Total Posts:68|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

School prayer.

Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 12:33:16 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Apprently when the Supreme Court tells you you can't have the teachers lead prayer and whatnot, it's actually just trying to help you be a better Christian. Learn something new erryday.

"

"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you." Matthew 6:5:6
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 2:30:05 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 1:20:21 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
We should practice slavery in school though.

We already do...mental slavery.
TheAsylum
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 2:44:02 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 2:30:05 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 8/15/2012 1:20:21 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
We should practice slavery in school though.

We already do...mental slavery.

Close enough. Praise Jesus.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 3:47:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)

I think people should be able to pray any where they see fit. I also think people should be able to not have to pray of they see fit.
TheAsylum
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 3:52:03 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 3:47:11 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)

I think people should be able to pray any where they see fit. I also think people should be able to not have to pray of they see fit.

There's a high school near where my parents live that has banned all prayer on school property. There used to be kids meeting 5 minutes before classes for a joint prayer. People complained.

Haha, separation of church and state... nobody actually understands it.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 3:59:08 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 3:52:03 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:47:11 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)

I think people should be able to pray any where they see fit. I also think people should be able to not have to pray of they see fit.

There's a high school near where my parents live that has banned all prayer on school property. There used to be kids meeting 5 minutes before classes for a joint prayer. People complained.

Haha, separation of church and state... nobody actually understands it.

I suggest that they step one foot off school property and conduct prayer. Another option would be to meet close to school and conduct prayer. They can never stop ones faith.
TheAsylum
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 9:17:09 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Shouldn't the separation of church and state keep the government from endorsing the atheist religion, just like it does all others??

Ya know this is just another case of molestation of the spirit of the constitution. Kids praying before class is in no way an act of endorsement of a religion by the government. All faiths were allowed to pray to whatever God they choose, and those who don't beleive in God were not required to take part. How much more impartial can you get?? But no, that's not good enough, some people feel that they have a right to put an end to any public sign of religion. What's next, no crosses on the outside of churches?? No church signs since they advertise religion??

Where does the constitution say that the government can't recognize a person's right to religion, at all?? Seems to me that it only says that it can't endorse one religion over the other. I guess we'll just allow our governing document to be raped by every little minority group that claims to be offended by anything. Freedom of religion be damned.

Seriously, what harm do atheists suffer from seeing kids pray?? What are the damages suffered?? Do they suffer intense emotional trauma, and end up with PTSD?? The reasons that atheists file these law suits are ridiculous.

A fire department can't have a nativity scene in it's yard, even though the community enjoys it. A privately owned water park can't offer group discounts to church groups, even though it's financially beneficial. I mean seriously, what hatred resides in these groups that causes them to file these lawsuits just because they can??

In this country, our freedoms use to mean that you don't have a right to not be offended. The liberalized pansies have so changed our country that that is no longer true. People think they do have a right to not be offended, even if it means crapping all over the freedoms that our founding fathers, and many since then, fought and died to gain, and defend.

End rant.
1dustpelt
Posts: 1,970
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 9:19:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 3:52:03 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:47:11 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)

I think people should be able to pray any where they see fit. I also think people should be able to not have to pray of they see fit.

There's a high school near where my parents live that has banned all prayer on school property. There used to be kids meeting 5 minutes before classes for a joint prayer. People complained.

Haha, separation of church and state... nobody actually understands it.

BANNING PRAYER? That is stupid.

People should be allowed to, but not forced to pray in school.
Wall of LOL
"Infanticide is justified as long as the infants are below two" ~ RoyalPaladin
"Promoting female superiority is the only way to establish equality." ~ RoyalPaladin
"Jury trials should be banned. They're nothing more than opportunities for racists to destroy lives." ~ RoyalPaladin after the Zimmerman Trial.
RichMacabre
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 9:43:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 9:17:09 AM, medic0506 wrote:
Shouldn't the separation of church and state keep the government from endorsing the atheist religion, just like it does all others??

This statement is rather silly. Were you being hyperbolic, or do you really mean that atheism is a religion, and that banning prayer is endorsing it?

Regardless, I mostly agree with the rest of your post. Freedom of religion doesn't mean banning religion. Prayer should not be endorsed at school, but it shouldn't be banned either. And private entities should be free to endorse whichever religion they choose.
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 9:54:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 3:52:03 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:47:11 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)

I think people should be able to pray any where they see fit. I also think people should be able to not have to pray of they see fit.

