Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME ENTER FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:38 am





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here: 
Author Message
Master Debater


Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 21
Thanks: 6
Thanked: 8 times in 8 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
Contrary to Taylor's assertions and false accusations, I am not a libertarian nor am I ignorant of the certain truths in the other side of this particular argument. I am open to hear the other's point of view, only as long as they are respectful and non-assuming, though. This is not the case with Taylor, especially given his rampant and seemingly boundless nature of perceptual arrogance. Yes, the Constitution has changed throughout the history of America, but it is by no means a document based upon the faulty principle of relativism. Relativism is the idea that every community varies culturally, and thus, no universal laws should be applied. However, if we take a closer look at this philosophy, it is, innately, a universal law, thereby contradicting itself. By arguing that the Constitution was molded after such a way of thinking, you are implying that our nation is built upon a hypocritical and broken theory. I am not denying that every culture is unique, but I am saying that there are certain principles that should be unconditionally accepted. One such principle that must be adopted is a policy of inclusion and freedom of expression, as guaranteed by the Constitution. The principles set forth by the Constitution apply to the entire United States; therefore, the Constitution was not created with relativism in mind.

It is clear that Constitution does not include the phrase "separation of church and state," and in fact, it never has. It does lay down the foundation for a non-discriminatory government. Under the provisions of this document, the government cannot favor one religion over another. This does not mean that religion cannot be expressed by the general citizenry in public spaces. In this case, students have been prohibited in several different educational institutions from expressing their religious values. Liberals attempt to justify this by asserting the Constitution mandates such unconditional separation, but this argument is invalid. America has, Taylor, rejected Catholic and Anglican tyranny, but in many ways, the early settlers were tyrannical themselves. The Great Awakening is an example of radical religious expression. In the 19th century, furthermore, Catholic Irish immigrants were persecuted by a tyrannical structure established by Protestants, making your claim that America has always combatted tyranny simply incorrect.

Further, Taylor, you misunderstand my stance on this issue. I do not think that the church should control the state or vice versa, as was the case with the Anglican Church of England. I am saying, though, that students should be allowed to express their religious beliefs in the schools setting. I also believe that Constitution does not imply there needs to be a complete and total separation of church and state. Instead, as I have argued before, it is merely saying that public institutions cannot discriminate against religions.



Fri Nov 13, 2020 10:15 pm
Profile Email
Master Debater


Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 21
Thanks: 6
Thanked: 8 times in 8 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
LanDroid, I agree with you that the Church should not control the state and vice versa, and I even say this in my book. I am merely stating that liberals are trying to rid freedom of religious expression in public schools under the false premise of "separation of church and state." This phrase has been misconstrued throughout recent decades, especially with the rise of secularism. Many progressive leaders state that the Constitution calls for a separation of church and state, but this is not necessarily the case. Although that may have been Jefferson's personal opinion, he did not include that phrase of concept in the Constitution. Instead, he included a clause prohibiting discrimination. I am glad that, while we disagree on certain things, we have found some common ground.



Fri Nov 13, 2020 10:17 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Platinum Contributor
Book Discussion Leader

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6801
Location: Luray, Virginia
Thanks: 2139
Thanked: 2362 times in 1782 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
YoungRepublican wrote:
I am merely saying that religion can be incorporated in public spaces as long as the municipality in question is not discriminating against or favoring a religion.

YR, it's the passive voice you use here that prevents me from seeing what kind of exercise of religion you're talking about. "Can be incorporated"? What does that mean? Who is doing the incorporating? The example you follow with doesn't clear things up. If a public official or a school principle or teacher is directing religious activity such as prayer, then likely that person is favoring one religion over another. It is generally acknowledged that such promotion is improper, and that understanding relates back to the Constitution regardless of the phrase you object to not appearing in the document.
Quote:
However, since the Constitution does not mandate a separation, students should be permitted to practice and express their religion while in school. As I have stated and proven before, there have been many instances where liberals have tried to limit the practice of religion in schools.

