The New School Prayer
Wednesday, January 4, 2006 by WOM | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Now I sit me down in school
Where praying is against the rule
For this great nation under God
Finds mention of Him very odd.
If scripture now the class recites,
It violates the Bill of Rights.
And anytime my head I bow
Becomes a Federal matter now.
Our hair can be purple, orange or green,
That's no offense; it's a freedom scene.
The law is specific, the law is precise.
Prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.
For praying in a public hall
Might offend someone with no faith at all
In silence alone we must meditate,
God's name is prohibited by the state.
We're allowed to cuss and dress like freaks,
And pierce our noses, tongues and cheeks.
They've outlawed guns, but FIRST the Bible.
To quote the Good Book makes me liable.
We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen,
And the 'unwed daddy,' our Senior King.
It's "inappropriate" to teach right from wrong,
We're taught that such "judgments" do not belong.
We can get our condoms and birth controls,
Study witchcraft, vampires and totem poles.
But the Ten Commandments are not allowed,
No word of God must reach this crowd.
It's scary here I must confess,
When chaos reigns the school's a mess.
So, Lord, this silent plea I make:
Should I be shot; My soul please take!
Amen
From watching whats on the news now a days, thought this made a lot of sense.
 |
|
Page 2 of 8 | |
|
|---|
Lantec
Reply #22 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 7:45 PM
Among several of the American Indian tribes, Cheyenne for example, every male child was taught to call all mature women Mother and younger women sister. It was the "responsibility" of the tribe to raise the child. The men were "responsible" for EVERY member of the tribe. Shirk your responsiblities and don't bother coming home. They had no concept of aberrent or criminal behavior until "civilized" people introduced them to it and took their children to "proper" schooling.
Reply #22 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 7:45 PM
| raising a child is the responsibility of all people |
Among several of the American Indian tribes, Cheyenne for example, every male child was taught to call all mature women Mother and younger women sister. It was the "responsibility" of the tribe to raise the child. The men were "responsible" for EVERY member of the tribe. Shirk your responsiblities and don't bother coming home. They had no concept of aberrent or criminal behavior until "civilized" people introduced them to it and took their children to "proper" schooling.
Sleeping Dragon
Reply #23 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 7:47 PM
Both well said; religion being an institution created by man with their own agendas. Their premise is to seek God, but often at the expense of others.
Personal belief (want it or not), is the Bible is the message of God through Jesus reaching a hand down to us. Not people standing on their soap boxes telling others to "be like me". It's all about Him. Not about us.
Regarding religion in school or government, I believe it needs to be seperate. We should be free to worship or not worship who or what we wish. As soon as you start creating a theocracy the free will disappears and "religious wars" flare up again.
Just sharing one believer's thoughts.
Reply #23 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 7:47 PM
| I have NEVER equated morality with religion |
| And let us not get God and religion confused |
Both well said; religion being an institution created by man with their own agendas. Their premise is to seek God, but often at the expense of others.
Personal belief (want it or not), is the Bible is the message of God through Jesus reaching a hand down to us. Not people standing on their soap boxes telling others to "be like me". It's all about Him. Not about us.
Regarding religion in school or government, I believe it needs to be seperate. We should be free to worship or not worship who or what we wish. As soon as you start creating a theocracy the free will disappears and "religious wars" flare up again.
Just sharing one believer's thoughts.
MadDeez
Reply #24 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:00 PM
Reply #24 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:00 PM
scorpio-logic, i'm sure you meant "corporal punishment". i doubt mr holt ever killed anyone with his wooden paddle. 
as for the atheist (adamness), have you folks ever noticed how many young people refuse religion in the their younger years but embrace it as they learn more? i'm not intending on slamming mr adamness. actually, if he is intent in being an atheist, that is his right. i'm only stating an observation i've seen that most younger people who claim to be atheists sooner or later embrace a religion.
_02
Reply #25 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:03 PM
Being of partial Native American blood and being taught by a Cherokee, I made that statement from that exact knowledge. It is a good way. A very successful way.
And very well said yourself Bill, and the thoughts of this believer as well.
Reply #25 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:03 PM
| Among several of the American Indian tribes, Cheyenne for example, every male child was taught to call all mature women Mother and younger women sister. It was the "responsibility" of the tribe to raise the child. The men were "responsible" for EVERY member of the tribe. |
Being of partial Native American blood and being taught by a Cherokee, I made that statement from that exact knowledge. It is a good way. A very successful way.
And very well said yourself Bill, and the thoughts of this believer as well.
rabidrobot
Reply #26 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:04 PM
Reply #26 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:04 PM
From the Secretary of Education's explaination of Religious Freedom in US Public Schools: http://www.ed.gov/Speeches/08-1995/religion.html
The original post gives the impression that religious expression is not tolerated in public schools. This is incorrect. You can't pray in class, just like you can't talk on the phone, or engage in chess club activities, etc. There are plenty of opportunities everyday for students alone or assembled to pray, chant, handle snakes, whatever.
