Maryland: State's Right Supercedes Parent's Rights

[kmw1123]

So you do give Muslims special treatment. See. The school is officially endorsing a religion over other religions.

how is that giving them special treatment? both religions are given equal opportunity to pray and they both have the same rules to be followed in school. both have to have an adult sponsor and both have to have their own place that is not in an open area of the school, such as the lunch room.

 

[kmw1123]

can a group of kids talk about the contributions to the world that homosexuals have contributed while in the lunch room?

as long as religion is not involved, i dont see why not.

and for whoever gave me bad karma for being a bad example as a teacher for not having perfect grammar and spelling, you'll have to excuse me for having a headache at the moment and typing too fast.

 

[bcp]

as long as religion is not involved, i dont see why not.

and for whoever gave me bad karma for being a bad example as a teacher for not having perfect grammar and spelling, you'll have to excuse me for having a headache at the moment and typing too fast.

so, religion is not allowed at the school. has to be hidden?

isnt the school violating the students rights under the 1st by saying that religion has no merit?

 

[kmw1123]

so, religion is not allowed at the school. has to be hidden?

isnt the school violating the students rights under the 1st by saying that religion has no merit?

religion is allowed at the school....just cant be practiced where people of different faiths or no faith are unwillingly exposed to it. no where does it say that religion has no merit. if that were the case, christian and muslim students who wanted to pray would not be given classroom space to do so.

 

[bcp]

religion is allowed at the school....just cant be practiced where people of different faiths or no faith are unwillingly exposed to it. no where does it say that religion has no merit. if that were the case, christian and muslim students who wanted to pray would not be given classroom space to do so.

but the constitution does not say you have the right not to be exposed to it, it says the government cant establish one religion over the other.
so, students praying in the cafeteria would not be in violation of the constitution unless a school official mandated that all students take part in the prayer.

 

[bcp]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_assembly

2nd part of the 1st.
Or prohibit free exercise of religion, (the free exercise clause) laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to assemble peaceably.

Seems like the law says that the students are not allowed to freely exercise their religious belief by praying prior to a meal

infringe the freedom of speech.. the students are not allowed by law to speak aobut religion

limit the right to assemble peaceably. Unless the students were throwing food and their trays as part of their religious prayer, they were not violating the peacefull assmebly portion of the amendment.

now, if non christian students became enraged and decided to start a fight with the christian students due to the prayer, then the non christian students would be the ones to curtail under the constitution.

The students rights were violated by not being allowed to pray prior to eating.

 

[kmw1123]

but the constitution does not say you have the right not to be exposed to it, it says the government cant establish one religion over the other.
so, students praying in the cafeteria would not be in violation of the constitution unless a school official mandated that all students take part in the prayer.

being that there is a separation of church and state, religion should not be practiced inside school walls. Accomodations have been made to allow groups to practice their religion so long as they are not offending anyone else. i think that seems more than fair. school systems are bending over backwards to try to accomodate everyone's wants and needs and instead of criticizing those efforts, people need to be a little more understanding and appreciative. this doesnt just go for christians, but for those of all faiths and those that are not religious. its not easy trying to please everyone.

 

[bcp]

being that there is a separation of church and state, religion should not be practiced inside school walls. Accomodations have been made to allow groups to practice their religion so long as they are not offending anyone else. i think that seems more than fair. school systems are bending over backwards to try to accomodate everyone's wants and needs and instead of criticizing those efforts, people need to be a little more understanding and appreciative. this doesnt just go for christians, but for those of all faiths and those that are not religious. its not easy trying to please everyone.

separation of church and state is not in the constitution.
I prefer to stick with the constitution, but I will play your game.

I believe (correct me if Im wrong) that Thomas Jefferson in speaking to the Danbury Church stated that the 1st amendment built a wall between the church and the state. He told them that the amendment protected them from the states interference in their worship.. it was not the other way around.

the actual phrase of church and state did not come until much later, and by then it was being used to try and keep religion silent. Not the intended purpose behind the constitution at all.

now you make reference to not having prayer in school because it is not possible to accomodate everyones wants.
What then is the difference between religion, and the states endorsement of homosexual lifestyles?
obviously just by reading this thread, one can clearly see that the endorsement of the homosexual lifestyle is an issue that some do not like, some like, and some just dont care.
same as with religion.

again, to not allow those students to sit in their group and pray among themselves was a violation of their civil rights, and the separation clause does not provide for that violation.

