Giddy up! More on the Bible in public schools

[Pogo]

As a State, they made the move for the inclusion. It isn't imposing,

Thou shalt, that is an imposition. duh

it's a display that is 1. historical

So is Shakespeare, so what, there is only so much wall space.

2. Represents the majority in that state

So what, that definitely makes it an imposition on the minority.

3. promotes peaceful relations

Between who and who, Have you read the old testament, it is full of religious war.

4. Doesn't impose any penalties

Other than the emotional harm on the minority.

5. Isn't a religious law

No, it is a secular law that violates secularity and serves no other purpose.

6. Was adopted by the Jewish people as basic among their 613 religious ones

So again, why don't we be fair and plaster the walls with all of them?

7. Was documented in the Bible

So, so is rape and murder.

Ultimately, it comes down to you like the law for your subset and everybody else be damned, Selfishness personified and who cares what the law says.
I'd say unChristian, but that seems to no longer be the case.

 

[Revoltingest]

I would assemble somewhere else that better reflected my views and more apt to increase my security and wellbeing.

Is religious balkanization of USA really OK with you?
Is the solution to move away when another religion
takes over?

Which, if it's any consolation, I plan to do anyway. Not that my home state is terrible, but we don't always see eye to eye well enough to acknowledge present needs. If this was a superficial issue, I'd be less inclined to get involved. The truth is, it isn't just a superficial non relevant issue.

Christians see Christian Dominionism as no problem.
But for non-Christians, creeping theocracy poses risks,
eg, being able to testify in court, paying taxes to support
their religion.

It's one that concerns most everyone in the nation, whether you're an atheist, Christian, Muslim, Bahai, Buddhist, Shinto, Wiccan, etc. No matter what you affiliate with, there are others who are very likely, like minded. I've never been much on board with segregation, but when offered a vault for precious metals in a segregated area or a non segregated area of a depository, I choose segregated. There's less confusion this way and it is more private, as well as less congested.

It's odd that so many Christians bristle at the idea of
a secular state. Tis insufficient that they may practice
their religion at home, church, in public, etc. Nay, they
seek to make it official....to have government formally
infuse it in courts, education, etc.

 

[Pogo]

I would assemble somewhere else that better reflected my views and more apt to increase my security and wellbeing. Which, if it's any consolation, I plan to do anyway. Not that my home state is terrible, but we don't always see eye to eye well enough to acknowledge present needs. If this was a superficial issue, I'd be less inclined to get involved. The truth is, it isn't just a superficial non relevant issue. It's one that concerns most everyone in the nation, whether you're an atheist, Christian, Muslim, Bahai, Buddhist, Shinto, Wiccan, etc. No matter what you affiliate with, there are others who are very likely, like minded. I've never been much on board with segregation, but when offered a vault for precious metals in a segregated area or a non segregated area of a depository, I choose segregated. There's less confusion this way and it is more private, as well as less congested.

Yes you can go find a new street corner, as you have said, you have no ties to any particular place and so have the option of going wherever you can find a like minded community. That is not true for probably the majority besides why should they have to move when the country was set up to avoid this problem and the Courts have reaffirmed that discrimination is not the law of the land.

 

[Viker]

I would assemble somewhere else that better reflected my views and more apt to increase my security and wellbeing. Which, if it's any consolation, I plan to do anyway. Not that my home state is terrible, but we don't always see eye to eye well enough to acknowledge present needs. If this was a superficial issue, I'd be less inclined to get involved. The truth is, it isn't just a superficial non relevant issue. It's one that concerns most everyone in the nation, whether you're an atheist, Christian, Muslim, Bahai, Buddhist, Shinto, Wiccan, etc. No matter what you affiliate with, there are others who are very likely, like minded. I've never been much on board with segregation, but when offered a vault for precious metals in a segregated area or a non segregated area of a depository, I choose segregated. There's less confusion this way and it is more private, as well as less congested.

Here's my dilemma. As Christian nationalism has began sweeping across the Country, there could soon be no where I feel safe as a trans person with a religion at odds with Christianity and Islam... especially their more conservative and fundamentalist crowds.

Let's be realistic. You have nothing to lose and only something to gain. I could, maybe not, have neither. That's why I am in "fight" mode here. I may run out of spaces to flight.

The US is my birthplace. It's my home.

 

[McBell]

Inclusion of only Christians.

Hypothetically, if where you lived, government
required public schools to teach the Koran,
how would you feel about it?

Duck and run
Duck and run

 

[Balthazzar]

Thou shalt, that is an imposition. duh

So is Shakespeare, so what, there is only so much wall space.

So what, that definitely makes it an imposition on the minority.

Between who and who, Have you read the old testament, it is full of religious war.

Other than the emotional harm on the minority.

