Kneel!

[Meriweather]

The Supreme Court has long held that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment forbids school-sponsored prayer or religious indoctrination. Over thirty years ago, the Court struck down classroom prayers and scripture readings even where they were voluntary and students had the option of being excused. See School Dist. of Abington Township v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963); Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962). The Court earlier had struck down a "released-time" program providing voluntary religious instruction in public schools during regular school hours. See Illinois ex rel. McCollum v. Board of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 209-10 (1948).

Talking about a religion is not establishing a religion. However, AGAIN, I am talking about teaching the Bible, not a religion.

 

[Hollie]

The Supreme Court has long held that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment forbids school-sponsored prayer or religious indoctrination. Over thirty years ago, the Court struck down classroom prayers and scripture readings even where they were voluntary and students had the option of being excused. See School Dist. of Abington Township v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963); Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962). The Court earlier had struck down a "released-time" program providing voluntary religious instruction in public schools during regular school hours. See Illinois ex rel. McCollum v. Board of Educ., 333 U.S. 203, 209-10 (1948).

Talking about a religion is not establishing a religion. However, AGAIN, I am talking about teaching the Bible, not a religion.

I understand you insist that the Bible (and thus Christianity), be taught in the public schools but that is clearly establishing a religion. The Bible is a most core element of the Christian religion. Christianity is a proselytizing religion so I understand your insistence but the courts have ruled on this matter.

 

[Meriweather]

I understand you insist that the Bible (and thus Christianity), be taught in the public schools but that is clearly establishing a religion. The Bible is a most core element of the Christian religion. Christianity is a proselytizing religion so I understand your insistence but the courts have ruled on this matter.

The trouble is...you do not understand.

 

[Hollie]

I understand you insist that the Bible (and thus Christianity), be taught in the public schools but that is clearly establishing a religion. The Bible is a most core element of the Christian religion. Christianity is a proselytizing religion so I understand your insistence but the courts have ruled on this matter.

The trouble is...you do not understand.

I understand the courts have already ruled on your attempt to bring religion into the school system.

 

[shimon]

1.According to the novel “Red Sparrow,” the Russian’s intelligence services were exceptionally good at compromising, and co-opting Americans…even American agents, into working for them. And, there is some evidence for that, some spies having given up their values, heritage, upbringing for various rewards, or by certain threats.

But no nation, agency, organization is as good at it as American Leftists have been at forcing everyday Americans to, ….if I may paraphrase R.E.M., …agree to ‘losing their religion.’ …. swapping for the religion of the state, Militant Secularism.



Sometimes they’re really outspoken about it:

“Rahm Emanuel: Athletes Kneeling During National Anthem Akin to Kneeling at ‘Religious Services’ Rahm Emanuel: Athletes Kneeling During National Anthem Akin to Kneeling at ‘Religious Services’ - Non Perele - News Online



2. And lots of those who have succumbed practice ‘convert psychology, they ridicule traditional religion while bowing their head to their new religion, Militant Secularism. One denomination of MS religion is the cult of Darwinism. As much as it is trumpeted by Secularists, there is no proof of same, but, as they respond to that complaint….neither is there for God. Touché.

Faith is the mode for both traditional religion, and for Darwinism.

"Darwinism, by contrast, is an essential ingredient in secularism, that aggressive, quasi-religious faith without a deity. The Sternberg case seems, in many ways, an instance of one religion persecuting a rival, demanding loyalty from anyone who enters one of its churches -- like the National Museum of Natural History.”
The Branding of a Heretic




3. “The secularists [that The New York Times, Katherine] Stewart represents just refuse to acknowledge that their religious beliefs are in fact religious beliefs, and of a far creepier and deadlier kind than Christians’.
….the belief that it is possible to fix the world by applying government pressure? That is not a belief that can be wholly validated by research or experience. In fact, research and experience both indicate that central planning usually makes life even more nasty, brutish, and short.

So what is this unfounded, undocumented, unprovable faith in government power to correct human psyches and behavior if not a religious (metaphysical) belief? It is also an unprovable and metaphysical belief about what a human is — a thing that can be “corrected” by politics and whose “error” is not intrinsic to itself. Again, these are all metaphysical, religious beliefs with no empirical basis or possibility of being fully empirically proven.

The secular, pagan, atheist types are the ones who claim religious assumptions are evil. They do so because they erroneously believe they are free from such assumptions. But in truth, no one is.””
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'



Call them atheists, or Militant Secularists..... they teach their religion in government school, don’t they.

