Illinois: Doing away with freedom of religion, one bill at a time

[Amethyst Hunter]

:mad: This really pisses me off, not least of all because it's an outright attempt to force the majority, bit by bit, into conforming with the ideals of a minority group.

Illinois just made it state law that ALL schools - not just private ones, public ones too - now must have a *mandated* "moment of silence" beginning every school day. This bullshit of a bill came about after a first attempt was sensibly vetoed by the governor; consequently, the zealots marshalled their numbers and apparently convinced almost all the legislators to overrride the governor's veto - meaning, the damn thing is now law. Thanks a lot, assholes. Gonna put Prayer Police into all the schools next to enforce this piece of crap legislation? (Probably, seeing as how all the zealotry seems to be coming out in full force nowadays...)

"Moment of silence" means nothing - everybody knows it's just code for state-sanctioned school prayer, even though no particular religion has been specified (yet). (One jackass on a newsblog had the balls to blame the lack of such prayer being responsible for all the school shootings. No, you ignorant fucktard: BULLYING and culturally-sanctioned bullying is what made all those kids kill each other!) Most kids will ignore it and carry on as usual. The few that will observe it, thanks to the brainwashing they've received from their in-turn brainwashed parents, will push for more such measures and claim they're being discriminated against. Because it's so totally anti-Christian to be prohibited against shovel-feeding *your* personal values down *someone else's* throat, you know.

[CancelMyService]

I may be an athiest but I don't grudge anyone wanting to have a moment of private prayer. It does rub me all sorts of wrong ways when I hear people make the "schools got bad when we took prayer away" argument. Actually, schools got bad when they became a low priority on the government funding food chain and so called "education reforms" turned into factories of rote-memorization to ensure proper achievement test scores.

Also, it's not discrimination to tell someone they can't push their beliefs down other people's throats. The day that no longer was common sense was a sad day in this country.

[Amethyst Hunter]

I don't grudge anyone wanting to have a moment of private prayer.

Neither do I. What bothers me most about this is that it opens the door for potential future abuse by the small minority that likes to abuse organized religion for their own sick purposes. Most kids will just ignore the ruling and go about their usual business, albeit 'silently' (For that matter, who gets to dictate how long the silence lasts, or what exactly people will have to do during it - do the ones who don't care get to opt out and pretend like it's just an extended study hall?). The few that agree with it will do their thing quietly for the most part, and the very few that see it as an invitation to make trouble will attempt to push for more overt measures, including ones that favor specific religions, and that's when it really gets hairy. :/

We don't need a 'moment of silence' to start off the school day. What we need are more teachers and officials that give a damn (no offense intended to the hardworking ones that do exist and do a lot of good; I've personally known both good and crap teachers) and curriculums that focus more on teaching people how to think instead of memorizing crap that five, ten years from now won't be worth two cents and that they're likely never to use for the rest of their lives.

[Boozy]

I have to agree with Amethyst Hunter - a "moment of silence" is just the first step in the Christian nationalist's campaign to get prayer back in schools.

They're trying to wear their opponents down gradually. And if they were to succeed in getting prayer back in school, don't think for a minute that they'd stop there. Public schools would become Christian schools if some people had their way.

[rahmota]

Well I'm with Boozy and Cancel on this one. I'm aethiest/agnostic/apathetic whatever about religion. Basically If you want to pray to the great god jiggityboo then have at it leave me alone and we'll be just fine.

Trying to get laws passed to support your religion must mean you dont have much faith in your religion. because if it was all that good then wouldnt people want to join it without being forced to do so by the government? And people wonder why I call the far right relgious nutjobs the Christian Taliban...

As for prayer in school I'll say this as long as there are pop quizes there will be prayer in school....:)

[Greenday]

I haven't had a pop quiz since middle school. And even then, they were just joke quizzes to up our grades.

A mandated moment of silence is a load of crap. I go to school to learn. If you want to get your prayer on, do it at home, or go to the bathroom and do it. Don't waste my freaking time. If my high school had started off every day with 5-10 minutes of a "moment of silence" for personal reflection, I'd have been late every day to school.

[tendomentis]

I suppose it would depend on how long that "moment of silence" really is.

10 seconds??? Nobody is really getting a "prayer" into that.
30 seconds? Maybe, but it's still going to be rushed.

How about this....a ten minute break (not lunch or recess) where you can sit quietly and read, or meditation for those students that meditate, or prayer for those students that pray?

[AFPheonix]

Why can't kids who want to pray do so during the breaks they already have between classes, recess, and lunch?
I fail to see why we need a special dedicated prayer time when not every child prays.

[Ryu]

I'm in college now but when I was in high school the breaks between classes werent long enough to do anything but get to class, there was no recess, and lunch was too loud

[tendomentis]

Why can't kids who want to pray do so during the breaks they already have between classes, recess, and lunch?
I fail to see why we need a special dedicated prayer time when not every child prays.

Many religions' prayer or meditation practices need more than the space of a few seconds (or even just a few minutes) to be observed according to that person's religion, and as of now there exists no time during a child's day at a USA public school to allow that student the necessary time to pray.

Effectively, that is the US government's passive (and quite possibly unintentional) means of restricting a person's religion by use of a state sponsored service.

No, not everyone prays. And not everyone prays the same as everyone else. And not everyone who prays takes the same amount of time as another person who prays a different way (or to a different deity). If a student doesn't want to take that designated "quiet time" to pray, that student could choose to read or study (like homeroom).

So many people cry to keep religion out of schools, but that shouldn't deny a citizen the right to practice their own religion during the school day. A student taking a scheduled ten minute break to pray to his or her diety or deities doesn't negatively impact a student who does not follow the same practice.

