Principal and AD to be thrown in jail for praying!

UnrepentantSinner · 16th August 2009, 12:43 AM

http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1016

also news release

Well, not really. They're facing contempt of court charges.

Dancing David · 16th August 2009, 06:12 AM

Violate a court order, possibly go to jail.

rwguinn · 16th August 2009, 07:06 AM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Violate a court order, possibly go to jail.

What a load of ********!

Quote:

he district consented to a very broad order fashioned by the ACLU, essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours.

Please...The ACLU would fight that kind of court order, not ask for it.
And I dislike the ACLU

Aitch · 16th August 2009, 07:10 AM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Violate a court order, possibly go to jail.

Don't you mean "fight the good fight and become martyrs"?

Madalch · 16th August 2009, 12:42 PM

I tried googling the name and found mostly frothing-at-the-mouth fundy sites screaming bloody murder that a man was arrested for praying. An actual news link:
http://www.pnj.com/article/20090809/...14/-1/archives

Simple- stop pushing your religious beliefs on your students. Period. If you consider it your moral duty to do so, then get a job as a preacher, not a teacher.

Dancing David · 16th August 2009, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by rwguinn

What a load of ********!

nope they were under a court order not to pray at school events. That ain't bullflop.

Dancing David · 16th August 2009, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by Aitch

Don't you mean "fight the good fight and become martyrs"?

I am washed in marinara.

rwguinn · 16th August 2009, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

nope they were under a court order not to pray at school events. That ain't bullflop.

That part, no.
But did you read the bull flop part I was referring to? Obviously, your agenda got in the way--or you lack of reading comprehension.
There is no way a Court in the US would allow an order "essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours."
Only if it is a school function "before, during, or after school hours" can that be enforced. The article implies that it doesn't matter--they can't do it at all--and that is what the fundies play on--and what the article wants its readers to believe.

RandFan · 16th August 2009, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by rwguinn

There is no way a Court in the US would allow an order "essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours."

I'm confused. My weekling listening of www.ffrf.com (freedom from religion) has adequatly demonstrated that employees can and ought to be banned from praying in front of students as they represent the school and is therefore a reasonable person could conclude that it is an endorsement of religion by the school.

I get the feeling that I'm missing something. Perhaps it is my reading comprehension. Is it your understanding the bann includes praying away from the school [ETA] or in school if it is in private?

jmcvann · 16th August 2009, 04:55 PM

As usual, the news release in the OP misstates the problem. There is no ban on prayer anywhere. Nor would I want one. What there is is a ban on making other people pray, or forcing them to watch and listen to you pray. At the event in the news release, as in every school in the U.S., you can pray from the moment you arrive until the moment you leave. Just don't involve me in it. Thanks.

Learning Phase · 16th August 2009, 04:56 PM

This is my local school district. I have relatives that work at the school, and details won't be provided, but I can show one thing:

The ACTUAL consent decree:

http://www.layfreemandefense.com/sit...nsentorder.pdf

Perhaps one of the lawyer types here could help decipher this, but I don't see what the Liberty Counsel claims is "essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours. "

It looks to me that they are banned from any proselytizing, whether before, during, or after school hours. They signed it, they ignored it, they should face the consequences.

HansMustermann · 16th August 2009, 05:35 PM

Except, looking at the link Madalch supplied, these guys did a lot more.

Quote:

On Jan. 28, he asked the school athletic director, Robert Freeman, to "bless the food" at a luncheon at Pace High for school personnel and booster club members instrumental in helping get a new fieldhouse. The school's culinary class prepared the meal.

If he had just bowed his head and said a prayer in his head or even muttered it in his beard, I'm going to take a wild guess that everyone would have politely ignored it. But asking to bless the food at a school event isn't even remotely the same as "arrested for praying." It is pushing religion on anyone at that luncheon.

And, again, most importantly, it's violating a court injunction about a week after getting it.

As for why he got sued by the ACLU in the first place:

Quote:

His school of more than 1,800 students was known by some as "the Baptist Academy." His teachers and staff delivered prayers, or invited students or outside leaders to lead prayers, during sporting events and other activities. Teachers offered Bible readings or biblical interpretations and talked about the churches they attend. They assigned religion- oriented work to students and encouraged them to attend religious clubs.