There's a high school near where my parents live that has banned all prayer on school property. There used to be kids meeting 5 minutes before classes for a joint prayer. People complained.

Haha, separation of church and state... nobody actually understands it.

Students should be allowed to pray in their free time as long as it does not interrupt school. For example, students should definitely be allowed to pray during lunch or recess. However, they should not be praying when the teacher is teaching.

Praying is like any other activity, chess, stretching, video-games, listening to music, meditating. If the students have free time they can do it, but school should take precedence.

I find it odd that the school has a "ban" on praying. Perhaps there were other circumstances to the incident mentioned? Is there a link to the story? It seems like that would be big news if that actually happened.
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 10:04:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 9:19:42 AM, 1dustpelt wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:52:03 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:47:11 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)

I think people should be able to pray any where they see fit. I also think people should be able to not have to pray of they see fit.

There's a high school near where my parents live that has banned all prayer on school property. There used to be kids meeting 5 minutes before classes for a joint prayer. People complained.

Haha, separation of church and state... nobody actually understands it.

BANNING PRAYER? That is stupid.

People should be allowed to, but not forced to pray in school.

If this story is true, it is worthy of harsh criticism. However, I am skeptical of it. I find it very very hard to believe that the story happened as told. It seems like this is just a story to get people riled up about a "War on Religion". I would wait for confirmation of the story before getting riled up.
Rusty
Posts: 2,109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 10:13:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 10:04:17 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 8/15/2012 9:19:42 AM, 1dustpelt wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:52:03 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:47:11 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)

I think people should be able to pray any where they see fit. I also think people should be able to not have to pray of they see fit.

There's a high school near where my parents live that has banned all prayer on school property. There used to be kids meeting 5 minutes before classes for a joint prayer. People complained.

Haha, separation of church and state... nobody actually understands it.

BANNING PRAYER? That is stupid.

People should be allowed to, but not forced to pray in school.

If this story is true, it is worthy of harsh criticism. However, I am skeptical of it. I find it very very hard to believe that the story happened as told. It seems like this is just a story to get people riled up about a "War on Religion". I would wait for confirmation of the story before getting riled up.

For whatever reason, that also sounds kind of funny to me. It seems just ridiculous enough to make me question whether there was something more to it. I'm not saying it's false, but it seems kind of out there. Maybe they were using insincere "prayer" as an excuse to be late to class? Then again, maybe not.
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 10:25:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago

A fire department can't have a nativity scene in it's yard, even though the community enjoys it. A privately owned water park can't offer group discounts to church groups, even though it's financially beneficial. I mean seriously, what hatred resides in these groups that causes them to file these lawsuits just because they can??


http://www.foxnews.com...

The problem was not that Church groups got
discounts. The problem was that the discounts were not extended to other child groups. ROCAN, a secular non-profit that seeks to help inner-city youth, did not get the discount.

Would you say that a furniture store could give Muslims better prices? What if Best Buy decided that all Jews get a discount? Or if a Movie theater gave only atheists discounts?

If they give youth Christian groups discounts, they should also give youth secular groups discounts, youth Hindu groups discounts and youth Muslim group discounts ect.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 10:47:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 9:17:09 AM, medic0506 wrote:
Shouldn't the separation of church and state keep the government from endorsing the atheist religion, just like it does all others??

You can't be serious, right? Atheism is not a religion. A religion is based on faith, which cannot be falsified and thereby supposed evidence that cannot be replicated. Atheism is based on a lack of faith, which counteracts the main principle of religion, which is faith.

Try harder plox.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 11:12:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 9:43:54 AM, RichMacabre wrote:
At 8/15/2012 9:17:09 AM, medic0506 wrote:
Shouldn't the separation of church and state keep the government from endorsing the atheist religion, just like it does all others??

This statement is rather silly. Were you being hyperbolic, or do you really mean that atheism is a religion, and that banning prayer is endorsing it?

I mean it. Atheism qualifies as a religion, and banning the freedom of other religious veiws is the same as endorsing a particular religion, which is the only thing that the constitution bans the government from doing.

Here's a pretty good article on the subject, if you're interested...

http://creation.com...