[Boozy]

If there are students who feel strongly that they need to pray during the school day, schools should accommodate them. Religious freedom and all that. I just don't see why every other non-religious student in the school needs to stand around and wait for them.

Why would I want to stand and stare at the wall while a handful of kids pray? If prayer time is such a problem, perhaps the schools should use that moment of silence to teach time management skills.

I went to school to learn, not to embrace my spiritual side. That is a personal/family concern to be dealt with at home.

Certainly accommodations should be made for strict adherents of Islam, because that requires prayer five times a day. But something tells me that Muslims were not the folks these Illinois legislators had in mind to help. Just call it a hunch. :rolleyes:

[tendomentis]

If there are students who feel strongly that they need to pray during the school day, schools should accommodate them. Religious freedom and all that. I just don't see why every other non-religious student in the school needs to stand around and wait for them.

Why would I want to stand and stare at the wall while a handful of kids pray? If prayer time is such a problem, perhaps the schools should use that moment of silence to teach time management skills.

I went to school to learn, not to embrace my spiritual side. That is a personal/family concern to be dealt with at home.

Certainly accommodations should be made for strict adherents of Islam, because that requires prayer five times a day. But something tells me that Muslims were not the folks these Illinois legislators had in mind to help. Just call it a hunch. :rolleyes:

Why don't you read other comments and get a clue? Students who do NOT use that time to pray would NOT have to just stand still and stare at a wall, they cold be free to "learn" and would not be required to participate in any kind of group prayer.

You may have gone to school to learn and not embrace your spirituallity, but your priorities can't be foisted on others. Many happy students embrace their spirituallity and study at the same time and seem to get along just fine, and it isn't for you or the state to say that they cannot observe their religious obligations during the day. As long as those relgious practices are not being forced on any other students, they should be as free to practice those religious observances during the school day as you would be free to NOT observe those same practices. Many faiths around the world require meditation or prayer several times during the day, not just Islam.

And while you are correct that the "group" pushing for this "moment of silence" probably does not have those other faiths as part of their agenda, it would just stick it to them all the more if the federal government as a whole allowed these "faith breaks" for all faiths, thereby pre-empting whatever agenda this group or other groups like them might have by extending those protections to all faiths.

[Greenday]

Why don't you read other comments and get a clue? Students who do NOT use that time to pray would NOT have to just stand still and stare at a wall, they cold be free to "learn" and would not be required to participate in any kind of group prayer.

Well, you obviously couldn't learn anything during that silent time as, well, it's SILENT. When a teacher verbally repeats what they are writing down, students' capacity to remember what is being taught is greatly increased.

High school for me was from 7:40am-2:35pm. If they threw a "silent time" somewhere in the middle of the day and extended school even longer, I'd be seriously pissed off. School is for learning. If you want to learn so much religion in school, go to a private school. Public schools are supposed to be about learning what you need to learn and no bsing around.

And when someone's need to pray in the middle of school infringes on my time management, my priorities DO come first. I wanted to get to class and learn as much as I could, as quickly as I could, in an efficient manner. I worked after school, as did many other kids. If school was extended because of a moment of silence each day for "personal reflection", my work schedule would have been messed up and I couldn't have worked all those after-school shifts.

What someone does in their own free time is their business, but this messes with my time and I'd fight this to the death for messing with my rights to learn and to make money. What's the big deal with just praying after school? Is our impending doom so damn close that you have to pray at every second for salvation?

[AFPheonix]

Maybe things are different now, but in grade school we had 2 recesses and a lunch period, about 30 minutes long each. We also had various other breaks, too.
In Junior High we had a 15 minute break midmorning, plus a 45 minute lunch and a 45 minute recess.
In high school we had a 15 minute mid morning break and a 45 minute lunch.
We had enough time in high school to have a little prayer group after lunch each day. Unless things are hugely different now, I fail to see why these would not be sufficient allotted times.
Besides, it's not like school has you from 9 to 5. You get out around 2. Pray after school.

[tendomentis]

Well, you obviously couldn't learn anything during that silent time as, well, it's SILENT. When a teacher verbally repeats what they are writing down, students' capacity to remember what is being taught is greatly increased.

High school for me was from 7:40am-2:35pm. If they threw a "silent time" somewhere in the middle of the day and extended school even longer, I'd be seriously pissed off. School is for learning. If you want to learn so much religion in school, go to a private school. Public schools are supposed to be about learning what you need to learn and no bsing around.

And when someone's need to pray in the middle of school infringes on my time management, my priorities DO come first. I wanted to get to class and learn as much as I could, as quickly as I could, in an efficient manner. I worked after school, as did many other kids. If school was extended because of a moment of silence each day for "personal reflection", my work schedule would have been messed up and I couldn't have worked all those after-school shifts.

What someone does in their own free time is their business, but this messes with my time and I'd fight this to the death for messing with my rights to learn and to make money. What's the big deal with just praying after school? Is our impending doom so damn close that you have to pray at every second for salvation?

You really are dense, aren't you?

You're just aching for a reason to take away someone else's rights because you don't agree with them. If CERTAIN students wanted to spend ten minutes out of the school day to observe their religous practices, that doesn't mean your schooling doesn't continue during that time. Homework maybe? Independant study time?

Or maybe there could be an option to take a half hour meditation/prayer break, or attend a class towards understanding the various different religions around the world (something you clearly could have benefited from given your flippant attitude and opinion that they can just "pray after school"). Quite a few religions practiced in the USA have the practicioners praying/meditating several times a day, but you don't want to be inconvenienced by their beliefs so you'd rather their rights be trampled on so you can act how YOU please.