No, it is a secular law that violates secularity and serves no other purpose.

So again, why don't we be fair and plaster the walls with all of them?

So, so is rape and murder.

Ultimately, it comes down to you like the law for your subset and everybody else be damned, Selfishness personified and who cares what the law says.
I'd say unChristian, but that seems to no longer be the case.

The way I view the intent, which isn't the way some view them, is that they are implication and affirmations. That's beside the point, I know that if I don't steal I won't go to jail for theft justly. The same is true for murder. I know that my concept of God is my own, and your concept of God has little credence to the concept I myself understand. The same is true for you. I also know that if I don't cheat on my spouse or her cheat on me, we'll more than likely have better relations, and if I don't tempt myself to steal your things, your house, your spouse that it won't be in vain for the reason that I very likely wouldn't. I like a lesser risk association in a community and so I'm on board with the basics as presented in the display. I wouldn't carry the same banner in predominately Muslim territory or one more secular bent, in a state such as Louisianna, I can support the move for the inclusion. If enough people assemble in a state for greater inclusion of the coexistence kind, I'd be just as much on board with that move as I am the one being made in Louisiana. This is true for every type, including secular types who have no need to effort their agenda beyond what has already been granted.

There is also documentation of wars, power struggles, marriages, births, etc in the bible. That's not the point. The point is what we're discussing. The 10 are shared among many people to be worth considering and most recognize them as something that can help maintain peaceful community relations if anyone is inclined enough to observe them. If not, there is no penalty associated aside from the secular laws already in place.

 

[Viker]

Hypothetically, if where you lived, government
required public schools to teach the Koran,
how would you feel about it?

The exact same way I feel about the Bible and Ten Commandments mandated in public schools.

Not very pleased, if anyone hasn't already noticed.

 

[Balthazzar]

Here's my dilemma. As Christian nationalism has began sweeping across the Country, there could soon be no where I feel safe as a trans person with a religion at odds with Christianity and Islam... especially their more conservative and fundamentalist crowds.

Let's be realistic. You have nothing to lose and only something to gain. I could, maybe not, have neither. That's why I am in "fight" mode here. I may run out of spaces to flight.

The US is my birthplace. It's my home.

Yes, lets be realistic and utilize the constitution and bill of rights as intended. From 13 colonies came 50 states and as we migrated and assembled, each state incorporated their respective assemblies wishes into their system of governance, many of which allowed the ten to be part of their curriculum and associated displays under the premise of maintaining the rule of secular law. After 200 years of this type of colonizing across north America, the people decided it was best to remove the 10 from government funded institutions. People were upset by this loss of freedom, so they began to assemble again in hope of finding a way to reincorporate the 10 in a manner that seems most appropriate to all in this nation. I would hope that this isn't to be a campaign for the inclusion in all 50 states. I would like to be witness to another state adopting another religions similar type document as a display that best represents their own citizens.

 

[Argentbear]

As a State, they made the move for the inclusion. It isn't imposing, it's a display that is 1. historical 2. Represents the majority in that state 3. promotes peaceful relations 4. Doesn't impose any penalties 5. Isn't a religious law 6. Was adopted by the Jewish people as basic among their 613 religious ones 7. Was documented in the Bible

it is imposed there is no way to escape it.

But what of the minority? What happens to the students who aren't part of the particular sect of Christianity being imposed on every classroom in the state. Are they expected to be silent as the state posts millions of signs stating that they personally are immoral?

 

[fantome profane]

Doesn't impose any penalties

• No other gods before me: Worshiping other gods was punishable by death (Deuteronomy 17:2-5).
• No graven images/idolatry: Idolaters were also to be put to death (Deuteronomy 13:6-10).
• Not take the Lord's name in vain: Blasphemy or misuse of God's name could result in death (Leviticus 24:16).
• Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy: Violating the Sabbath was punishable by death (Exodus 31:14-15, Numbers 15:32-36).
• Honor your father and mother: Cursing or striking parents was punishable by death (Exodus 21:15, 17; Leviticus 20:9).
• No murder: Murder was punishable by death (Exodus 21:12-14; Leviticus 24:17).
• No adultery: Adultery was punishable by death, often by stoning (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22).
• No stealing: Theft could result in various punishments, often involving restitution (Exodus 22:1-4).
• No false witness: Bearing false witness could result in the punishment intended for the accused (Deuteronomy 19:16-21).

