atheist to pass out materials at Florida high schools

[LittleNipper]

Of course we have that right in prohibiting indoctrination and prioritization of religion in public, tax-supported venues.

It is good education to include comparative religious and non-religious expressions and doctrines in the appropriate classroom, encouraging discussion and reflection.

the religious weill never allow this to happen.

They know full well if you teach a young person about all the religions and what they believe it becomes VERY apperent to the person that the vast majority of religions are dead wrong.

If they ALL claim tell the truth then only one of them can be correct.

That means all but the one you choose is lying to you.


how does that make you feel about the track record of mans religions?


it will make you reflect back on the ONE someone chose for you to be indoctrinated into.

It will cause more people to be atheists.


The religious wont allow that

True Christians enjoy a good debate. And you are right, most beliefs are based on shallow logic and inherited philosophies. But education is not about hidding the facts under a basket but to set the candle on a light stand. What is the difference if someone believes a lie or accepts another lie. The end result is exaclty one and the same. What is good is to stir the pot and this confronts everyone with the stew they are actually in. And hopefully they will come to see the light.

 

[Underhill]

Atheists win right to pass out materials at Florida high schools - Washington Times



If the Christians get to do it, then so should we. That was the winning argument of atheists who fought for access to several Florida high schools to distribute group documents — same as evangelicals did with Bibles in January.

“We want to close the door to religion in schools, not open it to Freethought,” said David Williamson, an organizer with the Central Florida Freethought Community, the Orlando Sentinel reported. “[But] if they’re going to have a religious discussion on campus, we need to be a part of it.”


Read more: Atheists win right to pass out materials at Florida high schools - Washington Times
Follow us: [MENTION=39892]Was[/MENTION]htimes on Twitter



fair is fair dont you think?

We want to close the door to religion in schools, not open it to Freethought So true! This is exactly what active atheists want to do. They do not want freedom of thought. They want only their thoughts.

So you are going to pretend you guys are okay with Muslims going into schools and spreading their religion? How about Scientoligist?

The point isn't to stifle anything. It's a school. A place of learning for our kids. If you want to stand on the street and preach all day long I couldn't care less. But schools are not the place for any of this.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course we have that right in prohibiting indoctrination and prioritization of religion in public, tax-supported venues.

It is good education to include comparative religious and non-religious expressions and doctrines in the appropriate classroom, encouraging discussion and reflection.

Does it cost taxpayers anything to allow the handing out of various pamphlets and bibles? Indoctrination is one set of rules, one set of values, one set of ideals while excluding everything else. Are Christians hurful people? Do they regularly pick fights and beat up others who look at them crosseyed? Are Christians hate filled? Do they get drunk and drugged out or go door to door shooting people in the name of Jesus?

My guess is that they do not; however, they do make people feel uncomfortable about choices that they make and why. And this I feel is why Christianity has been excluded from public schools. Everyone NEEDS to be forced to examine theri own beliefs, ideologies, values, and opinions. This is how people become educated. They weigh the pros and cons. We do not have great public education today because we are unable to look at ourselves objectively without someone crying for political/ideological correctness. And the only ones who bennefit are secular humanists and atheists. Because they have an open forum to present materialistic naturalism....

While your religious and philosophical belief is open to discussion, your argument for proslytization on tax-supported venues founders on constitutional ground. You may not do so

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course we have that right in prohibiting indoctrination and prioritization of religion in public, tax-supported venues.

It is good education to include comparative religious and non-religious expressions and doctrines in the appropriate classroom, encouraging discussion and reflection.

the religious weill never allow this to happen.

They know full well if you teach a young person about all the religions and what they believe it becomes VERY apperent to the person that the vast majority of religions are dead wrong.

If they ALL claim tell the truth then only one of them can be correct.

That means all but the one you choose is lying to you.


how does that make you feel about the track record of mans religions?


it will make you reflect back on the ONE someone chose for you to be indoctrinated into.

It will cause more people to be atheists.


The religious wont allow that

True Christians enjoy a good debate. And you are right, most beliefs are based on shallow logic and inherited philosophies. But education is not about hidding the facts under a basket but to set the candle on a light stand. What is the difference if someone believes a lie or accepts another lie. The end result is exaclty one and the same. What is good is to stir the pot and this confronts everyone with the stew they are actually in. And hopefully they will come to see the light.

Within in constitutional restraints, yes.