Think about it though. It's a beleif system centered around deities. It has it's clergy, Dawkins and Hitchins are like popes to many of them, and O'Hare is a saint. They have their own dogma, and propoganda. They proselytize and attempt to gain converts. They band together in groups and hold meetings to discuss their religion. And they have faith that man is the highest power, that nature is responsible for everything that exists, and that science will someday be able to explain the universe.

Sounds to me like the exact same things that "religions" do.

Regardless, I mostly agree with the rest of your post. Freedom of religion doesn't mean banning religion. Prayer should not be endorsed at school, but it shouldn't be banned either. And private entities should be free to endorse whichever religion they choose.

I agree. Your approach seems like the most fair, common sense approach that government could take. Unfortunately though, it is being forced by activist judges to take a more extreme, anti-religious position.
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 11:26:05 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 11:12:21 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 8/15/2012 9:43:54 AM, RichMacabre wrote:
At 8/15/2012 9:17:09 AM, medic0506 wrote:
Shouldn't the separation of church and state keep the government from endorsing the atheist religion, just like it does all others??

This statement is rather silly. Were you being hyperbolic, or do you really mean that atheism is a religion, and that banning prayer is endorsing it?

I mean it. Atheism qualifies as a religion, and banning the freedom of other religious veiws is the same as endorsing a particular religion, which is the only thing that the constitution bans the government from doing.

Here's a pretty good article on the subject, if you're interested...

http://creation.com...

I guess the first time someone called atheism a religion, it was kind of fun and silly, like the first time someone asked "If God made everything, who made God?" or "If we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" At this point, stances like these take on a sort of "Oh...you took that seriously" reaction.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 11:43:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 9:17:09 AM, medic0506 wrote:
Shouldn't the separation of church and state keep the government from endorsing the atheist religion, just like it does all others??

The government shouldn't pick sides.

Ya know this is just another case of molestation of the spirit of the constitution.

Could be. On the other hand, I can imagine circumstances in which the banning of religious demonstrations should be banned.

Banning actual prayer is of course impossible, but banning the practice of turning the classrooms into churches so that Christians can flaunt their religiosity might be good, in circumstances.

Kids praying before class is in no way an act of endorsement of a religion by the government.

Right.

All faiths were allowed to pray to whatever God they choose, and those who don't beleive in God were not required to take part.

Elsewhere on DDO, I'm getting shat on for not capitalizing the word "god" in circumstances in which capitalizing would be grammatically improper. Proper grammar was thought to be disrespectful, so I'm being coerced to kowtow to the Christian god.

Are we sure there was no such coersion going on, no, "Shush, we're praying," or other insistence on deference?

How much more impartial can you get?? But no, that's not good enough, some people feel that they have a right to put an end to any public sign of religion. What's next, no crosses on the outside of churches?? No church signs since they advertise religion??

I think you exaggerate. We don't want crosses on public land. There's no reason churches shouldn't display them.

Where does the constitution say that the government can't recognize a person's right to religion, at all?? Seems to me that it only says that it can't endorse one religion over the other. I guess we'll just allow our governing document to be raped by every little minority group that claims to be offended by anything. Freedom of religion be damned.

If the government doesn't take sides, that is freedom of religion. If the government sees one side bullying another, and takes steps to prevent it, that is also freedom of religion.

Seriously, what harm do atheists suffer from seeing kids pray??

None. Which is why we have to suspect something else was going on. Of course, there is the possibility that the school officials were as perverse and confused as you seem to assume, but I see no reason to presume that.

What are the damages suffered?? Do they suffer intense emotional trauma, and end up with PTSD??

Just from seeing a Christian pray? None. But I've been intimidated myself, so much so that I pretended for years that I was Christian. And when I came out, I had my headlights smashed, and thirteen tires slashed.

I can easily imagine that, say, some counter-demonstration occurred (praying to Satan, say) and somebody got beaten up after school, and those in charge decided to end it.

It's not necessarily different from banning the wearing of gang colors in school. Gathering in the front of a class room to flaunt your unity and power to the other students can be a form of belligerence, of intimidation.

I'm not saying that's what's going on in this particular case, but I see no reason to jump to the opposite conclusion.

The reasons that atheists file these law suits are ridiculous.

That's just wrong.