 

[Balthazzar]

• No other gods before me: Worshiping other gods was punishable by death (Deuteronomy 17:2-5).
• No graven images/idolatry: Idolaters were also to be put to death (Deuteronomy 13:6-10).
• Not take the Lord's name in vain: Blasphemy or misuse of God's name could result in death (Leviticus 24:16).
• Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy: Violating the Sabbath was punishable by death (Exodus 31:14-15, Numbers 15:32-36).
• Honor your father and mother: Cursing or striking parents was punishable by death (Exodus 21:15, 17; Leviticus 20:9).
• No murder: Murder was punishable by death (Exodus 21:12-14; Leviticus 24:17).
• No adultery: Adultery was punishable by death, often by stoning (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22).
• No stealing: Theft could result in various punishments, often involving restitution (Exodus 22:1-4).
• No false witness: Bearing false witness could result in the punishment intended for the accused (Deuteronomy 19:16-21).
• No coveting: While coveting itself was not typically subject to legal punishment, it was considered a sinful attitude that could lead to other sinful actions.

Thanks for listing the religious laws to show the difference between the 10 to be displayed and the religious laws themselves.

 

[Pogo]

Yes, lets be realistic and utilize the constitution and bill of rights as intended. From 13 colonies came 50 states and as we migrated and assembled, each state incorporated their respective assemblies wishes into their system of governance, many of which allowed the ten to be part of their curriculum and associated displays under the premise of maintaining the rule of secular law. After 200 years of this type of colonizing across north America, the people decided it was best to remove the 10 from government funded institutions. People were upset by this loss of freedom, so they began to assemble again in hope of finding a way to reincorporate the 10 in a manner that seems most appropriate to all in this nation. I would hope that this isn't to be a campaign for the inclusion in all 50 states. I would like to be witness to another state adopting another religions similar type document as a display that best represents their own citizens.

Just no, this is not the history of the US. The US is a country of people coming from multiple places and learning to live together without borders even if on first arriving they congregated in ethnic groups according to their origin. Yes we were more homogeneous 200 years ago and schools may well have had Bible verses on some walls, but it certainly wasn't the norm and the government was specifically set up to avoid sectarian division. It wasn't perfect, it took 100 years to start to overcome the slavery issue. Just because something was done in the past doesn't make it good.

You are arguing for the creation of ghettos, a concept that you should recognize as a negative part of history because of the friction they create.

BTW, I finished my grade schooling in 4 different states spread across the country before these first amendment prohibitions of religious material in class were ruled by the SC and none of them ever had the 10 commandments on the wall. I was not a common practice though it may have occurred in some areas.

 

[Argentbear]

I would assemble somewhere else that better reflected my views and more apt to increase my security and wellbeing.

So you wouldn't want someone else's beliefs forced into the schools and a as member of a minority religion you wouldn't' feel safe living there.

 

[Revoltingest]

But what of the minority? What happens to the students who aren't part of the particular sect of Christianity being imposed on every classroom in the state.

As they answered before....
"I would assemble somewhere else that better reflected my views...."

 

[Argentbear]

As they answered before....
"I would assemble somewhere else that better reflected my views...."

leading to the question, why should millions of families have to flee their homes to escape tyranny.

 

[Revoltingest]

leading to the question, why should millions of families have to flee their homes to escape tyranny.

Because many Christians don't care
about religious freedom for others?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Do you disagree as to the importance of the Christian faith in the development of western civilization?

Christian culture is reflected in world history, but that's a red herring. The purpose of legislation like this is to indoctrinate schoolchildren into Christianity, not to teach history. American Christianity - the version of the religion most familiar to me - is about historical revisionism, not history.

Art, law, literature, language, etc.?

But that's not what's on these theocrats' minds. If it were, the course ought to be more about Greek and Roman contributions to Western culture than Christianity's influence. What contributions do you imagine Christianity has made to those topics?

It had no significant impact on the development of western, say, European, civilization?

If that were the purpose of the course, it would include the horrors Christianity has perpetrated on the world such as the Inquisition. The class would be to promote Christianity, not teach about it.

Christians are unwilling to say that what they want to see is their religion making the laws, so instead the talk about historical documents and teaching world history. But that fools nobody. This is all about growing the church. The question is why rank-and-file Christians care about that. Sure, the church benefits with tithes and votes - they still need votes in the democracies in order to make them into authoritarian autocracies - but what about people like you? Why do you carry water for the church? Why do you want them to control the lives of the unwilling? What happened to the Golden Rule? If another religion - say Islam - were doing this in your country, you'd be alarmed, but you don't mind supporting a church that wants to do that to non-Christians.

Imagine paying tax dollars to have a religion forced down your throat

That's the plan - to force YOUR kids to hear about Jesus and have you pay for it, too.

The constitution exists to protect everyone in this nation, including the secular community, and the various cultures representing the many religions of the world.

The church doesn't respect that. It incessantly attempts to spread throughout government to control lives. Can't you see that the church is the enemy of the First Amendment?

"Every classroom in the state from grades 5 through 12 must have a Bible and all teachers must teach from the Bible in the classroom, Walters said."

