"Fed court orders RI school to remove prayer mural"

Buy Bologna

I don't want to be right. I want to be corrected.
Dec 10, 2011
121
1
Milky way Galaxy
✟15,267.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I agree with the decision of the court.

If we go by what the constitution says( which was apparently founded by christian forefathers) then the government shouldn't be involved with the influence of religion on government.
 
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
This was somewhat addressed elsewhere - but if you want the real reason that the mural is maintained (and it has been challenged) it's that it's fundamentally not religious in nature. The mural itself is a mural of lawgivers - it's a representation of law and not an overt religious display. It also has immense historical significance.

This banner is fundamentally religious, it's primarily religious, and it has little historical or cultural significance.

Hence, violation and removal.

This is absurd. There are PURELY religious inscriptions and artworks all over our Capitol city; on monuments and Gov't buildings. They're all devoted to the Judeo-Christian Tradition, too.

The banner has almost 0 religious connotations, but is purely social value driven; except for the words "heavenly Father" and "amen." And I'm pretty sure every religion can relate to God as heavenly Father, and the concept of amen isn't foreign to any, either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: heymikey80
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The basic problem is that
-> Government taxes individuals to establish a "religion-free" platform in school.
-> Growth of public schools and usurpation of money from other schools constitutes state encroachment on the lives of people.
-> Education takes the dominant amount of time away from human beings being educated. Therefore the "religion-free" platform is essentially an establishment of a religious perspective.
-> That taxation takes away from the exercise of religions that dictate education along religious values.

The result is an establishment of a religious viewpoint -- the "religion-free" viewpoint.

Mikey for President
 
Upvote 0

razeontherock

Well-Known Member
May 24, 2010
26,545
1,480
WI
✟35,597.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Well, stop arguing that since we've always done it, it must be ok.

Apparently you've never heard of his little thing called "precedent." No, I don't think I'll stop arguing that. It's far stronger than anything I've seen in this thread ...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

heymikey80

Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Dec 18, 2005
14,496
921
✟34,309.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I agree with the decision of the court.

If we go by what the constitution says( which was apparently founded by christian forefathers) then the government shouldn't be involved with the influence of religion on government.
The government shouldn't be involved with how religion influences government. I believe I agree.

Schoolchildren are not the government's to demand the absence of religious sentiment in the public sphere for seven hours a day.
 
Upvote 0

Drekkan85

Immortal until proven otherwise
Dec 9, 2008
2,274
225
Japan
✟23,051.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
Politics
CA-Liberals
Apparently you've never heard of his little thing called "precedent." No, I don't think I'll stop arguing that. It's far stronger than anything I've seen in this thread ...

Except precedent in this case is strongly in favour of removing the prayer roll. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held the first amendment's Establishment clause to provide for a separation between Church and State. The Court has also held that the 14th Amendment makes this apply to State and Local governments. Precedent thus is on the side of removal.

As for the buildings that have religious texts or iconography, as stated earlier about the SC building's religious iconography; it's not religious. It's a tribute to law makers of many different religions (and some non-religions, such as Confucius). The artwork also had fairly great historical and cultural significance that vastly outweighed any minor religious connotations.

That's not the case here - where we have an overtly religious scroll that has little value outside of its religious character.

As for an "activist bench" - every bench is activist. There is no such thing as a non-activist one. How do we know? Because Originalists disagree with each other about how to interpret Originalism and the most oft cited argument is a "No True Scotsman" fallacy. Everyone interprets the original texts and imports their own values in how they find the legislative intent behind the documents. We're all Dynamists and activists, it's merely a matter of what we call ourselves.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Drekkan85

Immortal until proven otherwise
Dec 9, 2008
2,274
225
Japan
✟23,051.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
Politics
CA-Liberals
The government shouldn't be involved with how religion influences government. I believe I agree.

Schoolchildren are not the government's to demand the absence of religious sentiment in the public sphere for seven hours a day.

The school, however, is within the sphere of the government. The scroll was hanging on the wall of a school with the official sanction of the school.
 
Upvote 0

heymikey80

Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Dec 18, 2005
14,496
921
✟34,309.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The school, however, is within the sphere of the government. The scroll was hanging on the wall of a school with the official sanction of the school.
Then that's government suppression of religious speech on the part of private individuals forced to spend their lives in the school.

The nondenominational prayer was submitted by a private group. It came from the private group. Does it need citation to remain?

Remove the first and last line.

Now what?
 
Upvote 0

Drekkan85

Immortal until proven otherwise
Dec 9, 2008
2,274
225
Japan
✟23,051.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
Politics
CA-Liberals
Then that's government suppression of religious speech on the part of private individuals forced to spend their lives in the school.

They're not forced into the school. They can apply for a Charter/Private school and, ultimately, should they not be able to afford that there's home schooling as an option.

The nondenominational prayer was submitted by a private group. It came from the private group. Does it need citation to remain?

