their practices cross over into criminal activity (drugs, human/animal sacrifices, etc.).

[wyguy]

People seem to gloss over the second part of the first amendment:

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