Seriously, shame on you. Be glad other people care more about your rights as an individual than you obviously care about others.

Perhaps a class like that could even count towards your grade, maybe as an addendum to social studies.

So, three options:

Pray/meditate according to your religious beliefs
Take a graded class to further understand world culture and relgious practices
Study independantly (which you would have to make time for after school anyway)

Allowing students who want the time to pray or meditate according to their beliefs does not inconvenience you or slow down your learning process or otherwise take time out of your precious day, you just use that as an excuse because you don't agree with it. You are truly dense if you truly lack the ability to learn during "silent time". I take it you don't sit quietly and just read much? Please don't pretend to be stupid by stating that one cannot learn during a "silent time". It demeans us all.

People like you who call for the rights of the individual but who would trample on the rights of anyone else they had a problem with are the worst kind of hypocrite and one of my personal pet peeves. Your narrow minded-ness is one of the worst kind, because it makes a false show of being open minded.

[rahmota]

And why cant the kids pray at home before or after school? Aside from islam I am not aware of there being any real need for kids to be praying during the school day. And if they do so then they can fit it into the one reason they are there for, unless its a religious dogma indoctrination facilities, which is to learn and be educated.

Religious studies can be done for a grade but not prayer. Study how the religions interact, the history of their actions, the mythos behind a lot of the religions and the social impact of the various belief systems. But allowin og forcing people to pray or be silent while others pray is a seriously bad idea.

And as for rights all the constitution says is the government cannot support religion. It does not say people have a right to their religion being forced down other peoples throats against their will. It basically says that the government will not support or interfere in someone having a religion or having the freedom FROM religion. Something a lot of the christian taliban have a problem with as they try to force this country into a theocracy just like the middle east.

And besides which its not a bad thing to keep prayer out of public schools as they are a government paid and sponsored organization and any support or conscessions or condoning of any religion is a violation of the constitution and the rights of others. Government support of religion must stop and must never be allowed to begin. And if no one is allowed to pray in school then all are being treated equally and fairly and cannot claim that some other group is getting preferential treatment.

Besides like I've said before if you need to have government help to support your religion you must not have much faith in your religion.

[tendomentis]

It never fails to amaze me just how truly insensitive some people are to other walks of life.

For the record, I'm not Islamic or Christian. I don't follow any particular religion, but I recognize the rights of those who do and find the intolerance by some people to be very unenlightened.

It astounds me that intelligent people (or so-called) would have an actual issue with another student or students being permitted to go somewhere secluded on campus to be allowed to practice their faith, ANY FAITH, during the school day. Practicioners of various faiths from around the world pray or meditate during different times of the day, but are forced to conceal or compromise their practices when attending a public school because the government doesn't allow for ANY religious practice AT ALL in the school system.

I personally don't agree with teaching religion, or making a class about religion NECESSARY for a grade in public schools....I feel that is definately going to far. But to deny those who would practice their religion during the day the right to do so is unconstitutional and downright narrow minded. That goes for any faith, be it any of the flavors of Christianity, Islam, Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, etc....

Those citizens have just as much right to practice their religion during the school day as you have the right to NOT be required to practice religion during the school day.

[rahmota]

Tendo said:But to deny those who would practice their religion during the day the right to do so is unconstitutional

Actually no you are incorrect about that. Public schools making an accomodation for a person's religion would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT OF A RELIGION BY THE GOVERNMENT. As prohibited by the First amendment to the Constitution's Establishment clause.

Also not making accomodations for students to go and have their own special time for prayer is not Denying anyone anything under the Free Exercise clause of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. they can still pray on their own time, at lunch, quietly in study hall to themselves, before school, after school, etc....The government is not saying they cannot pray just that they cannot take time out of the day and have special priviledges, forcing all others who do not worship the same way as the to take this time out of their day, and otherwise getting preferrential treatment. That if they want to pray they will have to do so on their own personal time. Not with governmental sponsorship and support.

Those citizens have just as much right to practice their religion during the school day as you have the right to NOT be required to practice religion during the school day.
You are quite correct in that statement however. I will totally agree with you that a person has the right to practice whatever relgion they want to that makes them comfortable as long as they do not break any other laws or are overly disruptive of the school day. i mean I doubt the schools would want a native american ritual that involves psychotropic substances during the school day, a wiccan skyclad ritual or an orthodox jew ritually sacrificing a lamb. Unfortuantely a lot of religious people or people with a misguided sense of rightness are more than willing to overlook the second part of your own statement. By making laws or rules that give special priviledges to followers of a religion that is infringing upon the rights and lives of those who do not follow a relgion at all or that particular religion. They however do not have the right to have laws establishing or supporting their religion. Any religion that feels they need laws to support it does not deserve those laws in the first place.

truly insensitive some people are to other walks of life You want to talk about insensitive, unenlightened and intolerant uptight people? It has been my unfortunate personal experience that the majority of people who fit that bill are the most religious people you could meet. Not all religious people are that way but an unfortunate number of them are. And usually those nut jobs are the most vocal ones that reasonable intelligent people have to fight against.

[AFPheonix]

Congratulations, Tendomentis, you managed to put down about 3 different people just because they don't agree with you. Lovely.
Guess what. I WAS Christian when I was growing up. Did my faith suffer because I didn't have a specific time allotted to pray? No, I did it during the free time breaks we were given. That is what kids should continue to be doing. To do otherwise is trampling on the rights of the kids who don't practice religion of any kind. Not having it is not curtailing prayer among the faithful in any way, they just get to incorporate it into their breaks, as they will get to do during college and as they join the workforce.