The Secretary continues:
This is the real issue. Unfotunately, only conflict can arise when the only limitation on religious expression is the coercion of others into participating when at the same time a fundamental religious belief of many is that others must be converted, coerced or not.
The belief that "God (in particular the Potestant Chirstian God) is being removed from society, and this is responsible for society's ills" has been thoroughly debunked.
Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies, a study published in The Journal of Religion & Society, found a direct correlation of just the opposite. More religious developed democracies, such as the United States, have much higher incidence of what most would call immoral behavior--ranging from crime to drug abuse, pre-marital sex and divorce. More secular societies had corresponding lower incidences of socially detrimental behavior.
When only the population of the United States is studied, it is found that Evangelical Fundamentalists--those clamoring most vociferously against secularism--have the same frequency of immoral acts as the population as a whole. In some cases, such as domestic abuse and racial bias, Evangelicals are more likely to engage in this behavior than the population as a whole. This is discussed by Ronald J. Sider, himself an Evangelical minister, in his book, The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/1/prweb202028.htm
| Schools may not discriminate against private religious expression by students, but must instead give students the same right to engage in religious activity and discussion as they have to engage in other comparable activity. Generally, this means that students may pray in a nondisruptive manner during the school day when they are not engaged in school activities and instruction, subject to the same rules of order that apply to other student speech. |
The original post gives the impression that religious expression is not tolerated in public schools. This is incorrect. You can't pray in class, just like you can't talk on the phone, or engage in chess club activities, etc. There are plenty of opportunities everyday for students alone or assembled to pray, chant, handle snakes, whatever.
The Secretary continues:
| And the right of religious expression in school does not include the right to have a "captive audience" listen, or to compel other students to participate. |
This is the real issue. Unfotunately, only conflict can arise when the only limitation on religious expression is the coercion of others into participating when at the same time a fundamental religious belief of many is that others must be converted, coerced or not.
The belief that "God (in particular the Potestant Chirstian God) is being removed from society, and this is responsible for society's ills" has been thoroughly debunked.
Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies, a study published in The Journal of Religion & Society, found a direct correlation of just the opposite. More religious developed democracies, such as the United States, have much higher incidence of what most would call immoral behavior--ranging from crime to drug abuse, pre-marital sex and divorce. More secular societies had corresponding lower incidences of socially detrimental behavior.
When only the population of the United States is studied, it is found that Evangelical Fundamentalists--those clamoring most vociferously against secularism--have the same frequency of immoral acts as the population as a whole. In some cases, such as domestic abuse and racial bias, Evangelicals are more likely to engage in this behavior than the population as a whole. This is discussed by Ronald J. Sider, himself an Evangelical minister, in his book, The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/1/prweb202028.htm
White_Moth
Reply #27 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:08 PM
Reply #27 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:08 PM
The cool thing about Christianity is that it's not a religion but about a man whose name is Jesus.
Adamness
Reply #28 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:19 PM
Reply #28 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:19 PM
First, it is no contradiction what I said. I was just using that as an example everyone can understand. I don't kill people, or steal. And I respect those around me. More than I can say for many so-called 'Christians.'
Second, I couldn't agree more rabitrobot.
And third, Christianity may not have been intended to be a religion, but it certainly is now. People nowadays seem to believe more in Christianity than Christ himself, if you know what I mean.
Second, I couldn't agree more rabitrobot.
And third, Christianity may not have been intended to be a religion, but it certainly is now. People nowadays seem to believe more in Christianity than Christ himself, if you know what I mean.
_02
Reply #29 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:25 PM
Unfortunately you are right about that. However not all "Christians" are like that, and to look at all Christians as the same is an easy way to not have to look at the truth behind the real Christianity. And once again, let us not confuse God with religion just because many do. They are two different things.
Reply #29 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:25 PM
| People nowadays seem to believe more in Christianity than Christ himself, if you know what I mean. |
Unfortunately you are right about that. However not all "Christians" are like that, and to look at all Christians as the same is an easy way to not have to look at the truth behind the real Christianity. And once again, let us not confuse God with religion just because many do. They are two different things.
Lantec
Reply #30 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:25 PM
This corresponds to what time frame. Currently and for the last 30+ years religion has been removed from political/public society in this Country. To say that this is a religious Democracy today is absurd. 50 years ago maybe....100 years ago yes....but today?? Not even close.
Evangelism, like anything else, has extremes. Frankly I don't give a TV minister/evangelist much chance of having his name in the book. For people who use religion as a "business" there's a special reward waiting for them. The other end/extreme would be someone for whom you have to ask "what the special hope that is within them comes from"
Reply #30 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:25 PM
| More religious developed democracies, such as the United States, have much higher incidence of what most would call immoral behavior--ranging from crime to drug abuse, pre-marital sex and divorce |
This corresponds to what time frame. Currently and for the last 30+ years religion has been removed from political/public society in this Country. To say that this is a religious Democracy today is absurd. 50 years ago maybe....100 years ago yes....but today?? Not even close.
