Illinois: Doing away with freedom of religion, one bill at a time

[rahmota]

And why cant the kids pray at home before or after school? Aside from islam I am not aware of there being any real need for kids to be praying during the school day. And if they do so then they can fit it into the one reason they are there for, unless its a religious dogma indoctrination facilities, which is to learn and be educated.

Religious studies can be done for a grade but not prayer. Study how the religions interact, the history of their actions, the mythos behind a lot of the religions and the social impact of the various belief systems. But allowin og forcing people to pray or be silent while others pray is a seriously bad idea.

And as for rights all the constitution says is the government cannot support religion. It does not say people have a right to their religion being forced down other peoples throats against their will. It basically says that the government will not support or interfere in someone having a religion or having the freedom FROM religion. Something a lot of the christian taliban have a problem with as they try to force this country into a theocracy just like the middle east.

And besides which its not a bad thing to keep prayer out of public schools as they are a government paid and sponsored organization and any support or conscessions or condoning of any religion is a violation of the constitution and the rights of others. Government support of religion must stop and must never be allowed to begin. And if no one is allowed to pray in school then all are being treated equally and fairly and cannot claim that some other group is getting preferential treatment.

Besides like I've said before if you need to have government help to support your religion you must not have much faith in your religion.

[tendomentis]

It never fails to amaze me just how truly insensitive some people are to other walks of life.

For the record, I'm not Islamic or Christian. I don't follow any particular religion, but I recognize the rights of those who do and find the intolerance by some people to be very unenlightened.

It astounds me that intelligent people (or so-called) would have an actual issue with another student or students being permitted to go somewhere secluded on campus to be allowed to practice their faith, ANY FAITH, during the school day. Practicioners of various faiths from around the world pray or meditate during different times of the day, but are forced to conceal or compromise their practices when attending a public school because the government doesn't allow for ANY religious practice AT ALL in the school system.

I personally don't agree with teaching religion, or making a class about religion NECESSARY for a grade in public schools....I feel that is definately going to far. But to deny those who would practice their religion during the day the right to do so is unconstitutional and downright narrow minded. That goes for any faith, be it any of the flavors of Christianity, Islam, Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, etc....

Those citizens have just as much right to practice their religion during the school day as you have the right to NOT be required to practice religion during the school day.

[rahmota]

Tendo said:

But to deny those who would practice their religion during the day the right to do so is unconstitutional

Actually no you are incorrect about that. Public schools making an accomodation for a person's religion would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT OF A RELIGION BY THE GOVERNMENT. As prohibited by the First amendment to the Constitution's Establishment clause.

Also not making accomodations for students to go and have their own special time for prayer is not Denying anyone anything under the Free Exercise clause of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. they can still pray on their own time, at lunch, quietly in study hall to themselves, before school, after school, etc....The government is not saying they cannot pray just that they cannot take time out of the day and have special priviledges, forcing all others who do not worship the same way as the to take this time out of their day, and otherwise getting preferrential treatment. That if they want to pray they will have to do so on their own personal time. Not with governmental sponsorship and support.

Those citizens have just as much right to practice their religion during the school day as you have the right to NOT be required to practice religion during the school day.

You are quite correct in that statement however. I will totally agree with you that a person has the right to practice whatever relgion they want to that makes them comfortable as long as they do not break any other laws or are overly disruptive of the school day. i mean I doubt the schools would want a native american ritual that involves psychotropic substances during the school day, a wiccan skyclad ritual or an orthodox jew ritually sacrificing a lamb. Unfortuantely a lot of religious people or people with a misguided sense of rightness are more than willing to overlook the second part of your own statement. By making laws or rules that give special priviledges to followers of a religion that is infringing upon the rights and lives of those who do not follow a relgion at all or that particular religion. They however do not have the right to have laws establishing or supporting their religion. Any religion that feels they need laws to support it does not deserve those laws in the first place.

truly insensitive some people are to other walks of life

You want to talk about insensitive, unenlightened and intolerant uptight people? It has been my unfortunate personal experience that the majority of people who fit that bill are the most religious people you could meet. Not all religious people are that way but an unfortunate number of them are. And usually those nut jobs are the most vocal ones that reasonable intelligent people have to fight against.

