High School allowing Muslims to takeoff and pray....

[9erempiree]

:facepalm

I wish they did this for me. Last time I checked, this is America. There is a reason why most majority Islamic States are 3rd world. They pray all day and not enough progress in their countries.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/md-public-school-teacher-denies-he-told-students-all-muslims-are-terrorists/2014/10/17/5495c3c0-5646-11e4-892e-602188e70e9c_story.html


Parkdale High School has a growing Muslim population, and it has recently changed its policies to be more accommodating to those students. Former principal Cheryl Logan recently changed school rules to allow Muslim students who have parental permission and high grades a pass out of class every day to pray.

[sweggeh]

Oh ffs..... This is 2014 retard. I have never been to a school, college or university that didnt have a small room for Muslims to pray for 5 minutes if necessary. I've seen the same thing for Jews. In fact when I was in Primary School, I think it was the Jehavoh's Witnesses kids who were allowed to play outside while other kids celebrated their birthday in class.

People are allowed religious freedom retard. Suck a fat **** and move to Uganda if you dont like it.

[SugarHill]

Wait, you're upset they're letting the kids pray but not the teacher who harassed children and told them they're terrorists responsible for 9/11?

[RidonKs]

Suck a fat **** and move to Uganda if you dont like it.
bad idea..

[sammichoffate]

Wait, you're upset they're letting the kids pray but not the teacher who harassed children and told them they're terrorists responsible for 9/11?:biggums:

[nathanjizzle]

:facepalm

I wish they did this for me. Last time I checked, this is America. There is a reason why most majority Islamic States are 3rd world. They pray all day and not enough progress in their countries.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/md-public-school-teacher-denies-he-told-students-all-muslims-are-terrorists/2014/10/17/5495c3c0-5646-11e4-892e-602188e70e9c_story.html

dont you get school off for easter and chrismas?

[MadeFromDust]

:facepalm

I wish they did this for me. Last time I checked, this is America. There is a reason why most majority Islamic States are 3rd world. They pray all day and not enough progress in their countries.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/md-public-school-teacher-denies-he-told-students-all-muslims-are-terrorists/2014/10/17/5495c3c0-5646-11e4-892e-602188e70e9c_story.html
Hey atheists where are your cries of "separation of church and state" now? Bet you won't go against these moslems and their accommodations :oldlol:

[sweggeh]

Hey atheists where are your cries of "separation of church and state" now? Bet you won't go against these moslems and their accommodations :oldlol:

You guys are allowed to rape little boys in your churches, so you cant really complain about Muslims being allowed to pray.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

:facepalm

I wish they did this for me. Last time I checked, this is America. There is a reason why most majority Islamic States are 3rd world. They pray all day and not enough progress in their countries.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/md-public-school-teacher-denies-he-told-students-all-muslims-are-terrorists/2014/10/17/5495c3c0-5646-11e4-892e-602188e70e9c_story.html

You do realize that due to the large Jewish population in the US we also get days off. Get off this website OP, you are so racist omg.

[9erempiree]

You do realize that due to the large Jewish population in the US we also get days off. Get off this website OP, you are so racist omg.
:facepalm

Here we go again. Calling me a racist when we all don't know what is the race of the Muslim.

It doesn't even mention the race bro.

[sammichoffate]

:facepalm

Here we go again. Calling me a racist when we all don't know what is the race of the Muslim.

It doesn't even mention the race bro.http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/349/990/304.gif :lol

[zoom17]

It so sad that OP complains about every little Muslim issue that doesn't even effect him at all. If he did this about Jews he would have been banned already come on Jeff:facepalm

[sweggeh]

It so sad that OP complains about every little Muslim issue that doesn't even effect him at all. If he did this about Jews he would have been banned already come on Jeff:facepalm

I made a legitimate thread reporting on the many news stories of Israel giving birth control to Ethiopian immigrants without their knowledge, and boom its closed straight away. Yet shit like this just stays for weeks. Like a particularly smelly piece of shit just floating in the bowl.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

I made a legitimate thread reporting on the many news stories of Israel giving birth control to Ethiopian immigrants without their knowledge, and boom its closed straight away. Yet shit like this just stays for weeks. Like a particularly smelly piece of shit just floating in the bowl.

