"One State, Under God"

[theotherguy]

:x In a sweeping bill (yet to be, but which will almost certainly be passed) imposing religion on schools, the Texas state legislature has decided to insert "One State, Under God" into the Texas pledge (yes, we have one, and are forced to say it every day) and also require mandatory bible classes in all schools. (Elective for students, mandatory for the schools to offer).

The ACLU has already come out and said they will do nothing about it. I think they have already declared our state too far gone.

Well, here's for secular government being replaced by theocracy.

I think I'll move to California....scratch that maybe Sweden.
source

 

[Absinthe]

One more reason for people to stop being pussies when it comes to criticism of absolute retardation (aka religion).

 

[kirovman]

Why doesn't Texas declare independence from the United States?

 

[Absinthe]

Why doesn't Texas declare independence from the United States?

The aim is to make the rest of the United States like Texas. Leaving would be counterproductive towards creating Jesusland.

 

[<RJMC>]

just start wearing turbants

 

[CrazyHarij]

come over to sweden dude! no inane religious bullshit here.

 

[kirovman]

No, just rabid Thor-worshipping.

 

[Bob_Marley]

No, just rabid Thor-worshipping.

Which, lets face it, makes more sense and is a whole lot more fun!

 

[PvtRyan]

Gotta admit, Thor is pretty awesome.

Also, their afterlife beats the poo poo out of Heaven:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valhalla

Here, every day, the slain warriors who will assist Odin in Ragnar?k, the gods' final conflict with the giants, arm themselves for battle and ride forth by the thousands to engage in mock combat on the plains of Asgard. At night, they return to Valhalla to feast on roasted boar and drink intoxicating mead.

 

[Qonfused]

How isn't this against the clause against the establishment of religion? I forget exactly what Supreme Court case this was but: It was ruled unconstitutional that a school cannot house a religious class. Students can go off campus to attend a religious teaching, but the school itself cannot be used. Students can meet for a "club" after school, but, again, the school cannot be used for a religious class.

 

[theotherguy]

How isn't this against the clause against the establishment of religion? I forget exactly what Supreme Court case this was but: It was ruled unconstitutional that a school cannot house a religious class. Students can go off campus to attend a religious teaching, but the school itself cannot be used. Students can meet for a "club" after school, but, again, the school cannot be used for a religious class.

They got around it by declaring the bible "a piece of literature". Which is true, and alot of english literature can only be understood if you know all the religious allusions.

However, keep in mind this class is not a "religious texts" class, or even a "the bible in literature" class, it is a bible class, as in it teaches the bible and only the bible. The class will consist of reading the bible, studying the verses and taking tests on it. They aren't "officially advocating" anything in the bible, just teaching "the stories". Yeah right, if you have 2 hours each day for a year to learn nothing but the bible, I can garuntee you that the teachers will be inserting their own religious opinions. I forsee a huge legal battle in the future over what constitues as "religious class". I especially hope someone sues the legislature and uses a "flying spaghetti monster defense" (Why not have a class over the gospel of the flying spaghetti monster, if you have one over the bible?)

 

[delusional]

where does it say bible classes would be taught in school?

EDIT: forgot to say that in english class we read some psalm in the bible, but the teacher kept saying we are reading it as literature. nothing religious about it though. i live in california too.

 

[Sebastian]

I think its reasonable to be teaching this in school. After all, it's not mandatory. I knew a lot of people in my old high school who wanted a bible study class, but it never happened. School is supposed to offer choices in learning, and there are plenty of people who want to learn about religion; Although I would like to see it cover all religions, rather than just the Christian bible. Another point is that religion is a very significant part of a culture's history, and in order to understand a culture you have to understand their religion.

 

[Absinthe]

School is supposed to offer choices in learning, and there are plenty of people who want to learn about religion;

School is supposed to teach children how to make sense. A Bible study class goes entirely against that maxim.

There's no point to a ****ing education system if you're going to be teaching hard science for one hour and then spend the next one treating Genesis as if it was valid.

Although I would like to see it cover all religions, rather than just the Christian bible. Another point is that religion is a very significant part of a culture's history, and in order to understand a culture you have to understand their religion.