[tendomentis]

So when it comes right down to it, you'd rather that some people sacrifice a little of their freedom for your convenience. That's what the heart of this matter is, and it's disgusting.

Hiding behind the whole "separation of church and state" clause is pathetic as that isn't what this is about. The government isn't sponsoring those students' relgions, merely making sure that their freedom of religion is allowed to exist during the school day.

Fundie christians who cry that our nation is going to hell because we took prayer out of the schools are one extreme of this arguement, and you are the other extreme. The ideal answer lies somewhere in between.

[Boozy]

You really are dense, aren't you?

Not cool. :(

[Greenday]

Fundie christians who cry that our nation is going to hell because we took prayer out of the schools are one extreme of this arguement, and you are the other extreme. The ideal answer lies somewhere in between.

This is called the gray fallacy. Some people say black, some people say white, and the rest figure the real answer has to be somewhere in the gray. But it's not always the case. If anything, you have presented some of the most absurd arguments without backing along with your personal attacks.

Yes, I HAVE taken classes on various cultures. I never payed attention in the class. I got an A. I've known about many different cultures in the world for a long time now.

Yes, I do read silently. Every night before I go to sleep I read. Sometimes when I'm on the toilet I read. Between classes I'll read.

So when it comes down to it, you'd prefer the rights of the majority to be sacrificed for the minority who actually want prayer time in school. Back in high school, if it was put to a vote, no prayer time would have won nearly unanimously. If we had prayer time for those couple kids who actually wanted it, the majority would be getting screwed over, not the minority. Your beliefs that the majority should have to suffer is "disgusting".

So before you make another comment about how dumb or stupid a member is, come up with a valid argument and actual back it with some reasoning. While this thread is about debating, and topics CAN become heated, this is a place for debating, not flaming. So keep your "denses" and other personal attacks out of it. Some of the people you are bashing are extremely intelligent. Hell, rahmota and I were on different sides when I entered the gun control debate. By the end of the debate, he had me nearly convinced to join the People's Militia.

[tendomentis]

My comments were not meant to be taken as flaming, merely frustration that the basic concepts I'm advocating seem to fall on deaf ears.

The gray fallacy only applies to logical thought problems where a middle ground cannot physically exist (i.e., I should go to work and I want to stay home and sleep, so no middle ground exists).

The resistance to the idea of actually allowing religious freedom by some members of this board is very similar to the resistance I find on some fundamental christian boards to allowing religious freedom without pushing the christian agenda, so in a very real sense those of you who are utterly resistant to allowing a balance (where the rest of the universe strives for a balance or median) are the other extreme.

If people are offended by my comments or opinions on this topic, I won't comment any further as nothing good comes of sharing ideas if nobody WANTS to hear ideas contrary to their own (despite the claim that this board is for debate).

[Seshat]

When I went to school, we had several students who skipped class at designated times for various reasons. Some were learning a musical instrument, some were seeing the guidance counsellor/school psychologist. We had one budding olympic-grade sportswoman in our school, too, who had special classes. None of us suffered academically because of this, as far as I know.

The practice of Islam requires prayer at specific times of the day. There may be other religions with similar requirements - I don't know of any, but I'm by no means a specialist in world religions.

If there's an unused classroom, or a corner of the library can be spared, the school could turn it into a non-denominational quiet room/chapel. The Islamic students could have special permission to slip out of class at their designated times, the other students could go the chapel during their breaks.

This would allow those students who need prayer or meditation to have it, with minimal impact on the other students. The few who have academic problems because of skipping class can be tutored by other members of their religious congregation, to make up for classes they missed.

It seems like a perfect solution to me. Does anyone have a problem with it?

[Seshat]

If people are offended by my comments or opinions on this topic, I won't comment any further as nothing good comes of sharing ideas if nobody WANTS to hear ideas contrary to their own (despite the claim that this board is for debate).

Stick to the ideas, don't debate the people. Look at the 'gun control' debate, and you'll see a marked lack of insults like "You really are dense, aren't you?" or assertions that opposing ideas are "pathetic".

I'm honestly interested in points of view which oppose my own, but I'm not at all interested in being insulted or having my point of view insulted. I believe that most humans are similar to me in that regard. (But I'm open to disagreement!)

As long as you are willing to keep the debate to ideas, not personalities, I believe you're welcome to keep posting.

[AFPheonix]

My comments were not meant to be taken as flaming, merely frustration that the basic concepts I'm advocating seem to fall on deaf ears.


They're not falling on deaf ears, as we are addressing your points with points of our own. Incredibly, people are allowed to disagree. Incredibly, no one's called you dense or narrow-minded simply because we hold a different view-point.

Now, the one thing that other people have brought up that you have failed to address is the possible motive of the legislators who brought this to pass. Do you think those legislators are thinking of Muslims or Seiks or any other number of religions?
Probably not, as Illinois is a pretty white bread, Christian state. That's why a lot of us are quite suspect of this legislation, because it seems that the same people who try to get Creationism taught alongside Evolution in schools are trying to get mandatory prayer re instituted, too.

[Boozy]

If my comments have been seen as anti-religion or intolerant, then I have been misunderstood. I have in fact stated that if a religious student feels the need to pray, then they should be able to do so, even during school hours if need be.

But I am suspect of the intentions of this specific legislation, and I believe rightfully so. This is mandated moment of silence for all students.

This is also a somewhat personal issue for me. Let me share a story from my own experience:

When I was in elementary school, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that school prayer was unconstitutional. Previously, we had opened each school day with my teacher leading us all in the Lord's Prayer. I suspect it made some of our Sikh students uncomfortable, but what could they do?