I guess I can't go on my pro-Palestine flow on here then doe.

[Patrick Chewing]

Oh ffs..... This is 2014 retard. I have never been to a school, college or university that didnt have a small room for Muslims to pray for 5 minutes if necessary. I've seen the same thing for Jews. In fact when I was in Primary School, I think it was the Jehavoh's Witnesses kids who were allowed to play outside while other kids celebrated their birthday in class.

People are allowed religious freedom retard. Suck a fat **** and move to Uganda if you dont like it.


OK retard, then I don't want to hear another ****ing story about a school banning school prayer just because it's the Christian God they're praying to. Just because Christianity is the majority does not mean that it deserves to be ostracized and all other religions get a free pass. Ok retard??

[sweggeh]

OK retard, then I don't want to hear another ****ing story about a school banning school prayer just because it's the Christian God they're praying to. Just because Christianity is the majority does not mean that it deserves to be ostracized and all other religions get a free pass. Ok retard??

Look at this fool acting like American schools arent already catering to Christians. Why is it there is no school on Sundays? Why is there no school on Easter or Christmas? If Christianity said Christians should pray 5 times a day, damn right they would work their school schedule around those prayers.

Do you even leave your house mate? You seem like a legit basement dweller.

[Patrick Chewing]

Why is it there is no school on Sundays?



Same reason there's no school on Saturday. Your logic is astounding!




Why is there no school on Easter or Christmas?


The country was founded by a Judeo-Christian value and belief system. God and Jesus were pretty popular 250 years ago.

And you proved my point on the relentless bashing Christianity gets. You clowns are straight up hypocrites. If it's Muslims we're talking about, ya'll suddenly become its defender. Christianity on the other hand, ya'll suddenly become Satanic.

[sweggeh]

Same reason there's no school on Saturday. Your logic is astounding!




The country was founded by a Judeo-Christian value and belief system. God and Jesus were pretty popular 250 years ago.

And you proved my point on the relentless bashing Christianity gets. You clowns are straight up hypocrites. If it's Muslims we're talking about, ya'll suddenly become its defender. Christianity on the other hand, ya'll suddenly become Satanic.

Dont bring me down to your level, pig. I have no problem with Christianity. I will admit I have at time highlighted its bad points but only to expose the hypocrisy of some members of this forum, including yourself. I respect the religion of Christianity and the Christian people.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Same reason there's no school on Saturday. Your logic is astounding!




The country was founded by a Judeo-Christian value and belief system. God and Jesus were pretty popular 250 years ago.

And you proved my point on the relentless bashing Christianity gets. You clowns are straight up hypocrites. If it's Muslims we're talking about, ya'll suddenly become its defender. Christianity on the other hand, ya'll suddenly become Satanic.

The world would be a better place if we were all atheists.

[Patrick Chewing]

The world would be a better place if we were all atheists.


I'll politely disagree with you on that. Talk to any Christian/Muslim/Jew/Hindu who is not any type of fundamentalist or radical and you'll see why faith and spiritualism play an important in society and above all else, in your own personal life.

Personally, I think society only falls into chaos and disorder without some type of religious perspective.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Why can't you post more like this?

Thinking the same exact thing

[KyrieTheFuture]

OK retard, then I don't want to hear another ****ing story about a school banning school prayer just because it's the Christian God they're praying to. Just because Christianity is the majority does not mean that it deserves to be ostracized and all other religions get a free pass. Ok retard??
Uhhhhhhhhh who is trying to make praying to Mecca a mandatory school activity? That's why those prayers got banned, you're still allowed to ask God for a good grade on your spelling quiz or that Suzy will circle yes I like you on the note you passed her

[Dresta]

Religion has ZERO place in any publicly funded American school. That is all and there is no need for any further discussion.

[NumberSix]

No different than when the NHS was allowing headscarves and turbans for "religious reasons" but banned nurses from wearing crosses. One nurse finally sued and OF COURSE won because it's hilariously hypocritical to ban Christian religious symbols and allow others.