A fire department can't have a nativity scene in it's yard, even though the community enjoys it.

Could it burn Jesus in effigy if the community enjoyed it? That kind of thing should be done by private citizens, not by government. Just employ the golden rule. If you would be offended by a "Smile, there is no Hell," sign in City Hall, then you object to Christians giving similar offense.

A privately owned water park can't offer group discounts to church groups, even though it's financially beneficial. I mean seriously, what hatred resides in these groups that causes them to file these lawsuits just because they can??

That sounds terrible. I don't know what would make that fair. Maybe there are facts we don't know? Maybe it wasn't fair? Maybe somebody misrepresented the facts to you?

In this country, our freedoms use to mean that you don't have a right to not be offended. The liberalized pansies have so changed our country that that is no longer true. People think they do have a right to not be offended, even if it means crapping all over the freedoms that our founding fathers, and many since then, fought and died to gain, and defend.

End rant.

"Liberalized pansies"? Impressive civility there.

Any individual person should be able to hate black people too, but when enough people got together and institutionalize that hatred so as to create a permanent underclass, that needed to be stopped.

It's the same with religious discrimination. When I was a kid, Madalyn Murray was the only other atheist I'd even heard of (in America). It's not that we weren't here, but we were repressed, afraid to speak out.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 11:53:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 10:25:41 AM, twocupcakes wrote:

A fire department can't have a nativity scene in it's yard, even though the community enjoys it. A privately owned water park can't offer group discounts to church groups, even though it's financially beneficial. I mean seriously, what hatred resides in these groups that causes them to file these lawsuits just because they can??


http://www.foxnews.com...

The problem was not that Church groups got
discounts. The problem was that the discounts were not extended to other child groups. ROCAN, a secular non-profit that seeks to help inner-city youth, did not get the discount.

So a private business owner can't use a discount to increase the type of business he wishes to attract, unless he gives that same discount to gang-bangers and ex-convicts?? I guess the liberals don't have any respect for "private property", unless they can force the owner to let them help run it.

Would you say that a furniture store could give Muslims better prices?

Yes, if that's what the owner, the one who put his own money into it, the one who put his sweat and hard work into it, chooses to do. What right do the rest of us have to his investment and hard work?? If he's willing to take the hit to his profit margin, it's his business.

Oh, I guess I forgot, "He didn't build that", right??...lol

What if Best Buy decided that all Jews get a discount?

So??

Or if a Movie theater gave only atheists discounts?

So??

Actually, in this case, I'd be tempted to sue like crazy and put it all over the news, just because I can, like the atheist groups do...lol

If they give youth Christian groups discounts, they should also give youth secular groups discounts, youth Hindu groups discounts and youth Muslim group discounts ect.

If some people are allowed to play in the NFL then they should let me play too. If some people are allowed to be astronauts they should let me be one too. Some people have a Lamborghini so I deserve one too. Seriously???? Where does it end??

This is one of the problems with society today. We've created a situation where people think that just because someone else has something, that they automatically have a right to it, without having done the work that that person did, to get it.

If that owner is a Christian and he wants to cater to the Christian community then why should someone have the right to tell him he can't?? If that were a Buddhist owner, or a muslim owner, I'd be defending him as well, even though we differ on religion.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 12:11:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)

Certainly, just no time out of school functions dedicated to it.

Of course, if they take advantage, they are bad at Christianity, see above.

Shouldn't the separation of church and state keep the government from endorsing the atheist religion, just like it does all others??
I don't see "In nongod we trust" anywhere.

Ya know this is just another case of molestation of the spirit of the constitution. Kids praying before class is in no way an act of endorsement of a religion by the government.
That's a school policy, not case law.

Where does the constitution say that the government can't recognize a person's right to religion, at all?? Seems to me that it only says that it can't endorse one religion over the other.
The establishment of religion in general is just as prohibited as the specific establishment of religion.

A fire department can't have a nativity scene in it's yard
That's taxpayer money. You're allowed to have a nativity scene if you pay for it your own damn self, on property you paid for your own damn self.

A privately owned water park can't offer group discounts to church groups
Wait, what?
http://www.foxnews.com...
Oh, I see, you're complaining about someone's first amendment right to complain to the water park and persuade them to change their policy. That's not the law.