(Plus, you know, such details as having a cross on his desk and whatnot. You know, 'cause if you have to go see the principal you need that in your face

)

I'm sorry. Prayer in school would be already illegal as it is, but these guys were assigning religion as homework and tried to recruit students for religious clubs. That's not just disrespect for the law, but openly defying it.

That's what he got to court for in the same place, and he got away with just an injunction. And a little over a week later, he pulls this stunt.

And reading the article, he sounds completely unrepentant about it. That's how things are in the good ol' south, that's what he's gonna do.

You know what? I say good riddance. Jail is too good for that kind of idiot, but I guess that's all we have.

rwguinn · 16th August 2009, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

I'm confused. My weekling listening of www.ffrf.com (freedom from religion) has adequatly demonstrated that employees can and ought to be banned from praying in front of students as they represent the school and is therefore a reasonable person could conclude that it is an endorsement of religion by the school.

Absolutely--I agree

Quote:

I get the feeling that I'm missing something. Perhaps it is my reading comprehension. Is it your understanding the bann includes praying away from the school [ETA] or in school if it is in private?

No--that is not the ban. That is what the article was written to make you THINK was the case
The bias in the article is typical of the fundies.

Dancing David · 16th August 2009, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by rwguinn

That part, no.
But did you read the bull flop part I was referring to? Obviously, your agenda got in the way--or you lack of reading comprehension.
There is no way a Court in the US would allow an order "essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours."
Only if it is a school function "before, during, or after school hours" can that be enforced. The article implies that it doesn't matter--they can't do it at all--and that is what the fundies play on--and what the article wants its readers to believe.

Wow, you are rude one, can't make a coherent argument without being insulting? Or just having a bad day. I am sure I read everything that you link to as that is my agenda. I wait on every word you say because you my friend are the center of the universe.

I don't care, really they can pray at home, or in Illinois at non-school functions at school. I don't care, they have a court order and oh too bad, if they have a case they can appeal it. They are welcome to pray all they want when they are not in an official school capacity.

rwguinn · 16th August 2009, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Wow, you are rude one, can't make a coherent argument without being insulting? Or just having a bad day. I am sure I read everything that you link to as that is my agenda. I wait on every word you say because you my friend are the center of the universe.

I don't care, really they can pray at home, or in Illinois at non-school functions at school. I don't care, they have a court order and oh too bad, if they have a case they can appeal it. They are welcome to pray all they want when they are not in an official school capacity.

Exactly/ The article in the OP implied otherwise.

Dancing David · 17th August 2009, 07:25 AM

Well, I tend to care more about other things the religious whackos do that involve legislation, I am sure this will go into the War on Xians and the 'we used to be a Xian nation' rhetoric.

I am proud to have grown up next to the the school district that led to the overturning of religious education in public schools.

McCollum v. Board of Education
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCollu...d_of_Education

the details in the wiki article are not exactly right, especially when it comes to the family dynamic of the McCollums. Like the mother being an avowed atheist, it was actaully the religious father who started the suit, etc..., the point was that there was no good opt out that did not lead the the son James being stigmatized for not attending the religion class. That is the father's actual reason for starting the suit.

ImaginalDisc · 18th August 2009, 07:28 AM

Originally Posted by rwguinn

What a load of ********!

Please...The ACLU would fight that kind of court order, not ask for it.
And I dislike the ACLU

I hear that quite often.

Why would anyone dislike the ACLU?

Jeff Corey · 18th August 2009, 07:50 AM

This lie in the article shows its bias, "Wake up America: Persecution is here! It is truly outrageous that this can happen in our beloved country that was founded on Christian principles."

drkitten · 18th August 2009, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc

I hear that quite often.

Why would anyone dislike the ACLU?

Because they protect the rights of people who don't deserve them, like Nazis, the KKK, criminals, and especially atheists.

Rights are uncomfortable things when your opponents have them. It would be so much simpler for the fundamentalists to be able simply to put their quaint little prejudices into law. After all, God mandated public exhibition of prayer (*) as well as public humililation and punishment of sinners (**), and the ACLU has this silly anti-Christian agenda to keep those from being put into place.

(*) Matthew 6:5 "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men."

(**) John 8:7 "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

All translations are from the NIV.

BobTheDonkey · 18th August 2009, 08:45 AM

The injunction clearly states:

Quote:

School Officials are permanently enjoined from promoting, advertising, endorsing, participating in, or causing Prayers during or in conjunction with School Events for any school within the School District

And 9 days later, the principal defies that order and claims to be a martyr? I mean, sure, on the one hand he is going to be nailed to the wall due to his beliefs...but, you really have to expect that he has it coming to him...