It has nothing to do with "tolerance" or any of those bs excuses. It's all about destruction of the dominant culture.

[poido123]

No different than when the NHS was allowing headscarves and turbans for "religious reasons" but banned nurses from wearing crosses. One nurse finally sued and OF COURSE won because it's hilariously hypocritical to ban Christian religious symbols and allow others.

It has nothing to do with "tolerance" or any of those bs excuses. It's all about destruction of the dominant culture.



Bingo.

[navy]

Highschools in my state Georgia have always done this. Is it not common or what? Maybe they were only allowed to do it during lunch and my memory is failing me.

[sweggeh]

No different than when the NHS was allowing headscarves and turbans for "religious reasons" but banned nurses from wearing crosses. One nurse finally sued and OF COURSE won because it's hilariously hypocritical to ban Christian religious symbols and allow others.

It has nothing to do with "tolerance" or any of those bs excuses. It's all about destruction of the dominant culture.

Hijabs and Turbans are necessary for their respective religions. Crosses are not. Are muslim women allowed to wear their full body gowns at work? No, because it is not strictly necessary.

I would bet anything your white, fat, balding and live at your mommies house. Just everything about the way you type makes me think that.

[dude77]

Hijabs and Turbans are necessary for their respective religions. Crosses are not. Are muslim women allowed to wear their full body gowns at work? No, because it is not strictly necessary.

I would bet anything your white, fat, balding and live at your mommies house. Just everything about the way you type makes me think that.

lol hijabs/turbans aren't necessary for shit .. there are muslim women who don't wear that in public in western countries .. they're not going to combust if they don't wear their stupid hijabs or turbans for work .. anyone can make up something that they 'need' to wear before they walk out of the house .. if you allow some idiot to wear a turban or hijab then you should have no damn problem allowing someone wear a fkn cross around their neck .. a cross doesn't interfere with anyone's job .. so wtf would you be against that ? .. trying to make excuses for the hypocrisy is all you're doing

[sweggeh]

lol hijabs/turbans aren't necessary for shit .. there are muslim women who don't wear that in public in western countries .. they're not going to combust if they don't wear their stupid hijabs or turbans for work .. anyone can make up something that they 'need' to wear before they walk out of the house .. if you allow some idiot to wear a turban or hijab then you should have no damn problem allowing someone wear a fkn cross around their neck .. a cross doesn't interfere with anyone's job .. so wtf would you be against that ? .. trying to make excuses for the hypocrisy is all you're doing

You are a retard. A muslim woman needs to wear a hijab if she is serious about her religion, which she is entitled to be. Ditto for a Sikh man who needs to wear his turban. A cross is just jewelry. If you allow a cross, you have to allow guys to turn up to work in necklaces and chains. They are all the same thing. Now do you understand? Its not rocket science, you retards should actually leave your house, talk to people and realise no one actually gives a **** about all the bullshit you spend all day typing.

[dude77]

You are a retard. A muslim woman needs to wear a hijab if she is serious about her religion, which she is entitled to be. Ditto for a Sikh man who needs to wear his turban. A cross is just jewelry. If you allow a cross, you have to allow guys to turn up to work in necklaces and chains. They are all the same thing. Now do you understand? Its not rocket science, you retards should actually leave your house, talk to people and realise no one actually gives a **** about all the bullshit you spend all day typing.

I don't give a fk about any of that .. I'm not into any religion .. I don't give a fk about anyone as long as they're not fkn with me ..

but lets not be hypocrites either ..

you don't need to wear any of that for work .. there are muslim women who don't wear it .. they chose not to wear it .. ultimately you wear it because you want to wear it or chose to wear it .. what if I say I need my cross to practice my religion ? .. be consistent .. if they allow them to wear some shit over there head, what is the problem with wearing a tiny cross around your neck ?

[sweggeh]

I don't give a fk about any of that .. I'm not into any religion .. I don't give a fk about anyone as long as they're not fkn with me ..

but lets not be hypocrites either ..

you don't need to wear any of that for work .. there are muslim women who don't wear it .. they chose not to wear it .. ultimately you wear it because you WANT to wear it or chose to wear it .. what if I say I need my cross to practice my religion ? .. be consistent .. if they allow them to wear some shit over there head, what is the problem with wearing a tiny cross around your neck ?