[AFPheonix]

Congratulations, Tendomentis, you managed to put down about 3 different people just because they don't agree with you. Lovely.
Guess what. I WAS Christian when I was growing up. Did my faith suffer because I didn't have a specific time allotted to pray? No, I did it during the free time breaks we were given. That is what kids should continue to be doing. To do otherwise is trampling on the rights of the kids who don't practice religion of any kind. Not having it is not curtailing prayer among the faithful in any way, they just get to incorporate it into their breaks, as they will get to do during college and as they join the workforce.

[tendomentis]

So when it comes right down to it, you'd rather that some people sacrifice a little of their freedom for your convenience. That's what the heart of this matter is, and it's disgusting.

Hiding behind the whole "separation of church and state" clause is pathetic as that isn't what this is about. The government isn't sponsoring those students' relgions, merely making sure that their freedom of religion is allowed to exist during the school day.

Fundie christians who cry that our nation is going to hell because we took prayer out of the schools are one extreme of this arguement, and you are the other extreme. The ideal answer lies somewhere in between.

[Boozy]

You really are dense, aren't you?

Not cool.

[Greenday]

Fundie christians who cry that our nation is going to hell because we took prayer out of the schools are one extreme of this arguement, and you are the other extreme. The ideal answer lies somewhere in between.

This is called the gray fallacy. Some people say black, some people say white, and the rest figure the real answer has to be somewhere in the gray. But it's not always the case. If anything, you have presented some of the most absurd arguments without backing along with your personal attacks.

Yes, I HAVE taken classes on various cultures. I never payed attention in the class. I got an A. I've known about many different cultures in the world for a long time now.

Yes, I do read silently. Every night before I go to sleep I read. Sometimes when I'm on the toilet I read. Between classes I'll read.

So when it comes down to it, you'd prefer the rights of the majority to be sacrificed for the minority who actually want prayer time in school. Back in high school, if it was put to a vote, no prayer time would have won nearly unanimously. If we had prayer time for those couple kids who actually wanted it, the majority would be getting screwed over, not the minority. Your beliefs that the majority should have to suffer is "disgusting".

So before you make another comment about how dumb or stupid a member is, come up with a valid argument and actual back it with some reasoning. While this thread is about debating, and topics CAN become heated, this is a place for debating, not flaming. So keep your "denses" and other personal attacks out of it. Some of the people you are bashing are extremely intelligent. Hell, rahmota and I were on different sides when I entered the gun control debate. By the end of the debate, he had me nearly convinced to join the People's Militia.

[tendomentis]

My comments were not meant to be taken as flaming, merely frustration that the basic concepts I'm advocating seem to fall on deaf ears.

The gray fallacy only applies to logical thought problems where a middle ground cannot physically exist (i.e., I should go to work and I want to stay home and sleep, so no middle ground exists).

The resistance to the idea of actually allowing religious freedom by some members of this board is very similar to the resistance I find on some fundamental christian boards to allowing religious freedom without pushing the christian agenda, so in a very real sense those of you who are utterly resistant to allowing a balance (where the rest of the universe strives for a balance or median) are the other extreme.

If people are offended by my comments or opinions on this topic, I won't comment any further as nothing good comes of sharing ideas if nobody WANTS to hear ideas contrary to their own (despite the claim that this board is for debate).

[Seshat]

When I went to school, we had several students who skipped class at designated times for various reasons. Some were learning a musical instrument, some were seeing the guidance counsellor/school psychologist. We had one budding olympic-grade sportswoman in our school, too, who had special classes. None of us suffered academically because of this, as far as I know.

The practice of Islam requires prayer at specific times of the day. There may be other religions with similar requirements - I don't know of any, but I'm by no means a specialist in world religions.

If there's an unused classroom, or a corner of the library can be spared, the school could turn it into a non-denominational quiet room/chapel. The Islamic students could have special permission to slip out of class at their designated times, the other students could go the chapel during their breaks.

This would allow those students who need prayer or meditation to have it, with minimal impact on the other students. The few who have academic problems because of skipping class can be tutored by other members of their religious congregation, to make up for classes they missed.

It seems like a perfect solution to me. Does anyone have a problem with it?

