Sultan Of Swing
Well-Known Member
In just some benign prayers!It is exactly that. It is the government (i.e. public schools) favoring/promoting one particular religion over all others.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
In just some benign prayers!It is exactly that. It is the government (i.e. public schools) favoring/promoting one particular religion over all others.
I'm Canadian, we have the same thing (though less so than we used to). Catholic schools are subsidized by our tax dollars, along with private schools.I suppose my perspective is a bit skewed being a filthy Brit, we have an established church and bishops in the House of Lords, etc.
Yes I do, but I don't see how any of those things violate the First Amendment to the Constitution.
How does Roe v. Wade restrict freedom of religion?
How does taking state-sponsored prayer out of public schools violate religious freedom? (So you were talking about state-sponsored prayer, as I said?)
How does allowing for a broader definition of marriage for anyone who is so inclined to participate a violation of religious freedom?
You will have to explain how Roe vs Wade is a First Ammendment violation.
Or unconstitutional for that matter.
Prayer has not been taken out of school.
Government sponsored prayer is not allowed in schools.
The states are the ones who required the federal government to step in.
Had the states not declared they would not recognize the legal marriage of other states then the Federal Government would not have had to step in at all.
So far you are batting a thousand in fails.
Perhaps you have better examples?
I will not hear the arguments of one who is so willingly blind to the religious side of the issues. Have a nice day.
Run Forrest, Run!Never mind. You obviously are blinded to the religious side of the issues. If it isn't obvious to you my explaining it to you isn't going to do any good.
In just some benign prayers!
Run Forrest, Run!
This is a moment of silence. I'm sure I could go look up the labor laws and find out the exact amount of minimum break time employers are required to grant to their workers. (In my state it is a mandatory 10 minute paid break for every 4 hour worked, which can be split up into smaller breaks if necessary. Meal breaks do not count towards the mandatory breaks.)This isn't school prayer. Breathing exercises don't establish religion in a public school and practicing gratitude doesn't promote one religion over other religions or no religion.
This is a completely different issue. No issue really, as no one has ever said students shouldn't be able to breathe or be grateful at school.
Not my wisdom.This is your wisdom, oh blind one? Do preach on.
decision to strike down a state law concerning the state's right to define marriage as it sees fit.
That's obvious because I asked you to explain yourself? Come on, don't cop out.Never mind. You obviously are blinded to the religious side of the issues. If it isn't obvious to you my explaining it to you isn't going to do any good.
Kids around here get two recesses and a lunch break. So I'm wondering what you're talking about.This is a moment of silence. I'm sure I could go look up the labor laws and find out the exact amount of minimum break time employers are required to grant to their workers. (In my state it is a mandatory 10 minute paid break for every 4 hour worked, which can be split up into smaller breaks if necessary. Meal breaks do not count towards the mandatory breaks.)
Now, I suppose that if the schools are not allowing these breaks to their students, lawsuits may be filed. The likely outcome I see this leading to would be mandatory moments of silence for all students, in order to protect the schools from further lawsuits. I might mention this to the ACLU, the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and maybe even The Satanic Temple if I see a push against allowing Moments of Silence in the schools. {just sayin' }
That would be to do with defining the legal definition of marriage, not the religious one. The definitions of marriage according to faith groups are not altered by this decision.
So if Georgia decided they wanted to reinstate slavery, they should have that right?True but the Constitution specifically states that the making of laws not specifically mentioned in it are delegated to the states. The states have the right to define marriage and the SCOTUS should have recognized that and upheld that right. Instead they stomped on that right.
We might as well just take everything pertaining to states' rights out of the Constitution if the court is going to deny states' rights.
That's obvious because I asked you to explain yourself? Come on, don't cop out.
I'm quite interested in hearing your defense of your assertions. I do not see how the three things you listed violate anybody's religious freedoms (in fact, I think they do the opposite). And I would love to know why someone does think that those things violate religious freedom.
So if Georgia decided they wanted to reinstate slavery, they should have that right?
What does this have to do with religious freedom??
The fact of the matter is that the Federal Government is required to settle disputes between states.True but the Constitution specifically states that the making of laws not specifically mentioned in it are delegated to the states. The states have the right to define marriage and the SCOTUS should have recognized that and upheld that right. Instead they stomped on that right.
We might as well just take everything pertaining to states' rights out of the Constitution if the court is going to deny states' rights.
Where can I read up on your reasons for thinking that those three things violate religious freedom?Please read up on it. I don't have the time, I'm at work. The reasons should be obvious, but since they aren't then you probably aren't of the mindset to truly grasp them, anyway.
The Federal Government is REQUIRED to settle disputes between states.The states have the right to define marriage as they see fit and the SCOTUS has no right to deny states the rights to make laws according to the document they are supposed to be supporting.
The distance from the school to the local mosque was a factor in the truancy that led to the current arrangement (kids would go for Friday prayers and just not come back to school), so it's just as valud to say that it's an issue of urban planning as it is about immigration.I don't see how this would be possible without mass immigration. So it is an issue of mass immigration.
The school, who has custody of the children in their care during school hours, hands kids over to the care of an imam and mosque volunteers and leaves them to do their own thing. When questioned about the arrangement, the school principal said that the kids weren't being supervised by school staff during prayer time.And prayers in school is hardly giving a religion 'the power of government', this is just exaggeration.