But you DONT. Thats the difference. Go to any Muslim country and the women wear hijabs. Go to India and the Sikh's wear turbans. Its a complete necessity for their religion. It they dont feel that strongly about their religion, they have every right to go to work without wearing it. If they do, they also have the right to go to work wearing it.

Do hospitals make male Jewish workers take off their kippahs? No. A cross is just a piece of jewelry.

If you think no one should be allowed to wear anything religious at work, just come out and say it. Stop trying to sneakily talk about the cross not being allowed to try and make others look wrong for wearing their religious clothing at work. If you really think they are the same thing, then the fact that you are comparing these things just shows you actually have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

[GimmeThat]

listen.

if I was a coach, I too would also allow my players to occasionally go and get in the head of the opposing player if that's gonna help me win the ball game

[NumberSix]

But you DONT. Thats the difference. Go to any Muslim country and the women wear hijabs. Go to India and the Sikh's wear turbans. Its a complete necessity for their religion. It they dont feel that strongly about their religion, they have every right to go to work without wearing it. If they do, they also have the right to go to work wearing it.

Do hospitals make male Jewish workers take off their kippahs? No. A cross is just a piece of jewelry.

If you think no one should be allowed to wear anything religious at work, just come out and say it. Stop trying to sneakily talk about the cross not being allowed to try and make others look wrong for wearing their religious clothing at work. If you really think they are the same thing, then the fact that you are comparing these things just shows you actually have no idea what the hell you are talking about.
No, you're misunderstanding our point. We're not arguing that NOBODY should be allowed to wear their religious symbols. We are arguing that EVERYBODY should be allowed to wear their religious symbols. That being the case, it's not okay to exclude Christians. If a nurse wants to wear a cross, there should be no problem with that.

[sweggeh]

No, you're misunderstanding our point. We're not arguing that NOBODY should be allowed to wear their religious symbols. We are arguing that EVERYBODY should be allowed to wear their religious symbols. That being the case, it's not okay to exclude Christians. If a nurse wants to wear a cross, there should be no problem with that.

A Christian coming to work with a cross is like a Muslim coming into work with a "I love Allah" scarf. Nothing wrong with that and while it is a religious statement, it is not something which your religion makes you wear. Your employers absolutely have the right to tell you to not come in with it.

[dude77]

But you DONT. Thats the difference. Go to any Muslim country and the women wear hijabs. Go to India and the Sikh's wear turbans. Its a complete necessity for their religion. It they dont feel that strongly about their religion, they have every right to go to work without wearing it. If they do, they also have the right to go to work wearing it.

Do hospitals make male Jewish workers take off their kippahs? No. A cross is just a piece of jewelry.

If you think no one should be allowed to wear anything religious at work, just come out and say it. Stop trying to sneakily talk about the cross not being allowed to try and make others look wrong for wearing their religious clothing at work. If you really think they are the same thing, then the fact that you are comparing these things just shows you actually have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

they don't need to wear a hijab either .. again, there are women who don't wear that .. don't tell me it's absolutely mandatory when there are women who don't wear it .. the problem with your stance is that you want to give them all the leeway they want in wearing it or not wearing it .. accommodate muslim folks at all costs according to you .. but you're a wearing a christian cross ? take that shit off .. gtfoh .. there are folks who wear a cross all the damn time because of their deep religious beliefs and they feel they 'need' to wear it .. I DON'T GIVE FK WHAT YOU WEAR as long as it's not messing with other people in any way .. that includes wearing a cross

[bdreason]

Separation of church and state. Kids shouldn't be practicing religion at public schools. If they want to practice their religion during school hours, I suggest they go to a private school.