[Seshat]

If people are offended by my comments or opinions on this topic, I won't comment any further as nothing good comes of sharing ideas if nobody WANTS to hear ideas contrary to their own (despite the claim that this board is for debate).

Stick to the ideas, don't debate the people. Look at the 'gun control' debate, and you'll see a marked lack of insults like "You really are dense, aren't you?" or assertions that opposing ideas are "pathetic".

I'm honestly interested in points of view which oppose my own, but I'm not at all interested in being insulted or having my point of view insulted. I believe that most humans are similar to me in that regard. (But I'm open to disagreement!)

As long as you are willing to keep the debate to ideas, not personalities, I believe you're welcome to keep posting.

[AFPheonix]

My comments were not meant to be taken as flaming, merely frustration that the basic concepts I'm advocating seem to fall on deaf ears.

They're not falling on deaf ears, as we are addressing your points with points of our own. Incredibly, people are allowed to disagree. Incredibly, no one's called you dense or narrow-minded simply because we hold a different view-point.

Now, the one thing that other people have brought up that you have failed to address is the possible motive of the legislators who brought this to pass. Do you think those legislators are thinking of Muslims or Seiks or any other number of religions?
Probably not, as Illinois is a pretty white bread, Christian state. That's why a lot of us are quite suspect of this legislation, because it seems that the same people who try to get Creationism taught alongside Evolution in schools are trying to get mandatory prayer re instituted, too.

[Boozy]

If my comments have been seen as anti-religion or intolerant, then I have been misunderstood. I have in fact stated that if a religious student feels the need to pray, then they should be able to do so, even during school hours if need be.

But I am suspect of the intentions of this specific legislation, and I believe rightfully so. This is mandated moment of silence for all students.

This is also a somewhat personal issue for me. Let me share a story from my own experience:

When I was in elementary school, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that school prayer was unconstitutional. Previously, we had opened each school day with my teacher leading us all in the Lord's Prayer. I suspect it made some of our Sikh students uncomfortable, but what could they do?

My teacher disagreed with the new legislation, and announced that now we would all open each school day with - you guessed it - a moment of silence.

The first day we did this, a student actually began praying aloud. A few other students chimed in. The second day, several students led the prayer. By the third day, every student was once again saying the Lord's Prayer aloud. Even the Sikhs, who likely didn't want to stand out from the crowd any more than they already did. We were all 12 year-olds, after all, and kids that age will do anything to fit in.

I suspect that this is exactly what the Illinois legislators are hoping will happen.

In my case, I think the moment of silence lasted about a week before the school administrators caught on. I'm not sure what happened, but that was the end of that.

I won't comment any further as nothing good comes of sharing ideas if nobody WANTS to hear ideas contrary to their own (despite the claim that this board is for debate).

Everyone here wants to hear ideas contrary to their own. I can't for the life of me think of a reason why any of us would be members on a debate forum if that's not what we wanted.

Just because we may not agree doesn't mean we don't hear what you're saying. The gun control thread is indeed a fantastic example. Some of us don't agree with rahmota, for example, but he's done a terrific job of explaining the other side, and I for one have come away with a much better understanding of the whole issue.

[tendomentis]

I went back and re-read my own comments and saw the personal attacks in them that I didn't see a day ago, so I apologize to anyone I may have personally offended. Needless to say, I guess I get to personally motivated in rights issues, and that's my failing. I know I got heated, but until I calmed down and re-read everything I said I didn't remember how personal I got.

So I am sorry.

I think it's safe to say that I've used up my right to discuss this in a civilized fashion. I'm not a religous nut who wants prayer back in the schools, but I am passionate about protecting rights of the individual, not just the majority. I let my feelings on it dictate my words on the topic instead of staying logical, so I lose on principle.

I don't think anyone on this forum is particularly dense, at least no more than myself My abrasive words were unnecessary, and I think in general that the people who would seek out this forum demonstrate greater intelligence than the norm just by wanting to discuss these issues.

I'd like to stay on the forum, but I should probably shy away from this topic as it seems to provoke me more than I'd care to admit.

