The Perpetrated Lie of Today's Separation of Church and State

[Guitar's Cry]

@SkepticThinker
CRT, homosexuality, activism et al

instead of, math, reading, history, geography, writing, respect authority and love your neighbor et al.

Wait, respect authority isn't indoctrination?

And loving your neighbor means understanding your neighbor, so learning about homosexuality is important. (You may have gay neighbors!)

And I suspect most "CRT" fears stem from history lessons that focus not on a patriotic or nationalistic approach (which would be indoctrination) but are unbiased or are based on understanding the nature of our current situation concerning cultural issues with minority groups.

 

[Kenny]

Wait, respect authority isn't indoctrination?

And loving your neighbor means understanding your neighbor, so learning about homosexuality is important. (You may have gay neighbors!)

And I suspect most "CRT" fears stem from history lessons that focus not on a patriotic or nationalistic approach (which would be indoctrination) but are unbiased or are based on understanding the nature of our current situation concerning cultural issues with minority groups.

No
No
No.

 

[Windwalker]

I think you are asking the wrong questions...

Why should one be anti-religion? Why should we through out faith just because one is in school? You have everything else on the walls, what do you have against the ten commandments on the wall or other faiths? How did you go from walls to booths? Why do you exaggerate? What is your agenda?

I think those are better questions.

I think you should answer the questions I asked you first, rather than diverting away to ask me that question instead of answering. Can you do that? Nevertheless, I will answer you, but you must promise to answer mine next post, okay?

No one is asking students to throw out their personal faith, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, or otherwise. But it is not the role of public education to instill religious faith in students. That is the job of their pastors within their churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, or monasteries. That is where religious instructions should be taught.

If you put that in a public school, you have a problem, since for one thing, they are not qualified spiritual teachers! Also, which religion do they teach? All of them equally? One of them predominantly? Etc. This is not possible to do without favoring one's own personal religious views over others. Therefore, leaving it outside school is the best for every student. Each gets to keep their own faith. And if they have special religious needs, that can be addressed individually. Accomodating a student's needs, is quite different from posting the 10 Commandments.

As far as the 10 Commandments goes, I have nothing against them. They're fine in a church. But they don't belong in a school as they are not any more appropriate there than putting a crucifix with a hanging Jesus on it in a public school is, or a statue of Ganesha in the corner of the classroom is. In a Catholic school that's appropriate. In a Hindu school that is appropriate. But not in a public school with non-Catholics, and non-Christians, or non-Hindus, non-Jews, etc.

As far as having a religious bazarre in school, that was based on your idea that having the texts of all the religions hanging in the schools is appropriate. Do you want to turn schools into a marketplace for competing religious belief systems for students to choose from? Wouldn't that be more appropriate at the local county fair?

Now, if you would please answer my question. Why do you think it's appropriate to have these in school? Is it a way to reach out to those children whose parents don't take them to a church with the message of God? Is it a way to get the taxpayers to introduce children to Christianity so they can come to church and pay tithes and offerings?

Seriously, what is the real reason? Let's have an honest discussion about this. You seem to believe it's appropriate, so please explain why. I'd like to hear your reasons.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

No
No
No.

So it sounds like you're ok with indoctrination as long as you agree with it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And I suspect most "CRT" fears stem from history lessons that focus not on a patriotic or nationalistic approach (which would be indoctrination) but are unbiased or are based on understanding the nature of our current situation concerning cultural issues with minority groups.

I would argue that critical race theory is an important aspect of national self-reflection with an aim toward making the country better, and because of this, it's very much aligned with a patriotic approach (as opposed to a jingoistic approach).

Edit: and I would also argue that those who aren't even willing to listen to the lessons of CRT and instead wilfully continue to subject large portions of their country's population to injustice are not patriotic.

 

[Estro Felino]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Would it make sense to interpret this without a separation of church and state?

That does not exclude a separation.

There should be written somewhere : "Church and State are independent from one another snd separated from one another".

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I would argue that critical race theory is an important aspect of national self-reflection with an aim toward making the country better, and because of this, it's very much aligned with a patriotic approach (as opposed to a jingoistic approach).

Edit: and I would also argue that those who aren't even willing to listen to the lessons of CRT and instead wilfully continue to subject large portions of their country's population to injustice are not patriotic.

