Prayer in school.

@Elmud,

Yes it has. But so have many other teachings within Christianity. Perhaps the foremost of these are the teaching that treasures in Heaven are what you are to pursue instead of treasures in this life, the teaching that you are to love and forgive your fellow man regardless of what he does, and, similar to the previous example, the teaching that under no circumstances is it your job to judge others.

Having gone to public school in Southern California, attempts to force religion on students were unheard of during my school career. However, it seems this is an ongoing battle in other parts of the country, and I just wish there were a way to please both sides and not have to infringe on the rights of either.

0 Replies

@Elmud,

"Seek ye the inner most silence of the soul, it is there that I AM."

Yeah, you have a good point Elmud. Jesus in the Bible showed us how to pray.

WithoutReason wrote:

Perhaps the foremost of these are the teaching that treasures in Heaven are what you are to pursue instead of treasures in this life...

Amen to that. The treasure lay under our nose should we wake up enough to recognize it.

So back to the thread title, 'Prayer in school'. Is this thread about prayer in school or Evangelical Christians?

I have no qualms with removing prayer from the daily routine before and or during school. Is the National Anthem a prayer as well?

1 Reply

@Elmud,

Pray should never be allowed in school. What happens when my future children refuse to play along if they were forced to recite prays they do not believe in?

1 Reply

@Justin,

Justin wrote:

"Seek ye the inner most silence of the soul, it is there that I AM."

Yeah, you have a good point Elmud. Jesus in the Bible showed us how to pray.

Amen to that. The treasure lay under our nose should we wake up enough to recognize it.

So back to the thread title, 'Prayer in school'. Is this thread about prayer in school or Evangelical Christians?

I have no qualms with removing prayer from the daily routine before and or during school. Is the National Anthem a prayer as well?

It is about prayer in School Justin. Also, public prayer in general. I guess my intention in posting this thread was to bring to light the fact that many of Jesus' teachings have been willfully ignored by some who profess to be his followers. I won't go into the reasons. People have their own thoughts as to why. I would be interested in others opinions as to why, and I'll keep my reasons to myself at this time.

0 Replies

@Theaetetus,

Theaetetus wrote:

Pray should never be allowed in school. What happens when my future children refuse to play along if they were forced to recite prays they do not believe in?

There's a huge difference between prayer being allowed in school if students so choose and forced by the administration. Of course students shouldn't be forced to go along with something they don't believe in, but it's equally wrong to deny students the right to go along with something they do.

1 Reply

@Axis Austin,

Yes, Evangelical Christians have set themselves up as diametrically opposed to quite a bit of scripture.

Regarding prayer in school, Axis Austin hit the nail on the head. Of course we should allow prayer in school, but to force prayer upon students is a violation of the Constitution.

Justin, you brought up an interesting idea: is the national anthem prayer? Sure sounds like it to me.

0 Replies

@Elmud,

Bah, save the religion for the homestead. If we are truly a multicultural society, or should I say world, then the schools themselves should be secular, allowing home time for an individual family's shaping of their young into the religious person they wish them to be. School should be the base of life and teachings from home and free time the fine tuning.

0 Replies

@Elmud,

Everyone assumes that the United States is a Christian country, so most people find it acceptable. I don't see how it's a problem, unless people are evangelising others.

0 Replies

@Elmud,

In fact you can not force someone to take/recite any kind of an oath, or any kind of prayer in public school. That includes the national anthem.
The more subtle problem is public displays of religous symbols or the voluntary recitation of the pledge of allegiance, students right to wear religious jewelry or publically pray, the right of religious groups to use public faciitiies, schools, etc.
The right of public officials to use religious language.
Separation of church and state should not mean supression of voluntary religous observance.

0 Replies

@Elmud,

Anywhere the government has you as a "captive audience" it must remain mute on religious issues. That doesn't mean you as an individual can't pray in school or courtrooms -- it means the gov't as a whole cannot force me as an individual to pledge allegiance to a flag under a god, or exchange a promissory note for goods with the idea that I trust in a god, or requires me to worship as a child in a tax-supported public school. Unconstitutionally, the US government does all three.

The bottom line is very common-sense related: if the government is free to exalt any one religion over another, then what do you do if someday that religion is not the one you believe in? What is the only way to ensure this does not happen? The only way I can see it is if the government is silent about all religious issues. That doesn't make the individuals in government atheists or irreligious -- they can believe whatever they wish. What it means is they are prevented from forcing their beliefs on me or you.

0 Replies

@Elmud,

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

The constitution prohibits the "an establishment of religion" not the use of religious symbols, religious speech or the mention of religion in general in speeches, ceremonial, traditional or historical venues. The use of "in God we trust" or "one nation under god" does not constitute "an establishment of religion" and has a long traditional, historical and ceremonial usage.