Kneeling was quite common to do before a king or a nobleman...I understand what you are stating here and I don’t disagree In what is being done and by the way Jews do not kneel but the chazzan does in one very specific place during an orthodox service During the high holidays it is more of a laying flat and prostate before G-d ... Originally Jews prostrated themselves similar to how Muslims prayed but that changed as we were to remain a “ holy” or separate people so our style of praying changed with our circumstances..Regardless I find the subject of kneeling very interesting for similar reasons you have brought forth...

 

[Meriweather]

I understand the courts have already ruled on your attempt to bring religion into the school system.

I understand:

• You fervently wish to cling to ignorance of the Bible
• You want everyone else to be equally as ignorant.
• You refuse to understand the difference between studying a book and establishing/practicing a religion.
• You are covering your ears and calling 'na-na-na-na' when you begin to hear how no religious teaching is involved.

So, I guess we have covered everything and you are still at the same place, with no further understanding, as when we began. Out of curiosity: Should people who live in a democracy study Karl Marx and Marxism? Stalin and the Communist Manifesto? Russian history? Or does all this make us German or Russian? If it does not, then it is quite interesting that you believe studying the writings of ancient man (i.e. the Bible, Quran, etc) makes one religious.

 

[Hollie]

I understand the courts have already ruled on your attempt to bring religion into the school system.

I understand:

• You fervently wish to cling to ignorance of the Bible
• You want everyone else to be equally as ignorant.
• You refuse to understand the difference between studying a book and establishing/practicing a religion.
• You are covering your ears and calling 'na-na-na-na' when you begin to hear how no religious teaching is involved.

So, I guess we have covered everything and you are still at the same place, with no further understanding, as when we began. Out of curiosity: Should people who live in a democracy study Karl Marx and Marxism? Stalin and the Communist Manifesto? Russian history? Or does all this make us German or Russian? If it does not, then it is quite interesting that you believe studying the writings of ancient man (i.e. the Bible, Quran, etc) makes one religious.

I see you're enraged but your anger is misplaced. Your argument is that you want Bible study to be a part of the public school syllabus but you claim Bible study is not connected to Christianity. That seems rather dishonest to me.

You earlier wrote: “I keep harping on that the Bible should be taught along with Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, Science, History, PE, etc.”

What part of teaching the Bible does not include teaching Christianity?

What I see in your argument mirrors the tactics of the industry of Christian fundamentalism in their dishonest tactics of rebranding creationism to scientific creationism to intelligent design. It's Christian fundamentalism under a burqa of silly labels in an attempt to force Christian Bible study into public schools.

Kitzmiller v. Dover: Decision of the Court, Part 3

The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.

Both Defendants and many of the leading proponents of ID make a bedrock assumption which is utterly false. Their presupposition is that evolutionary theory is antithetical to a belief in the existence of a supreme being and to religion in general. Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs' scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator.

To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions.

The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.

Note: I added the bolding to the last sentence.

Lies and deceit are at the heart of Christian fundamentalists to force their religion into the public schools.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Kneel!.

View attachment 369749

Is that the head of the Militant Secularist church......or the head of the DNC????

 

[PoliticalChic]

1.According to the novel “Red Sparrow,” the Russian’s intelligence services were exceptionally good at compromising, and co-opting Americans…even American agents, into working for them. And, there is some evidence for that, some spies having given up their values, heritage, upbringing for various rewards, or by certain threats.

But no nation, agency, organization is as good at it as American Leftists have been at forcing everyday Americans to, ….if I may paraphrase R.E.M., …agree to ‘losing their religion.’ …. swapping for the religion of the state, Militant Secularism.



Sometimes they’re really outspoken about it:

“Rahm Emanuel: Athletes Kneeling During National Anthem Akin to Kneeling at ‘Religious Services’ Rahm Emanuel: Athletes Kneeling During National Anthem Akin to Kneeling at ‘Religious Services’ - Non Perele - News Online



2. And lots of those who have succumbed practice ‘convert psychology, they ridicule traditional religion while bowing their head to their new religion, Militant Secularism. One denomination of MS religion is the cult of Darwinism. As much as it is trumpeted by Secularists, there is no proof of same, but, as they respond to that complaint….neither is there for God. Touché.

Faith is the mode for both traditional religion, and for Darwinism.

