ROOT: Harassment based on faith shows hypocrisy

King

Fri Feb 24 2012 16:33

@Cranston
Would you feel differently if Jessica were a Muslim or a Buddhist? If she were, the religious language of the prayer would clearly be excluding her beliefs. In fact, Christian prayer in school is much more oppressive or "tyrannical" than the school simply showing no favor towards any one religion. Jessica was just the minority student brave enough to point it out.

The spirit of Cranston

Wed Feb 22 2012 00:11

If Jessica Ahlquist is an atheist than why did the banner bother her at all? If she is an atheist than the words "our heavenly father" are just those words. If her religious beliefs involve a unfounded belief that there is no God than why should it be an issue? Why should it bother her if others talk of a God that she believes doesn't believe exists? She says that it made her feel left out. Does she feel more accepted now that she has trampled on others beliefs and rights? Why must we worry so much about those who are offended and why is this concern so selective? Everyday I have to hear the views of those I disagree and see practices I find objectionable but I don't insist that everyone conform to my standards or remains silent. It seems that everyone else is being asked to conform to her religious beliefs. This violates our Constitutional right to freedom of worship. Besides if you take the beginning "Our heavenly father" and the end "Amen" out of it you get:
"Grant us each day the desire to do our best, To grow mentally and morally as well as physically,To be kind and helpful to our classmates and teachers, To be honest with ourselves as well as with others, Help us to be good sports and smile when we lose as well as when we win, Teach us the value of true friendship, Help us always to conduct ourselves so as to bring credit to Cranston High School West." What is so objectionable about this? Why most we all suffer just because one narrow-minded militant demands her way at the expense of others? Must we live by her standards at the expense of our own? Do you call this freedom? I have another name for it, tyranny.

Bruce

Mon Feb 13 2012 01:55

It is ironic, that Rhode Island was founded by Roger Williams, described by wikipedia as "...an English Protestant theologian who was an early proponent of religious freedom and the separation of church and state. In 1636, he began the colony of Providence Plantation, which provided a refuge for religious minorities."

With regards to the history of Christmas celebrations in America, according to wikipedia: "In Colonial America, the Puritans of New England shared radical Protestant disapproval of Christmas. Celebration was outlawed in Boston from 1659 to 1681. The ban by the Pilgrims was revoked in 1681 by English governor Sir Edmund Andros, however it was not until the mid-19th century that celebrating Christmas became fashionable in the Boston region."

Bruce

Mon Feb 13 2012 01:53

It is ironic, that Rhode Island was founded by Roger Williams, described by wikipedia as "...an English Protestant theologian who was an early proponent of religious freedom and the separation of church and state. In 1636, he began the colony of Providence Plantation, which provided a refuge for religious minorities."

With regards to the history of Christmas celebrations in America, according to wikipedia: "In Colonial America, the Puritans of New England shared radical Protestant disapproval of Christmas. Celebration was outlawed in Boston from 1659 to 1681. The ban by the Pilgrims was revoked in 1681 by English governor Sir Edmund Andros, however it was not until the mid-19th century that celebrating Christmas became fashionable in the Boston region."

Anonymous

Fri Feb 10 2012 11:52

One question: Would the lawsuit be dismissed if the banner changed only the start "Oh Heavenly Father" and changed it to "Oh Wonderful Flying Spaghetti Monster" or didn't say anything.

Ess Lessman

Tue Feb 7 2012 17:16

@Zeke B: "If everything requires a creator, who created your creator?"
If my creator was created by a creator who was that creator?
I don't know, I wasn't created before my creator was created because then my creator couldn't have created me and so I couldn't have been created before my creator because my creator hadn't been created yet.
So if my creator was created by a creator I couldn't possibly know who created the creator's creator because I hadn't been created yet.
Unless something comes from nothing but then if I came from nothing how could I be something since something is something and nothing is nothing?
Kinda blows you mind don't it?