Evangelism, like anything else, has extremes. Frankly I don't give a TV minister/evangelist much chance of having his name in the book. For people who use religion as a "business" there's a special reward waiting for them. The other end/extreme would be someone for whom you have to ask "what the special hope that is within them comes from"
Gregory2001
Reply #31 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:44 PM
Reply #31 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:44 PM
There has never been a war fought because of something non-religious.
Lantec
Reply #32 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:52 PM
That's a bit of a sweeping statement. Helen of Troy was not a religious artifact. What was the "religious" content of the World Wars, Vietnam, Korea, French-Indian War, American Civil War (does the Panama Canal thing count). Not to say that there have not been wars based on reigion, I just think your statement is a slightly inaccurate.
Reply #32 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:52 PM
| There has never been a war fought because of something non-religious |
That's a bit of a sweeping statement. Helen of Troy was not a religious artifact. What was the "religious" content of the World Wars, Vietnam, Korea, French-Indian War, American Civil War (does the Panama Canal thing count). Not to say that there have not been wars based on reigion, I just think your statement is a slightly inaccurate.
WOM
Reply #33 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:56 PM
Reply #33 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 8:56 PM
Hum, I'am somewhat on in years, but what about the Spanish/American war and the Mexican/American.?
_TAPPER_
Reply #34 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:03 PM
Not to mention the American Revolutionary War, wich was caused by no representation in England. Freedom of religion was a benifit of that war, not the cause.
Reply #34 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:03 PM
| Hum, I'am somewhat on in years, but what about the Spanish/American war and the Mexican/American.? |
Not to mention the American Revolutionary War, wich was caused by no representation in England. Freedom of religion was a benifit of that war, not the cause.
Lantec
Reply #35 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:03 PM
Could've been a failed attempt to convert the Catholic majority to Protestant.
Reply #35 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:03 PM
| Spanish/American war and the Mexican/American |
Could've been a failed attempt to convert the Catholic majority to Protestant.
_02
Reply #36 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:07 PM
Of course there have been wars over religion, but the majority are about money, power, greed and the control of land and people. Your statement is more than slightly inaccurate.
Reply #36 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:07 PM
| There has never been a war fought because of something non-religious |
Of course there have been wars over religion, but the majority are about money, power, greed and the control of land and people. Your statement is more than slightly inaccurate.
NightTrainthedark
Reply #38 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:17 PM
Reply #38 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:17 PM
The US didn't declare war against Saddam over because of religion. Fear yes, but not religion.
Adamness
Reply #39 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:41 PM
Reply #39 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 9:41 PM
You could say all wars were fought over religion, or none at all. Remember how we were taught the American Civil War was fought over slavery? It's all in the interpretation.
War isn't the issue here anyway. Obviously, anyone who starts wars, is ignoring basic tenants of just about all of the big religions.
The issue here is freedom to practice, or not to practice religion. I choose not to practice, and I don't want people telling me I have to, or saying to me that I'm wrong and will turn to religion in the future. That is an insult to my ideas and quite disrespectful.
People have many, many times a day they can pray or do whatever they want to do. If you think people are better off with religion, and think it should be forced or at least encouraged, than get an amendment to the Consitution passed.
And for whoever was saying there is less religion going around now, than 50 years ago is greatly mistaken. Forced prayer was taken out of school, and rightfully so. Other than that, things are pretty much the same, if not more religious. Members of government use religion more, and religion is invading science. There is more religion in movies, television, and music. Basically, we're constantly surrounded by something that has religion in it.
Another thing: keep in mind the founding fathers were not Christian, but rather deist. Meaning they belived there was one God, and that's it. No Jesus, no Bible, just God. In fact, it is well established Ben Franklin attended meetings of the first Satanist organizations. I'm sure none of them would be too pleased with what is going on today, in terms of religion.
War isn't the issue here anyway. Obviously, anyone who starts wars, is ignoring basic tenants of just about all of the big religions.
The issue here is freedom to practice, or not to practice religion. I choose not to practice, and I don't want people telling me I have to, or saying to me that I'm wrong and will turn to religion in the future. That is an insult to my ideas and quite disrespectful.
People have many, many times a day they can pray or do whatever they want to do. If you think people are better off with religion, and think it should be forced or at least encouraged, than get an amendment to the Consitution passed.
And for whoever was saying there is less religion going around now, than 50 years ago is greatly mistaken. Forced prayer was taken out of school, and rightfully so. Other than that, things are pretty much the same, if not more religious. Members of government use religion more, and religion is invading science. There is more religion in movies, television, and music. Basically, we're constantly surrounded by something that has religion in it.
Another thing: keep in mind the founding fathers were not Christian, but rather deist. Meaning they belived there was one God, and that's it. No Jesus, no Bible, just God. In fact, it is well established Ben Franklin attended meetings of the first Satanist organizations. I'm sure none of them would be too pleased with what is going on today, in terms of religion.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 2 of 8 | |
|
|---|
Reply #21 Wednesday, January 4, 2006 7:05 PM