Dave Rogers · 18th August 2009, 09:20 AM

I see the Liberty Counsel article at http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1016 says,

Originally Posted by Liberty Counsel

How can you help?

1. Above all, PRAY for this case.

Now that's just irresponsible. All that'll do is escalate the situation.

Dave

BobTheDonkey · 18th August 2009, 11:27 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

I see the Liberty Counsel article at http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1016 says,

Now that's just irresponsible. All that'll do is escalate the situation.

Dave

I actually LoL'd at work...

Nominated for Pith

pgwenthold · 18th August 2009, 12:07 PM

Quote:

School Officials are permanently enjoined from promoting, advertising, endorsing, participating in, or causing Prayers during or in conjunction with School Events for any school within the School District

The sad part of this is that there was actually an injunction required. This is all pretty much established stuff.

Clearly, "promoting," "advertising," "endorsing," and "causing" prayers is not allowed. What I find interesting is the court's use of "participating in" prayers. It's a subtle, but important caveat. It says that even if the students all decide to pray, the teachers have to stay the heck out of it. The court is apparently concerned about the school's commitment to finding ways to violate the constitution.

ImaginalDisc · 18th August 2009, 10:25 PM

Originally Posted by drkitten

Because they protect the rights of people who don't deserve them, like Nazis, the KKK, criminals, and especially atheists.

Rights are uncomfortable things when your opponents have them. It would be so much simpler for the fundamentalists to be able simply to put their quaint little prejudices into law. After all, God mandated public exhibition of prayer (*) as well as public humililation and punishment of sinners (**), and the ACLU has this silly anti-Christian agenda to keep those from being put into place.

(*) Matthew 6:5 "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men."

(**) John 8:7 "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

All translations are from the NIV.

If we don't make an effort to protect the constiutionally provided rights of even the least popular people then one day those rights will be endangered for the rest of us.

Or does the preamble read ". . .all men expect those we don't like are endowed by their Creator with certain rights we can suspend whenever they are nasty and stupid, among these are some arbitrary rights we can mess with at will?"

vIQleS · 18th August 2009, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by jmcvann

As usual, the news release in the OP misstates the problem. There is no ban on prayer anywhere. Nor would I want one. What there is is a ban on making other people pray, or forcing them to watch and listen to you pray. At the event in the news release, as in every school in the U.S., you can pray from the moment you arrive until the moment you leave. Just don't involve me in it. Thanks.

Actually - I'm pretty sure that this would get you fired too...

The same way that if I showed up to work, and then just sat in front of my computer all day reading and posting on...

Umm...

* vIQleS goes and does some work...

Dancing David · 19th August 2009, 05:59 AM

The ACLU seems to be unknown to most people, it fights for all sorts of free speach, not just the obnoxious ones. How many people have actually looked at www.aclu.org?

Cainkane1 · 19th August 2009, 06:24 AM

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1016

also news release

Well, not really. They're facing contempt of court charges.

If they deliberately broke the law then they should be put in jail. When they are released they should not be allowed to work in a school again. Organized prayer is wrong and illegal.

DC · 19th August 2009, 06:35 AM

Quote:

essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours.

wth??
why should they not be alowed to pray to whatever fantasy they want AFTER or BEFORE school?
or did i get that wrong?
i mean thats their Private live, or not?

HansMustermann · 19th August 2009, 09:20 AM

Well, the way I understand if (but I'm no lawyer), he's forbidden to pray in school or at school events, even before or after hours.

Consider that a lot of school events do happen outside the normal hours, one such being the luncheon where he broke the injunction. Also consider that we're talking the kind of pricks who assigned religious homework to students and proselitised for religious clubs and such. If the injunction only covered normal school hours, it would be trivial to bypass it entirely by requiring the students to stay half an hour after school to pray.

drkitten · 19th August 2009, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by DC

wth??
why should they not be alowed to pray to whatever fantasy they want AFTER or BEFORE school?
or did i get that wrong?

Sort of. You're taking the fundicrat distortion as though it were true. The actual injunction has been cited above:

Quote:

School Officials are permanently enjoined from promoting, advertising, endorsing, participating in, or causing Prayers during or in conjunction with School Events for any school within the School District/

Since "school events" can take place at any time (think about an after-school football game, or a weekend track meet), the injunction applies at all times.

