Judge Says NO to Free Bibles............

[nhboy]

Federal Judge Blocks Missouri Public School From Distributing Bibles

"ST. LOUIS — A rural school district's long-standing practice of allowing the distribution of Bibles to grade school students is unconstitutional, a federal judge has ruled.

An attorney for the southeastern Missouri school district said Wednesday he will appeal the judge's injunction against the practice.

For more than three decades, the South Iron School District in Annapolis, 120 miles southwest of St. Louis in the heart of the Bible Belt, allowed representatives of Gideons International to give away Bibles in fifth-grade classrooms."

FOXNews.com - Federal Judge Blocks Missouri Public School From Distributing Bibles - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News

 

[bcp]

giving the bibles might be ok, but the Gideons like to get people to sign that last page of their bible that has the contract with Jesus on it. (page not found in the hotel version, only the small version)

 

[LCDj]

Bibles, Public Schools

The judge is right. Bibles should not be handed out in public schoools. Our public schools are not there to teach religion. That is the parents responsibility. Let the parents to their job and let our public schools do their job.

 

[toppick08]

The judge is right. Bibles should not be handed out in public schoools. Our public schools are not there to teach religion. That is the parents responsibility. Let the parents to their job and let our public schools do their job.

Do judges still get sworn in with Bibles?

 

[pa1151]

Guess I missed the part in the constitution that says organizations are not allowed to offer free gifts to students.

I wonder if the courts would have the same problem with the Gideons if they were distributing candy, or maybe the works of Shakespeare.

 

[Gwydion]

Guess I missed the part in the constitution that says organizations are not allowed to offer free gifts to students.

I wonder if the courts would have the same problem with the Gideons if they were distributing candy, or maybe the works of Shakespeare.

I say the judge gives every student a Koran. Maybe then the stupid parents would create an uproar about how the judge is trying to make their students Muslims, and the judge could say, "and the difference is?"

Get over it. Put bibles and every other holy book in the library and let the kids check them out if they want to.

 

[Solja_Boy]

That is one dumb judge. Why is he gona get in the way of people getting free stuff.

 

[Novus Collectus]

That is one dumb judge. Why is he gona get in the way of people getting free stuff.

Right, and if it was a Hare Krishna passing out free literature, then how would you feel?
Because that is exactly what will happen if the practice is allowed to continue. Before long other religious groups are going to demand free access to the kids to hand out their religious literature too. Before long kids will be getting free copies of the Satanic Bible and the Great Book of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or a book by Richard Dawkins.......don't think it likely? There are some people that would do it just to prove a point.
You open the door for your religion to be entangled with religion, and you leave room open for the religions you don't like to be just as entangled...or even more entangled. This is why we have a wall between church and state, it is to protect us all by not favoring one.

 

[This_person]

The judge is right. Bibles should not be handed out in public schoools. Our public schools are not there to teach religion. That is the parents responsibility. Let the parents to their job and let our public schools do their job.

That's right. No bibles, no condoms, no food (let 'em bring their own from home, that's the parents' job!) nothing other than the education. Forget bussing, DARE programs, or ANY extra-curricular activities (sports, chess club, etc.). None of these things are a part of the educational program (ie, EXTRA-curricular = not curriculum)

 

[toppick08]

Do judges still get sworn in with Bibles?

Somebody please answer this.............

 

[This_person]

Right, and if it was a Hare Krishna passing out free literature, then how would you feel?

Personally, I'd feel like they have a right to do that as long as anyone else does anything extra-curricular with the school system. Everybody can, or nobody can.

Because that is exactly what will happen if the practice is allowed to continue. Before long other religious groups are going to demand free access to the kids to hand out their religious literature too. Before long kids will be getting free copies of the Satanic Bible and the Great Book of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or a book by Richard Dawkins.......don't think it likely? There are some people that would do it just to prove a point.
You open the door for your religion to be entangled with religion ("schooling"?), and you leave room open for the religions you don't like to be just as entangled...or even more entangled. This is why we have a wall between church and state, it is to protect us all by not favoring one.

Actually, it's why we have the second phrase, which says everybody can practice what they want. If these books were forced on the students, part of the curriculum as anything other than a religious studies class (ie, a study of various religions, not an indoctrination into any one religion), then you'd be right. Otherwise, it's like Pizza Hut offering free coupons - unless somebody takes 'em, they mean nothing to anyone there.

 

[Novus Collectus]

Do judges still get sworn in with Bibles?

I believe it depends on the state and it is also their personal choice to do so. If not it is unconstitutional.

Article VI, clause 3:
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

Not even all presidents were sworn in on a bible. One even took the oath on a law book.

 

[SShewbert]

No one said that the students had to take them. They are offering. Every child has to make the decision for him or her self as to what religion to follow if any at all. What harm does it do to offer them a bible? Or any other religious material from any other religion?

While evolution may not be a RELIGION it is a belief as to how humankind started. If that is allowed to be taught in school why are kids not allowed to be taught or learn about any religions? Just learning it does not mean they have to believe it. And offering a bible does not mean they have to take it. We may have seperation of Church and State but we also have Freedom of Religion. Not Freedom from Religion.

