Georgia bypasses the constitution !!!

[phreakwars]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060420/ap_on_re_us/bible_bills

 

What kind of bullshit is this that they be allowed to offer religion courses sanctioned by the government !!!

 

Holy shit does our constitution REALLY mean NOTHING any more ??

.

.

[Lethalfind]

God save us all from the Bible belt.

 

I had forgotten how different things are there. As I was driving from Orlando back to Dallas over Christmas I was brought back to that reality. I couldn't believe the number of churches. I was glad to get back home where I don't have to deal with that kind of bullshit.

 

I agree, this is insane and I would object if my child were put in that position...Its bad enough in her school where they reject Halloween parties because of the heathen undertones...that pisses me off as well.

[manicmonday]

The classes are made elective, not mandatory. Local schools can decide if they want to teach them. I don't see the problem with that. They aren't making the students sign up, they are just making it legal to do so if the school wants to put it in the offering.

 

As for the Ten Commandments, they again aren't saying court houses have to put a statue of theem up, it's just not illegal if they choose to do so.

 

 

The Constitution gave us freedom of religion, but in the 21st Century if your religion is Chritianity, then it has no freedom.

[Lethalfind]

The classes are made elective, not mandatory. Local schools can decide if they want to teach them. I don't see the problem with that. They aren't making the students sign up, they are just making it legal to do so if the school wants to put it in the offering.

 

As for the Ten Commandments, they again aren't saying court houses have to put a statue of theem up, it's just not illegal if they choose to do so.

 

 

The Constitution gave us freedom of religion, but in the 21st Century if your religion is Chritianity, then it has no freedom.

 

So your saying you only agree with the seperation of church and state as it applies to OTHER religions, NOT Christianity...How convenient !!

[angie]

e Constitution gave us freedom of religion, but in the 21st Century if your religion is Chritianity, then it has no freedom.

That's because most people are tired of having it shoved down their throats. Mostly because of the shrub. Him and his "christian" values. It's nauseating. However I don't agree with the hissy fits over town halls and other municipal buildings putting up Christmas trees. I think it's absolutely ridiculous. I'm not Christian and in no way whatsoever do I find it offensive. People just need something to complain about, and Christianity is the 'in' thing to bash right now.

[TheJenn88]

I dare them to allow the teachings of Islam in school, too

[manicmonday]

So your saying you only agree with the seperation of church and state as it applies to OTHER religions, NOT Christianity...How convenient !!

 

 

No that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that our country, whether you want to believe it or not, was built on "God We Trust". It's not a coincidence that it's on our money, in our pledge of allegience, ect ect ect.

 

It's an elective class. Offer a class about Ilslam. Better yet, a world view of religions. As an elective class. I don't see the Buddists lobbying to put up a Budda around the court system. Oh right, aren't they pacifists and inactivists and don't believe in voting?

 

Angie's right, Christianity is the soup de jer to patronize.

[angie]

No that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that our country, whether you want to believe it or not, was built on "God We Trust". It's not a coincidence that it's on our money, in our pledge of allegience, ect ect ect.

 

It's an elective class. Offer a class about Ilslam. Better yet, a world view of religions. As an elective class. I don't see the Buddists lobbying to put up a Budda around the court system. Oh right, aren't they pacifists and inactivists and don't believe in voting?

 

Angie's right, Christianity is the soup de jer to patronize.

I forgot to give my stance on the hooplah when I first replied.

 

I don't see the big deal. When I was in high school, I studied mythology (religions of ancient civilizations) and took a religion class. We covered the basics of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism (it was only a one semester course so we only covered a few). And we were able to choose whichever religion (even those not included in our coursework) to do our term paper on. The class was elective. You're not forced to take it. Some people like to study religions. Plain and simple. It will give some insight to non-Christians who choose to take it, and perhaps a better understanding of their faith for those who ARE Christian.

Would we be making such an ordeal if it was a course on Buddhism, Paganism (well maybe in the Bible Belt), Judaism, or Hinduism? I HIGHLY doubt it. Get a grip, people. If you want your beliefs (or lack thereof) to be accepted and tolerated, you have to tolerate others first.

[Hamza123]

I dare them to allow the teachings of Islam in school, too

 

Pfft... It's been done. Perhaps you should check one out before you say things you actually don't know... They're tons in my city, and it's a conservative city too... People like to learn about it, but most of it is all inocorporated in a World Religions class.. and 16th Century History and all with Saladin.

 

Anyways that was O/T... The point is, the state is put ahead of any government... Did anyone learn anything from John Locke?

[Hamza123]

I forgot to give my stance on the hooplah when I first replied.

 

I don't see the big deal. When I was in high school, I studied mythology (religions of ancient civilizations) and took a religion class. We covered the basics of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism (it was only a one semester course so we only covered a few). And we were able to choose whichever religion (even those not included in our coursework) to do our term paper on. The class was elective. You're not forced to take it. Some people like to study religions. Plain and simple. It will give some insight to non-Christians who choose to take it, and perhaps a better understanding of their faith for those who ARE Christian.