 

[Oldguy]

the vast majority of religions are dead wrong.

That must mean there are a minority of religions which are right. Which ones are they?

 

[FA_Q2]

We do have constitutional protection from religious indoctrination in institutions t hat are tax supported.

No, we don’t by the way. We have constitutional protections that prevent THE GOVERNMENT from indoctrinating people into religious institutions. There is nothing in the constitution at all that prevents CITIZENS from proselytizing in say, a park, that is clearly owned and operated by the state. The right in question does not prevent you from doing something, it prevents THE GOVERNMENT from doing something.

You may certainly worship or otherwise conduct your religious expression in such an environment as long as (1) you do not disrupt the organization's activities, or (2) infringe on your neighbor's right to not be infringed on by you.

You just moved the goalposts. You original statement was:

Proslytizing by religious or atheist groups should be prohibited on tax-supported ground.

Atheism, religious studies, comparative religions, etc., should be taught as subjectively objectively and openly in HS classrooms.

Prohibited on tax supported ground. That is incorrect; there is no reason (or constitutional fallback) that would do such a thing. It is ridiculous on its face.

That tax payer supported activity should not proselytize and, as you stated, it cannot affect the functions of that agency either BUT that does not mean that you should be prevented from doing so anywhere. A school should not be allowed to proselytize; there is no reason that a church should be barred from sending a representative there though as long as his or her actions did not disrupt the school activities in any way. They are not paying for it.

 

[Oldguy]

We do have constitutional protection from religious indoctrination in institutions t hat are tax supported.

No, we don’t by the way. We have constitutional protections that prevent THE GOVERNMENT from indoctrinating people into religious institutions. There is nothing in the constitution at all that prevents CITIZENS from proselytizing in say, a park, that is clearly owned and operated by the state. The right in question does not prevent you from doing something, it prevents THE GOVERNMENT from doing something.

You may certainly worship or otherwise conduct your religious expression in such an environment as long as (1) you do not disrupt the organization's activities, or (2) infringe on your neighbor's right to not be infringed on by you.

You just moved the goalposts. You original statement was:

Proslytizing by religious or atheist groups should be prohibited on tax-supported ground.

Atheism, religious studies, comparative religions, etc., should be taught as subjectively objectively and openly in HS classrooms.

Prohibited on tax supported ground. That is incorrect; there is no reason (or constitutional fallback) that would do such a thing. It is ridiculous on its face.

That tax payer supported activity should not proselytize and, as you stated, it cannot affect the functions of that agency either BUT that does not mean that you should be prevented from doing so anywhere. A school should not be allowed to proselytize; there is no reason that a church should be barred from sending a representative there though as long as his or her actions did not disrupt the school activities in any way. They are not paying for it.

The problem is that if government restricts access to people on its property to just one or two or three religions, it's viewed as an endorsement of that religion and THAT violates the 1st amendment. If people are compelled to listen to it or participate (as all we school kids were years ago) that too violates the 1st Amendment.

In the end, government has two options: Disallow ALL religious proselytizing or allow them all equal access. Either would be in line with the 1st Amendment, but neither is acceptable to those Christian's who would "put God back into the schools."

Therein lies the problem. They want access to school kids, but they don't want anybody else having that same access. That clearly violates the 1st Amendment rights of the target audience, does it not?

 

[FA_Q2]

We do have constitutional protection from religious indoctrination in institutions t hat are tax supported.

No, we don’t by the way. We have constitutional protections that prevent THE GOVERNMENT from indoctrinating people into religious institutions. There is nothing in the constitution at all that prevents CITIZENS from proselytizing in say, a park, that is clearly owned and operated by the state. The right in question does not prevent you from doing something, it prevents THE GOVERNMENT from doing something.


You just moved the goalposts. You original statement was:

Proslytizing by religious or atheist groups should be prohibited on tax-supported ground.

Atheism, religious studies, comparative religions, etc., should be taught as subjectively objectively and openly in HS classrooms.

Prohibited on tax supported ground. That is incorrect; there is no reason (or constitutional fallback) that would do such a thing. It is ridiculous on its face.

That tax payer supported activity should not proselytize and, as you stated, it cannot affect the functions of that agency either BUT that does not mean that you should be prevented from doing so anywhere. A school should not be allowed to proselytize; there is no reason that a church should be barred from sending a representative there though as long as his or her actions did not disrupt the school activities in any way. They are not paying for it.