I would too.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

That does not exclude a separation.

There should be written somewhere : "Church and State are independent from one another snd separated from one another".

How could it not?

Imagine an America where a church, let's just say Catholic, is intricately tied to the government. How would this Catholic America respond to Satanic after school school clubs?

Or religious groups practicing non-catholic marriages?

Or even just the existence of any religious organization that allows practices it considers unholy?

By disallowing the state to put legal restrictions on establishments of religious and religious practice, the First Amendment is drawing a line between the state and the church.

 

[Estro Felino]

How could it not?

Imagine an America where a church, let's just say Catholic, is intricately tied to the government. How would this Catholic America respond to Satanic after school school clubs?

Or religious groups practicing non-catholic marriages?

Or even just the existence of any religious organization that allows practices it considers unholy?

By disallowing the state to put legal restrictions on establishments of religious and religious practice, the First Amendment is drawing a line between the state and the church.

Then why is In God we Trust is written anywhere?

 

[Kenny]

I think you should answer the questions I asked you first, rather than diverting away to ask me that question instead of answering. Can you do that? Nevertheless, I will answer you, but you must promise to answer mine next post, okay?

No one is asking students to throw out their personal faith, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, or otherwise. But it is not the role of public education to instill religious faith in students. That is the job of their pastors within their churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, or monasteries. That is where religious instructions should be taught.

In a sense, you have answered my questions.

I have never said that the school should instill religious faith in children. As a matter of fact, it had nothing to do with the OP but simply saying that there has been a misappropriation of what it means "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" by creating something that isn't in the Constitution that being "The Wall of Separations between Church and State".

If you put that in a public school, you have a problem, since for one thing, they are not qualified spiritual teachers! Also, which religion do they teach? All of them equally? One of them predominantly? Etc. This is not possible to do without favoring one's own personal religious views over others. Therefore, leaving it outside school is the best for every student. Each gets to keep their own faith. And if they have special religious needs, that can be addressed individually. Accomodating a student's needs, is quite different from posting the 10 Commandments.

Who said they should teach religion? I didn't. BUT, if it shouldn't be "in the school", then it was wrong to have a foot wash installed in the University. AND, if you can wear a Burkha in the school, you can bring a Bible without consequence. If a teacher can wear a religious Burkha, then a teacher can bring a Bible.

As far as the 10 Commandments goes, I have nothing against them. They're fine in a church. But they don't belong in a school as they are not any more appropriate there than putting a crucifix with a hanging Jesus on it in a public school is, or a statue of Ganesha in the corner of the classroom is. In a Catholic school that's appropriate. In a Hindu school that is appropriate. But not in a public school with non-Catholics, and non-Christians, or non-Hindus, non-Jews, etc.

This might sound like a turnaround... in reality it the 10 Commandments was given as a point of the effort of the Wall of Separation. If it is just not to create a wall of religious thought throughout the school... I would agree.

So, I have no problem with not having the 10 Commandments. But, if we are going to be equal, no LGBT flag either or political indoctrination. Let's stick to "education"... period.

As far as having a religious bazarre in school, that was based on your idea that having the texts of all the religions hanging in the schools is appropriate. Do you want to turn schools into a marketplace for competing religious belief systems for students to choose from? Wouldn't that be more appropriate at the local county fair?

Yes, it was. But, as I said, it was an exaggeration so it was irrelevant. And, yes, schools should be a marketplace for competing religious belief systems. But when they started trying to eliminate after school Christian Clubs in the name of the false Wall of Separation and they had to claw their way back to their rights, it simply proved what the Wall of Separation is really about... the eradication of faith.

Now, if you would please answer my question. Why do you think it's appropriate to have these in school? Is it a way to reach out to those children whose parents don't take them to a church with the message of God? Is it a way to get the taxpayers to introduce children to Christianity so they can come to church and pay tithes and offerings?

Again, what is your agenda for exaggeration, misapplication of what we are talking about? Are you Anti-Christian that you have to bring in bizarre statements?

Seriously, what is the real reason? Let's have an honest discussion about this. You seem to believe it's appropriate, so please explain why. I'd like to hear your reasons.

So the REAL reason is to address the fake news of the Wall of Separation of Church and State.

Am I clear now? Or do you have another exaggerated statement?

 

[Kenny]

So it sounds like you're ok with indoctrination as long as you agree with it.