My teacher disagreed with the new legislation, and announced that now we would all open each school day with - you guessed it - a moment of silence.

The first day we did this, a student actually began praying aloud. A few other students chimed in. The second day, several students led the prayer. By the third day, every student was once again saying the Lord's Prayer aloud. Even the Sikhs, who likely didn't want to stand out from the crowd any more than they already did. We were all 12 year-olds, after all, and kids that age will do anything to fit in.

I suspect that this is exactly what the Illinois legislators are hoping will happen.

In my case, I think the moment of silence lasted about a week before the school administrators caught on. I'm not sure what happened, but that was the end of that.

I won't comment any further as nothing good comes of sharing ideas if nobody WANTS to hear ideas contrary to their own (despite the claim that this board is for debate).

Everyone here wants to hear ideas contrary to their own. I can't for the life of me think of a reason why any of us would be members on a debate forum if that's not what we wanted.

Just because we may not agree doesn't mean we don't hear what you're saying. The gun control thread is indeed a fantastic example. Some of us don't agree with rahmota, for example, but he's done a terrific job of explaining the other side, and I for one have come away with a much better understanding of the whole issue.

[tendomentis]

I went back and re-read my own comments and saw the personal attacks in them that I didn't see a day ago, so I apologize to anyone I may have personally offended. Needless to say, I guess I get to personally motivated in rights issues, and that's my failing. I know I got heated, but until I calmed down and re-read everything I said I didn't remember how personal I got.

So I am sorry.

I think it's safe to say that I've used up my right to discuss this in a civilized fashion. I'm not a religous nut who wants prayer back in the schools, but I am passionate about protecting rights of the individual, not just the majority. I let my feelings on it dictate my words on the topic instead of staying logical, so I lose on principle.

I don't think anyone on this forum is particularly dense, at least no more than myself :) My abrasive words were unnecessary, and I think in general that the people who would seek out this forum demonstrate greater intelligence than the norm just by wanting to discuss these issues.

I'd like to stay on the forum, but I should probably shy away from this topic as it seems to provoke me more than I'd care to admit.

[rahmota]

OKay tendo. I'm not exactly sure whats goign on here with you but I would like to say that I'm not exactly pleased by your debating skills. Insulting and otherwise not being very diplomatic to others is not a good way to get your point across. As has been pointed out on the firearms control debate we managed to have some very passionate discussions with diverse Points of view without resorting to name calling. And if it can be done on something as contentious as firearms then it can be achieved here as well on somethign as equally contentious. (Oh and to greenday and boozy, thanks for the compliments.:o You guys did good on there too.) And since I feel like some of your comments where directed at me personally (not you boozy) I feel justified in saying that.

As has been mentioned several times here there are alternatives to a mandatory moment of silence. Letting students use their personal time., letting them go off to the office or a unused classroom, individually as they need it. No one is trying to deny those who want to pray, or need to pray, their ability to pray. No one is saying that.

What is being said is that the motivation behind the "moment of silence" is rather suspicious. Yeah being politically correct and inclusive is popular right now. This does not feel like its motivated by that. Illinois is not exactly a great hot bed of alternative culture.

Now specifically:So when it comes right down to it, you'd rather that some people sacrifice a little of their freedom for your convenience. That's what the heart of this matter is, and it's disgusting.
Actually no. I do not want a single person to sacrifice any of their freedoms whatsoever. All a person has in this life is their personal freedom when it comes right down to it. Freedom to choose, freedom to live according to their beliefs. When you have a religious organization or secular organization attempting to dictate how a person may live their personal life and how they may think or believe I get rather bent about it.

I personally dont give a rats butt if a person prays to god, allah, budda,their tablelamp or the great noodlebeast. As long as they are happy about it, do it with consenting adults, dont break any other laws, and most importantly DONT TRY AND FORCE ME or others to believe that way. If I want to see what's up with your church/beliefs I'll do so of my own free will. If I dont then sorry but you're probably better off without me around.

Which comes back to the whole letting students go off and do their prayer thing on their time or on their own. Its not forcing others to go along with their prayer time, not interefering in normal classroom activities and not denying them their prayer time. To force everyone to stop what their doing and have a moment of silence at set prayer times is not very kosher if you'll forgive the phrase.

Hiding behind the whole "separation of church and state" clause is pathetic as that isn't what this is about. The government isn't sponsoring those students' relgions, merely making sure that their freedom of religion is allowed to exist during the school day.

*sigh* Okay really? If an agency goes out of their way to support and provide special benefits for a group of people is that or is that not sponsoring or otherwise supporting and endorsing the actions of that group of people? The 1st amendment states that the government nor its agencies, as has been determined by the supreme court, can endorse or support relgious activites. Nor can they prevent or prohibit religious activities unless it breaks other existing laws. (ie trying to do a wiccan skyclad ceremony on times square at high noon would be rather frowned upon from a legal standpoint)

As boozy says:Everyone here wants to hear ideas contrary to their own. I can't for the life of me think of a reason why any of us would be members on a debate forum if that's not what we wanted.

Exactly. I mean I got booted from a board because they didnt want anyone disagreeing with their white bread right wing commentary. I'm not missing it as it was rather boring and dangerous to be around that many people slapping them selves on the back for all thinking alike. I like it here as while not everybody thinks the same at least folks are able to be polite about it.

[rahmota]

Ok tendo. apology accepted as I can definately understand being passionate about something you believe in. My previous post was typed up while you where posting yours. I'll leave it stand as it is a valid commentary on posting like that. Something I am borderline guilty of doing. As I can get a bit intense in my discussions. But there are certain lines that cannot or at least should not be crossed in polite debate, no matter how passionate, before it devolves into an argument.