[rahmota]

OKay tendo. I'm not exactly sure whats goign on here with you but I would like to say that I'm not exactly pleased by your debating skills. Insulting and otherwise not being very diplomatic to others is not a good way to get your point across. As has been pointed out on the firearms control debate we managed to have some very passionate discussions with diverse Points of view without resorting to name calling. And if it can be done on something as contentious as firearms then it can be achieved here as well on somethign as equally contentious. (Oh and to greenday and boozy, thanks for the compliments. You guys did good on there too.) And since I feel like some of your comments where directed at me personally (not you boozy) I feel justified in saying that.

As has been mentioned several times here there are alternatives to a mandatory moment of silence. Letting students use their personal time., letting them go off to the office or a unused classroom, individually as they need it. No one is trying to deny those who want to pray, or need to pray, their ability to pray. No one is saying that.

What is being said is that the motivation behind the "moment of silence" is rather suspicious. Yeah being politically correct and inclusive is popular right now. This does not feel like its motivated by that. Illinois is not exactly a great hot bed of alternative culture.

Now specifically:

So when it comes right down to it, you'd rather that some people sacrifice a little of their freedom for your convenience. That's what the heart of this matter is, and it's disgusting.

Actually no. I do not want a single person to sacrifice any of their freedoms whatsoever. All a person has in this life is their personal freedom when it comes right down to it. Freedom to choose, freedom to live according to their beliefs. When you have a religious organization or secular organization attempting to dictate how a person may live their personal life and how they may think or believe I get rather bent about it.

I personally dont give a rats butt if a person prays to god, allah, budda,their tablelamp or the great noodlebeast. As long as they are happy about it, do it with consenting adults, dont break any other laws, and most importantly DONT TRY AND FORCE ME or others to believe that way. If I want to see what's up with your church/beliefs I'll do so of my own free will. If I dont then sorry but you're probably better off without me around.

Which comes back to the whole letting students go off and do their prayer thing on their time or on their own. Its not forcing others to go along with their prayer time, not interefering in normal classroom activities and not denying them their prayer time. To force everyone to stop what their doing and have a moment of silence at set prayer times is not very kosher if you'll forgive the phrase.

Hiding behind the whole "separation of church and state" clause is pathetic as that isn't what this is about. The government isn't sponsoring those students' relgions, merely making sure that their freedom of religion is allowed to exist during the school day.

*sigh* Okay really? If an agency goes out of their way to support and provide special benefits for a group of people is that or is that not sponsoring or otherwise supporting and endorsing the actions of that group of people? The 1st amendment states that the government nor its agencies, as has been determined by the supreme court, can endorse or support relgious activites. Nor can they prevent or prohibit religious activities unless it breaks other existing laws. (ie trying to do a wiccan skyclad ceremony on times square at high noon would be rather frowned upon from a legal standpoint)

As boozy says:

Everyone here wants to hear ideas contrary to their own. I can't for the life of me think of a reason why any of us would be members on a debate forum if that's not what we wanted.

Exactly. I mean I got booted from a board because they didnt want anyone disagreeing with their white bread right wing commentary. I'm not missing it as it was rather boring and dangerous to be around that many people slapping them selves on the back for all thinking alike. I like it here as while not everybody thinks the same at least folks are able to be polite about it.

[rahmota]

Ok tendo. apology accepted as I can definately understand being passionate about something you believe in. My previous post was typed up while you where posting yours. I'll leave it stand as it is a valid commentary on posting like that. Something I am borderline guilty of doing. As I can get a bit intense in my discussions. But there are certain lines that cannot or at least should not be crossed in polite debate, no matter how passionate, before it devolves into an argument.

I too believe in individual freedoms in personal life. A person can only control so far as they can reach, anythign beyond that is just influence and that can change with the wind the further away from you for the most part. I think this has been a bit of a misunderstanding and you are wanting somethign similar just not saying it in the same way.

I dont want kids who want to pray to be denyed the ability to do so. I just dont want others forced to be there too if they dont want to.

I think it's safe to say that I've used up my right to discuss this in a civilized fashion.

No I dont think so. You got a bit mad and let your mouth(fingers) get ahead of your diplomacy censor. not an uncommon or totally unforgivable thing especially as you noticed it yourself. Hope to discus thigns with you again later.