Would we be making such an ordeal if it was a course on Buddhism, Paganism (well maybe in the Bible Belt), Judaism, or Hinduism? I HIGHLY doubt it. Get a grip, people. If you want your beliefs (or lack thereof) to be accepted and tolerated, you have to tolerate others first.

 

RIGHT!! I agree. If ppl wanna' learn about it, than let them learn about it, better yet, make it available for the public to learn about.

 

 

EDIT

 

I just wanted to add...

 

The fact that the US was founded and based on Christian principles, well... It means that if people want to learn about it, let them do so. I know I am currently learning about it, and I think it's pretty cool to learn about. Infact, my ISU (Independen Study Unit), must be based on a religion I am not directly affiliated with... I chose Christianity, but more than that, I am trying to get down to the sole, sole, sole roots of it, and see what I can find. This isn't an argumentative assignments, where I take a side, and make a stupid judgement... It's more expository. I basically tell the story of Jesus, and why people view him the way they do. I think of him as a Prophet, others think of him as the father of all man kind. Quite frankly, it doesn't really matter to me, as those of us who do believe in him, all share something in common... We BELIEVE in him. Even in the Qur'an, he is the most quoted Prophet, and his story is told the same way through his fellows.

[Lethalfind]

No that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that our country, whether you want to believe it or not, was built on "God We Trust". It's not a coincidence that it's on our money, in our pledge of allegience, ect ect ect.

 

It's an elective class. Offer a class about Ilslam. Better yet, a world view of religions. As an elective class. I don't see the Buddists lobbying to put up a Budda around the court system. Oh right, aren't they pacifists and inactivists and don't believe in voting?

 

Angie's right, Christianity is the soup de jer to patronize.

 

Our country was founded by people who FLED other countries in order to have the freedom to practice their religion they saw fit WITHOUT the government getting involved...they objected to the England have an official religion and the mixture of government and religion...thus the saying "seperation of church and state". Our country can't have freedom of religion if the government is responsible for poking that religion down peoples throats...no government subsidized schools should teach religion unless its in a purely historical sense...pure and simple. The fact this is only being tolerated in a backward ass red neck bible belt state like Georgia should be your first clue.

[manicmonday]

Our country was founded by people who FLED other countries in order to have the freedom to practice their religion they saw fit WITHOUT the government getting involved...they objected to the England have an official religion and the mixture of government and religion...thus the saying "seperation of church and state". Our country can't have freedom of religion if the government is responsible for poking that religion down peoples throats...no government subsidized schools should teach religion unless its in a purely historical sense...pure and simple. The fact this is only being tolerated in a backward ass red neck bible belt state like Georgia should be your first clue.

 

 

 

Since when is ELECTIVE pushing it down students throats? It's not mandatory for graduation, it's elective. And without the bias of a specific flavor, I suspect it is on a more historical basis. We have the freedom of learning about other religions. Without that being taught in schools as well, then we truly have no freedom as well.

 

I live in the Bible belt. In fact I would argue the buckle is squeezing our state, and I don't have a problem with that. And I'm not red neck because I read the Bible, I'm red neck because I pick my teeth in public.

[Hamza123]

Manic and Lethal... YOU'RE BOTH RIGHT!!

 

Yes, you did leave Europe and other countries to have freedom of religion, but that doesn't mean you can't learn about it...

 

POINT IS... IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE LEARNED ABOUT, BUT NOT MANDITORY TO BE TAKEN!!

[phreakwars]

We might have "IN GOD WE TRUST" on our money, but I do NOT recall our money ever reading "In CHRISTIAN GOD, WE TRUST". I am a Diest, just like the founders of this nation... I believe in God just as THEY believed in God. I'd like to know where "IN GOD WE TRUST" got turned into "IN CHRISTIAN GOD WE TRUST" over 200 years later.

.

.

[manicmonday]

Phreak, I never said it was the Christian God we trust. But by taking out all religion classes for PC's sake, then we really are doing a disservice to our youth. I don't have a problem with world religions being taught, as long as they are an elective class. Meaning, if you don't want to learn it, take shop. Take home ec. But let the people who might want to learn about it to do so. By not letting them, their freedom is being infringed on as well.

[Lethalfind]

Since when is ELECTIVE pushing it down students throats? It's not mandatory for graduation, it's elective. And without the bias of a specific flavor, I suspect it is on a more historical basis. We have the freedom of learning about other religions. Without that being taught in schools as well, then we truly have no freedom as well.

 

I live in the Bible belt. In fact I would argue the buckle is squeezing our state, and I don't have a problem with that. And I'm not red neck because I read the Bible, I'm red neck because I pick my teeth in public.