I too believe in individual freedoms in personal life. A person can only control so far as they can reach, anythign beyond that is just influence and that can change with the wind the further away from you for the most part. I think this has been a bit of a misunderstanding and you are wanting somethign similar just not saying it in the same way.

I dont want kids who want to pray to be denyed the ability to do so. I just dont want others forced to be there too if they dont want to.

I think it's safe to say that I've used up my right to discuss this in a civilized fashion.
No I dont think so. You got a bit mad and let your mouth(fingers) get ahead of your diplomacy censor. not an uncommon or totally unforgivable thing especially as you noticed it yourself. Hope to discus thigns with you again later.

[Boozy]

I'd like to stay on the forum, but I should probably shy away from this topic as it seems to provoke me more than I'd care to admit.

There are some threads I usually stay away from too, for the same reasons. Its hard to remain unemotional when you're discussing something that means a great deal to you.

But please don't let this silence you on other topics! I like your posts - you always have some good points to make.

[Greenday]

I don't think students shouldn't be allowed to pray in school. If they have free time, I don't see why they can't use it to pray. In high school, lunch was half an hour, freshman through junior year you could easily fit a study hall in and that's another forty minutes. That's already over an hour of time that can be used for prayer. Senior year, most kids had two study halls. And if it got loud in study hall, you were kicked out to the vice principal's office. In middle school, we had a half an hour for lunch and a half an hour for recess. That's plenty of time to get praying done. I always got reading and/or homework done during lunch if need be. As much as I enjoy reading, during the day, I just want to go to class and get class over with. I know all of my friends feel the same way. It'd just be unfair to so many of us to extend our days when we have other things we need to get done.

[Rapscallion]

I don't know about the US, but over here anyone who considers it important to pray five times a day when following islam is in an islamic school. Based on this, my take is that people who go to non-denominational schools are there to learn. If someone at such a school wishes to pray, they can do it in their breaks, before school, or after school. I can't see why anyone at such a school should have to change their day to accomodate anyone else's beliefs. In the spirit of fairness, if all pupils don't get the five pray periods off during the day, that's a lack of equality. Such a distraction is going to affect how a lesson works as well, I would imagine.

Is a moment of silence an attempt to get religion into schools? I'm trying to see any reason why this is necessary.

Rapscallion

[Boozy]

I don't know about the US, but over here anyone who considers it important to pray five times a day when following islam is in an islamic school....In the spirit of fairness, if all pupils don't get the five pray periods off during the day, that's a lack of equality.

You're probably right - any Muslim who prays five times a day is most likely attending a madrasah. There's a Christian home schooling movement in the US taking off, especially in the South. And not just because of the prayer thing, but also because of issues like evolution and sex education.

You're also right about the spirit of fairness - public schools must be accommodating of anyone regardless of religion. Not every student can afford private religious school.

But we obviously can't acquiesce too much to religious groups - that is when we see the removal of sex ed and the teaching of creationism.

[Seshat]

I apologize to anyone I may have personally offended.
So I am sorry.


It takes maturity to recognise one's own failings and apologise for them. I respect you for this.


I'd like to stay on the forum, but I should probably shy away from this topic as it seems to provoke me more than I'd care to admit.

If you so choose.
Another alternative would be to type up a post offline, wait 24 hours, review it for personal attacks, and then cut-and-paste it into the forum. Over time, you'll develop the skills to debate even issues you feel strongly about, without needing to take the cool-off time. ;)

[Seshat]

I don't know about the US, but over here anyone who considers it important to pray five times a day when following islam is in an islamic school.


Here in Aussieland, we have enough Islamic students attending local schools (especially near where I live) that the uniform shops for the school uniforms include headscarves in the school uniform colours.

I don't know what they do about the prayer thing - when I was growing up, we didn't have any obviously Islamic students in my schools - but clearly there's a solution which satisfies the Islamic parents, and gets the kids learning the same stuff as every other kid in our culture.

[daleduke17]

I just saw this conversation, and being from Illinois, I thought I'd chime in.

This whole Moment of Silence vs State Sponsored religion has gotten old. The General Assembly (basically State Congress) worked on this when they should have been working on more important issues like the budget that wasn't approved for almost two months (including going into overtime and affecting a whole lot of state and local agencies), or taking care of the electric price freeze issue.

Since it has gotten passed there have been numerous articles and letters to the editor in the local newspaper. Some for it, some against it. I personally think it should have been a low priority issue, not a hotly contested deal. It was another piece of legislation that Illinois put into effect before working out the details or how it is going to be enforced. It seems like a hard piece of legislation to enforce as how can one actually go in and check if the schools are actually following legislation.

Governor Blagojevich has hardly done anything with any of the pressing issues of the state so he can show off his ideas, including: moment of silence, universal healthcare and pay raises for the General Assembly and himself. He has greatly irritated the residents of Illinois (even a lot of downstate* democrats) and should be assured this is his last term, even if he does run again.

*-"downstate" consists of all of Illinois outside of Chicago and the collar counties around Chicago.

[Amethyst Hunter]

What most likely happened was that a small but very vocal minority (i.e., the ones who think Religion Solves Everything) pushed for this bill to go through - the governor did NOT approve it when it landed on his desk; it became a law through default when the GA garnered enough votes to override his (sensible) veto and it automatically then went into effect.

Last I had heard, a court did rule that it was unconstitutional, but the ruling evidently only applies to this one school district - others may still have it in effect. We'll know more as the story develops, I suppose.