[imdaman99]

they don't need to wear a hijab either .. again, there are women who don't wear that .. don't tell me it's absolutely mandatory when there are women who don't wear it .. the problem with your stance is that you want to give them all the leeway they want in wearing it or not wearing it .. accommodate muslim folks at all costs according to you .. but you're a wearing a christian cross ? take that shit off .. gtfoh .. there are folks who wear a cross all the damn time because of their deep religious beliefs and they feel they 'need' to wear it .. I DON'T GIVE FK WHAT YOU WEAR as long as it's not messing with other people in any way .. that includes wearing a cross
Let me educate you on the matter since you seem to be ignorant about this. Those that wear hijab or turban believe they are supposed to. Sure, a lot of modern muslim women are not wearing it. I find it hypocritical when they wear one at the mosque, but as soon as they get out it comes off but that's for another day. Every person has their own beliefs, and if they don't wear a head scarf, than they will not wear one at work. But if they wear one outside the home or in front of anyone who she isn't family with, than she WILL wear it at work and should be allowed.

It is all about beliefs. If she takes Islam seriously and wears a hijab, than absolutely she should wear one at work because they believe that if anyone sees their hair it is a sin. So don't state stupid shit like "they dont need to wear a hijab either because I saw some muslim girls who weren't wearing and they didnt die from it" :facepalm

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Let me educate you on the matter since you seem to be ignorant about this. Those that wear hijab or turban believe they are supposed to. Sure, a lot of modern muslim women are not wearing it. I find it hypocritical when they wear one at the mosque, but as soon as they get out it comes off but that's for another day. Every person has their own beliefs, and if they don't wear a head scarf, than they will not wear one at work. But if they wear one outside the home or in front of anyone who she isn't family with, than she WILL wear it at work and should be allowed.

It is all about beliefs. If she takes Islam seriously and wears a hijab, than absolutely she should wear one at work because they believe that if anyone sees their hair it is a sin. So don't state stupid shit like "they dont need to wear a hijab either because I saw some muslim girls who weren't wearing and they didnt die from it" :facepalm

repped good to see a nyc brother spitting this. but i do agree with macho, your choice of words on that specific topic is little harsh.

[bdreason]

Let me educate you on the matter since you seem to be ignorant about this. Those that wear hijab or turban believe they are supposed to. Sure, a lot of modern muslim women are not wearing it. I find it hypocritical when they wear one at the mosque, but as soon as they get out it comes off but that's for another day. Every person has their own beliefs, and if they don't wear a head scarf, than they will not wear one at work. But if they wear one outside the home or in front of anyone who she isn't family with, than she WILL wear it at work and should be allowed.

It is all about beliefs. If she takes Islam seriously and wears a hijab, than absolutely she should wear one at work because they believe that if anyone sees their hair it is a sin. So don't state stupid shit like "they dont need to wear a hijab either because I saw some muslim girls who weren't wearing and they didnt die from it" :facepalm


And as an American business owner, it's my right not to hire someone who refuses to work without a scarf on their head. Just like it's my right not to hire someone with tattoos on their neck or a mo-hawk. You can talk all you want about someone's right to practice their religion, but you also have to consider someone's right to disagree with those practices.

What if my religion states it's a sin to cover your hair? Which religios belife should supersede the other? That's why religion shouldn't be brought into the discussion at all. If you want a job, you go by their rules. If you're religious beliefs are so strong that you can't abide by those rules? Find another job.

[iamgine]

And as an American business owner, it's my right not to hire someone who refuses to work without a scarf on their head. Just like it's my right not to hire someone with tattoos on their neck or a mo-hawk. You can talk all you want about someone's right to practice their religion, but you also have to consider someone's right to disagree with those practices.

What if my religion states it's a sin to cover your hair? Which religios belife should supersede the other? That's why religion shouldn't be brought into the discussion at all. If you want a job, you go by their rules. If you're religious beliefs are so strong that you can't abide by those rules? Find another job.
There are laws about this right? If you don't hire them or fire them because they insist on wearing a scarf then it could be considered religious discrimination which I believe is against the law.

The law supercede religion.

[GimmeThat]

There are laws about this right? If you don't hire them or fire them because they insist on wearing a scarf then it could be considered religious discrimination which I believe is against the law.

The law supercede religion.


safety and anti-bullying supercede religion

that I do agree.