The problem is that if government restricts access to people on its property to just one or two or three religions, it's viewed as an endorsement of that religion and THAT violates the 1st amendment. If people are compelled to listen to it or participate (as all we school kids were years ago) that too violates the 1st Amendment.

In the end, government has two options: Disallow ALL religious proselytizing or allow them all equal access. Either would be in line with the 1st Amendment, but neither is acceptable to those Christian's who would "put God back into the schools."

Therein lies the problem. They want access to school kids, but they don't want anybody else having that same access. That clearly violates the 1st Amendment rights of the target audience, does it not?

Bold part:
The first honestly is NOT an option. The second is the only proper action that the government can take. I care not what religious bigots want. Separating or singling out any one group is wrong as you say and defiantly a violation of the first as you also pointed out. When I say that such people should be allowed to spread their word or share their faith I mean that all people should be allowed to do so. I have not argued that there should be anything other than complete and open access for anyone that wants to spend their time and their own resources doing so.

Underlined part:
I should add that I would not disagree with basic rules concerning it though that would cover ‘not disturbing the operations’ of that place. IOW, someone screaming on top of a box at passersby could be stopped but that does not mean that open access is not shared by all.

As far as them not wanting others access though, can you even substantiate that? I don’t really think that is correct by the way. There are a few like this but for the most part; I have not seen anyone decry access of other faiths as long as they have access as well. The common complaint that I do here though is that many Christians feel that Islam is given access they are not in order to appease pc attitudes. I am not saying that this is true but just that I have seen that sentiment. That is not complaining that one should have access and the other not. It is asking for equal access.

 

[JakeStarkey]

FA_Q2 knows his interpretation is not the one accepted by SCOTUS and the interpreters of the law.

We did not allow the Gideons or the atheists in the foyers of our schools passing our propaganda.

The proper place in tax-supported schools (notice to FA-Q2 - don't change the discussion) for student discussion is in the proper classes.

 

[Oldguy]

No, we don’t by the way. We have constitutional protections that prevent THE GOVERNMENT from indoctrinating people into religious institutions. There is nothing in the constitution at all that prevents CITIZENS from proselytizing in say, a park, that is clearly owned and operated by the state. The right in question does not prevent you from doing something, it prevents THE GOVERNMENT from doing something.


You just moved the goalposts. You original statement was:

Prohibited on tax supported ground. That is incorrect; there is no reason (or constitutional fallback) that would do such a thing. It is ridiculous on its face.

That tax payer supported activity should not proselytize and, as you stated, it cannot affect the functions of that agency either BUT that does not mean that you should be prevented from doing so anywhere. A school should not be allowed to proselytize; there is no reason that a church should be barred from sending a representative there though as long as his or her actions did not disrupt the school activities in any way. They are not paying for it.

The problem is that if government restricts access to people on its property to just one or two or three religions, it's viewed as an endorsement of that religion and THAT violates the 1st amendment. If people are compelled to listen to it or participate (as all we school kids were years ago) that too violates the 1st Amendment.

In the end, government has two options: Disallow ALL religious proselytizing or allow them all equal access. Either would be in line with the 1st Amendment, but neither is acceptable to those Christian's who would "put God back into the schools."

Therein lies the problem. They want access to school kids, but they don't want anybody else having that same access. That clearly violates the 1st Amendment rights of the target audience, does it not?

Bold part:
The first honestly is NOT an option. The second is the only proper action that the government can take. I care not what religious bigots want. Separating or singling out any one group is wrong as you say and defiantly a violation of the first as you also pointed out. When I say that such people should be allowed to spread their word or share their faith I mean that all people should be allowed to do so. I have not argued that there should be anything other than complete and open access for anyone that wants to spend their time and their own resources doing so.

Underlined part:
I should add that I would not disagree with basic rules concerning it though that would cover ‘not disturbing the operations’ of that place. IOW, someone screaming on top of a box at passersby could be stopped but that does not mean that open access is not shared by all.

As far as them not wanting others access though, can you even substantiate that? I don’t really think that is correct by the way. There are a few like this but for the most part; I have not seen anyone decry access of other faiths as long as they have access as well. The common complaint that I do here though is that many Christians feel that Islam is given access they are not in order to appease pc attitudes. I am not saying that this is true but just that I have seen that sentiment. That is not complaining that one should have access and the other not. It is asking for equal access.