"Darwinism, by contrast, is an essential ingredient in secularism, that aggressive, quasi-religious faith without a deity. The Sternberg case seems, in many ways, an instance of one religion persecuting a rival, demanding loyalty from anyone who enters one of its churches -- like the National Museum of Natural History.”
The Branding of a Heretic




3. “The secularists [that The New York Times, Katherine] Stewart represents just refuse to acknowledge that their religious beliefs are in fact religious beliefs, and of a far creepier and deadlier kind than Christians’.
….the belief that it is possible to fix the world by applying government pressure? That is not a belief that can be wholly validated by research or experience. In fact, research and experience both indicate that central planning usually makes life even more nasty, brutish, and short.

So what is this unfounded, undocumented, unprovable faith in government power to correct human psyches and behavior if not a religious (metaphysical) belief? It is also an unprovable and metaphysical belief about what a human is — a thing that can be “corrected” by politics and whose “error” is not intrinsic to itself. Again, these are all metaphysical, religious beliefs with no empirical basis or possibility of being fully empirically proven.

The secular, pagan, atheist types are the ones who claim religious assumptions are evil. They do so because they erroneously believe they are free from such assumptions. But in truth, no one is.””
Barr: The People Trying To 'Impose Their Values' Are 'Militant Secularists'



Call them atheists, or Militant Secularists..... they teach their religion in government school, don’t they.

Kneeling was quite common to do before a king or a nobleman...I understand what you are stating here and I don’t disagree In what is being done and by the way Jews do not kneel but the chazzan does in one very specific place during an orthodox service During the high holidays it is more of a laying flat and prostate before G-d ... Originally Jews prostrated themselves similar to how Muslims prayed but that changed as we were to remain a “ holy” or separate people so our style of praying changed with our circumstances..Regardless I find the subject of kneeling very interesting for similar reasons you have brought forth...

Informative.

 

[Meriweather]

I see you're enraged but your anger is misplaced.

Then you are not engaging with me, but an enraged creation of your own mind, perhaps a reflection of your own mind? Hollie, I am simply shrugging. Some people have no understanding of what the original Biblical authors were conveying to their original audience. Original authors were not thinking about young earth, planet wide floods, or the world being created in seven 24-hour periods, or Rapture. It took modern language and culture to come up with all of that. These two visions are like having two separate books. I am in favor of people knowing about the original because it is quite fascinating. You are saying, "Not interested" and that is fine with me. I still think it is a good idea, despite what you think. And you think it is a bad idea, despite what I think. Yet you see rage while I am at peace, which means the rage is within yourself and you are reflecting it onto me.

 

[JoeB131]

I understand:

• You fervently wish to cling to ignorance of the Bible
• You want everyone else to be equally as ignorant.
• You refuse to understand the difference between studying a book and establishing/practicing a religion.
• You are covering your ears and calling 'na-na-na-na' when you begin to hear how no religious teaching is involved.

Again, I was subjected to 12 years of Bible Study... and they avoided the really juicy parts about Jephthah butchering his daughter or God sending bears to maul children who made fun of a bald prophet.

I'd be all for an atheist bible study in the schools, showing some of the crazy teachings in the bible, using the actual text, but I doubt you'd be down for that.

If we did it your way and the way the Nuns did it, We'd all hear the cute story about Lot's wife being turned into a pillar of salt, but we wouldn't hear the story about Lot getting flat out drunk and fucking both of his daughters...

 

[JoeB131]

Then you are not engaging with me, but an enraged creation of your own mind, perhaps a reflection of your own mind? Hollie, I am simply shrugging. Some people have no understanding of what the original Biblical authors were conveying to their original audience. Original authors were not thinking about young earth, planet wide floods, or the world being created in seven 24-hour periods, or Rapture.

The problem is, the Bible SAYS THESE THINGS EXPLICITLY. (Except for the Rapture, that's something the Fundi-tards made up.)

 

[Meriweather]

What part of teaching the Bible does not include teaching Christianity?

As I wrote before, in our current World History textbooks, we read about all religions and what they were teaching. This is not considered teaching our students to become Buddhist, Taoist, Hindus, Jews, Christians, Muslims, etc. The Lord of the Flies does not teach our students to gather a group of friends and go off and have their own adventure/society. No more would teaching the Bible result in students running off to the nearest synagogue, pagan site, or church. Some may wish to find a time machine so they could go back thousands of years and live in those times to see it all for themselves, but that is about it.