[boozehound]

:facepalm

I wish they did this for me. Last time I checked, this is America. There is a reason why most majority Islamic States are 3rd world. They pray all day and not enough progress in their countries.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/md-public-school-teacher-denies-he-told-students-all-muslims-are-terrorists/2014/10/17/5495c3c0-5646-11e4-892e-602188e70e9c_story.html
OP apparently knows nothing about the US. The supreme court decided this back in the early 80s, when mormon kids (and others) were getting a class period to go to the seminary building, just "off" campus. The SC said they could do this, but not get HS credit for that hour (they were getting credit for that hour).

If you go past any HS or MS in Utah, you will see a LDS seminary building just off campus. They get a class period to go there (if they want), but it does not count as HS credit anymore.

[NumberSix]

There are laws about this right? If you don't hire them or fire them because they insist on wearing a scarf then it could be considered religious discrimination which I believe is against the law.

The law supercede religion.
It's not that black and white.

For example, businesses that require a uniform are within their legal rights to enforce a dress code.

It's not an absolute rule that you can't discriminate. If you have a legitimate claim that something conflicts with your business interests, you are within your rights.

We actually see it all the time with stories about teachers getting fired from private Christian schools when it gets exposed that they are gay or divorced, etc. This is a case of legal discrimination. You can make a legitimate claim that having a gay teacher may cause some people to not send their kids to that school or that people might not donate money.

[GimmeThat]

OP apparently knows nothing about the US. The supreme court decided this back in the early 80s, when mormon kids (and others) were getting a class period to go to the seminary building, just "off" campus. The SC said they could do this, but not get HS credit for that hour (they were getting credit for that hour).

If you go past any HS or MS in Utah, you will see a LDS seminary building just off campus. They get a class period to go there (if they want), but it does not count as HS credit anymore.


there's also the GED

but them nerds be all about that AP

[iamgine]

It's not that black and white.

For example, businesses that require a uniform are within their legal rights to enforce a dress code.

It's not an absolute rule that you can't discriminate. If you have a legitimate claim that something conflicts with your business interests, you are within your rights.

We actually see it all the time with stories about teachers getting fired from private Christian schools when it gets exposed that they are gay or divorced, etc. This is a case of legal discrimination. You can make a legitimate claim that having a gay teacher may cause some people to not send their kids to that school or that people might not donate money.
That is correct but not what I was talking about unfortunately.

[GimmeThat]

It's not that black and white.

For example, businesses that require a uniform are within their legal rights to enforce a dress code.

It's not an absolute rule that you can't discriminate. If you have a legitimate claim that something conflicts with your business interests, you are within your rights.

We actually see it all the time with stories about teachers getting fired from private Christian schools when it gets exposed that they are gay or divorced, etc. This is a case of legal discrimination. You can make a legitimate claim that having a gay teacher may cause some people to not send their kids to that school or that people might not donate money.



so is the school there for the interest of business
or for the interest of education

I don't know if people want to be made that of an example

but you know,

christians gonna christian

[NumberSix]

so is the school there for the interest of business
or for the interest of education

I don't know if people want to be made that of an example

but you know,

christians gonna christian
It's a PRIVATE school. They need money to run.

[code green]

Is this a public or private school? I just find it odd that there are groups that exist for the sole purpose of getting religion out of the government, especially with Christian prayers (or just the word 'God') on monuments at schools, yet in this system, there are rooms specifically made for Muslims to leave the classroom and pray.

I really don't have anything to say about the fact that it exists, other than I'm glad they include the caveat of having to be a high performance student in order to get that privilege. My mom's a teacher in a predominantly Hispanic system and she wants to rip her hair out every time a student takes an extended absence to go to their country of heritage. Although I recognize the time differences between the two, leaving the classroom for most reasons isn't exactly conducive to a healthy education.

[2LeTTeRS]

Separation of church and state. Kids shouldn't be practicing religion at public schools. If they want to practice their religion during school hours, I suggest they go to a private school.

Your interpretation of "separation of church and state" is at best overly broad or at worst totally wrong. The courts have interpreted this to mean that any law which serves to establish an official religion, or that prohibits the free exercise of religion (which you seem to endorse) is unconstitutional.

