http://www.thnt.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060726/NEWS/607260437/1001This article is about something that seems innocuous, but heads strongly in the wrong direction. Coaches are now allowed to participate in student-led prayer.In defense, they cite the coach’s constitutional rights, the fact that the prayer is non-sectarian, and that the effort is “secular in purpose”. BUT nobody was saying the coach couldn’t pray, and come on, what exactly is a secular prayer anyway? I’ll tell you: It’s a lie.Let’s get something straight: There is no such thing as organized high-school prayer that is not coercive. If students lead it, some may argue that the coercion is worse due to the peer pressure (the exact intent). There is also no such thing as organizing prayer for a secular reason. The only reason for prayer is to subjugate the students and push the mythology. Yes, the coach has the constitutional right to pray, but the students have the rights to play football without having religion (specifically Chrtistianity) pushed on them by their own coach. Sorry coach, but your own religion says you should pray in private (read Matthew), and that your god can hear your prayers even if you don’t make it obvious that you are praying. Your rights are just fine.If coaches can participate, then so can teachers, principals, and the rest of the staff. The next step is the return to forced prayer. This is the whole purpose, and we’re going to see it happen very soon.
Bones
A “purgative” helps you throw up when you’ve consumed too much after “preying”.
I think it’s something bulimics do–binge then purgatively purge.
Karen-your answer is definetly superior to mine.
I have a question, and it may not be all that sound, but will mention it anyway and hope for thoughtful answers.
If such institutions, such as education, were originally in the realm of family and the church in our culture, and not under the jurisdiction of the state, wouldn’t the origins of public education be an intrusion and violation by the state of the separation principles?
In other words, does separation of church and state work both ways, so to speak?
bones,
from dictionary.com
I guess it is something a xian coach would do after preying on a team of students.
Of course it might, just might, be an illiterate fool’s attempt at writing prerogative.
Tim
SOCAS should work both ways, in answer to the rephrasing of your question.
The original question is cumbersome and I’m not sure I understand it, or that it means what you rephrased it as.
Could you try again?
I like Karen’s definitionn the best. That’s kinda how I feel when I pray……
tgleeson:
I think it works both ways. Private religious schools must meet minimum state standards, but I’m unaware of other curriculum restrictions.
I’m aware of a few “unaccredited” private religious schools that operate outside state standards. I was told by one parent that her daughter must take standardized tests to verify her progress. She also indicated that Katie will have a completely different process to apply for college, since her high school records are from a non-accredited school.
tgleeson@eoni.com,
If I understand you question correctly you are asking: if we accept that schools in the US were originally founded and managed by churches, then at what point and by what law did the government take over their direction?
Please correct me if I am misstating your case.
Is the premise valid? Did the church originally control education? I don’t know to what extent this is true. Certainly the church controlled a fair proportion of education.
Secondly, the church still controls a fair portion of the educational institutions in the US.
Third, Even if the church did have exclusive control in days of old, there is nothing to prevent the state from providing secular educational institutions that complement or compete with the church establishments.
In short, were it a take over of religious schools by the state, you might well have a point, but since it at least appears to be two parallel tracts I suspect the question is moot.
Karen,
Thanks, let me try again, and rephrase the question.
If such institutions as education were in the domain of privacy which I believe to be the case in the origins of our society, was the intrusion by the state to make education public a violation of the separation principles when that occurred? In other words, do the separation priciples restrict government intrusion in private affairs as well as private intrusion in public affairs? (Not sure the rephrase is any better)
Tim
I don’t think I could answer any better than HeatheNZ did. See especially his third point and the conclusion to his comment.
Churches certainly have the right to establish educational institutions based on their principles. But they don’t have exclusive rights to education itself.
HeathNZ
I am not sure either, as to the extent of Church control of education, but do think it was very significant since public education didn’t exist.
Is it a violation of separation when the government tells a private school what standards it demands, when it coerces private individuals who pay for private schooling to fund public schools as well? Just wondering your thoughts?
****OFF TOPIC ******** HUMOR***
anyone need a giggle?
Stolen headline:
Church camp shuts down after outbreak of gastroenteritis bring a whole new meaning to holy crap
http://www.jacksonholestartrib.com/articles/2006/07/27/news/wyoming/f2762ba12eed1a4b872571b70003e5d9.txt
Karen,
I apprecite HeatheNZ response as well.
But, who decides when something is indeed exclusively private (as was education originally)or something is public. Isn’t that what separation is all about? Wasn’t the original decision to make educaton public a gross power grab by the Gov. and a violation of separation?
Change of subject.
I saw that the latest Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines religion as: (paraphrase) Any strongly held ideology that explains existence.
I find it interesting that it doesn’t mention the notion that one must believe in God or Gods. What do you think?
prey that was a typo. The conversation in here is lacking intelligence. It is pointless to carry on conversation with people who are unarmed to engage in a mental battle.
Who in here is endanger of a heart attack when they have sex?
I would like to speak with you because you would know what you are talking about since you have the problem. Do you have a form of angina, an arrhythmia, a damaged valve, let me know. I would like to discuss this with you.
Most of these things can be fixed or managed to where they are no longer a significant threat. It really depends on how far your healthcare provider will go to protect you.
Anyways, if you want to talk about it feel free to leave me a message.
Secular prayer? Now there’s an oxymoron I haven’t heard before. Good one!
I thought prayer had been banned from public schools, no matter who is leading it.
For the record, I agree with the court’s decision on this one. All the court is saying here is that the coach is allowed to silently acknowledge the prayer. Whether or not said-prayer is valid in the first place is a DIFFERENT issue.
There’s a huge difference between the coach leading a prayer, or perhaps requiring others to be in the student-lead prayer, etc.