No, I just don't subscribe to ridiculous statements. No need to address irrelevant thoughts such as above.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Then why is In God we Trust is written anywhere?

A mix of tradition and Cold war propaganda:

The Legislation Placing “In God We Trust” on National Currency | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives.

Consider also the Constitution forbidding religious tests for public officials:

Article VI
Clause 3
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

 

[Guitar's Cry]

No, I just don't subscribe to ridiculous statements. No need to address irrelevant thoughts such as above.

Homosexuality is a subject of discussion because of the intense emotional and physical suffering homosexuals endure based on bullying and abuse. Diversity and civil rights are taught because America is a country of diverse civilians with rights.

Are those ridiculous statements?

 

[Kenny]

Homosexuality is a subject of discussion because of the intense emotional and physical suffering homosexuals endure based on bullying and abuse. Diversity and civil rights are taught because America is a country of diverse civilians with rights.

Are those ridiculous statements?

That isn't a education subject matter unless it is within the course of history and civil rights.

Childhood sexual abuse among homosexual men. Prevalence and association with unsafe sex - PubMed

Perhaps maybe even with a counselor?

Edited:
Within the LGBTQ community, transgender people and bisexual women face the most alarming rates of sexual violence. Among both of these populations, sexual violence begins early, often during childhood.

Sexual Assault and the LGBTQ Community

 

[Guitar's Cry]

That isn't a education subject matter unless it is within the course of history and civil rights.

Both of which are educational subjects and taught in school.

 

[Kenny]

Both of which are educational subjects and taught in school.

Then, let's keep it there within its allotted timeframe (not a complete high school course) and help those children who are struggling with their identity because of sexual abuse.

Edited:

And not be a "promotion of" but rather a historical overview.

 

[Estro Felino]

A mix of tradition and Cold war propaganda:

The Legislation Placing “In God We Trust” on National Currency | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives.

Consider also the Constitution forbidding religious tests for public officials:

Article VI
Clause 3
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Very interesting.
Thanks for sharing.
But still, naming God (as a superior and immaterial entity) is not symptom of a perfect separation between Church and State.
And by Church I do not mean the RCC. I mean the universal Church, the Christian Churches overall.

Btw "In God we trust" is written in courtrooms too.
Right where we have another sign. Which says "the law idls equal for all".

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Then, let's keep it there within its allotted timeframe (not a complete high school course) and help those children who are struggling with their identity because of sexual abuse.

Edited:

And not be a "promotion of" but rather a historical overview.

A couple of points:

1. School is mandatory, and by law, all children have a right to free appropriate education, which means schools need to provide an environment conducive to learning, which requires a diverse population that is capable of managing the complex social and emotional issues that arise. Part of this means providing for the social and emotional learning of the population.

2. Homosexuality does not stem from abuse. The article you quoted before doesn't suggest that. Yes, mental health resources should be available more than they are (please advocate for better school funding!), especially for those kids struggling with abuse. But linking homosexuality with abuse is one of those reasons why we need better education on the difficulties homosexual folks have to deal with from uneducated people.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Very interesting.
Thanks for sharing.
But still, naming God (as a superior and immaterial entity) is not symptom of a perfect separation between Church and State.
And by Church I do not mean the RCC. I mean the universal Church, the Christian Churches overall.

Btw "In God we trust" is written in courtrooms too.
Right where we have another sign. Which says "the law idls equal for all".

And while these examples appear innocuous, they do show a problem with allowing a particular religious concept to leak into governmental institutions: not everyone trusts in God.

To be fair, why not include "Trust in Lucifer" on courtroom walls or on our money. Or allow posters that say "There is no God, believe in yourself" in schools.

The United States is not a Christian nation, and Constitutionally, allowing such little phrases that suggest it is is detrimental to our right to freedom of religion.

 

[Estro Felino]

And while these examples appear innocuous, they do show a problem with allowing a particular religious concept to leak into governmental institutions: not everyone trusts in God.

To be fair, why not include "Trust in Lucifer" on courtroom walls or on our money. Or allow posters that say "There is no God, believe in yourself" in schools.

The United States is not a Christian nation, and Constitutionally, allowing such little phrases that suggest it is is detrimental to our right to freedom of religion.

What about " The law is equal for all" instead?