Teachers forced to 'hide in closets' to pray

[Axxman]

You must not be a Constitutional lawyer, because that is a complete absurdity to the 14th Amendment.

You must not be on the Supreme Court...because that was their definition...not mine.

[Fez]

Nebula mentioned evolution. It is now being taught in our schools as a subject. Where does it stop? Who said "give me a child at 5 and he is mine for life"? (or words to that effect). Was it Stalin or Mao?

[nebula]

You must not be a Constitutional lawyer, because that is a complete absurdity to the 14th Amendment.

You must not be on the Supreme Court...because that was their definition...not mine.

OK, I looked up the 14th amendment, and I am not seeing what you are saying, Axx.

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

[wyguy]

Nebula mentioned evolution. It is now being taught in our schools as a subject. Where does it stop? Who said "give me a child at 5 and he is mine for life"? (or words to that effect). Was it Stalin or Mao?

Dunno. But Hitler once said, "I begin with the young

[Axxman]

hmmm.. What Bible are you reading, Axxman?

But let's just say that your Bible supports all of those things as "religious expressions... "

That gives my Bible, the true Word of God and my Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, as much right under the equal access laws to be spoken of in public places. Thank you for substantiating my point.

You see...this is just intellectual dishonesty on your part. You know good and well that I don't have a bible that supports human sacrifice, or polygamy, or drug use...if even such a bible exists. Nor did I say I supported those things. You also know FULL WELL that wasn't even a part of the question. When you start throwing the 1st amendment around like it has no restrictions (which it does) then you MUST also support the rights of others to express themselves religiously without restrictions...and that is ridiculous. Restrictions on the 1st Amendment are precisely why polygamy and human sacrifice and drugs are outlawed as religious expression.

So do you support restrictions on the 1st Amendment...or do you support polygamy, human sacrifice, and drug use?

Well, obviously, it appears to me that Bible believing Christians are being discriminated against in the OP.

How so? You cannot discriminate against a persons right to discriminate against others.

The separation of church and state myth is no where in the American Constitution. The First Amendment was written into the Constitution to keep the government from interferring with the people's right to worship God and Jesus Christ during a time when the people had broken away from the dictatorial King and State run Church of England, and the founding fathers had the foresight to include it to protect all future generations from Christian religious tyranny.

I'm sorry...I can't mention the intent of the 1st amendment (i.e. the separation)...but you can add all sorts of stuff about how the 1st amendment was about worshipping Jesus and God...as if thats in the Constitution??? It is there just as much to protect a persons religious freedom, as it is to protect from religious practices.

I know what you said, Axxman. How can one show his faith in Christ by doing good works when even athesists do good works and don't believe in God? How is sharing your love for and faith in Christ by "using words" throwing Christianity in someone's face? I don't understand your logic.

C'mon Nikki you telling me that you have never had anyone start talking about something you don't believe in (whether politics, philosophy, or religion) and it created an uncomfortable scene. You've never had a kid come home from school and start talking about how cool evolution is...or about how Obama is so great...or false religion materials? I find it hard to believe you don't get the context of how uncomfortable it can be to have to wonder about the consequences of speaking up...not just for you...but for your child.

Why would you want to hide your faith in Jesus by not verbally telling others of your faith in Him if you are not ashamed?

you did say...

There are about a hundred different ways to be Christian and show Christ at work without proselytizing.

Why does it have to be shame? Why can't it just be a courtesy to not use my position or my authority to put other people in an uncomfortable position. I really don't see the love of Christ being shown with the attitude of "I don't care who likes it, I don't care who is offended, I don't care about anybody...I'm gonna do what I want."

I agree; that's why parents today need to monitor on a daily basis what their children are being exposed to while away at school. But I doubt the OP is about false religious teachings as Liberty Counsel is an exceptional and highly recognized Constitutional legal authority who has been defending the rights of Bible believing Christians who are discriminated against under the First Amendment in all walks of life in America for years.

Well of course its about false religious teachings...its about all teachings. If you let public servants, even the ones you like, have a free pass...then it gives a free pass to the ones you don't like. Trust me, the one's we don't like are in the vast majority. I don't want, or need, any teacher ever expressing their religious thoughts or habits around my kids.

[Axxman]

OK, I looked up the 14th amendment, and I am not seeing what you are saying, Axx.

