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

[Demonslayer]

Why is advocacy for such so bad?

Sultan, when your children go to school would you be in favor of them spending 15 minutes per day reciting Muslim prayers?

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

It says:

"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 "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another . . . in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State' . . . That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach.

There were then several landmark cases further defining school sponsored prayer to be unconstitutional.

But if you want to understand why this is so, just think: "would I want my Christian child to be forced to spend school time listening to Muslim prayers?"

Why I would send my child to a Muslim school I'll never know. As to the several landmark cases, I would refer to the fallibility of the Supreme Court once again, and cannot find the exclusion of schools from having prayers actually in the constitutional text.

Probably not, but one thing they cannot do is bring religious beliefs into their decision making.

Yes, all Christians should realize that we can't legislate based on religious ideals. What would prevent Muslims from forcing Sharia Law into our legal system?

Do you think the belief that life begins at conception, and thus are afforded rights, is purely a religious ideal? Is there no real argument to be had, no valid conflict?

Was Christopher Hitchens' difficulty with the issue a religious ideal, and his dismissal of those who would suggest there is no valid conflict? And while this is indeed shameless name-dropping, it's still a very good piece well-worth reading: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2003/02/hitchens200302

 

[metis]

Exactly. Change the question to ask if Muslim prayer should be sponsored in our public schools and suddenly this 76% become strict Constitutionalists lol.

We actually had this happen on one of the reservations that I have spent some time on whereas the Ojibwe who went to the local public school were not allowed to have drumming after school hours but a Christian group was allowed to have prayer meetings. When threatened by a possible lawsuit, the board of education suddenly "got religion" and allowed us to do so (I was an occasional participant even though my ancestry does not include Ojibwe).

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Sultan, when your children go to school would you be in favor of them spending 15 minutes per day reciting Muslim prayers?

The children don't have to be forced to say it now do they. They can keep respectfully quiet.

And no I wouldn't send my imaginary children to a Muslim school in the first place, this isn't a conceivable problem in Western countries.

The vast majority of Christians and non-Christians don't really mind, Christian prayers are rather benign.

 

[Neo Deist]

The law is interpreted to mean that a public school, as a state institution, can't mandate or sponsor prayer, because of the US Constitution. While the Constitution does not say "separation of Church and State" it has been viewed that way since Thomas Jefferson. However, that does not mean that a student led prayer can't take place.

 

[Lyndon]

I hope I'm not the only one confused by the logic on display here. Considering the sheer number of translations, editions & amendments the Bible has gone through, why do you consider it more valuable than the Constitution if being open to change is a flaw?

The only value the Bible has for me are the words of Jesus, and man I consider vastly superior to anyone that had anything to do with writing the damn constitution or its amendments. Jesus was a spiritual genius and leader, the writers of the constitution were mere politicians.

 

[metis]

However, that does not mean that a student led prayer can't take place.

Depending on the situation, that may not be true. If it's during school hours or at an official school function, even student-led prayer is not constitutionally allowed because there's a "captive audience" involved.

 

[Father Heathen]

Why I would send my child to a Muslim school I'll never know.

Nice dodge. We're not talking about private religious schools. We're talking about public schools that are supposed to be religiously neutral, inclusive, diverse, etc. (and funded by the tax payers, who are of course of many different faiths, and lack there of). You do raise a good point, though. Those who want religion mixed in with their child's education can simply enroll them in a private religious school, yes? Now please give the question a proper answer now.

 

[Demonslayer]

The children don't have to be forced to say it now do they. They can keep respectfully quiet.

Would you be in favor of Christian children being forced to sit quietly for 15 minutes during public school time for sponsored Muslim prayer?

And no I wouldn't send my imaginary children to a Muslim school in the first place, this isn't a conceivable problem in Western countries.

OK let's back up a second because no one is talking about Muslim or Christian schools. This makes me think you don't understand the issue.

In America at least we have public schools, and then there are private religious schools. If you choose to send your child to a religious school, they can pray until the cows come home, spend science class learning about Noah's Ark, anything the religious school wants. Have at it.

What this law covers is PUBLIC SCHOOLS. Non-religious institutions.

So let me rephrase the question to make it more clear. Would you be in favor of Christian children going to PUBLIC school (not a Muslim school) being forced to sit quietly for 15 minutes a day and listen to school sponsored Muslim prayers?

The vast majority of Christians and non-Christians don't really mind, Christian prayers are rather benign.

LOL. You've soundly missed the point.

 

[Neo Deist]

Depending on the situation, that may not be true. If it's during school hours or at an official school function, even student-led prayer is not constitutionally allowed because there's a "captive audience" involved.

It is 100% true.

I did not say that the student has the right to grab the mic, interrupt the school meeting/function, or force their views on others. But the school can't stop or prevent a student from praying.

 

[Father Heathen]

The only value the Bible has for me are the words of Jesus, and man I consider vastly superior to anyone that had anything to do with writing the damn constitution or its amendments. Jesus was a spiritual genius and leader, the writers of the constitution were mere politicians.

You mean like Matthew 6:5-7?

5“When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. 6“But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you.
7“And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words

 

[Demonslayer]

Those who want religion mixed in with their child's education can simply enroll them in a private religious school, yes?

The fact that religious people have their own schools to send their kids to isn't enough. The fact that religious people can pray silently in public school, or organize prayer groups during free periods is not enough.

The only acceptable outcome is forcing everyone in public schools to sit quietly while their prayers are forced on everyone.