Such is a fair enough point, but that is not what's being advocated here.

I personally think that there is very little to be gained from trying to understand the world's religions when they're all total nonsense. If we were to apply a strict educational approach to the material, you'd have to explain how Jesus rose from the dead and how Mohammed flew off on a winged horse, and then say "But this is all bullshit, kids". Actually, that would be pretty cool. But I think it's a waste of time and would be at best a temporary quick-fix at halting the generational perpetuation of irrational faith.

The only place for religion in a school curriculum is in literature classes where biblical references need to be understood to grasp the texts. There's no reason for it to go any further. It should go the way of Greek mythology.

 

[DeusExMachina]

If they wanna learn about religion, they can take anthropology.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

1) Lol Texas.
2) Meh factor of eleventy.
We used to say "one nation under god" in our pledges in my schools in Florida.

They got around it by declaring the bible "a piece of literature". Which is true, and alot of english literature can only be understood if you know all the religious allusions.

I had a class (elective) once that had us study Genesis "as literature". No big deal. We treated it like any other novel.

 

[Absinthe]

That had to be a very pointless course. I'm not even sure what worth it has as literature in comparison to, say, "The Metamorphosis".

 

[Qonfused]

Teaching the Bible, and only the Bible, in public school is against the constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemon_v._Kurtzman

1. The government's action must have a legitimate secular purpose;
2. The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
3. The government's action must not result in an "excessive entanglement" with religion.

Aside from the third, it fails the first two.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

That had to be a very pointless course. I'm not even sure what worth it has as literature in comparison to, say, "The Metamorphosis".

I think it was a mythology class. We studied lit of pretty much every well-known religion.

 

[Nemesis6]

Well, in all fairness, the ACLU are morons. I don't really see that much of a problem. People can interpret it as they want, as with the bible. Christianity and Islam, one God in each, so unless you think it over too much, it makes sense for the individual. But if you're a hindu, man, good luck picking one out!

 

[Absinthe]

Well, in all fairness, the ACLU are morons.

Oh, just shut the **** up.

Yeah, people who fight for civil liberties. What assholes. :dozey:

 

[theotherguy]

1) Lol Texas.
2) Meh factor of eleventy.
We used to say "one nation under god" in our pledges in my schools in Florida.



I had a class (elective) once that had us study Genesis "as literature". No big deal. We treated it like any other novel.

we say one nation under god in the national pledge, but the state pledge has never included it. And I dont mind looking at one or two books of the bible in an english class, just not an entire class devoted to the teaching of the bible and the bible only.


btw, to everyone wondering, the article I posted is old. I got my information from this morning's paper which included the full pledge and told about the bible classes, all being tacked on to the same bill.

 

[Jintor]

Which god?

I'mma thinking Vishnu.

 

[Taboo]

They got around it by declaring the bible "a piece of literature". Which is true, and alot of english literature can only be understood if you know all the religious allusions.

However, keep in mind this class is not a "religious texts" class, or even a "the bible in literature" class, it is a bible class, as in it teaches the bible and only the bible. The class will consist of reading the bible, studying the verses and taking tests on it. They aren't "officially advocating" anything in the bible, just teaching "the stories". Yeah right, if you have 2 hours each day for a year to learn nothing but the bible, I can garuntee you that the teachers will be inserting their own religious opinions. I forsee a huge legal battle in the future over what constitues as "religious class". I especially hope someone sues the legislature and uses a "flying spaghetti monster defense" (Why not have a class over the gospel of the flying spaghetti monster, if you have one over the bible?)

Theoretically, I think it would be a valuble literature class. I mean, its one of, if not alone, the most widely printed, distributed, taught, available, alluded to, influential and recognized pieces of literature in the world (unlike the gospel of the flying spaghetti monster). It would outweigh the advantage christians, that have been force fed Bible school since before they can remember, have over athiests in english through a historical/ literary content type of educational environment. As opposed to Bible school's, Jesus knows you picked your nose 5 minutes ago, and hes not happy, type of lessons.

That is, theoretically. It will probably be abused as you said. Especially in Texas. Atleast you have corndogs.

I was lucky (did I say lucky?) enough to be brought up in a pro-jesus environment before becoming athiest. Teachers really do look at you like youre retarded when you dont pick up biblical allusions.