Oh, and I always hate the slippery-slope shit. Judge an issue by the facts at hand, not what such a ruling could potentially be. For example, allowing gay marriage does not necessarily mean that polygamy or animal-marriage will be legal next.
Bones
I feel bad for all the kids.
Guess the adults forgot to “prey” for holy water. Lots of “preying” to the porcelain gods.
Tim
I don’t know who decides. But something that is supposedly for “everyone” would be a public commodity, by definition, I’d think.
As for the original decision, I’d have to look it up. Not really familiar w/it.
You asked HZ these Q’s, but I’ll ring in. As to standards, the govt has to let the private schools know what their students will be competing with, and what expectations will have to be met when they go to institutes of higher learning, or if they transfer at any time from private to public institutions. There has to be some level of consistency across the board for students to receive an on par education. We’re talikng about minimum standards here. Privatized schools can add whatever they desire. It’s like building codes. Would you object to the govt. enforcing the same building codes on churches, or do you want to let churches be built to any standards?
I don’t see it as a violation of SOCAS.
I’m not certain, but I don’t think the govt. has any involvement in education within the Amish community. They are a self-contained
community, and tend to stay that way. See the difference?
As for coercing the funding of public schools, I assume you mean by paying taxes.
Public schools are for everyone. They are built for you whether you choose to use them or not. Just as roads are.
If you choose to bypass the public school and pay to go to a private school, that is your choice. You are not being coerced into anything. You never know if someday you might need that public school.
Educating the general populace is good for the country as a whole. Paying taxes to provide education is worth it avoid having uneducated masses unable to self-support. That is why everyone pays for public schools-even folks with no kids, even folks whose kids are all grown, even folks who pay to have their kids go to private schools.
Tim,
Regarding the imposition of educational standards.
It’s my understanding that the standards set are requirements to be accredited by the state.
As Bones stated earlier, she is aware of a few non-accredited religious schools. I assume this means that they have chosen not to abide by the state standards. This of course causes issues when assessing the academic performance of graduates from such institutions.
So it’s not so much an imposition of standards as setting a minimum bar to be considered equivalent to a state school. The decision to play ball is dictate by the priorities and perceptions of the prospective students (or their parents).
Tim
The question as stated is demonstrably a misrepresentation of the current situation by virtue of the fact that both private and public education have, and continue to, exist side by side.
Lightning: homosapien/non homosapien marriage is a moot point, because a legal contract between the two is not recognized due to insufficient mental capacity. Contracts involving minors or those deemed mentally incompetent are also not recognized. I don’t know why the gay marriage=pedophilia/b_eastiality crowd doesn’t recognize this.
sorry, for feeding the beast….
Exactly the same typo in three consecutive sentences. Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
and were javier to take his comments to a xian fundy site it would raise the average intelligence level of both sites considerably.
Tim
I couldn’t find the definition you were talking about in Merriam Webster online.
Do you have a link, or can you cut and paste the actual definition rather than a paraphrase?
I find it hard to believe that it would be limited to “Any strongly held ideology that explains existence.”
mxracer652:
Exactly, one single different facet totally changes the issue. That’s why a court ruling should always be specific to only the specific facts for the specific case.
Allowing this coach to silently join the prayers does not mean suddenly teachers can lead school prayer. Similarly, the silently-praying coach cannot now force other kids to join in.
Tim,
Religion is a loaded term that to some extent is contextual. Take the following definitions from dictionary.com
Given the above one could legitimately call baseball or fishing a religion. Of course, in the context of discussions of the supernatural this is not a useful definition. Likewise when discussing a religious baseball fan it’s not very useful to restrict one’ self to a definition concerning demons, angels and gods.
Karen, the PA Amish schools are subject to the state’s requirement of number of days a student must attend, length of their school day, as well as when a student’s education is complete. I don’t know if the state has any control over curriculum. However, I do know that Amish children are not taught English at home. They learn English at school. If you speak to an Amish toddler, chances are s/he will not be able to respond unless they’re particulary ambitious and pick up a smattering of English on their own. This is not forbidden.
Thank you all for your responses regarding the separation issue.
It still seems somewhat arbitrary as to what and who gets violated in the separation issues. Most of the above reasons for public education were pragmatic ones and not based on philsophic consistency regarding the separation concepts. Certainly one can easily discredit our public schools (pragmatic argument)in that they are failing–look who the masses elected for president.
Also, it seems like most of the “good for society” arguments send a red flag to me, just as a Christian would argue praying in school is “good for the society”.
It would be nice to have better evidence and reason on both sides of the education and religious separation issues, don’t you think?
Tim — “Separation” refers to church and state. Check your first amendment — something to the effect of “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….” The state(s) can support schools, libraries, highways, etc., but not churches.
I’m not sure that education was originally “exclusively private,” as you claim. Was Thomas Jefferson’s University of Virginia supported, at least in part, by taxpayers of Virginia?
Tim,
Not that I disagree with you conclusion, but I feel it’s only fair to point out that the Shrub went to Andover High School, which I understand to be one of the most exclusive private high schools in the land.
Will take correction on this as my source is Kitty Kelley.
Incidently the Shrub hated it and was a sub-par student.
cry4turtles
Thanks for the info. I was thinking of curriculum. Length of day and number of days, etc, did not even occur to me, but are certainly something to be considered. School schedules are a hot button item around here, as a matter of fact.
I wonder if the school days and lengths of the year are regulated in part to keep the children from working the farms too much? That seems like govt. interference if so.
And I wonder how well the Amish do with admittance to college? Are their doctors and vets and such not degreed professionals? Or do they venture outside the community for services now?