[Dresta]

Your interpretation of "separation of church and state" is at best overly broad or at worst totally wrong. The courts have interpreted this to mean that any law which serves to establish an official religion, or that prohibits the free exercise of religion (which you seem to endorse) is unconstitutional.
Then the courts are wrong. The first Amendment 'establishment' and 'free exercise' clause were modelled on the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which was drafted by Jefferson. Jefferson is on record saying the first Amendment's purpose is to create a 'wall of separation' between Church and State - that implies literal separation. Madison is also documented in his Detached Memoranda as declaring the appointing of chaplains in congress and having national days of prayer were 'unconstitutional'

It means that the state can not financially support any religious practice, nor provide any funding for religious institutions or practices through the spending of tax-payer money. That means no prayer in school, that means no 'in God we trust' on the money, it means no chaplains in Congress, and no 'Under God' in the pledge of allegiance (a defacing of the original btw).

[2LeTTeRS]

Then the courts are wrong. The first Amendment 'establishment' and 'free exercise' clause were modelled on the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which was drafted by Jefferson. Jefferson is on record saying the first Amendment's purpose is to create a 'wall of separation' between Church and State - that implies literal separation. Madison is also documented in his Detached Memoranda as declaring the appointing of chaplains in congress and having national days of prayer were 'unconstitutional'

It means that the state can not financially support any religious practice, nor provide any funding for religious institutions or practices through the spending of tax-payer money. That means no prayer in school, that means no 'in God we trust' on the money, it means no chaplains in Congress, and no 'Under God' in the pledge of allegiance (a defacing of the original btw).

Seems to me your interpretation is wrong. You're right that Jefferson intended there to be a wall created separating the government from over-involving itself in religious matters, but you neglect to mention that the system he was contrasting it with was one in which the King was considered the Head of the Church and all citizens were forced to be members.

The world you imagined seems to be one in which people only are allowed to practice religion in the privacy of their own homes; and I can say emphatically that the majority of Congress did not believe that.

[code green]

Seems to me your interpretation is wrong. You're right that Jefferson intended there to be a wall created separating the government from over-involving itself in religious matters, but you neglect to mention that the system he was contrasting it with was one in which the King was considered the Head of the Church and all citizens were forced to be members.

The world you imagined seems to be one in which people only are allowed to practice religion in the privacy of their own homes; and I can say emphatically that the majority of Congress did not believe that.

Yeah, I agree. We took a mechanism to ensure equality and bastardized it into seclusion. It's a big issue I have with the organizations that I referred to earlier that only seem to exist to harass organizations about what they can and cannot display when it comes to religion. The same people that are championing things like gay marriage and abortion under the conception of "live and let live," are totally flipping over the table when it comes to things like the Pledge of Allegiance or a post office displaying a Christmas tree.

"Live and Let Live" should be just that, regardless of the subject at hand, as long as nobody is truly getting hurt.

[Dresta]

Seems to me your interpretation is wrong. You're right that Jefferson intended there to be a wall created separating the government from over-involving itself in religious matters, but you neglect to mention that the system he was contrasting it with was one in which the King was considered the Head of the Church and all citizens were forced to be members.

The world you imagined seems to be one in which people only are allowed to practice religion in the privacy of their own homes; and I can say emphatically that the majority of Congress did not believe that.
Seems to me your interpretation of my interpretation is wrong. People can practice their religion wherever they like provided the religious observance is not initiated and funded by the taxpayer and doesn't interfere with the religious freedom of others. As far as i'm aware a church is not a home and you can practice religion there - you can practice religion on the sidewalk or even in school, but you CAN'T have officialised 'hour of prayer' or anything similar because it is official state religious discrimination.

Also, the 'wall of separation' means that the government doesn't involve itself AT ALL in religious matters - hence the use of the word 'wall' (you cannot go through one). None of this even implies that religion is confined to the home.

[GimmeThat]

what one ought to taken into the consideration when discussing the meaning of the separation of church and state

isn't to create a state without the determination of what is morally correct and what is wrong. but to do so without the influence given directly "by the church"


as for religious rituals and practices

clearly, it should/have nothing to do with the state.

are most likely be best left with the civil court, instead of the state as well as the supreme court.


my 2 cents