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

Its right there...section one of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits discrimination by securing "the equal protection of the laws" for every person. That would include religious discrimination. In a 1979 consultation on the issue, the United States commission on civil rights defined religious discrimination in relation to the civil rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

[Ovedya]

OK, I looked up the 14th amendment, and I am not seeing what you are saying, Axx.

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

Its right there...section one of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits discrimination by securing "the equal protection of the laws" for every person. That would include religious discrimination. In a 1979 consultation on the issue, the United States commission on civil rights defined religious discrimination in relation to the civil rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

However, "equal protection" under law does not define discrimination in terms of what is not done. Equal protection under the law simply means that the protections granted to one group of people must also be granted to another. It cannot be excluded from another group based upon religious faith, color, etc.

[Ovedya]

You must not be a Constitutional lawyer, because that is a complete absurdity to the 14th Amendment.

You must not be on the Supreme Court...because that was their definition...not mine.

Cite the ruling then, so I can read exactly what the Supreme Court said on the issue. I'd like to know, because my daughter's second grade teacher needs to get herself a bunch of religious symbols to hang around her neck, next to her cross.

[nikki1]

Blessings, Axxman

You see...this is just intellectual dishonesty on your part.

Not really...

All of those are religious expressions

You know good and well that I don't have a bible that supports human sacrifice, or polygamy, or drug use...

I'm just going by what you said.

So do you support restrictions on the 1st Amendment

That's really off topic.

How so?

I think that's already been addressed.

but you can add all sorts of stuff about how the 1st amendment was about worshipping Jesus and God...as if thats in the Constitution???

Well, the First Amendment deals with religion,which is a part of the Constitution, so why not?

C'mon Nikki you telling me that you have never had anyone start talking about something you don't believe in (whether politics, philosophy, or religion) and it created an uncomfortable scene. You've never had a kid come home from school and start talking about how cool evolution is...or about how Obama is so great...or false religion materials? I find it hard to believe you don't get the context of how uncomfortable it can be to have to wonder about the consequences of speaking up...not just for you...but for your child.

huh? You still didn't answer my question.

Why does it have to be shame?

Why not? If you are not ashamed of someone, why not include Him in your conversations?

The Apostle Paul said For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Romans 1:16

Why can't it just be a courtesy to not use my position or my authority to put other people in an uncomfortable position. I really don't see the love of Christ being shown with the attitude of "I don't care who likes it, I don't care who is offended, I don't care about anybody...I'm gonna do what I want."

You sound as if talking about Jesus in public is offensive to you? I don't understand how one's position or authority can put anyone else in an uncomfortable position because one talks about Jesus? His name is well known all over the world.

Well of course its about false religious teachings...its about all teachings. If you let public servants, even the ones you like, have a free pass...then it gives a free pass to the ones you don't like. Trust me, the one's we don't like are in the vast majority. I don't want, or need, any teacher ever expressing their religious thoughts or habits around my kids.

I kinda agree with Liberty Counsel as they have an excellent track record in defending Christian liberties and I trust what they say.

[Ovedya]

Here's an interesting thought: Paul wrote that he is, "...not shamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one who believes," Wouldn't someone who is afraid of preaching the gospel, or of even mentioning Jesus for fear of offending someone, actually be ashamed of the gospel? Likelwise wouldn't that mean that such a person is ashamed of the power of God? Wouldn't that make such a person a coward?

My boss told me an interesting story today. He was at a restaurant recently and he said, "Merry Christmas" to the waiter just before getting up to leave. The waiter responded with "Merry Christmas." My boss said he was a little taken aback and said, "Don't you want to wish me a "Happy Holiday?" The waiter said that he usually did wish patrons a "Happy Holiday" but had made an exception for him. My boss replied with, "Why don't you wish everyone a Merry Christmas? It is Christmas after all." The waiter said that he didn't want to offend anyone. My boss stated, "You would be offending the majority of people by not wishing them a Merry Christmas. Why do you make the exception for the few that really don't care anyway? Just to be safe?" The waiter said that he never thought of it that way.

We don't make exceptions where the gospel of Christ is concerned. It is the power of God unto salvation. Making an exception because you might offend the fragile sensitivities of another person is really denying them the opportunity for salvation! Who would you suppose is really concerned about the denial of salvation?