 

Sorry, I didn't mean to say you were a red neck...thanks for the info about your teeth though...lolol

[ImWithStupid]

I believe that when "separation of church and state" was enacted it was to prevent Congress (as in federal government) from establishing a national religion or not allowing religious practice in federal law. This was a reaction to the Church of England being named the official Church of both England and the colonies and to prevent such from happening in the new government of the United States of America.

 

Now that said, the US was founded on individual state sovereignty. There for I feel that if Georgia (or any other state) decides that religious classes are allowed, as electives and not mandatory, based on what the local population wants to teach in their respective schools, they are not in violation of this section of the US Constitution, First Amendment or the Establishment Clause as it relates to the First Amendment.

[Lethalfind]

I believe that when "separation of church and state" was enacted it was to prevent Congress (as in federal government) from establishing a national religion or not allowing religious practice in federal law. This was a reaction to the Church of England being named the official Church of both England and the colonies and to prevent such from happening in the new government of the United States of America.

 

Now that said, the US was founded on individual state sovereignty. There for I feel that if Georgia (or any other state) decides that religious classes are allowed, as electives and not mandatory, based on what the local population wants to teach in their respective schools, they are not in violation of this section of the US Constitution, First Amendment or the Establishment Clause as it relates to the First Amendment.

 

Its my understanding there is no mention of the phrase "seperation of church and state" in the constitution.

[builder]

Its my understanding there is no mention of the phrase "seperation of church and state" in the constitution.

 

What constitution? It's toilet paper for shrubbites.

[Lethalfind]

What constitution? It's toilet paper for shrubbites.

 

I have to agree, its ignored completely...

[ImWithStupid]

Its my understanding there is no mention of the phrase "seperation of church and state" in the constitution.

 

There isn't. I put in quotes because that is how it is referred to usually and even by you.

 

Our country was founded by people who FLED other countries in order to have the freedom to practice their religion they saw fit WITHOUT the government getting involved...they objected to the England have an official religion and the mixture of government and religion...thus the saying "seperation of church and state". Our country can't have freedom of religion if the government is responsible for poking that religion down peoples throats...no government subsidized schools should teach religion unless its in a purely historical sense...pure and simple. The fact this is only being tolerated in a backward ass red neck bible belt state like Georgia should be your first clue.

 

and was kind of my point on how Georgia isn't bypassing the Constitution as this thread implies.

[Lethalfind]

There isn't. I put in quotes because that is how it is referred to usually and even by you.

 

 

 

and was kind of my point on how Georgia isn't bypassing the Constitution as this thread implies.

 

I don't feel they are bypassing the Constitution at all. Religious people themselves sing about seperation of church and state only as long as it benefits them. They don't want an official religion or any aspect of their religion to be dictated to them but when its good for them they are willing to set aside the seperation of church and state and for example put religious classes in a public school. I don't think any school that is supported by states funds should be teaching religion...The only reason they are OK with this is because the school will be teaching a religion they are comfortable with, if the school started teaching about pagans, muslims, or some other non bible belt religion, the hue and cry would be enormous. This is the Christians way of controlling things a little too much for my taste. Seperation of church and state must be absolute, no exceptions or someone is going to end up being discriminated against and posibly harmed.

[ImWithStupid]

I don't feel they are bypassing the Constitution at all. Religious people themselves sing about seperation of church and state only as long as it benefits them. They don't want an official religion or any aspect of their religion to be dictated to them but when its good for them they are willing to set aside the seperation of church and state and for example put religious classes in a public school. I don't think any school that is supported by states funds should be teaching religion...The only reason they are OK with this is because the school will be teaching a religion they are comfortable with, if the school started teaching about pagans, muslims, or some other non bible belt religion, the hue and cry would be enormous. This is the Christians way of controlling things a little too much for my taste. Seperation of church and state must be absolute, no exceptions or someone is going to end up being discriminated against and posibly harmed.

 

If you don't think they are bypassing or violating the Constitution, then how can you say that what they are doing is wrong?

[Lethalfind]

If you don't think they are bypassing or violating the Constitution, then how can you say that what they are doing is wrong?

 

I think its wrong because of what I have said, I think people don't have the freedom of religion when there is no seperation of church and state, this practice of teaching religion in a public school denies people the freedom of religion. Freedom of religion is probably a better term since seperation of church and state is not a term found there. I think they are bending the constitution in the wrong direction, not bypassing it.

[ImWithStupid]

I think its wrong because of what I have said, I think people don't have the freedom of religion when there is no seperation of church and state, this practice of teaching religion in a public school denies people the freedom of religion. Freedom of religion is probably a better term since seperation of church and state is not a term found there. I think they are bending the constitution in the wrong direction, not bypassing it.

 

Let's see if I've got your point. You don't think what they are doing is illegal or in violation of the Constitution. You just don't agree with it.

 

Also I don't think they're bending anything. I don't think the Constitution even applies in this instance.