Karny Bob Bobivich

Tue Feb 7 2012 10:38

@Zeke B sounds like you subscribe to the sh#thappens school of philosophy, you know, How did life start? Sh#thappens. How was the universe created? Sh#thappens Why do things happen like they do? Sh#thappens. Wouldn't need any philosophy or science with your viewpoint cause, well, Sh#thappens. Probably explains why you rely on UTube for your information.
But then I'm stuck in the Bronze age so what do I know?
Anyway, got to go now. I'm helping round up human sacrifices for the vernal equinox

LOL

Tue Feb 7 2012 00:51

@Zeke B The First Law of Energy (First Law of thermodynamics): You can't get something for nothing, so If Dr. Lawrence Krauss explains how something from nothing doesn't necessarily violate the laws of physics then apparently life or the universe itself most have been some sort of miraculous occurrence. Why how bronze age of you! By the way the Constitution does not "explicitly separate church and state"

Religious intolerence in America

Tue Feb 7 2012 00:39

A pro-life event at the Rhode Island State House was disrupted by Occupy Wall Street protesters who heckled speakers and dumped condoms on Catholic girls in the crowd.

Last Friday, an estimated crowd of 150 pro-life supporters (including a reported two dozen legislators) had assembled in the rotunda of the State House for the 39th annual Pro-Life Rally, but they were prevented from speaking by members of Occupy Providence and other OWS sympathizers who shouted and chanted during speeches, held signs in front of the faces of speakers and prevented the delivery of the closing prayer by local Catholic leader Father Bernard Healey.

Rhode Island's Right-To-Life Executive Director Barth Bracy was the scheduled keynote speaker, but the chanting and shouted made it impossible for him to deliver his speech. Bracy told Fox News radio that one Occupier climbed to the third floor balcony and dumped a box of condoms on a group of Catholic girls gathered below. Mr. Bracy wondered: "What kind of individual throws condoms on Catholic school girls?"

Anonymous

Mon Feb 6 2012 20:27

"I don't really understand where the anti-Christmas fervor comes from, and I don't think it's a nod in the direction of tolerance to be quiet in the face of people who are calling for the banning of something most Americans celebrate," Walther said. "

JesusChrist! No one is banning xmas. You are free to celebrate xmas, put up your banners, pray to your sky daddy...you just can't do it in the public square. Simple. Whether-or-not most of the Country agrees with sometime is of no consequence. The Constitution protects the minority! Why is protecting the minority so important?! Because, as you clearly demonstrate, the majority doesn't respect the right of those who doesn't believe as they do...remember segregation? Jim Crow? Slavery?

Zeke B

Fri Feb 3 2012 00:27

To the UNL junior who claims to favour separation of church and state, but is fine with religious displays in public schools: I urge you to learn more about the connection between religious freedom, as enjoyed in America, with the requirement that government be completely neutral in religious matters. Not just somewhat neutral or mostly neutral, but scrupulously neutral. It's no accident that more than two centuries after its founding, the United States--the first nation to explicitly separate church and state in its Constitution--is the most religious of all developed countries. It's a trade-off: in exchange for religion staying out of government, government stays out of religion. This has been a winning formula for faith groups in America, as evidenced by their variety and number of adherents, and to alter it could be at their peril.

At the same time, it's not so obvious to everyone else that the universe required a creator. If everything requires a creator, who created your creator? That's not one bit less troubling from a logical perspective, than whether the primordial soup required a creator. In fact, it might be more troubling. In his new book "A Universe From Nothing", University of Arizona astrophysicist Dr. Lawrence Krauss explains how something from nothing doesn't necessarily violate the laws of physics (his ideas are also presented in lectures available on YouTube). We may never know from whence the universe came, but surely on such factual, material matters, informed scientific inquiry is to be preferred to the speculation of our bronze-age ancestors.

Anonymous

Thu Feb 2 2012 10:08

Good article. I really don't understand the religious folks who feel it's necessary to have their beliefs encroach on others who do not believe the same. It seems it is not enough for them to have their churches built all over communities, with tax free money, so they feel the need to spread their message to those who just don't want to hear it or see it on public land. No one is stopping you from practicing your religion; there is no persecution. Get over yourselves.

Al Denelsbeck

Wed Feb 1 2012 22:43

I have to admit to finding no small amount of amusement in posts that call the article biased and anti-christian, then immediately bleat that there was nothing offensive about the banner and no one was forced to read it. Also amusing are the ones claiming that christians are a vast majority in this country that are somehow being persecuted when Constitutional proscriptions against government institutions favoring or promoting one religion are upheld. Funny, I always considered it affording the same protections to everyone, regardless of how privileged they consider themselves, but I suppose some feel obligated to turn water into whine.