OK, so it's only this student-initiated religious activity that you feel should be allowed and does not go against what the First Amendment is generally understood to mean? I could probably agree with you as long as you don't extend to anything led by the adults. Away from school, of course citizens have the right to practice their religion anywhere they want, except in places where such practice might be interpreted as the government endorsing a particular religion. So, not on the courthouse grounds, for instance.



The following user would like to thank DWill for this post:
LanDroid
Fri Nov 13, 2020 10:57 pm
Profile
Master Debater


Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 21
Thanks: 6
Thanked: 8 times in 8 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
DWill, what I am saying is that the Constitution does not include the phrase "separation of church and state," and that the document instead offers a principle of non-discrimination. Yes, schools administrations should not promote a certain religion over another or coerce students into engaging in certain religious practices. However, what I am saying is that students should have the right the express their religion, contrary to what some radical liberals have claimed and attempted to restrict under the fault premise of Constitutionally guaranteed "separation of church and state."



The following user would like to thank YoungRepublican for this post:
DWill
Sat Nov 14, 2020 11:00 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Addict

BookTalk.org Moderator
Book Discussion Leader
Silver Contributor

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2273
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Thanks: 101
Thanked: 901 times in 699 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
The 2nd amendment does not mention the precise word "gun" therefore guns are not protected.
The 4th amendment does not contain the phrase "right to privacy," therefore that concept is a hallucination.
The word "all" is a caucasian code word. We understand the statement "ALL" men are created equal sounds great, but actually excluded women, blacks, and non-property owning whites. We understand the statement "with liberty and justice for ALL" in the pledge of allegiance is a goal some Americans who make that pledge agree to only as a code word for continued injustice.

Considering the above, your statements about "the wall of separation" not being in the constitution are weak.

However, since you seem to be limiting religious expression in the schools to what individual students do while prohibiting influence from administrators, it is possible that some prohibitions are too strict. You're in high school / I'm near retirement, so that's hard for me to say. But you have brought up a court case regarding the Columbine High School where one of the first mass school shootings occurred. You claim students were prohibited from titling artwork as "God is Love." I read a brief summary of the case which actually involved permanent tiles being affixed to the wall of the school. Those tiles would have art or statements that would be viewed for the next 50+ years, likely transferring to a new school even when the old one is torn down. This is not artwork tacked to a cork board to be removed next week, so I can appreciate the need for more control over the content. Did restrictions go too far? Hard to say in context. But I don't think localized incidents like this are a big deal compared to the general risk of Christians seeking to dominate public school curricula.



The following user would like to thank LanDroid for this post:
DWill
Sun Nov 15, 2020 12:09 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Platinum Contributor
Book Discussion Leader

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 6801
Location: Luray, Virginia
Thanks: 2139
Thanked: 2362 times in 1782 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
YoungRepublican wrote:
DWill, what I am saying is that the Constitution does not include the phrase "separation of church and state," and that the document instead offers a principle of non-discrimination. Yes, schools administrations should not promote a certain religion over another or coerce students into engaging in certain religious practices. However, what I am saying is that students should have the right the express their religion, contrary to what some radical liberals have claimed and attempted to restrict under the fault premise of Constitutionally guaranteed "separation of church and state."

Well put. I'm not familiar with particular cases, but I don't have a problem believing that at times student religious expression has been stifled in a manner inconsistent with the free expression part of the First Amendment (even though I guess some would argue that statement applies only to adults!).

It's paradoxical, isn't it, that what I'll call, with apologies, the separation of church and state, produced quite a flourishing of religion in the U.S. European countries have state churches, yet much lower interest in religion. So it actually behooves those who value the high rate of religious participation here, to maintain a separation.



Sun Nov 15, 2020 7:08 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7189
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1122
Thanked: 2173 times in 1728 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
YR wrote:
Hope you're happy that you had me rewrite previously mentioned points.


You may have regurgitated some of what you'd previously written, but you didn't address my point at all.

Some religious freedoms for students are allowed. Others are not allowed. Where do we draw the line? I'm not saying that there aren't instances of overreach. I'm saying that, in principle, a line must be drawn on what is allowed.

Should a pastafarian be allowed to have pizza delivered every day during lunch? Should ceremonial daggers be allowed in schools? Should a student be allowed a 2 hour break to face east, kneel, and pray every day? Should a school be allowed to decorate it's walls with custom paintings that say "Our God is Muhammad" or "Satan Rules"?

