Reading the Bible in School

[Stoked]

Wait, so you're solving the problem of kids not sleeping or not talking? It's not about what the kids could do here, it's about why you want to introduce it to begin with. Which is prayer. The fact that you get an option to not engage in it doesn't make it any different.

I think it does make a difference.

But you make an interesting point (that it allows the introduction of prayer where there was no option for it before). One I will have to think on.

 

[Tarkanian]

where I come from, you slap either the teacher or the kid and the problem is solved.
this is so post-modern times news.
this stuff happens when you are not hungry and your country is not torn by a civil war.

 

[UGLI baby]

JimLol

 

[Stoked]

where I come from, you slap either the teacher or the kid and the problem is solved.
this is so post-modern times news.
this stuff happens when you are not hungry and your country is not torn by a civil war.

lol, then it is a good problem to have.

 

[Stifle Tower]

where I come from, you slap either the teacher or the kid and the problem is solved.
this is so post-modern times news.
this stuff happens when you are not hungry and your country is not torn by a civil war.

Can we slap the parent in this case?

 

[JimLes]

I think it does make a difference.

It makes a difference only in the sense that being compelled to pray and being allowed to opt out are different. Introducing "quiet time" because you believe in order to fix the problem with kids wanting to pray but telling them it's actually "quiet time" where they can do whatever they want is no different than introducing "prayer time" and telling kids they can do what they want. The intent remains, however much you're trying to pretend it isn't there. What is especially transparent in your "quiet time" proposal is that it obviously encourages Christian prayer. Buddhist or Hindu chants would definitely not be quiet, Muslim prayer requires a fair degree of physical space and a prayer mat, as well as a way to indicate qibla(direction where Mecca is), and Jewish prayer should be communal and ideally involve a quorum of 10 men who've been Bar Mitzvaed. How would you accommodate these religions?

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I'm late to this debate. While I am 100% opposed to any form of religious promotion in public schools, I simply don't see the harm here. If it was truly 'free time' where students could read non-assigned books, then I don't see why anyone would get up in arms if students chose to read out their 'holy scriptures.' It appears that the teacher overstepped her boundaries, if this article is telling the full story.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

It makes a difference only in the sense that being compelled to pray and being allowed to opt out are different. Introducing "quiet time" because you believe in order to fix the problem with kids wanting to pray but telling them it's actually "quiet time" where they can do whatever they want is no different than introducing "prayer time" and telling kids they can do what they want. The intent remains, however much you're trying to pretend it isn't there. What is especially transparent in your "quiet time" proposal is that it obviously encourages Christian prayer. Buddhist or Hindu chants would definitely not be quiet, Muslim prayer requires a fair degree of physical space and a prayer mat, as well as a way to indicate qibla(direction where Mecca is), and Jewish prayer should be communal and ideally involve a quorum of 10 men who've been Bar Mitzvaed. How would you accommodate these religions?

And why would you need to accommodate these religions to begin with? There's plenty of time to pray outside of school, or students could use their recess time to go somewhere quite and say their prayers, if it matters that much to them. I see no reason at all that public schools should/need to carve out time during the day for students to pray.

 

[One Brow]

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/frien...at-school-once-again-the-facts-say-otherwise/

Says the teacher was in the wrong here, and the parents have been notified of the correction (although I didn't quite see it in the links presented).

 

[moevillini]

Normally I wouldn't say anything (you know, you're like the board Grandma), but you also sent me this rep:


Go home Gramms, you're drunk.

Sheesh, it was INTENTIONAL! I figured you of all people would know that.

And there's a reason I'm the board Grammar.

:wink:

 

[Stoked]

It makes a difference only in the sense that being compelled to pray and being allowed to opt out are different. Introducing "quiet time" because you believe in order to fix the problem with kids wanting to pray but telling them it's actually "quiet time" where they can do whatever they want is no different than introducing "prayer time" and telling kids they can do what they want. The intent remains, however much you're trying to pretend it isn't there. What is especially transparent in your "quiet time" proposal is that it obviously encourages Christian prayer. Buddhist or Hindu chants would definitely not be quiet, Muslim prayer requires a fair degree of physical space and a prayer mat, as well as a way to indicate qibla(direction where Mecca is), and Jewish prayer should be communal and ideally involve a quorum of 10 men who've been Bar Mitzvaed. How would you accommodate these religions?

Very good point. I would have no problem providing them with the space to do so. Such as the cafeteria, football field, library or gymnasium. The prioritizing of one religion above another should not be tolerated. If this was to be seen as an effective, ann I think it could be, solution to a problem then it must be fair to all.

But that is why these ideas are brought up. To be discussed and either improved to the point of acceptability or ultimately dismissed as ineffective.

Edit: However I am sure the question would come into play that is it is allowed in one location why not another? Say a predominately Christian area adopts such a plan. Then a Hindu student in a different location wants that time to adhere to his religious views. If he is denied he has a compelling discrimination suit. Would he not?

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

Very good point. I would have no problem providing them with the space to do so. Such as the cafeteria, football field, library or gymnasium. The prioritizing of one religion above another should not be tolerated. If this was to be seen as an effective, ann I think it could be, solution to a problem then it must be fair to all.

Help me understand Stoked, why is it the responsibility of public schools in the first place to provide time and space for religious worship/rituals? I agree with you that IF public schools are to do this, they cannot privilege one religious belief over another, but what I have a hard time accepting is that public schools have a duty to provide ANY religious belief time and space during school hours for worship/rituals.