When it comes to Prayer 76% of Americans Don't Give a **** About the Constitution

[Sultan Of Swing]

Second is, only about 60-70% of the "culture" right now is Christian. So what, the other 30%-40% can go crap in their hats? How infuriatingly arrogant.

That's why people are bristling at your responses. Christians on this issue are acting like arrogant, privileged whiners.

• Christianity: (59.9% to 70.6%)

• Unaffiliated, including atheist or agnostic (15.0% to 37.3%)

• Judaism (1.2% to 2.2%)

• Islam (0.6% to 0.9%)

• Buddhism (0.5% to 0.9%)

• Hinduism (0.4% to 0.7%)

• Unitarian Universalism (0.3%)

• Wicca/Paganism/Druidry (0.1%)

Oh, I'm in the UK where 40%, probably less, are Christian. Only something like 15% go to church?

Oh yeah, but many schools have prayers and hymns here, and many if not most non-Christians either don't care or enjoy them. Why? Because they're not arrogant, privileged whiners and appreciate their own culture, heritage and traditions.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Why? What practical, real, negative effect has it had?

Have you not been reading the thread?

 

[First Baseman]

Have you not been reading the thread?

Are you kidding? The Sultan OWNS this thread.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The founding fathers never meant for anyone to practice religion in the USA at all. As a matter of fact the 1st amendment right to religion is just to be ignored and was only put there for political correctness. Religion should be discouraged and therefore unproven theories should be taught in science classes as fact. Abiogenesis is a wild theory at best but children are taught "around" it. Who cares? Religion is to be discouraged at all costs! Teach any old lie or theory but keep religion away from our classrooms!

It's pretty simple, actually. Science belongs in science classrooms.

 

[Demonslayer]

Oh, I'm in the UK where 40%, probably less, are Christian.

Than how can you say Christianity is "the cultural religion?"

Oh yeah, but many schools have prayers and hymns here, and many if not most non-Christians either don't care or enjoy them. Why? Because they're not arrogant, privileged whiners and appreciate their own culture, heritage and traditions.

Maybe they are weak-willed pushovers, too afraid to stand up to religious bullying. Perhaps it's also why in 10 years you'll be the Islamic Republic of Britain, and then maybe you'll wish you realized how important it is to keep religion out of the government of a nation.

most non-Christians either don't care or enjoy them. Why? Because they're not arrogant, privileged whiners and appreciate their own culture, heritage and traditions

Let me post this bit again because it's just flat out bonkers. How does a non-Christian appreciate Christian prayer as "their own culture?" If they aren't Christians, it's not their culture, heritage and traditions, it's someone else's culture, heritage and traditions.

 

[First Baseman]

It's pretty simple, actually. Science belongs in science classrooms.

Factual science does. Theoretical science should be taught as theoretical science, not as fact. Abiogenesis isn't even a good set of theories with any credibility at all, they should not be taught at all unless the teacher is trying to be funny. Alternatives need to be taught. There is such a thing as Creation Science, this should also be taught.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I didn't use the word 'privilege' not sure why you're putting that in quotation marks.

Maybe that wasn't the correct term to put into quotes, but nevertheless you did say it was good for the non-Christians to be respecting the freedoms of Christians as they sit in silence while the Christians pray.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Abiogenesis isn't even a good set of theories with any credibility at all, they should not be taught at all unless the teacher is trying to be funny.

Abiogenesis isn't taught.

There is such a thing as Creation Science, this should also be taught.

Creationism isn't a science, and it has no scientific validity. It is a belief.

Theoretical science should be taught as theoretical science, not as fact.

But yet Creationism should be taught?

 

[Demonslayer]

I didn't use the word 'privilege' not sure why you're putting that in quotation marks.

You made some comment about what a wonderful opportunity it would be for non-Christians to be able to sit quietly and listen to the Christians pray.