YR wrote:
For example, there was a case called Fleming v. Jefferson County School District which went to the U.S. Court of Appeals (10th circuit) in 2002. The court upheld the school's authority to prevent students from titling their displayed artwork "God is Love." Is that not a blatant example of public schools banning religion?


The tiles said things like "Jesus Wept", "Jesus Christ is Lord", had anarchist symbols, gang graffiti, etc.. Having verbiage that favors one religion over another installed in the school facility violates the first amendment. Staff told the students that they can decorate the tiles however they wished(their expression wasn't banned), but that if the tiles did not meet the guidelines to be installed as part of the facility, then the students would instead be given the tiles to take home.

And a decent quote from Garrett Epps: "If government can't require its officials to support a church; may not support a church itself; and may not interfere with the worship or belief of any church, is there a serious argument that church and state are not separate?"


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Sun Nov 15, 2020 8:45 am
Profile
Master Debater


Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 21
Thanks: 6
Thanked: 8 times in 8 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
LanDroid, while you make a decent point, there are some faults within it. The second amendment includes a synonym for the word guns, which is arms. I think it is important to remember that there is no phrase synonymous to "separation of church and state" in the first amendment. Also, would you be willing to provide an example of Christians trying to influence public school curriculum? Additionally, localized incidents are not always important, but it is important to at least consider them because, sometimes, small incidents become a larger reality.

Interbane, I think that students should be allowed to freely express their religious beliefs as long as they do not disturb the peace of cause serious security issues within the school. Furthermore, students should be allowed to take a longer lunch if they genuinely have an obligation to pray during that specific time. Also, school administrations should not be allowed to paint their walls with religious slogans because this violates the clause stating that the government should not favor a specific religion.I believe I already clarified that I believe school administrators should not promote one religion over another. With regards to the tiles, you bring up a fair point. However, the students were prohibited from including any religious slogans on the tiles even prior to their actual creation.



Sun Nov 15, 2020 10:00 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7189
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1122
Thanked: 2173 times in 1728 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
YR wrote:
Furthermore, students should be allowed to take a longer lunch if they genuinely have an obligation to pray during that specific time.


And can you imagine where that slippery slope would eventually lead? This issue, specifically, has been hotly debated, and I agree that allowing exceptions to the scheduled hours of instructional time is foolish.

Here's the specific guidance, for reference:

Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer and Religious Expression in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools
January 16, 2020

Part II. Section A.
Students may pray when not engaged in school activities or instruction, subject to the same rules designed to prevent material disruption of the educational program that are applied to other privately initiated expressive activities. Among other things, students may read their Bibles, Torahs, Korans, or other scriptures; say grace before meals; and pray or study religious materials with fellow students during recess, the lunch hour, or other non-instructional time to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious activities. While school authorities may impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, they may not discriminate against student prayer or religious perspectives in applying such rules and restrictions.

YR wrote:
However, the students were prohibited from including any religious slogans on the tiles even prior to their actual creation.


The art teachers who initiated the project n the fall of 1996, Erin Yust-Brown and Barbara Hirokawa, instructed their students that "tile decorations had to be abstract or nonobjective with no symbols or words." Other teachers saw the project and allowed their students free reign on content. It eventually morphed into a wider project including thousands of tiles.

The teachers obtained permission from administrator Monseu to proceed on a wider basis, outside their classrooms. However, Ms. Monseu directed that there could be no references to the attack, to the date of the attack, April 20, 1999 or 4/20/93, no names or initials of students, no Columbine ribbons, no religious symbols, and nothing obscene or offensive. This direction was given after a great deal of consultation, and was made with the mental health of the students in mind, as they returned to school. That sounds like a ban on creation, but further clarification was given during the case:

Ms. Monseu's notes, included as exhibit 8 in the case, stated "The following guidelines will be used to determine which tiles will be hung in Columbine High School" and that "[t]iles which do not fit within these parameters will not be hung and can be claimed by the person who made the tile."