But it only applies during "school events." They can do whatever they like at other events. And the consent decree explicitly spells out what constitutes "school events."

Lisa Simpson · 20th August 2009, 08:07 PM

The rest of the thread has been moved here.

Posted By:Lisa Simpson

16th August 2009, 12:43 AM	#1
UnrepentantSinner A post by Alan Smithee Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USAian is not a word Posts: 23,209	Principal and AD to be thrown in jail for praying! http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1016 also news release Well, not really. They're facing contempt of court charges.
	__________________ "The permanence of the stars was questioned, the justice of slavery was not" - Carl Sagan in Cosmos discussing the content of the Library of Alexandria. a post by Alan Smithee explained. Blutoski's taxonomy of woo Join my The Not Cool Kids Club Last edited by UnrepentantSinner; 16th August 2009 at 12:45 AM.

16th August 2009, 06:12 AM	#2
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Violate a court order, possibly go to jail.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

16th August 2009, 07:06 AM	#3
rwguinn Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 5,309	Originally Posted by Dancing David Violate a court order, possibly go to jail. What a load of ********! Quote: he district consented to a very broad order fashioned by the ACLU, essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours. Please...The ACLU would fight that kind of court order, not ask for it. And I dislike the ACLU
	__________________ "Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

16th August 2009, 07:10 AM	#4
Aitch Apprentice Crud Puppy Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,443	Originally Posted by Dancing David Violate a court order, possibly go to jail. Don't you mean "fight the good fight and become martyrs"?
	__________________ There's less to this than meets the eye!

16th August 2009, 12:42 PM	#5
Madalch The Jester Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The wet coast. Posts: 4,810	I tried googling the name and found mostly frothing-at-the-mouth fundy sites screaming bloody murder that a man was arrested for praying. An actual news link: http://www.pnj.com/article/20090809/...14/-1/archives Simple- stop pushing your religious beliefs on your students. Period. If you consider it your moral duty to do so, then get a job as a preacher, not a teacher.
	__________________ As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of resolving approaches zero. -Vaarsuvius

16th August 2009, 04:25 PM	#6
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Originally Posted by rwguinn What a load of ********! nope they were under a court order not to pray at school events. That ain't bullflop.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

16th August 2009, 04:27 PM	#7
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Originally Posted by Aitch Don't you mean "fight the good fight and become martyrs"? I am washed in marinara.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

16th August 2009, 04:34 PM	#8
rwguinn Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 5,309	Originally Posted by Dancing David nope they were under a court order not to pray at school events. That ain't bullflop. That part, no. But did you read the bull flop part I was referring to? Obviously, your agenda got in the way--or you lack of reading comprehension. There is no way a Court in the US would allow an order "essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours." Only if it is a school function "before, during, or after school hours" can that be enforced. The article implies that it doesn't matter--they can't do it at all--and that is what the fundies play on--and what the article wants its readers to believe.
	__________________ "Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

16th August 2009, 04:42 PM	#9
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 31,778	Originally Posted by rwguinn There is no way a Court in the US would allow an order "essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours." I'm confused. My weekling listening of www.ffrf.com (freedom from religion) has adequatly demonstrated that employees can and ought to be banned from praying in front of students as they represent the school and is therefore a reasonable person could conclude that it is an endorsement of religion by the school. I get the feeling that I'm missing something. Perhaps it is my reading comprehension. Is it your understanding the bann includes praying away from the school [ETA] or in school if it is in private?
	__________________ www.StopSylvia.com. Probability has absolutely nothing to do with statistics. --Southwind17 Last edited by RandFan; 16th August 2009 at 05:09 PM.

16th August 2009, 04:55 PM	#10
jmcvann Navel Gazer Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Chicago Posts: 586	As usual, the news release in the OP misstates the problem. There is no ban on prayer anywhere. Nor would I want one. What there is is a ban on making other people pray, or forcing them to watch and listen to you pray. At the event in the news release, as in every school in the U.S., you can pray from the moment you arrive until the moment you leave. Just don't involve me in it. Thanks.
	__________________ I think it is much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers that might be wrong. -- Richard Feynman

16th August 2009, 04:56 PM	#11
Learning Phase Scholar Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 83	This is my local school district. I have relatives that work at the school, and details won't be provided, but I can show one thing: The ACTUAL consent decree: http://www.layfreemandefense.com/sit...nsentorder.pdf Perhaps one of the lawyer types here could help decipher this, but I don't see what the Liberty Counsel claims is *"essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours. "* It looks to me that they are banned from any proselytizing, whether before, during, or after school hours. They signed it, they ignored it, they should face the consequences.
Learning Phase Scholar Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 83	__________________ "The United States has become a place where entertainers and professional athletes are mistaken for people of importance." Robert A. Heinlein