If that doesn't highlight the incredible hubris of the Christians on this issue, I don't know what does. What a wonderful opportunity for my child to be forced to stop learning algebra and listen to other kids recite the ancient superstitious chants their parents forced them to say for so long they don't even likely know what they mean.

I mean I can't think of a more incredible opportunity!

 

[SkepticThinker]

Factual science does. Theoretical science should be taught as theoretical science, not as fact. Abiogenesis isn't even a good set of theories with any credibility at all, they should not be taught at all unless the teacher is trying to be funny. Alternatives need to be taught. There is such a thing as Creation Science, this should also be taught.

Creationism is not science. Creation myths don't belong in science classrooms.
That's not enough? Why must your religious beliefs be forced on everyone participating in the public school system?


Never mind the difficult matter of trying to determine which creation myth to teach in the classroom. All of them? Why should the one you believe get special consideration?

 

[Demonslayer]

Abiogenesis isn't even a good set of theories with any credibility at all, they should not be taught at all

There are no abiogenesis classes. The sciences are biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, etc.

There is such a thing as Creation Science

There is a thing called Creation Science because some religious nudnik stuck the word "science" in front of "creation" to get uneducated religious people to believe it has any weight whatsoever. There is nothing whatsoever about Creationism that fits the scientific method because there is nothing we can test. There is literally nothing except supposition and baseless claims.

 

[First Baseman]

There are no abiogenesis classes. The sciences are biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, etc.



There is a thing called Creation Science because some religious nudnik stuck the word "science" in front of "creation" to get uneducated religious people to believe it has any weight whatsoever. There is nothing whatsoever about Creationism that fits the scientific method because there is nothing we can test. There is literally nothing except supposition and baseless claims.

Wrong. They teach macro-evolution as fact when it isn't fact and it is taught based on some undefined, unknown theory of abiogenesis. They certainly do not teach that there was any god involved and as a matter of fact they disdain and frown at the very thought. That's not very objective. Oh well. It's PC, after all, so it must be okay.

Creation science is well defined on this site icr.org. Creation science is very real and has just as much validity as assumed theoretical science does, even more so to many theists. Atheists need to get their heads out of their duffle bags and sniff the possibility that a divine being at least may have been and probably was involved in creation. A big bang as the result of unexplainable but only assumed theories isn't factual science.

 

[crossfire]

Why? I believe preserving culture, tradition etc. is important. At least the good parts.

Like tribalism?

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

There are about 9 pages of new comments that i've mssed and I didn't go through them all; but I wanted to respond to a few ... uhem ... highlights?

Atheist court justices have decided this means no prayer is allowed but that is definately not what the Constitution says.

You are wrong on so many counts. First, we have 5 Roman Catholics and 3 Jews (Judaism) sitting on SCOTUS. Last I checked, Roman Catholics and Jews are not atheists. Second, they didn't say that "prayer is not allowed". That's a Christian apologist myth. They said that the schools can not sanction or lead prayer. School kids can gather together and, at appropriate times, say all the prayers they want. No one can stop them. That is their constitutional right. But they can't use school functions for a captive audience (assemblies, games, etc) for which to do so. Christians must share this nation with everyone else. That's the way this works. Your tone, I'm sure, would be much different if SCOTUS had decided that a school may not offer prayers to Shiva at school functions.

Disagreeing with the high court's ruling on what is unconstitutional, does not equate to disrespect for the constitution.

No. But it can sure equate to ignorance of the constitution and its intents.

Well, it says a lot more about religion than that. Today, as far as law goes, "the Constitutional" encompasses more than just the original 1788 Constitution. It also includes all of its amendments, and SCOTUS rulings.

Not entirely correct. SCOTUS rulings are not the constitution; but the final decider on how the constitution is interpretted.

Certainly no one should be forced to pray but no one should stop someone from praying who wants to do so.

This is the whole point exactly. Using volunteer school functions as an excuse to proselytize to the pupils is forcing them into unfair choices: Forego volunteer activities or be subjected to religious dogma and rituals for which they may not agree or are opposed. (I find it odd, though, that we rule against prayers in school functions; then open congressional sessions with prayer and have a prayer during presidential inaugurations. Hmmm).