 

[Nemesis6]

Oh, just shut the **** up.

Yeah, people who fight for civil liberties. What assholes. :dozey:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007092

Uh, dumbass? They believe that racial profiling is terrorism, and they are a leftist group, in bed with Amnesty International and all those dummies.

 

[CptStern]

no, seriiously, shut the **** up, you're as annoying as they come and just as stupid

 

[Nemesis6]

Dude, yesterday you tried to paint me a racist, implying that I hate black people. And before that, you tried painting me "islamophobic". In all fairness, while I might be annoying from your narrow point of view, from my point of view - You are damn assumptious for a political debater. What I mean by that is that anyone who's not on the same wavelength as you politically(RepiV for example) is a racist and thereby deserves your juvenile insults. I've noticed that the times you insult me, it's because you disagree with something I've said so intensely that you have nothing to express but your own anger. So talk about me shutting up all you want, you know you have nothing to say yourself except for your assumptious bile.

 

[theotherguy]

Theoretically, I think it would be a valuble literature class. I mean, its one of, if not alone, the most widely printed, distributed, taught, available, alluded to, influential and recognized pieces of literature in the world (unlike the gospel of the flying spaghetti monster). It would outweigh the advantage christians, that have been force fed Bible school since before they can remember, have over athiests in english through a historical/ literary content type of educational environment. As opposed to Bible school's, Jesus knows you picked your nose 5 minutes ago, and hes not happy, type of lessons.

That is, theoretically. It will probably be abused as you said. Especially in Texas. Atleast you have corndogs.

I was lucky (did I say lucky?) enough to be brought up in a pro-jesus environment before becoming athiest. Teachers really do look at you like youre retarded when you dont pick up biblical allusions.

no, I know exactley what you mean. In english we look for all the allusions all the time. What I am saying is that parts of the bible should be taught in an introductory literary class before anything else, along with greek myths and other popular allusions. I really don't think it should have its own class, because that is just inviting religious dogma into the classroom. I mean really, what teachers are they going to pull for this class?

You have three choices: english teachers, theologians or biblical scholars. Schools will probably choose more specialized teachers to conserve their english staff if it is its own class...and to be honest I really do not like the idea of theologians happily sitting in a school teaching children their holy book.

 

[Absinthe]

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007092

Uh, dumbass? They believe that racial profiling is terrorism, and they are a leftist group, in bed with Amnesty International and all those dummies.

So the ACLU isn't perfect. Alert the press. Just because they've engaged in some things that are stupid and frivolous does not make the entire organization or its aims on the whole worthless. And as stupid, ignorant, and childish your opinions are, the ACLU would be the first to come to your defense if your right to express them was infringed upon.

Oh no, they're a leftist group? Well, shit. I had no idea! Thank you for pointing out their roots in evil pinko ideology. We're gonna have to convert them to the right quicksmart!

You're a tool. You're on the same wavelength as mental degenerates. The difference between you and Revip is that while I disagree with both of you on a lot of things, he's able to engage in rational discussion without resorting to kneejerk "moonbat" bullshit like yourself.

I seriously don't get you. It's like your totally incapable of addressing an actual topic and instead just pick up on irrelevant details for your apologetics. If there was a headline called "LIBERALS FACING MASS EXTERMINATION AT THE HANDS OF NEO-FASCISTS", I have no doubt that your very first response would be "To be fair, liberals are idiots" or some similar tripe.

 

[Pulse]

Anyone know where I can find some moonbat caves?

I'm intrigued. *strokes chin*

 

[Nemesis6]

You're on the same wavelength as mental degenerates.

Could you elaborate on that? Who do you mean when you say mental degenerates? I'm not spewing bull here, I would really like an answer to that. Please elaborate.

By the way, you just did the same thing that Stern did - You made assumptions about me without knowing me. You stereotyped me, too.

 

[Absinthe]

Could you elaborate on that? Who do you mean when you say mental degenerates? I'm not spewing bull here, I would really like an answer to that. Please elaborate.

...Read the rest of my post?

The amount of thought (let alone the critical sort) you put into your posts is obviously lacking. Your very posts in this topic exemplify that.