And what does that tell us? It tells us that the class is not a history class. When I studied the history of Western civilization, no holy books were involved. They were mentioned, but not required reading. What history should be taught from the Bible?

 

[Balthazzar]

Just no, this is not the history of the US. The US is a country of people coming from multiple places and learning to live together without borders even if on first arriving they congregated in ethnic groups according to their origin. Yes we were more homogeneous 200 years ago and schools may well have had Bible verses on some walls, but it certainly wasn't the norm and the government was specifically set up to avoid sectarian division. It wasn't perfect, it took 100 years to start to overcome the slavery issue. Just because something was done in the past doesn't make it good.

You are arguing for the creation of ghettos, a concept that you should recognize as a negative part of history because of the friction they create.

BTW, I finished my grade schooling in 4 different states spread across the country before these first amendment prohibitions of religious material in class were ruled by the SC and none of them ever had the 10 commandments on the wall. I was not a common practice though it may have occurred in some areas.

I grew up in the 70's, before the 1980 ruling in Kentucky. I remember many things and some of those memories included the 10 commandments and the pledge of allegiance. We even had moments of silence to venerate our chosen faiths, but this came later in the 80's if I remember correctly. This nation has spread out from 13 colonies to 50 now, and our populations have increased exponentially. Much of that increase has come from immigrants, who settled and assembled in areas that best represented them. You bring up ghettos, as if ghettos are the issue. The issues aren't limited to these areas but expand beyond them in every area of the nation. I'm in favor of assembling with people who are similar to myself, if only for the increase in cooperative efforts and less turbulent social environments. I couldn't imagine feeling comfortable within the confines of high income classes, but this is due to living at poverty level. I couldn't imagine feeling comfortable living within the confines of secular humanists, either. This is because I'm a faith based individual and religious oriented. My own specified philosophy isn't always compatible with Christians, nor with Muslims, nor with many other types who view me as an outsider due to not being part of their own fold. So, at the end of the day, I'm an American who supports religious freedom.

 

[Spice]

I grew up in the 70's, before the 1980 ruling in Kentucky. I remember many things and some of those memories included the 10 commandments and the pledge of allegiance. We even had moments of silence to venerate our chosen faiths, but this came later in the 80's if I remember correctly. This nation has spread out from 13 colonies to 50 now, and our populations have increased exponentially. Much of that increase has come from immigrants, who settled and assembled in areas that best represented them. You bring up ghettos, as if ghettos are the issue. The issues aren't limited to these areas but expand beyond them in every area of the nation. I'm in favor of assembling with people who are similar to myself, if only for the increase in cooperative efforts and less turbulent social environments. I couldn't imagine feeling comfortable within the confines of high income classes, but this is due to living at poverty level. I couldn't imagine feeling comfortable living within the confines of secular humanists, either. This is because I'm a faith based individual and religious oriented. My own specified philosophy isn't always compatible with Christians, nor with Muslims, nor with many other types who view me as an outsider due to not being part of their own fold. So, at the end of the day, I'm an American who supports religious freedom.

I grew up in the 60s where the Pledge of Allegiance and the Lord's Prayer was the start of every day. I fully believe beginning each morning with collaborative structure is paramount to a productive, cooperative day, however, it was not necessary nor helpful, that it be these particular two group recitations that were used. In today's society of diverse cultural backgrounds it would just be wrong.

 

[wellwisher]

Oh boy.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/27/us/oklahoma-schools-bible-curriculum/index.html

How will the USSC decide on these proposals/laws?

Tune in next week, same bat time, same bat channel.

This actually comes down to State's Rights. It is not the Job of the Federal Government. If you read the First Amendment to the Constitution, it addresses religion.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Congress makes the law for the Federal Government, therefore the Federal Government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibit the free exercise thereof. That means the Fed needs to butt out. However, it does not say the States Assemblies are under the same restrictions as Congress and the Fed.

Separation of Church and State are words, not even in the Constitution. That was a lawyer word scam, like the Inflation Reduction Act that caused inflation. It is commercial lawyer jingle that has allowed Federal Government overreach, under the guise of pretending to be Constitutional using a word scam that misdirects away from the clear wording in the Constitution.

The Tenth Amendment says;

The Tenth Amendment reads as follows: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.​

Congress shall make no law, pro or con, concerning religion, and since Congress makes all the Federal laws, the Fed is also powerless when it comes to religion. However, there is nothing in that Amendment about state assemblies who make state laws, unable to makes laws about religion or the free exercise thereof. This is still a state option, like abortion, marijuana, gambling, etc. Liberal States can ban the Bible in schools but Conservative State can go the other way. We can then run two parallel tests to see what happens instead of a one size fits all, illegal approach using crooked Federal Governor overreach.