And religious people feel persecuted and wonder why the big deal?

 

[Father Heathen]

The fact that religious people have their own schools to send their kids to isn't enough. The fact that religious people can pray silently in public school, or organize prayer groups during free periods is not enough.

The only acceptable outcome is forcing everyone in public schools to sit quietly while their prayers are forced on everyone.

And religious people feel persecuted and wonder why the big deal?

It's all about meddling, imposing, posturing, grandstanding, etc. - things that are actually frowned upon in the bible.

 

[Skwim]

I don't see a prohibition against schools sponsoring prayers in the constitutional text you've written.

Constitutional law now exceeds that of the original document. It includes all its many amendments plus all the interpretations that have been made. So when one says "according to the Constitution," they mean to include all of these refinements.

Why can't it be up to the school?

In their interpretation of the laws of the Constitution the courts decided such a practice would be in violation of the law.

So people can't disagree with it, and think it isn't what the original constitution is saying?

People can disagree with it all they want.

These people aren't suggesting they'd break the law.

When a law says you can't do X and someone says you should do X anyway, they're saying you should disregard the law and do it anyway.

should be allowed

not just "should"

A distinction without a difference.

It's supporting the lifting of a ban, the changing of the law. Why is advocacy for such so bad?

Advocacy for change is not bad at all, but it doesn't involve breaking the law or advocating breaking the law. A change in Constitutional law is far, far more complicated than that.

Can we not disagree with laws, or wish them to be changed?

Sure. Go ahead and disagree and wish. It won't get you anywhere.

They aren't advocating breaking the law. You are misreading/reading into what these poll questions are saying.

As I pointed out, when they say the school should, they are. To say one should do X is to advocate doing X.


.

 

[metis]

It is 100% true.

I did not say that the student has the right to grab the mic, interrupt the school meeting/function, or force their views on others. But the school can't stop or prevent a student from praying.

That depends what you mean by the latter. For example, if some students or players on a public school football team organize a prayer for the team, that is unconstitutional. However, if a student just states a prayer on his/her own w/o seeking permission from the staff, that may be constitutional depending on what said student is doing it for.

 

[First Baseman]

(As an FYI, for the last 54 years public school sponsored prayer has been against the law in America)

"More than three-quarters (76%) of Americans agree that public high schools should be allowed to sponsor prayer before football games. There are few differences by race, region, gender, or age.

More than 9-in-10 (93%) white evangelical Protestants, approximately 8-in-10 white mainline Protestants (82%), minority Christians (81%), and Catholics (79%), and even a majority (56%) of religiously unaffiliated Americans agree that public high schools should be able to sponsor prayer before football games.

Nearly 9-in-10 (89%) Republicans agree that public high schools should be allowed to sponsor prayer before football games, compared to more than three-quarters (77%) of independents and nearly 7-in-10 (68%) Democrats."
source

​

Or is it that these 76% are simply out-and-out ignorant Christians?

Supreme Court Rules School Sponsored Prayer Unconstitutional

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Jane Doe

On June 19, 2000, in the case of Santa Fe Independent School District v. Jane Doe (99-62), the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that a Texas public school district's practice of opening high school football games with a prayer is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court first ruled against school-sponsored prayer in 1962 in Engel v. Vitale. Since then, the Court has consistently ruled against school-sponsored worship, while permitting voluntary student-initiated religious activities. The Santa Fe case began in 1995 when the parents of two students sued their Texas school district in federal court following adoption of a policy allowing students to elect a classmate to deliver a prayer over the stadium's public address system prior to football games.
source



​

.

The SCOTUS made a bad ruling. They have made several. That doesn't mean Christians don't like the Constitution. It does mean many or most of us do not agree with many rather repugnant and controversial SCOTUS decisions, Roe vs. Wade among them.

Of course the SCOTUS can change its mind and change its rulings in the future. This is why Republicans do not want Obama appointing a Justice.

 

[Demonslayer]

The SCOTUS made a bad ruling. They have made several. That doesn't mean Christians don't like the Constitution. It does mean many or most of us do not agree with many rather repugnant and controversial SCOTUS decisions, Roe vs. Wade among them.

Of course the SCOTUS can change its mind and change its rulings in the future. This is why Republicans do not want Obama appointing a Justice.

A bad ruling? So your in favor of mandated time for Muslim prayer in America's public schools then, and want the constitution amended so each day every American child must spend 15 minutes either praying to Allah or quietly watching their classmates do so?

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Possibly that's because myself and most Christians do not believe the Constitution was written by, or in my case, even inspired by, God.

You're looking at this too one-dimensional.

I'm positive that if your school district started sponsoring religious ceremonies or prayers to God other than the one you subscribe to, you would have a difference of opinion.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

The SCOTUS made a bad ruling.

No. They didn't. Again, you look at this myopically. Preventing Christian prayer at football games, etc. also prevents the schools from allowing forms of prayer that are inconsistent or opposed to your religion. Its not a one way street.

 

[Skwim]

The SCOTUS made a bad ruling. They have made several. That doesn't mean Christians don't like the Constitution. It does mean many or most of us do not agree with many rather repugnant and controversial SCOTUS decisions, Roe vs. Wade among them.

Please read the OP Carefully. If nothing registers read post 23 and post 54.

Of course the SCOTUS can change its mind and change its rulings in the future.

No it can't. The best that could happen would be repeal of an amendment, which would have to happen by the introduction of an amending amendment, as the 21st Amendment did, which has to be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a convention of states called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures.


.