 

[kmw1123]

here is the official policy on religion in school according to the US Department of Education.

http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/religionandschools/prayer_guidance.html

 

[bcp]

here is the official policy on religion in school according to the US Department of Education.

http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/religionandschools/prayer_guidance.html

and had you ever actually read that guide, you would not even argue that the school was within it rights to stop students from praying together in the cafeteria.
Unless of course, a teacher was praying with them.

even by the link you provide, it is very clear that their rights were violated.

personally I would have sued the teacher and sued the school.
two separate suites, that way the teacher would have had to dig in her/his own pocket for his/her defense.

 

[kmw1123]

after further investigation, the students were suspended for refusing to move and stop blocking traffic in a busy social area in the school after being asked to do so, not because they were praying. they were offered a space so that they would not disrupt the flow of traffic so other students could get to class on time, but they refused to move.

 

[bcp]

after further investigation, the students were suspended for refusing to move and stop blocking traffic in a busy social area in the school after being asked to do so, not because they were praying. they were offered a space so that they would not disrupt the flow of traffic so other students could get to class on time, but they refused to move.

no longer the point as far as your view goes.
You were defending the schools actions when you thought the students were just praying out of the way. Be careful, your true colors are starting to show here.

now, why should the school endorse the homosexual lifestyle?

 

[bcp]

after further investigation, the students were suspended for refusing to move and stop blocking traffic in a busy social area in the school after being asked to do so, not because they were praying. they were offered a space so that they would not disrupt the flow of traffic so other students could get to class on time, but they refused to move.

by the way, since you engaged in further investigation,, you must have a link or something to this situation.
could you share it so that I might read it and find the flaws that you are missing?

Thank you in advance.

 

[kmw1123]

now, why should the school endorse the homosexual lifestyle?

why shouldnt it? it's not against the law and more and more people are becoming more open about it and accepting it. it is not the school's goal to turn kids into homosexuals, but it is important that kids are shown that there are different types of people out there and that even though they may not agree with what they do, it is important to understand that they are human beings and entitled to the same rights as everyone else.

 

[kmw1123]

by the way, since you engaged in further investigation,, you must have a link or something to this situation.
could you share it so that I might read it and find the flaws that you are missing?

Thank you in advance.

here is the article i read

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/mar/07030609.html

 

[bcp]

why shouldnt it? it's not against the law and more and more people are becoming more open about it and accepting it. it is not the school's goal to turn kids into homosexuals, but it is important that kids are shown that there are different types of people out there and that even though they may not agree with what they do, it is important to understand that they are human beings and entitled to the same rights as everyone else.

when did it become the states responsibility to dictate morals to students.

if children are taught by their parents, or their religion that homosexuality is a sin and therefore immoral, isnt the school telling the children that their parents and church are wrong?


when it become the states responsibility to dictate their version of morality to the students?

are you going to agree if lets say in a couple years the new school board decides to teach the children that homosexuality is not normal or acceptable?
will that be ok with you?

 

[bcp]

here is the article i read

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/mar/07030609.html

have any other small groups of students been suspended for talking in groups at the school?

maybe if they would not have been denied their request to start a prayer group, they would not have had to go this route.


when did the schools take on the responsibility of teaching their morals to students?

 

[bcp]

but it is important that kids are shown that there are different types of people out there and that even though they may not agree with what they do, it is important to understand that they are human beings and entitled to the same rights as everyone else.

do they have a special class to teach kids not to make fun of fat people? or, handicapped people?

dont fat people and handicapp people deserve rights also?

 

[kmw1123]

when did it become the states responsibility to dictate morals to students.

if children are taught by their parents, or their religion that homosexuality is a sin and therefore immoral, isnt the school telling the children that their parents and church are wrong?


when it become the states responsibility to dictate their version of morality to the students?

are you going to agree if lets say in a couple years the new school board decides to teach the children that homosexuality is not normal or acceptable?
will that be ok with you?

If parents dont want their children to attend those lessons, they have the right to keep their children out of them. No one is going to force them to sit in those classes. no one is even forcing them to sit in regular classes since no on in the state enforces truancy laws any more.

Since the government now supports homosexuality according to the changes in the constitution, it would be unconstitutional to teach that it is unacceptable.

 

[bcp]

If parents dont want their children to attend those lessons, they have the right to keep their children out of them. No one is going to force them to sit in those classes. no one is even forcing them to sit in regular classes since no on in the state enforces truancy laws any more.

Since the government now supports homosexuality according to the changes in the constitution, it would be unconstitutional to teach that it is unacceptable.

no one is going to force them YET.
however, when too many students opt out, they will make it mandatory.

There is a difference between support, and endorse.
the government supports religions through the 1st amendment, and through tax exempt status.

so, since its ok to endorse homosexuality because the government recognizes it, it also must be ok to endorse religion because the government recognizes it.

when did it become the schools job to dictate morals. This has not been answered as of yet.