Would you say that a furniture store could give Muslims better prices? What if Best Buy decided that all Jews get a discount? Or if a Movie theater gave only atheists discounts?
I would. It's called "Freedom of association."
And you have every right to complain. To the store.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 12:35:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 10:04:17 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 8/15/2012 9:19:42 AM, 1dustpelt wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:52:03 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:47:11 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 8/15/2012 3:43:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Question:

Should a group of students be allowed to gather, of their own volition, before school, or during lunch, or after school, for a group prayer?(on school property)

I think people should be able to pray any where they see fit. I also think people should be able to not have to pray of they see fit.

There's a high school near where my parents live that has banned all prayer on school property. There used to be kids meeting 5 minutes before classes for a joint prayer. People complained.

Haha, separation of church and state... nobody actually understands it.

BANNING PRAYER? That is stupid.

People should be allowed to, but not forced to pray in school.

If this story is true, it is worthy of harsh criticism. However, I am skeptical of it. I find it very very hard to believe that the story happened as told. It seems like this is just a story to get people riled up about a "War on Religion". I would wait for confirmation of the story before getting riled up.

Uh, I'm confirming that it's true. I don't lie, so that should be enough for you to believe it.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 12:37:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Another example of stupidity at that school:

Snowball fights are banned. That includes snowball fights on the public property adjacent to the school. Students caught throwing snowballs near the school will be disciplined, up to and including suspension for repeat offenders.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
1dustpelt
Posts: 1,970
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 12:45:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 12:37:39 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Another example of stupidity at that school:

Snowball fights are banned. That includes snowball fights on the public property adjacent to the school. Students caught throwing snowballs near the school will be disciplined, up to and including suspension for repeat offenders.

What, is "Sneezing is banned" going to be next?
Wall of LOL
"Infanticide is justified as long as the infants are below two" ~ RoyalPaladin
"Promoting female superiority is the only way to establish equality." ~ RoyalPaladin
"Jury trials should be banned. They're nothing more than opportunities for racists to destroy lives." ~ RoyalPaladin after the Zimmerman Trial.
caveat
Posts: 2,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 12:48:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 12:45:00 PM, 1dustpelt wrote:
At 8/15/2012 12:37:39 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Another example of stupidity at that school:

Snowball fights are banned. That includes snowball fights on the public property adjacent to the school. Students caught throwing snowballs near the school will be disciplined, up to and including suspension for repeat offenders.

What, is "Sneezing is banned" going to be next?

Actually, the velocity of the particles is approximately 150 ft/s. The muzzle velocity of a 9mm is approximately 1250 ft/s. A sneeze is more than 10% of a bullet!
There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. " Clearly, it is this second part, the missing, which presents the difficulties.
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 12:50:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 12:45:00 PM, 1dustpelt wrote:
At 8/15/2012 12:37:39 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
Another example of stupidity at that school:

Snowball fights are banned. That includes snowball fights on the public property adjacent to the school. Students caught throwing snowballs near the school will be disciplined, up to and including suspension for repeat offenders.

What, is "Sneezing is banned" going to be next?

Probably. Of course, there is a zero-tolerance policy as to violence. If you kick somebody in the back of the head while they are getting books out the locker, you both get suspended.

It's only logical to start suspending students for 'biological warfare-type assaults' on each other.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 1:11:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago



So a private business owner can't use a discount to increase the type of business he wishes to attract, unless he gives that same discount to gang-bangers and ex-convicts?? I guess the liberals don't have any respect for "private property", unless they can force the owner to let them help run it.

No, he does not have to for ex-cons. The owner cannot discriminate based on protected minority groups. So, the owner cannot discriminate based on race, colour, religion, national origin and sex , for example.

Would you say that a furniture store could give Muslims better prices?

Yes, if that's what the owner, the one who put his own money into it, the one who put his sweat and hard work into it, chooses to do. What right do the rest of us have to his investment and hard work?? If he's willing to take the hit to his profit margin, it's his business.

So you seem okay with discrimination based on religion? What about other minority groups? How about white people get 50% off? Or,by one get one free for Mexicans? You MUST see that it is important to protect minority groups like race and religion from discrimination.

Oh, I guess I forgot, "He didn't build that", right??...lol

He did build it, but he must follow basic anti-discrimination laws to be apart of a society.