16th August 2009, 05:35 PM	#12
HansMustermann Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,100	Except, looking at the link Madalch supplied, these guys did a lot more. Quote: On Jan. 28, he asked the school athletic director, Robert Freeman, to "bless the food" at a luncheon at Pace High for school personnel and booster club members instrumental in helping get a new fieldhouse. The school's culinary class prepared the meal. If he had just bowed his head and said a prayer in his head or even muttered it in his beard, I'm going to take a wild guess that everyone would have politely ignored it. But asking to bless the food at a school event isn't even remotely the same as "arrested for praying." It is pushing religion on anyone at that luncheon. And, again, most importantly, it's violating a court injunction about a week after getting it. As for why he got sued by the ACLU in the first place: Quote: His school of more than 1,800 students was known by some as "the Baptist Academy." His teachers and staff delivered prayers, or invited students or outside leaders to lead prayers, during sporting events and other activities. Teachers offered Bible readings or biblical interpretations and talked about the churches they attend. They assigned religion- oriented work to students and encouraged them to attend religious clubs. (Plus, you know, such details as having a cross on his desk and whatnot. You know, 'cause if you have to go see the principal you need that in your face) I'm sorry. Prayer in school would be already illegal as it is, but these guys were assigning religion as homework and tried to recruit students for religious clubs. That's not just disrespect for the law, but openly defying it. That's what he got to court for in the same place, and he got away with just an injunction. And a little over a week later, he pulls this stunt. And reading the article, he sounds completely unrepentant about it. That's how things are in the good ol' south, that's what he's gonna do. You know what? I say good riddance. Jail is too good for that kind of idiot, but I guess that's all we have.

16th August 2009, 07:03 PM	#13
rwguinn Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 5,309	Originally Posted by RandFan I'm confused. My weekling listening of www.ffrf.com (freedom from religion) has adequatly demonstrated that employees can and ought to be banned from praying in front of students as they represent the school and is therefore a reasonable person could conclude that it is an endorsement of religion by the school. Absolutely--I agree Quote: I get the feeling that I'm missing something. Perhaps it is my reading comprehension. Is it your understanding the bann includes praying away from the school [ETA] or in school if it is in private? No--that is not the ban. That is what the article was written to make you THINK was the case The bias in the article is typical of the fundies.
	__________________ "Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

16th August 2009, 07:28 PM	#14
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Originally Posted by rwguinn That part, no. But did you read the bull flop part I was referring to? Obviously, your agenda got in the way--or you lack of reading comprehension. There is no way a Court in the US would allow an order "essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours." Only if it is a school function "before, during, or after school hours" can that be enforced. The article implies that it doesn't matter--they can't do it at all--and that is what the fundies play on--and what the article wants its readers to believe. Wow, you are rude one, can't make a coherent argument without being insulting? Or just having a bad day. I am sure I read everything that you link to as that is my agenda. I wait on every word you say because you my friend are the center of the universe. I don't care, really they can pray at home, or in Illinois at non-school functions at school. I don't care, they have a court order and oh too bad, if they have a case they can appeal it. They are welcome to pray all they want when they are not in an official school capacity.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

16th August 2009, 08:28 PM	#15
rwguinn Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 5,309	Originally Posted by Dancing David Wow, you are rude one, can't make a coherent argument without being insulting? Or just having a bad day. I am sure I read everything that you link to as that is my agenda. I wait on every word you say because you my friend are the center of the universe. I don't care, really they can pray at home, or in Illinois at non-school functions at school. I don't care, they have a court order and oh too bad, if they have a case they can appeal it. They are welcome to pray all they want when they are not in an official school capacity. Exactly/ The article in the OP implied otherwise.
	__________________ "Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

17th August 2009, 07:25 AM	#16
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Well, I tend to care more about other things the religious whackos do that involve legislation, I am sure this will go into the War on Xians and the 'we used to be a Xian nation' rhetoric. I am proud to have grown up next to the the school district that led to the overturning of religious education in public schools. McCollum v. Board of Education http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCollu...d_of_Education the details in the wiki article are not exactly right, especially when it comes to the family dynamic of the McCollums. Like the mother being an avowed atheist, it was actaully the religious father who started the suit, etc..., the point was that there was no good opt out that did not lead the the son James being stigmatized for not attending the religion class. That is the father's actual reason for starting the suit.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos Last edited by Dancing David; 17th August 2009 at 07:31 AM.