In the end the Supreme Court interprets what the phrase means and the court has not chosen to ban religious symbols and references from public life: nor is it likely to in the near future. It is hard to imagine Lincoln's speeches having the power and grace without their reference to divine providence and transcendent values.

The court has struggled with what constitutes a "religion" (divine pot smokers of Southern California) or what constitutes "an establishment of religion" and also what is "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" but has generally held that mere reference to the divine is not "an establishment" and that "religious practice" is not an excuse for violating the law.

To ban all religious reference in any governmental forum by any governmental official is "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" and in effect "an establishment of non religion". That you cannot be forced to pray or take an oath is established law.

2 Replies

@prothero,

I have a split personality on this issue, i abhor religion inflicting its ceremony onto my disbelief, in so many ways but then i feel content in the fact it is ceremony and the historic value is appropriate. I have sworn my allegiance to my queen, god bless her, and my country, in the name of a god, a god i dont believe in but it still means something to me. I have a love of my country that overcomes my reticence and it means everything to me.

0 Replies

@prothero,

There is no way to have freedom of religion without also having freedom from religion. If it were otherwise, then Moslems could argue that Christians are not permitted to have freedom from believing in Islam! Or Christians could claim that Moslems could not be permitted to have freedom from Islam! Freedom from is part and parcel of freedom of.

The entire constitution is rules that limit the government's involvement in the citizen's lives. It is clearly a muzzle on the state's ability to dictate to the citizenry what it can and cannot do within the paradigm of the federal mandate. Certainly rule of law is to be enforced, but that is also controlled at the local level. So it is not any news that government is restrained from interfering with religion.

What is not being said here is that once you are not allowed to interfere in favor of one religion, you must again be neutral across the board because any favortism to one religion must by definition be done so at the expense of another religion, or no religion.

I am an atheist. I must use money to function in this society. Why must my money state "In God We Trust" for me, when I do not trust in gods or even believe in them?

Before you answer, think of whatever your religion is, and then ask yourself, how would you feel if you were forced to pledge to a god you didn't believe in? To many, it is of no consequence, but that's because most of those who say that are comfortable with being made to pledge and trust in the generic god their government forced on everyone in the mid 1950's. So a Christian is going to be happy with IGWT on his money. But suppose that said "In Allah We Trust"? Then how would you feel? Imagine in the US saying, "I pledge allegience.. one nation, under Allah... etc."

I'll bet Christians wouldn't like it at all-- they would feel they are being forced to pay homage to a god they don't worship. And to that, I would say "Exactly -- now how is that any different from an atheist having to pay homage to any god at all?" It isn't. And that is how this atheist feels--- forced to kowtow to a superstition he doesn't believe in.

The solution is really easy -- by constitutional decree, no one is forced not to acknowledge their beliefs -- you wanna' pray is school? Go ahead, pray-- you are allowed to do that. You want to say "one nation under God/Jesus/Allah/Beelzebub/Guiseppe/WingWang/Whomever" -- go ahead the government is not and can not stop you!

What you can't do is force everyone else to do it. You cannot hand the 10 commandments in a courtroom, with the first 3 rules about kowtowing to a specific god, and then say all people and all beliefs are equal in the site of the law-- they are only if they also embrace those tenets. Well, I can embrace not stealing and murdering and so on because it's the right thing to do for a peaceful society, but who are you to tell me I must have this one god and no other god before him? What if I prefer Vishnu?

And that is what the contention is about. The constitution forbids government from favoring one religion over another for the benefit of all religions and no religion.

Also, both the motto "In God We Trust" and the words "one nation, under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance were 20th century additions. While "In God We Trust" was commissioned by Lincoln to be placed on our coins as a way to unite the nation during a bloody and vicious Civil War, it was never intended to replace our national motto. Our original (correct) motto was, "E Pluribus Unum" (Out of Many Comes One), but the Eisenhower administration in the 1950's, trying to make greater the gulf between the "good" religious Americans and the "bad" atheist Communists, enacted a law to change the motto and add the clause regarding God into the Pledge of Allegiance, and placing "Under God" in the pledge-- both done in the 1950's).

Further, Lincoln making a speech is free speech and therefore he-- like you, me or like any other president, can make gestures about deities all they want.

A pledge of allegiance is an oath. A national motto is in place by Congressional law. In God We Trust on our money is an agency of the federal government placating a specific deity.

0 Replies

@Elmud,

I don't want to pray in school, I'm not christian. Unless it's before a test of course..

0 Replies

Prayer in school.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know