 

[Novus Collectus]

Personally, I'd feel like they have a right to do that as long as anyone else does anything extra-curricular with the school system. Everybody can, or nobody can.Actually, it's why we have the second phrase, which says everybody can practice what they want. If these books were forced on the students, part of the curriculum as anything other than a religious studies class (ie, a study of various religions, not an indoctrination into any one religion), then you'd be right. Otherwise, it's like Pizza Hut offering free coupons - unless somebody takes 'em, they mean nothing to anyone there.

[I meant "government" not "religion" in that part]

As soon as the government takes an active involvment like this, they are entangled and they are showing favoritism of one religious opinion over another and that is why we have the first part of the First...it is to protect the free expression of mentioned in the second part.
If students brought their own bibles to read, then that is protected in the First Amendment, but the school endorsing one religion by granting access to active religious recruiters is blatant violation.
Now if they had free access to all religious opinions including atheism, Satanism and antitheism, then you may or may not be right about not having the problem of endorsing one over another, but that is impractical to the extreme because there are probably thousands of different religious beliefs and opinions in this country alone, or it becomes an endorsment when only one religious view is represented by default.

There is no legitimate reason for the school system to venture into the realm of religous indoctrination and/or influence or allowing it by their authority.

 

[This_person]

[I meant "government" not "religion" in that part]

As soon as the government takes an active involvment like this, they are entangled and they are showing favoritism of one religious opinion over another and that is why we have the first part of the First...it is to protect the free expression of mentioned in the second part.
If students brought their own bibles to read, then that is protected in the First Amendment, but the school endorsing one religion by granting access to active religious recruiters is blatant violation.
Now if they had free access to all religious opinions including atheism, Satanism and antitheism, then you may or may not be right about not having the problem of endorsing one over another, but that is impractical to the extreme because there are probably thousands of different religious beliefs and opinions in this country alone, or it becomes an endorsment when only one religious view is represented by default.

There is no legitimate reason for the school system to venture into the realm of religous indoctrination and/or influence or allowing it by their authority.

I would agree with you if there was some evidence that any other thought process was excluded. It seems to me that this is just one place offering to hand out something not inappropriate for the age level of the kids, and the school says 'fine'. Now, if Jehovah's Witnesses offered up the Watchtower, and the school says yes to the Gideons and no the the JW, then they'd be favoring.

Allowing all groups does not require all groups to participate. And, doesn't show favoritism if only one group participates.

 

[Novus Collectus]

No one said that the students had to take them. They are offering. Every child has to make the decision for him or her self as to what religion to follow if any at all. What harm does it do to offer them a bible? Or any other religious material from any other religion?

Fine, then they can be offered the bibles outside of class rooms then. There is no reason to offer them the religious recruitment books in class as part of the government function.
Besides I would think some parents might not think some of the stories are proper for a small kid like the ones with incest and murder.

What harm does it do to offer them a bible? Or any other religious material from any other religion?

http://www.gay-bible.org/index2.html
or how about a Fed Phelps version of the bible handed out to kids? http://www.godhatesfags.com/

No, it is a Pandora's box that our founding fathers did not want to be opened and that is why they wrote the First Amendment the way they did.

 

[Novus Collectus]

I would agree with you if there was some evidence that any other thought process was excluded. It seems to me that this is just one place offering to hand out something not inappropriate for the age level of the kids, and the school says 'fine'. Now, if Jehovah's Witnesses offered up the Watchtower, and the school says yes to the Gideons and no the the JW, then they'd be favoring.

Allowing all groups does not require all groups to participate. And, doesn't show favoritism if only one group participates.

Once you cross the equal access line, there is no turning back. Can you imagine what it would be like if NAMBLA started a church and passed out man/boy love bibles in school? They could not be denied because they have a right to free speech and free expression and free, equal access.
Some people view some other relgious beliefs as just as offensive and having the state allow their kids be exposed to the offensive religion as part of a government function the kids must be present for is a violation of their free excersise of religion.

 

[This_person]

Once you cross the equal access line, there is no turning back. Can you imagine what it would be like if NAMBLA started a church and passed out man/boy love bibles in school? They could not be denied because they have a right to free speech and free expression and free, equal access.
Some people view some other relgious beliefs as just as offensive and having the state allow their kids be exposed to the offensive religion as part of a government function the kids must be present for is a violation of their free excersise of religion.

People have to accept the full concept of liberty - "I disagree with all you say but will fight to the death your right to say it" concept.

Because NAMBLA could conceivably pass out information does not mean that anyone has to accept the information (and would probably not pass the "community standard" of decency/obscenity). Just like this Bible, or the horrific ones you found as examples of ones not desired by parents.

It's basically an all or nothing concept. Accept the scientific fact that the only way to prevent pregnancy is to not have intercourse - and thus don't pass out condoms. Accept that the school's function is education alone - and have absolutely no extra-curricular activity. OR, accept that it's okay, then you must accept that ANY of it is okay, so long as none of it is specifically endorsed. As soon as anything is denied, it all must be denied, otherwise everything left allowed is tacitly endorsed. Give my kid a condom and disallow a Bible, and you've endorsed secularism.