18th August 2009, 07:28 AM	#17
ImaginalDisc Proactive Untwister of Octagonal Hippopotamus Pants Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Miami, Fl Posts: 10,049	Originally Posted by rwguinn What a load of ********! Please...The ACLU would fight that kind of court order, not ask for it. And I dislike the ACLU I hear that quite often. Why would anyone dislike the ACLU?
	__________________ Definition: 'Love' is making a shot to the knees of a target 120 kilometers away using an Aratech sniper rifle with a tri-light scope. Statement: This definition, I am told, is subject to interpretation. Obviously, love is a matter of odds. Not many meatbags could make such a shot, and fewer would derive love from it. Yet for me, love is knowing your target, putting them in your targeting reticle, and together, achieving a singular purpose, against statistically long odds. *-HK-47*

18th August 2009, 07:50 AM	#18
Jeff Corey New York Skeptic Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,731	This lie in the article shows its bias, "Wake up America: Persecution is here! It is truly outrageous that this can happen in our beloved country that was founded on Christian principles."

18th August 2009, 08:24 AM	#19
drkitten Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Wits' End Posts: 17,338	Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc I hear that quite often. Why would anyone dislike the ACLU? Because they protect the rights of people who don't deserve them, like Nazis, the KKK, criminals, and especially atheists. Rights are uncomfortable things when your opponents have them. It would be so much simpler for the fundamentalists to be able simply to put their quaint little prejudices into law. After all, God mandated public exhibition of prayer () as well as public humililation and punishment of sinners (), and the ACLU has this silly anti-Christian agenda to keep those from being put into place. () Matthew 6:5 "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men." (**) John 8:7 "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." All translations are from the NIV.

18th August 2009, 08:45 AM	#20
BobTheDonkey Muse Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 913	The injunction clearly states: Quote: School Officials are permanently enjoined from promoting, advertising, endorsing, participating in, or causing Prayers during or in conjunction with School Events for any school within the School District And 9 days later, the principal defies that order and claims to be a martyr? I mean, sure, on the one hand he is going to be nailed to the wall due to his beliefs...but, you really have to expect that he has it coming to him...
BobTheDonkey Muse Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 913

18th August 2009, 09:20 AM	#21
Dave Rogers The Unbanned Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Notlob Posts: 8,013	I see the Liberty Counsel article at http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1016 says, Originally Posted by Liberty Counsel How can you help? 1. Above all, PRAY for this case. Now that's just irresponsible. All that'll do is escalate the situation. Dave
	__________________ "I guess for Truthers the great thing about Google is that it abolishes context automatically, thus saving your precious reserves of stupid for more important tasks." - Dr. Adequate GENERATION 6: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

18th August 2009, 11:27 AM	#22
BobTheDonkey Muse Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 913	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers I see the Liberty Counsel article at http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1016 says, Now that's just irresponsible. All that'll do is escalate the situation. Dave I actually LoL'd at work... Nominated for Pith
BobTheDonkey Muse Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 913

18th August 2009, 12:07 PM	#23
pgwenthold Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 8,795	Quote: School Officials are permanently enjoined from promoting, advertising, endorsing, participating in, or causing Prayers during or in conjunction with School Events for any school within the School District The sad part of this is that there was actually an injunction required. This is all pretty much established stuff. Clearly, "promoting," "advertising," "endorsing," and "causing" prayers is not allowed. What I find interesting is the court's use of "participating in" prayers. It's a subtle, but important caveat. It says that even if the students all decide to pray, the teachers have to stay the heck out of it. The court is apparently concerned about the school's commitment to finding ways to violate the constitution.
pgwenthold Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 8,795	__________________ "Baseball is a philosophy. The primordial ooze that once ruled our world has been captured in perpetual motion. Baseball is the moment. Its ever changing patterns are hypnotizing yet invigorating. Baseball is an art form. Classic and at the same time...progressive. Baseball is pre-historic and post-modern. Baseball is here to stay." (Stolen from the side of a lava lamp box, and modified slightly)