So while the project morphed into more than the two art teacher's original intent, the restrictions also morphed. Instead of banning symbols or words from initial creation(which is permissible in the classrooms setting), it instead changed the filtering process to be after the creation of tiles. Ms Monseu's guidelines, in other words, did not ban the creation of content, but instead were used to determine which tiles would be hung in the school.

In the end, I see nothing amiss with the case and how it was decided. Instead, it seems you're conflating nuances of the events and passing judgement with broad brushstrokes.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Mon Nov 16, 2020 9:42 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Addict

BookTalk.org Moderator
Book Discussion Leader
Silver Contributor

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2273
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Thanks: 101
Thanked: 901 times in 699 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
YoungRepublican wrote:
I think it is important to remember that there is no phrase synonymous to "separation of church and state" in the first amendment.

As I stated before, President Jefferson was describing the effect of the first amendment. Guaranteeing free expression + prohibiting Government establishment or discrimination = separation. I see you'll never vary from that weak line of reasoning, so I'll let it go...
Quote:
Also, would you be willing to provide an example of Christians trying to influence public school curriculum?

Evolution.



The following user would like to thank LanDroid for this post:
geo, Interbane
Mon Nov 16, 2020 9:41 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4601
Location: NC
Thanks: 2059
Thanked: 2103 times in 1564 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
LanDroid wrote:
YoungRepublican wrote:
Quote:
Also, would you be willing to provide an example of Christians trying to influence public school curriculum?

Evolution.

Indeed. There have been numerous efforts to teach Intelligent Design in public schools as an alternate “theory” to evolution. Fortunately the courts usually prevail, ruling that Intelligent Design is just a thinly veiled version of Creationism. And that teaching it violates separation of church and state.

https://www.pewforum.org/2019/10/03/rel ... 19-update/

Of more concern is the ongoing predominantly conservative Christian bias against evolution because it conflicts with certain antiquated religious beliefs. As such, evolutionary theory—one of the most important ideas of modern science, and well supported by evidence—has become almost taboo in some communities. And some public school teachers go out of their way to avoid teaching it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/a ... on/598312/

This is how fundamentalist religion has had a dumbing down effect on society, and why a large number of Americans still never learn about the the human part of evolution or how all life is intricately connected. A tragedy in my view.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Tue Nov 17, 2020 9:04 am
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

BookTalk.org Moderator
Platinum Contributor

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4601
Location: NC
Thanks: 2059
Thanked: 2103 times in 1564 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: Purchase Your Copy of Liberal Corruption for Just $7.50 Here:
Addendum to my previous post: While the teaching of evolution has been stifled somewhat by fundamentalism, so has the teaching of the Bible been stifled by the separation of church and state. This is a shame too. The Bible could be seen as a collection of historical texts that contain much beauty and wisdom. The Bible could be taught as literature and there would be much value in that.


_________________
-Geo
Question everything


Thu Nov 26, 2020 12:52 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:

Announcements 

• What fiction book should we read next?
Thu Oct 22, 2020 10:58 am

• Promote Your FICTION Book on BookTalk.org
Sun Jul 30, 2017 7:33 pm

• Promote Your NON-FICTION Book on BookTalk.org
Sun Jul 30, 2017 7:18 pm



Site Resources 
HELPFUL INFO:
Community Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Author Interview Transcripts
Book Discussion Leaders

IDEAS FOR WHAT TO READ:
Bestsellers
Book Awards
Banned Books
• Book Reviews
• Online Books
• Team Picks
Newspaper Book Sections

WHERE TO BUY BOOKS:
• Coming Soon!

BEHIND THE BOOKS:
• Coming Soon!

PROMOTE YOUR BOOK!
Advertise on BookTalk.org
Promote your FICTION book
Promote your NON-FICTION book





BookTalk.org is a thriving book discussion forum, online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a community. Our forums are open to anyone in the world. While discussing books is our passion we also have active forums for talking about poetry, short stories, writing and authors. Our general discussion forum section includes forums for discussing science, religion, philosophy, politics, history, current events, arts, entertainment and more. We hope you join us!


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSOUR BOOKSAUTHOR INTERVIEWSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICYSITEMAP

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism Books

Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2021. All rights reserved.

Display Pagerank