The court would not allow a law that stopped Muslims from wearing their traditional clothing. Only Christians are prevented from doing things because the courts are not against religion only against Christianity.

That is totally absurd. SCOTUS hears so many cases regarding Christianity because it is Christians who consistently try so hard to shove their religion down everyone's throat.

Yes, that can be true, but even that can be challenged in terms of what is the intent of those calling for such a moment of silence?

Already one. Certain atheists are all up at arms about moments of silence. In this case, I feel that this small group of atheists are becoming what they started fighting to overcome: the Thought Police.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Have you not been reading the thread?

All I hear is wishy washy statements about preferring one religion over another, all over a few benign prayers, while not hearing real-life practical things that are happening.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Wrong. They teach macro-evolution as fact when it isn't fact and it is taught based on some undefined, unknown theory of abiogenesis. They certainly do not teach that there was any god involved and as a matter of fact they disdain and frown at the very thought. That's not very objective. Oh well. It's PC, after all, so it must be okay.

Creation science is well defined on this site icr.org. Creation science is very real and has just as much validity as assumed theoretical science does, even more so to many theists. Atheists need to get their heads out of their duffle bags and sniff the possibility that a divine being at least may have been and probably was involved in creation. A big bang as the result of unexplainable but only assumed theories isn't factual science.

Why don' you take this to the "Creation vs Evolution" forum and keep to the topic at hand; there, we'll tear this sad dribble to bits and shreds. But for now, let's stick to school-sanctioned prayer, hmmm? Thanx!

 

[First Baseman]

Why don' you take this to the "Creation vs Evolution" forum and keep to the topic at hand; there, we'll tear this sad dribble to bits and shreds. But for now, let's stick to school-sanctioned prayer, hmmm? Thanx!

You mean you'll just tiptoe around it and skate by it. That's how you'll rip it to shreds.

In the meantime you take your advice and give it to your fellows. I don't want or need it, bro.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Than how can you say Christianity is "the cultural religion?"

Oh, it's clearly an integral part of the inherited culture, heritage, history and traditions.

I agree Britain isn't a Christian country anymore.

Maybe they are weak-willed pushovers, too afraid to stand up to religious bullying. Perhaps it's also why in 10 years you'll be the Islamic Republic of Britain, and then maybe you'll wish you realized how important it is to keep religion out of the government of a nation.

An Islamic Republic of Britain would be the fault of mass immigration, not a lack of secularism. In fact, the established Christian church would hinder such a transition...

And no, people who just appreciate their cultural inheritance, and like hymns and prayers, aren't 'weak-willed pushovers'. Sorry that not everyone foams at the mouth as much as you do.

Let me post this bit again because it's just flat out bonkers. How does a non-Christian appreciate Christian prayer as "their own culture?" If they aren't Christians, it's not their culture, heritage and traditions, it's someone else's culture, heritage and traditions.

Regardless of being Christian, people are still British, and there are great hymns and prayers written by British people of old, to be enjoyed and admired by people of any faith or none.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Maybe that wasn't the correct term to put into quotes, but nevertheless you did say it was good for the non-Christians to be respecting the freedoms of Christians as they sit in silence while the Christians pray.

Umm... I didn't say that either. Good for them to respect the freedoms of Christians as they sit in silence while the Christians pray?

That sounds a bit odd. Could you actually quote me?

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

You made some comment about what a wonderful opportunity it would be for non-Christians to be able to sit quietly and listen to the Christians pray.

If that doesn't highlight the incredible hubris of the Christians on this issue, I don't know what does. What a wonderful opportunity for my child to be forced to stop learning algebra and listen to other kids recite the ancient superstitious chants their parents forced them to say for so long they don't even likely know what they mean.

I mean I can't think of a more incredible opportunity!

Where did I say this?