18th August 2009, 10:25 PM	#24
ImaginalDisc Proactive Untwister of Octagonal Hippopotamus Pants Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Miami, Fl Posts: 10,049	Originally Posted by drkitten Because they protect the rights of people who don't deserve them, like Nazis, the KKK, criminals, and especially atheists. Rights are uncomfortable things when your opponents have them. It would be so much simpler for the fundamentalists to be able simply to put their quaint little prejudices into law. After all, God mandated public exhibition of prayer () as well as public humililation and punishment of sinners (), and the ACLU has this silly anti-Christian agenda to keep those from being put into place. () Matthew 6:5 "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men." (**) John 8:7 "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." All translations are from the NIV. If we don't make an effort to protect the constiutionally provided rights of even the least popular people then one day those rights will be endangered for the rest of us. Or does the preamble read ". . .all men expect those we don't like are endowed by their Creator with certain rights we can suspend whenever they are nasty and stupid, among these are some arbitrary rights we can mess with at will?"
	__________________ Definition: 'Love' is making a shot to the knees of a target 120 kilometers away using an Aratech sniper rifle with a tri-light scope. Statement: This definition, I am told, is subject to interpretation. Obviously, love is a matter of odds. Not many meatbags could make such a shot, and fewer would derive love from it. Yet for me, love is knowing your target, putting them in your targeting reticle, and together, achieving a singular purpose, against statistically long odds. *-HK-47* Last edited by ImaginalDisc; 18th August 2009 at 10:28 PM.

18th August 2009, 10:39 PM	#25
vIQleS Muse Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Auckland NZ Posts: 730	Originally Posted by jmcvann As usual, the news release in the OP misstates the problem. There is no ban on prayer anywhere. Nor would I want one. What there is is a ban on making other people pray, or forcing them to watch and listen to you pray. At the event in the news release, as in every school in the U.S., you can pray from the moment you arrive until the moment you leave. Just don't involve me in it. Thanks. Actually - I'm pretty sure that this would get you fired too... The same way that if I showed up to work, and then just sat in front of my computer all day reading and posting on... Umm... * vIQleS goes and does some work...
	__________________ ==--New NZ Skeptical Podcast--== TheCusp Episode Zero is Live!!! http://thecusp.org.nz RSS feed: http://thecusp.org.nz/podcast/rss

19th August 2009, 05:59 AM	#26
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	The ACLU seems to be unknown to most people, it fights for all sorts of free speach, not just the obnoxious ones. How many people have actually looked at www.aclu.org?
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

19th August 2009, 06:24 AM	#27
Cainkane1 Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: The great American southeast Posts: 2,566	Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner http://www.lc.org/index.cfm?PID=14102&AlertID=1016 also news release Well, not really. They're facing contempt of court charges. If they deliberately broke the law then they should be put in jail. When they are released they should not be allowed to work in a school again. Organized prayer is wrong and illegal.
	__________________ If at first you don't succeed try try again. Then if you fail to succeed to Hell with that. Try something else.

19th August 2009, 06:35 AM	#28
DC Formerly The Dictator Cheney Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Helvetia Posts: 8,407	Quote: essentially banning employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities, whether before, during, or after school hours. wth?? why should they not be alowed to pray to whatever fantasy they want AFTER or BEFORE school? or did i get that wrong? i mean thats their Private live, or not?
	__________________ "Creation Science 101"

19th August 2009, 09:20 AM	#29
HansMustermann Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 3,100	Well, the way I understand if (but I'm no lawyer), he's forbidden to pray in school or at school events, even before or after hours. Consider that a lot of school events do happen outside the normal hours, one such being the luncheon where he broke the injunction. Also consider that we're talking the kind of pricks who assigned religious homework to students and proselitised for religious clubs and such. If the injunction only covered normal school hours, it would be trivial to bypass it entirely by requiring the students to stay half an hour after school to pray.

19th August 2009, 09:25 AM	#30
drkitten Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Wits' End Posts: 17,338	Originally Posted by DC wth?? why should they not be alowed to pray to whatever fantasy they want AFTER or BEFORE school? or did i get that wrong? Sort of. You're taking the fundicrat distortion as though it were true. The actual injunction has been cited above: Quote: School Officials are permanently enjoined from promoting, advertising, endorsing, participating in, or causing Prayers during or in conjunction with School Events for any school within the School District/ Since "school events" can take place at any time (think about an after-school football game, or a weekend track meet), the injunction applies at all times. But it only applies during "school events." They can do whatever they like at other events. And the consent decree explicitly spells out what constitutes "school events."