No, I can't offer a link to substantiate that claim (right now, but maybe later) but I know dozens of these people personally and I guarantee you they'd have a cow if an Imam showed up at the school house wanting to talk to the kids.

I'm reminded of a City Council which once voted to have a prayer led by a preacher before every session (Dallas?) That was great until a Wiccan minister asked to lead the prayer one day. Realizing that they could not refuse him, they quickly decided to dispense with the prayer altogether.

Too many of my brethren see "God in schools" as meaning their/our God. They seem to be unaware of either the Constitution or the Law of Unintended Consequences.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Atheists win right to pass out materials at Florida high schools - Washington Times



If the Christians get to do it, then so should we. That was the winning argument of atheists who fought for access to several Florida high schools to distribute group documents — same as evangelicals did with Bibles in January.

“We want to close the door to religion in schools, not open it to Freethought,” said David Williamson, an organizer with the Central Florida Freethought Community, the Orlando Sentinel reported. “[But] if they’re going to have a religious discussion on campus, we need to be a part of it.”


Read more: Atheists win right to pass out materials at Florida high schools - Washington Times
Follow us: @Washtimes on Twitter



fair is fair dont you think?

You think it is fair that schools can be sued to force them to let people distribute material? Did you ever think it would make more sense to simply tell everyone who is not part of the school to stay the fuck away?

Adding fuel to the legal fire: The Bible distributions in January stemmed from a threat of a lawsuit, too. The Orlando Sentinel reported that World Changers of Florida, a group that promotes more religion in schools, warned it would sue unless its members were allowed to place Bibles on a table in a public place for students to take. The atheists have to follow the same rules — no interaction with students, the newspaper reported.

 

[FA_Q2]

FA_Q2 knows his interpretation is not the one accepted by SCOTUS and the interpreters of the law.

We did not allow the Gideons or the atheists in the foyers of our schools passing our propaganda.

The proper place in tax-supported schools (notice to FA-Q2 - don't change the discussion) for student discussion is in the proper classes.

Notice that you have changed the goalposts, ignored the points and then made baseless claims. Don’t worry; I expect nothing less from you. At least oldguy is capable of having an adult conversation.

 

[whitehall]

Did the atheists imagine Christian groups were giving out Bibles on campus? Last I heard students in any union run public schools who were found in possession of Bibles on campus would be expelled.

 

[FA_Q2]

No, I can't offer a link to substantiate that claim (right now, but maybe later) but I know dozens of these people personally and I guarantee you they'd have a cow if an Imam showed up at the school house wanting to talk to the kids.

I'm reminded of a City Council which once voted to have a prayer led by a preacher before every session (Dallas?) That was great until a Wiccan minister asked to lead the prayer one day. Realizing that they could not refuse him, they quickly decided to dispense with the prayer altogether.

Too many of my brethren see "God in schools" as meaning their/our God. They seem to be unaware of either the Constitution or the Law of Unintended Consequences.

Well, the first part would not surprise me. That is the general attitude toward Islam at the moment; I just have not heard anyone here making those claims. At least not anyone that was credible enough for me to care. There are always some crazies out there.

The rest though, you are now talking about another thing entirely. For me there are three categories that this topic falls under. Many people have views that span all three but they are distinct in that there are vast differences in what should and should not be allowed. One is what we are discussing: the spreading of your religion/faith on taxpayer property. The other is doing so in the classroom. The last is the display of religious symbols on public land. Each is different in how we should approach this. For instance, I advocate that anyone should, within reasonable rules and in a non-disruptive manner, be able to speak about their faith on public land. I do not think that any religion whatsoever should be brought in the schools in any way barring that of a comparative religions class. The difference for me is in the fact that one is sponsored by the school in a class that you must attend and cannot possibly represent all faiths. The other is an outreach by whoever is willing to spend the time and effort and can be completely ignored.

Lastly would be the public lands but that is not on this topic or part of your statements so I’ll leave that for another day

 

[FA_Q2]

Did the atheists imagine Christian groups were giving out Bibles on campus? Last I heard students in any union run public schools who were found in possession of Bibles on campus would be expelled.

Ah, no. They did not imagine it, that is EXACTLY what happened. They were handing out bibles in the school to those that wanted one.

Such a scary thought, I know. At least to some of the people here

 

[JakeStarkey]

FA_Q2 knows his interpretation is not the one accepted by SCOTUS and the interpreters of the law.