Governor Blagojevich has hardly done anything with any of the pressing issues of the state so he can show off his ideas, including: moment of silence, universal healthcare and pay raises for the General Assembly and himself. He has greatly irritated the residents of Illinois (even a lot of downstate* democrats) and should be assured this is his last term, even if he does run again.


I'm from Illinois myself, and with some exceptions, I don't think Blagojevich has really been that bad. I definitely would rather have him over a Republican - I will NEVER vote for another Republican ever again after what that party has done to this state and this country (if not the world). I do think Blagojevich should spend more time trying to work out a feasible healthcare solution though, being as that's one of his ideas that I do agree with.

[daleduke17]

That's right, it was due to the GA override.

I'd just like to see another person like Edgar to get into office. From what I have read he didn't seem like he was that bad of a governor, even being a Republican. No offense if you're from Chicagoland, Amethyst, but Blagojevich needs to realize the seat of Illinois Government is in Springfield.

[Rapscallion]

I mat be geographically challenged here, but wherever the seat is, isn't it his duty to represent all of his constituents?

Rapscallion

[Amethyst Hunter]

I'd just like to see another person like Edgar to get into office. From what I have read he didn't seem like he was that bad of a governor, even being a Republican. No offense if you're from Chicagoland, Amethyst, but Blagojevich needs to realize the seat of Illinois Government is in Springfield.

I can't say as I know much about Edgar, being that I was fairly young when he was around. He may well have been 'old school' Repub, before the party got hijacked by all the nutjobs and assholes. I could probably tolerate old school Repub, but there are too few of them these days and they all seem more interested in bonding with their fellow scum than in honest representation. Until they kick those kinds out, I refuse to support them.

Granted, Dems have their own issues, but in general, they're a lot less likely to (irreparably) royally screw over the populace than the other bunch.

I'm not from Chicagoland, not even close, but as Raps said, Blago's job is to represent all the state, not just Springfield, even if the state legislative body is headquartered there. I'm not sure what part of IL you're from, but I have been downstate before (as far south as the IL-KY border, actually), and trust me - depending on the area, parts of it are downright SCARY in comparison to some of the central/northern areas.

One of the reasons I like Blago is because he helped spearhead a law which states that all IL pharmacies *must* fill all prescriptions they're presented with, or else refer the customer to someplace that will. This came about thanks to some asshole who thought it was their Moral Duty to tell a customer what physician-prescribed medication (i.e., birth control pills) she could and could not have based on that asshole's *personal beliefs*. Guess where this happened - Chicagoland area. Now, if these kinds of scumbags are infesting a *city*, how bad is it, I wonder, way downstate where the 'ol Bible Belt reigns supreme? (for the record, this kind of crap has been happening all over the *country* in recent years)

Sometimes the politicians actually do do what they're supposed to, which is look out for the little guy.

[daleduke17]

I'm from Bloomington, which is about an hour north of Springfield going towards Chicago on I55.

I do like a couple of Blagojevich's new things, but there are a lot more I don't like. I agree about the pharmacist one, definitely. I could only imagine how bad it is south of I70 (Carbondale, Marion, Cairo, etc) in the Bible Belt area.

I did like watching Rich Whitney run for Governor this past time being the Green Party person and all. He seemed like the legit best candidate. Too bad he didn't win. :-/

[Arcade Man D]

I mat be geographically challenged here, but wherever the seat is, isn't it his duty to represent all of his constituents?

Rapscallion

It's a popular expression in various US states when a state official seems to care more about one particular city than the entirety of the state. Particularly "The seat of New York's government is in Albany", or others I can't think of at half past midnight.

[powerboy]

If there's an unused classroom, or a corner of the library can be spared, the school could turn it into a non-denominational quiet room/chapel. The Islamic students could have special permission to slip out of class at their designated times, the other students could go the chapel during their breaks.

This would allow those students who need prayer or meditation to have it, with minimal impact on the other students.

It seems like a perfect solution to me. Does anyone have a problem with it?



I was going to mention this. It would be the best solution. This is what we had in my high school.

[Saydrah]

I'm late to the party with this thread, but I think that most people offering solutions are overlooking a larger problem.

If students are completely unable to find a few minutes and a quiet space each day for gathering their thoughts, prayer, meditation, or just to get AWAY from each other, it's no suprise so many kids cut class at higher grade levels!

I had the good fortune to attend an alternative school, which though it had many problems, was not the type to over-schedule, over-test, and exhaust students like so many high schools do today. Relaxation and self-expression were rights every student had. We made our own schedules with the advice and approval of teachers, choosing what subjects to take and at what times of day from a list of offerings. It was permissible to take a free period during the day for study or work on independent projects, if one placed it on one's schedule and submitted a proposal for use of the time to one's advisor (homeroom teacher, in conventional school jargon).

I don't think a student of ANY religion struggled to find quiet time for prayer at my high school, because quiet time was always available to anyone who expressed they needed it built into their schedule, whether to combat stress, pray, or what have you. Where is the harm in allowing students a little say in their schedules? Eliminate NCLB and the pressure to test constantly, implement measures to attract more creative and talented teachers and school administrators, and put a little wiggle room in students' schedules, and let them decide for themselves where in the day to place a few 10 minute breaks for whatever purpose.

The government doesn't need to administrate religious expression for students. Give them the freedom to self-advocate for flexibility in their education, and religious students who feel they must pray during the day will schedule their own times and places to do so.

I WOULD have a problem with a quiet room called a chapel being in a building built with public funds. However, I do not have a problem with not forcing schools to use every room of the building all the time, and I do not have a problem with allowing students the flexibility to use empty rooms for any purpose.