What if Best Buy decided that all Jews get a discount?

So??

This is discrimination on a protected minority group!

Or if a Movie theater gave only atheists discounts?

So??

Again, the difference between this and your outlandish examples is religion is a protected minority group.


If they give youth Christian groups discounts, they should also give youth secular groups discounts, youth Hindu groups discounts and youth Muslim group discounts ect.

If some people are allowed to play in the NFL then they should let me play too. If some people are allowed to be astronauts they should let me be one too.

Again, the NFL CAN discriminate based on ability, but not religion, race, colour or national origin. The NHL CANNOT discriminate against protected minority groups. In this case we are discussing religion. How about, not Muslims are allowed to play in the NFL? Or, No blacks are allowed in the NFL. You can tell the difference between discriminating on ability and minority groups, right?

Some people have a Lamborghini so I deserve one too. Seriously???? Where does it end??

It ends with protected minority groups. People do not demand a Lamborghini. They just don't want to be discriminated against based on religion.

This is one of the problems with society today. We've created a situation where people think that just because someone else has something, that they automatically have a right to it, without having done the work that that person did, to get it.

Minorities should be protected in society

If that owner is a Christian and he wants to cater to the Christian community then why should someone have the right to tell him he can't?? If that were a Buddhist owner, or a muslim owner, I'd be defending him as well, even though we differ on religion.

It is very important for society to protect give equal rights to people of all races, religions ect. This owner CAN give youth groups discounts, but he CANNOT give only Christian youth group discounts. Do you believe that the owner can charge Jews double what everyone else pays? Can they Charge blacks triple what everyone else pays? Or refuse gays entry?
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 1:21:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago

Uh, I'm confirming that it's true. I don't lie, so that should be enough for you to believe it.

I do not doubt your sincerity. I doubt your ability to correctly verify all the facts. Perhaps the room they were "praying in" needed to be used for something else, or it was a liability for the students to be unattended in a room? Or, perhaps what the school really meant was "teacher lead prayer" was banned?

You say " a school by your parents banned all prayer". How did you find out about this? Did your parents tell you? Did you read an article or did your hear it from a friend of a friend whose children wean't there. What is the name of the school?

It is highly unlikely that the school banned all praying. Possible, but in all likelihood your story is false and did not happen as told. Again, I do not doubt your sincerity, but you are making an extreme claim without any evidence.
slo1
Posts: 4,337
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 1:34:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 12:33:16 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Apprently when the Supreme Court tells you you can't have the teachers lead prayer and whatnot, it's actually just trying to help you be a better Christian. Learn something new erryday.

"

"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you." Matthew 6:5:6

That is very interesting. It is very obvious in many churches that there is a learned behavior, almost a badge of honor, that if I raise my hands in the air and make a larger display of myself while we pray then I am a better Christian and love God more than the guy in the corner who is more quite about the matter. It makes one wonder if they do that when saying grace before diner.
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/15/2012 1:51:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/15/2012 1:21:20 PM, twocupcakes wrote:

Uh, I'm confirming that it's true. I don't lie, so that should be enough for you to believe it.

I do not doubt your sincerity. I doubt your ability to correctly verify all the facts. Perhaps the room they were "praying in" needed to be used for something else, or it was a liability for the students to be unattended in a room? Or, perhaps what the school really meant was "teacher lead prayer" was banned?

Considering that I am friends with half of the teachers at the school, and it is a small community where everyone knows everyone, the facts haven't been very difficult to verify.

They were meeting before school, by the flagpole, of their own accord, to pray. No teachers led the prayer.

You say " a school by your parents banned all prayer". How did you find out about this? Did your parents tell you? Did you read an article or did your hear it from a friend of a friend whose children wean't there. What is the name of the school?

I'm not going to tell you the name of the school, because I don't put out any real personal information online. It's a small high school that services about a dozen small towns. I went there my senior year, and participated in the prayer groups. I have verified this with several of the teaches, parents of students, and local religious leaders.

It is highly unlikely that the school banned all praying. Possible, but in all likelihood your story is false and did not happen as told. Again, I do not doubt your sincerity, but you are making an extreme claim without any evidence.

It's personal experience. I can't link you to an article(unless I write it first).

I've verified it, so you either believe me or you think I'm lying. There's no room for me being mistaken here.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13