We did not allow the Gideons or the atheists in the foyers of our schools passing our propaganda.

The proper place in tax-supported schools (notice to FA-Q2 - don't change the discussion) for student discussion is in the proper classes.

Notice that you have changed the goalposts, ignored the points and then made baseless claims. Don’t worry; I expect nothing less from you. At least oldguy is capable of having an adult conversation.

Typical you accuse me of what you did: change the goal posts. You are aware of this (post 74 above).

No, you don't get pass out propaganda, religious or atheist, in the hallways of tax-supported public schools.

You know it, and I know it.

 

[Noomi]

Atheists win right to pass out materials at Florida high schools - Washington Times



If the Christians get to do it, then so should we. That was the winning argument of atheists who fought for access to several Florida high schools to distribute group documents — same as evangelicals did with Bibles in January.

“We want to close the door to religion in schools, not open it to Freethought,” said David Williamson, an organizer with the Central Florida Freethought Community, the Orlando Sentinel reported. “[But] if they’re going to have a religious discussion on campus, we need to be a part of it.”


Read more: Atheists win right to pass out materials at Florida high schools - Washington Times
Follow us: [MENTION=39892]Was[/MENTION]htimes on Twitter



fair is fair dont you think?

Fair is fair - and if the Muslims wish to pass out material, they should be permitted to as well.

 

[Immanuel]

Theophobes promoting theophobia. How quaint.

Who cares?

Interesting that atheism is being treated like a religion, though.

You hate athiests huh?

What's your point? You hate Christians. Why would you come down so hard on CJ for being no different than you? Not that I believe he hates atheists, but it is and has been evident for a very long time that you hate Christians as well as your fellow Americans.

Immie

 

[LittleNipper]

Atheists win right to pass out materials at Florida high schools - Washington Times



If the Christians get to do it, then so should we. That was the winning argument of atheists who fought for access to several Florida high schools to distribute group documents — same as evangelicals did with Bibles in January.

“We want to close the door to religion in schools, not open it to Freethought,” said David Williamson, an organizer with the Central Florida Freethought Community, the Orlando Sentinel reported. “[But] if they’re going to have a religious discussion on campus, we need to be a part of it.”


Read more: Atheists win right to pass out materials at Florida high schools - Washington Times
Follow us: [MENTION=39892]Was[/MENTION]htimes on Twitter



fair is fair dont you think?

We want to close the door to religion in schools, not open it to Freethought So true! This is exactly what active atheists want to do. They do not want freedom of thought. They want only their thoughts.

So you are going to pretend you guys are okay with Muslims going into schools and spreading their religion? How about Scientoligist?

The point isn't to stifle anything. It's a school. A place of learning for our kids. If you want to stand on the street and preach all day long I couldn't care less. But schools are not the place for any of this.

Much of what Muslims believe is found in the Old and New Testament. They just do not hold to all of it. Mahamad did some picking and choosing and adding. But frankly I believe that if all the cards were placed on the table, Scientology would appear lame and the Quran would pale in comparison to what the Bible has to say --- at its fifth grade reading level --- I might add (King James or not). A school is a place to teach respect for study and investigation and figuring out answers to problems, and questioning values, It should not be a place of unmitigated bordom and unnaturally select segragated thought. And unfortunately, this is what secular humanists have made of much of public education.

 

[Oldguy]

We want to close the door to religion in schools, not open it to Freethought So true! This is exactly what active atheists want to do. They do not want freedom of thought. They want only their thoughts.

So you are going to pretend you guys are okay with Muslims going into schools and spreading their religion? How about Scientoligist?

The point isn't to stifle anything. It's a school. A place of learning for our kids. If you want to stand on the street and preach all day long I couldn't care less. But schools are not the place for any of this.

Much of what Muslims believe is found in the Old and New Testament. They just do not hold to all of it. Mahamad did some picking and choosing and adding. But frankly I believe that if all the cards were placed on the table, Scientology would appear lame and the Quran would pale in comparison to what the Bible has to say --- at its fifth grade reading level --- I might add (King James or not). A school is a place to teach respect for study and investigation and figuring out answers to problems, and questioning values, It should not be a place of unmitigated bordom and unnaturally select segragated thought. And unfortunately, this is what secular humanists have made of much of public education.

Nor should it be a place of religious instruction. That should occur in the home and in churches, not the school house.