Anonymous

Wed Feb 1 2012 21:17

To all those who claim that Christians are being persecuted when their religious symbols and practices are not allowed in public functions and public places, please note that these functions and places belong to all of us, not just the religious majority. Nobody is preventing the free exercise of religion in the USA, as long as the religious practices and symbols are not incorporated into government functions or places, where they act to establish religion. Goverment and religion are a dangerous mix to be avoided.

Anonymous

Wed Feb 1 2012 20:14

Roman winter solstice: the "reason for the season".

Ken Nahigian

Wed Feb 1 2012 19:48

Great article. If Christianity needs the bludgeon of government behind it, if it can't survive without a captive audience, what kind of religion is it? Keep faith in your hearts, and leave our public schools alone. Also the cowardly 'Christians' who harrassed and bullied Jessica should practice what they preach. For starters, read Matt 6:5-8.

UNL Junior

Wed Feb 1 2012 18:00

This article was clearly written with an anti-Christian, anti-Catholic, and anti-Religious bias.
That's poor journalism on Ms. Root's part because it doesn't show the story from all sides and was based off a lot of opinion instead of fact.
Although I am completely in favor of separation of church and state, I don't think there is anything offensive about a prayer banner in a school. No one was forced to pay attention to it or to pray. I think if the Christians are allowed to post a banner, then Muslims, Buddhists, whomever should also be allowed to post a banner if they wish.
In all reality, how could there not be some sort of a higher power? How do you think this world got here? Whether it was Allah, God (Jesus), or whatever God, the world had to be created by someone. (And you can't say, "Oh but what about the Big Bang theory? Wellll....who created the primordial soup?! Hmmm?")

Lincoln Pagan

Wed Feb 1 2012 17:34

Fantastic Article!

If only everyone could just live and let live.

And to the above "persecuted Christian", there is a difference between "persecution" and "loss of privileges".

LOL

Wed Feb 1 2012 15:39

Root: Once again proving that atheists are stupid bigots.

Persecution of Christians in the USA

Wed Feb 1 2012 15:38

In the United States religious persecution also is alive and well. Although this nation was founded upon Judeo-Christian moral and religious values and standards, many now insist that Christians today are being treated as second-class citizens.

In their work Christianity on Trial (Encounter Books), Vincent Carroll, editor of the editorial pages of Rocky Mountain News, Denver, Colorado, and David Shiflett, a freelance writer, observe that "Christianity inhabits a strange place in American life. It is by far the predominant religion in the most religious country in the industrialized world, with more than 90 percent of its citizens professing belief in God and a large majority claiming allegiance to a Christian denomination or sect." At the same time, though, "Christians are regularly targeted for ridicule and vilification by a significant portion of America's cultural elite, a situation all the more striking in view of the prevailing hypersensitivity toward other religious, ethnic and lifestyle groups."

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, provides these examples of anti-Christian bigotry that threaten our religious freedom: "In Kentucky, the ACLU filed challenges to Ten Commandments displays in Mercy and McCreary counties. In Utah, the ACLU launched a [search] for more than a dozen Ten Commandments displays across the state, . . . and [then]took legal action to have them all removed." In Tennessee, the ACLU pressured government officials in Hamilton County to remove three Ten Commandments displays from public property.

According to an editorial in the New Orleans Times-Picayune that was reprinted in the December 18, 2003, News-Star, Monroe, Louisiana, the religious freedom rights of an 8-year-old public school student in Zachary, Louisiana, also have come under attack. A teacher at Northwestern Elementary School had assigned some "quiet time reading" to her second-grade students, and 8-year-old Harrison Kravat decided to read the New Testament; however, the teacher, thinking she was upholding the principle of separation of church and state, told the boy he could not read the Bible in public school.

Harrison's parents contacted the Alliance Defense Fund, a coalition of attorneys dedicated to defending the religious freedom rights of Americans, which in turn wrote to the superintendent of schools. The school superintendent ordered that Harrison be allowed to resume reading the Bible.