When our schools are so over-crowded and our students so over-booked that the government has to mandate a moment of silence or a chapel room simply to allow students to express themselves, we need more than a debate over those mandated moments of silence- we need fundamental change in the school system. Students are humans, and children, and forcing them into schedules so strict it's impossible to find a few quiet minutes to pray is detrimental to much more than freedom of religion.

[Amethyst Hunter]

When our schools are so over-crowded and our students so over-booked that the government has to mandate a moment of silence or a chapel room simply to allow students to express themselves, we need more than a debate over those mandated moments of silence- we need fundamental change in the school system. Students are humans, and children, and forcing them into schedules so strict it's impossible to find a few quiet minutes to pray is detrimental to much more than freedom of religion.

Two problems:

1) American schools do not want students who can actually *think*. They want little drones that will slavishly follow the system and turn out more little drones. This is why genuinely good teachers/schools can't get the help that they need and get edged out by the mediocre/crap mobs and BS like NCLB.

2) The *majority* of the people who are pushing for mandated "moments of silence" (which IS code for school prayer) in schools are NOT doing it out of any sympathy for overstressed students - they are explicitly trying to force a particular religious agenda into a place where it doesn't belong. This is also the same mindset that thinks Intelligent Design needs to be taught in place of evolution and accepted scientific theory. And yes, there IS a section of dominionism wherein these people are *encouraged* to get seats on school boards and other local administrative positions of power in order to help pave the way for just these types of shenanigans.

I would not have a problem with students having some type of 'free time' during their class day where they could have a breather to use as they pleased (whatever happened to study halls?). However, when a vocal minority attempts to shovelfeed their version of morality down everybody's throat and tries to pass it off as something neutral, that annoys me greatly.

At last count, the Illinois law was struck down not long ago, but as I understand it, it's going back to another court for review and perhaps editing to a voluntary status (which isn't quite as bad as mandated, but it still irks me that they have to call it a "moment of silence").

[I8DaCookie]

I'm jumping in here late and haven't read all of the posts but I do have my own bit to add.

I work in Maryland as a substitute teacher and I'm student teaching one day a week. Maryland has manditory moment of silence. I don't know when they started doing this but it was after I left the school system as a student. I was surprised the first time I was back in a classroom and they did it.

I personally believe that it is a waste of time. The MOS is done right after the pledge (which I believe should also not be required but that's a different topic) where students are asked to stand for a bit. Most students look board or if I'm in a high school, they're already starting ot chat with one another.

I don't see it as mandated prayer time. There really isn't time for a prayer, everyone is just quiet and I can tell you, no one is reflecting on anything.

And if there is prayer...it's praying that you don't fail the big test you didn't study for.

[Nekojin]

Hoo boy, where to begin.

Allowing the free exercise of religions in public school is a very, very thorny situation - moreso than most people seem to get. There is no "good solution" that caters to everyone equally.

If you go with a wide-open policy that allows all students to specify a religion and dictate when they "must" do religious observations, you open it to all sorts of shenanigans, especially when lassiez-faire parents get involved ("My kid says he's a Pastafarian, and needs a full hour for lunch? You heard him - and I support my child!"). Is the school expected to be well-versed in all possible real religions (as opposed to wholly-fabricated ones)?

Either the religious time of some students gets infringed upon, or the proper teaching of students does. When a student can get up in the middle of class, say, "Religious pass," and walk out, to come back 20 minutes later, how can they expect to actually learn the lessons being taught?

It is simply not possible to cater to all religions; therefore it is best for public schools to cater to none. Most people are not devout observers of their religion. If you are, do you want a school that caters to your devout worship, and gives appropriate breaks? If so, then find a suitable private school.

It's not a perfect solution. But it is the best one, IMO.

[Seshat]

If students are completely unable to find a few minutes and a quiet space each day for gathering their thoughts, prayer, meditation, or just to get AWAY from each other, it's no suprise so many kids cut class at higher grade levels!

<snip>

Students are humans, and children, and forcing them into schedules so strict it's impossible to find a few quiet minutes to pray is detrimental to much more than freedom of religion.

I spent most of my school years in the library. There was nowhere else that I was safe from the teasing.

As for a place to pray or meditate or get away from other people? No such place. The library was the closest you could get - and it was safe primarily because there was nowhere there the librarians couldn't see you.

[Slytovhand]

I'm coming in even later.. but I did read all previous threads...

I like Saydrah's idea, which was sort of similar to what I had in secondary. We had 7x45 periods per day. We had a few choices and a few required - English, a from of maths, religion (it was a private school). We also had the choice for a 'study' (hahahaha - who chose that name?? :p) period. That should be a good time to exercise one's religious requirements (not that we did, given the christian school...).

Also, back when I was in primary, every Tuesday we had some sort of religious education - where we would go to a designated classroom, and meet with a designated authority on the religion of our 'choice' (choice is in brackets cos we were kids.. like we could really choose!!). Mine was Mormon (IIRC) - not that we were, but because mother decided she liked some aspects of it - I dunno!!

I appreciate both sides to this argument, and other than Saydrah's idea, I don't think of a 'fair' balance.

Oh - and I do think religion should be taught in schools - but as a history/psychology exercise. After all, it is one of the most potent and driving forces in humanity.


The 1st amendment states that the government nor its agencies, as has been determined by the supreme court, can endorse or support relgious activites. Nor can they prevent or prohibit religious activities unless it breaks other existing laws. (ie trying to do a wiccan skyclad ceremony on times square at high noon would be rather frowned upon from a legal standpoint)

Why?? Only because it's skyclad?

Slyt