 

[Meriweather]

What I see in your argument mirrors the tactics of the industry of Christian fundamentalism in their dishonest tactics of rebranding creationism to scientific creationism to intelligent design. It's Christian fundamentalism under a burqa of silly labels in an attempt to force Christian Bible study into public schools.

Then you are not hearing me.

 

[Hollie]

I see you're enraged but your anger is misplaced.

Then you are not engaging with me, but an enraged creation of your own mind, perhaps a reflection of your own mind? Hollie, I am simply shrugging. Some people have no understanding of what the original Biblical authors were conveying to their original audience. Original authors were not thinking about young earth, planet wide floods, or the world being created in seven 24-hour periods, or Rapture. It took modern language and culture to come up with all of that. These two visions are like having two separate books. I am in favor of people knowing about the original because it is quite fascinating. You are saying, "Not interested" and that is fine with me. I still think it is a good idea, despite what you think. And you think it is a bad idea, despite what I think. Yet you see rage while I am at peace, which means the rage is within yourself and you are reflecting it onto me.

I’m not clear as to how you have this claimed intimate knowledge of the Bible and know with certainty what the original authors were thinking. That sounds to me like hubris.

On the other hand, we know the intent of the Founding Fathers regarding freedom from religion. We can read their writings and read the Constitution that spells out their intent. They purposely ratified a constitution that was totally secular in nature (and intent). They clearly did not wish to eradicate religion which is why they enacted a muzzle on government to keep religious expression free.

There’s no rage on my part. I’ve been critiquing your argument in support of Bible study as somehow separate from religious study when inserted in public schools and find that to be inconsistent.

 

[Hollie]

What part of teaching the Bible does not include teaching Christianity?

As I wrote before, in our current World History textbooks, we read about all religions and what they were teaching. This is not considered teaching our students to become Buddhist, Taoist, Hindus, Jews, Christians, Muslims, etc. The Lord of the Flies does not teach our students to gather a group of friends and go off and have their own adventure/society. No more would teaching the Bible result in students running off to the nearest synagogue, pagan site, or church. Some may wish to find a time machine so they could go back thousands of years and live in those times to see it all for themselves, but that is about it.

World history books are not religious texts. Do you see the difference?

You wrote:

“No more would teaching the Bible result in students running off to the nearest synagogue, pagan site, or church.”

You could have written out that intent several pages ago. As I explained several pages ago, teaching the Bible, which is teaching religion, violates the establishment clause.

 

[Meriweather]

I’m not clear as to how you have this claimed intimate knowledge of the Bible and know with certainty what the original authors were thinking. That sounds to me like hubris.

Or decades of study with primary sources and reading commentaries of ancient rabbis. Then there were additional years of study tracking where a teaching (such as young earth) originally appeared and through whom.

 

[Hollie]

I’m not clear as to how you have this claimed intimate knowledge of the Bible and know with certainty what the original authors were thinking. That sounds to me like hubris.

Or decades of study with primary sources and reading commentaries of ancient rabbis. Then there were additional years of study tracking where a teaching (such as young earth) originally appeared and through whom.

That’s fine. However, others have reached different conclusions after similar experiences.

Who is the final arbiter of the ‘true” interpretation?

As the gods have chosen not to referee the match, do we add all the personal opinions, divide by the median and reach some truth?

 

[Meriweather]

On the other hand, we know the intent of the Founding Fathers regarding freedom from religion. We can read their writings and read the Constitution that spells out their intent. They purposely ratified a constitution that was totally secular in nature (and intent). They clearly did not wish to eradicate religion which is why they enacted a muzzle on government to keep religious expression free.

The Founding Fathers did not tout Freedom from religion, but freedom of religion. Their history and culture was the people being required to follow the religion of its leaders. Our Founding Fathers said the leaders of America would not establish a state religion--they would make no law about religion at all. Like speech, religion was free to thrive. I think most of the Founding Fathers would agree that the SCOTUS decision overlooked that promise. It is a different issue entirely, but in our schools and in the public square we should see all our community's religions on display. The Founding Fathers thought all religions and all opinions should be welcome in our society. I think the current stifling of both religion and opinions in the public arena would greatly trouble them.

But as I said, this is an entirely separate discussion. Right now the idea I have presented is about teaching the Bible without teaching the religions that came later.

 

[Meriweather]

There’s no rage on my part.

Good to hear. I was just wondering where it came from as there was never any on my part.