No - it needs to be not on publicly owned property.

Remove the first and last line.

Now what?

Well, then it doesn't make all that much sense (since most of it is "help us" or similar); however, if you retitled it "School motto", took out the top and bottom, and then reworded it somewhat so it wasn't non-nonsensical in the context, and yeah, that's ok.
 
Upvote 0

Woden84

Darth
Jun 21, 2010
111
2
The South....help!
✟7,755.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Do you even know which human being put this mural up? Do you have any reason to believe they were acting as a representative of the US government?
Really. You interviewed him? You know the origin of the painting & prayer?

It was the school officials that made the banner, endorsed it as the official school prayer, and hung it up. School officials in public schools count as representatives of the US government while they are doing their job.

AlexBP said:
Public schools are generally run by local governments, and the First Amendment of the Constitution acts to restrict only Congress, not local governments.

And the 14th amendment brings those protections down to the state and local level. It's why state governments can't make you a slave, restrict your right to free speech, or endorse a religion anymore than the federal government can.

My, my. Touched a nerve, did we?

No, sometimes I use expletives a lot when I talk. Doesn't mean anything more than I have a dirty mouth.

It'll be all right, honest. Nobody ever dropped dead from being exposed to Christianity---it's not like high doses of radiation, or the Maralinga strain of Ebola Zaire. ;)

Tell that to the victims of the Crusades and Inquisition, or the "witches" that are still being killed to this day.

So if they added more murals in RI?

Like I said before, if they had a examples of prayers from various different religions in relations to a social studies class that would be perfectly fine. There's a huge difference between that and endorsing a Christian prayer as the official school prayer. This isn't a private religious school; it's a public school.

Fine. There's a mural including Moses inside chambers, and a relief on the doors.

As an example of early lawgivers. He is not endorsed as the official prophet of the US in anyway.

All people do. The Constitution does not prohibit the free exercise of religion. The SC has curtailed that free exercise, but it's written into the Constitution.

Yes people, not the government. It's why the government can't label you a heretic for following the wrong flavor of Christianity.

The absence of religious speech is equally a statement about religious speech.

Before now, I said absolutely nothing about stamps, quarks, Charlie Brown, chocolate, kitties etc in this thread. Pray tell, what statement does that make about all those things plus all the other stuff I did not mention? Be as specific as you can for each and every item I haven't mentioned in this thread.

Its absence in school is the problem. In fact to me it constitutes a conscience problem as to why I'm funding the state suppression of religious speech......
Secularization is suppression, just as surely as dictation of a religion.

Your religion not being pandered to and given special treatment in no way suppresses it.

Since lots of people here seem to think this is a matter of freedom of speech, I wonder if anybody would defend the banner if it was satanic.

Exactly. I'd be willing to bet that the vocal defendants of this school officially endorsing Christianity would be either silent, or on our side if they were endorsing Satanism or Islam or any other religion besides their own.

Apparently it has been acceptable for 99.9% of our Nation's history. You know, all that time we were a great Nation, instead of a pitiful pool of red ink?

Slavery, genocide, and open racial and sexual discrimination were also acceptable for a good chunk of our history. Should we bring those back as well?

And all those crosses in Arlington National Cemetary.....simply disgraceful. Have to replace them all with hammers and sickles, I guess.

United States Department of Veterans Affairs emblems for headstones and markers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That isn't forced on everyone buried there. It's by the choice of the person who is being buried as relayed by their will or close family that would know what they wanted. You can have a cross, or a Muslim moon and star, or an Atheist symbol, or a humanist symbol etc.

Read the banner again. Do you see any reference---any at all, to Christ or Christianity?

Yes, "Our Heavenly Father" and "Amen". At worst it's Christian exclusively, at best it's inclusive of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. But considering the majority of American's are Christian, including presumably the people who decided to endorse this as the official school prayer, it's pretty foolish to think they meant anything besides the Christian god.

What it does have is an address to "Our Heavenly Father", but for all you know, the heavenly father in question might be Zeus, or Odin, or Anubis; the banner istself does not specify which deity it's addressing.

No if it meant me it would be All-Father. Google "heavenly father", it's not a coincidence that all the links are Christian in nature.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

heymikey80

Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Dec 18, 2005
14,496
921
✟34,309.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
They're not forced into the school. They can apply for a Charter/Private school and, ultimately, should they not be able to afford that there's home schooling as an option.
All are financial hardships. Where's your argument that the high cost should be mitigated by the government?
No - it needs to be not on publicly owned property.
You're making my point that the removal of religion from school combined with charging people for it is oppressive against free exercise of religion.
Well, then it doesn't make all that much sense (since most of it is "help us" or similar); however, if you retitled it "School motto", took out the top and bottom, and then reworded it somewhat so it wasn't non-nonsensical in the context, and yeah, that's ok.
No less nonsensical than numerous other statements of personal dedication.
 
Upvote 0