Why can't they just offer a Koran class, or Torah class?

[HardDrive]

Story about Bible classes in Georgia:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12440797/site/newsweek

What I don't get is, why do they always make it into an unnessecary battle? Offer a class on the torah, offer one on the koran. If they would at least offer courses on other religions, that would go a long way. But they don't, so one can only assume they are trying to make a point and ram Jesus down the kids throats.

Kids need moral guidance. If we can get them reading and thinking about morality, regardless of the religon or belief system, it would improve our country.

[Dottore]

Because the Hindus and The Rastafarians etc would complain.

Much smarter just to keep relgion out of the classroom.

[bryanthompson]

much smarter to just keep liberals out of the classroom.

[914GT]

Originally posted by HardDrive
Story about Bible classes in Georgia:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12440797/site/newsweek

What I don't get is, why do they always make it into an unnessecary battle? Offer a class on the torah, offer one on the koran. If they would at least offer courses on other religions, that would go a long way. But they don't, so one can only assume they are trying to make a point and ram Jesus down the kids throats.

Kids need moral guidance. If we can get them reading and thinking about morality, regardless of the religon or belief system, it would improve our country.

First of all, that part of the country is predominantly Christian, so if they want to offer a class on the Bible they have the constitutional right to do so. What's wrond with it as long as it's an elective? Second, if there's any religion that's being 'rammed down kids' throats' it's Islam . Do some research and you'll find out public schools are indoctrinating children into the 'religion of peace'. Of course, you won't find any mention of those stories in your biased MSNBC and Newsleak.

[alf]

One does not need to practice a religion to be moral and a religious person is not necessarily moral.

There is a reason why there is a seperation of church and state.

[bryanthompson]

Offering classes that teach what various religions believe doesn't establish a religion. Environmentalism is a religion which is taught in every school, somehow, though.

[BlueSkyJaunte]

For a Mac user you're remarkably doltish.

[Tervuren]

Speration of church and state, not religion and state, please get it straight. The church SHOULD NOT RUN THE GOVERNMENT! That is both bad for the church, the people, and the government. Neither should the government run a church.

[914GT]

Originally posted by Tervuren
Speration of church and state, not religion and state, please get it straight. The church SHOULD NOT RUN THE GOVERNMENT! That is both bad for the church, the people, and the government. Neither should the government run a church.

Separation of church and state is a myth. Go read the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

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

Get that last part? The states, local schools, etc. can do what the people want. The federal government should have no involvement in matters of local government and local school districts. It's only Congress that cannot make laws establishing or prohibiting religion. If anything, your statement actually violates the first amendment. You want Congress to pass laws preventing the free exercise of religion.

[BlueSkyJaunte]

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article06/

no religious test

Unless your school receives zero federal funding, you're on really shaky ground supporting any religion.

[IROC]

Originally posted by 914GT
Separation of church and state is a myth. Go read the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Not according to Thomas Jefferson. But then again what did he have to do with our constitution anyway...

Mike

[alf]

Originally posted by bryanthompson
...Environmentalism is a religion which is taught in every school, somehow, though.

Please elaborate on this one...

[IROC]

...just to add some Thomas Jefferson substantiation:

"Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State." Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from our Founding Fathers."

I think the men who formed our government fully intended for there to be a "separation of church and state"...

Mike

[alf]

Originally posted by 914GT
Separation of church and state is a myth. Go read the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

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

Get that last part? The states, local schools, etc. can do what the people want. The federal government should have no involvement in matters of local government and local school districts. It's only Congress that cannot make laws establishing or prohibiting religion. If anything, your statement actually violates the first amendment. You want Congress to pass laws preventing the free exercise of religion.

The Judicial system gets to interpret that and in the case of constitutional law that would be the Supreme court. I believe that they made a ruling on that one already, but hey they could change their minds. It is mostly about Federal Funding as BlueSky pointed out.

So lets turn the table on this slightly. Say there is a large Muslim population in City X. The citizens there overwhelmingly want to model their public schools like traditional muslim schools. Will you be cool with that?

I wonder what public schools are like wrt religion in Utah.

[914GT]

Originally posted by alf
The Judicial system gets to interpret that and in the case of constitutional law that would be the Supreme court. I believe that they made a ruling on that one already, but hey they could change their minds. It is mostly about Federal Funding as BlueSky pointed out.

So lets turn the table on this slightly. Say there is a large Muslim population in City X. The citizens there overwhelmingly want to model their public schools like traditional muslim schools. Will you be cool with that?

I wonder what public schools are like wrt religion in Utah.

The role of the Supreme Court is the authority to invalidate legislation or executive actions which, in the Court’s considered judgment, conflict with the Constitution. So show me the federal legislation that dictates what religious classes can or cannot me taught in schools. Any laws should automatically conflict with the first amendment.

Your example is already becoming a reality in some parts of the country. It's only a matter of time they will use the Constitution to establish Sharia law.

[alf]

Originally posted by 914GT
....
Your example is already becoming a reality in some parts of the country. It's only a matter of time they will use the Constitution to establish Sharia law.

and you are cool with that? "They" being who? We the people?

Remember there is more than one religion in our country.

[Tervuren]

Originally posted by 914GT
Separation of church and state is a myth. Go read the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

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

Get that last part? The states, local schools, etc. can do what the people want. The federal government should have no involvement in matters of local government and local school districts. It's only Congress that cannot make laws establishing or prohibiting religion. If anything, your statement actually violates the first amendment. You want Congress to pass laws preventing the free exercise of religion.

You are getting mixed up. I said seperation of church and state. Not religion and state. There should NOT be a federal church, and the federal government, should not be run by the church.

I am not saying that an elected official should completey neglect any beleif he has so as to "seperate" his relgion from running the state, far far from it. I am saying that the government should not run the church, and the church should not run the government. Look at what happened with Catholicism.

[914GT]

Originally posted by alf
and you are cool with that? "They" being who? We the people?

Remember there is more than one religion in our country.

I have no problems with a local school district providing a religious class for any religion, assuming it meets the approval of the parents and educators. It would only make sense that a class would be offered when there are sufficient numbers of students interested. No public school should make any religious class mandatory for all students.

I am totally against attempts by any religious group to change the laws of this country to suit their purpose. There's a big difference between offering a religious class in school and legalizing honor killings.

[914GT]

Originally posted by Tervuren
You are getting mixed up. I said seperation of church and state. Not religion and state. There should NOT be a federal church, and the federal government, should not be run by the church.

I am not saying that an elected official should completey neglect any beleif he has so as to "seperate" his relgion from running the state, far far from it. I am saying that the government should not run the church, and the church should not run the government. Look at what happened with Catholicism.

I think we pretty much agree. And it's clear that the federal government cannot pass any laws to establish or deny a particular religion. But that does not imply that state or local governments cannot pass laws establishing a particular religion. The various state constitutions would ideally have had similar amendments as the U.S. Constitution regarding freedom of religion.

[VaSteve]

Originally posted by 914GT


I am totally against attempts by any religious group to change the laws of this country to suit their purpose.

It's just like every other special interest group. Religeons happen to be very BIG special interest groups.