Texas adds a Bible class to the educational curriculum and you say "ACLU is stupid durr". You reasoning behind this? "Well, they're a leftist group". Bravo, Nemesis. I'm not stereotyping you. I'm pointing out the common thread of idiocy through most of your posts in the Politics section. I don't need to know anything about you, and I frankly don't care. I can only go off of what you post here, and what you post is garbage.

Seriously, you're the last person that should be talking about generalizations and stereotypes when one of your major criticisms of the ACLU is that it's liberal.

 

[Nemesis6]

Big deal! America has its roots in Christianity. If anything, this is alarmist bullshit.

 

[Cole]

People can interpret it as they want, as with the bible. Christianity and Islam, one God in each, so unless you think it over too much, it makes sense for the individual. But if you're a hindu, man, good luck picking one out!

And for those who don't believe in a God?

It's a ****ing anthem, big deal. America has its roots in Christianity. If anything, you're an alarmist.

Sure thats where America's roots lie, but a better description of it's roots are "People espcaping religions presecution". People left Britian to come to the newly found land so they could practice there religion freely. Not be forced to say something that basically rips away there self-pride because they do not believe in a god.

In fact they should not say under god. America was not found under god. It's roots go back to religious persecution in europe and people wanting to practice whatever-religion[As in ANY, those with or without Gods(You can have religion without a god. Atheism is not a religion btw)]. What it should say is this, "Found under the division of church and state".


If you teach the Bible in school, you must teach every other religious book. This is a lot more books than just the Koran btw. If the Bible can be considered literature so can the Koran.

 

[Nemesis6]

A better question: What about those who are on the fence like me? It's harder for them than for atheists, and yet, I seem to have no problem tolerating a simple line of text.

 

[Absinthe]

Big deal! America has its roots in Christianity. If anything, this is alarmist bullshit.

No, the United States does not have roots in Christianity. The Constitution was drafted as a secular document by theists, deist, and atheists. Christian historical revisionism has duped you among many others.

Alarmist? Perhaps with this particular incident. But this is only a piece of a persistent and pervasive problem in the United States.

 

[Absinthe]

A better question: What about those who are on the fence like me? It's harder for them than for atheists, and yet, I seem to have no problem tolerating a simple line of text.

You're an atheist. Shut up.

You don't have a harder time if you identify yourself as agnostic. People would sooner hug your for that than they would a self-identified atheist.

What "simple line of text" are you referring to? What are you talking about? Bible classes in public education isn't one ****ing sentence, you know.

 

[Nemesis6]

That may be, but that is the America most people have come to know today. Revisionism or not, there are a lot of things that have been decorated to look more appealing than they actually are. For the second time this week, I'm reminded of a cartoon, The Simpsons: They discover that the glorious history of their town is actually rooted in something much, much more sinister, and when confronted with the choice to tell people the truth, Lisa refuses. The reason: A celebrated myth or legend can have just as much positive influence as the even deeper-rooted truth. The sentence you asked about: "One State, Under God" as added to the pledge.

By the way, are you telling me what my relationship with God is? That's a little over the top, don't you think?

 

[Cole]

A better question: What about those who are on the fence like me? It's harder for them than for atheists, and yet, I seem to have no problem tolerating a simple line of text.

Because I can easily see this country becoming more and more religious as time has passed. While I look over in europe and I see religion very slowly fading. Most of the world hates America right now, including many european countries. The worst thing we could possibly do is become more of a christian nation. European countries will look at us like we are nuts and middle eastern countries will only hate us more. We are basically telling the world to **** off and that we are going to do our own thing while still interfering with all there affairs.

I mean our own president said god spoke to him and told him to attack afghanistan. I'm sorry but America was founded on seperation of chruch and state NOT GOD.

 

[Nemesis6]

Well, Bush is a special case when it comes to religion. I don't know what his relationship with God is, but I know that he said that to some leaders in the Middle-East. I think he stereotyped them to be religious people and said that to win points. But anyway, I don't have anything against people becoming more religious. As long as it doesn't cross the line of accepted behavior, their beliefs are their own and if it contributes positively to themselves as people and fills their life with more content, I don't see any harm.