Don’t forget, there are images of Moses and the Ten Commandments on display in the halls of Congress.
If that doesn’t qualify as historical context, I don’t know what does.
Uh, followers of Zeus would probably want to build a statue of Zeus. Why would they want to have one of Odysseus? He was Athena’s favorite.
If those people want to donate copies of the bible and build a monument to the TC, I have no problem with it either. As long as the donating isn’t in any way paid for by taxpayer dollars (such as during school on school grounds), and the monument isn’t paid for, maintained by, or result in any use of taxpayer dollars (which would include taking up space on public property.)
If they want to have their monument, let them build it on their own property, be it the front lawn of their church or their privately owned park, just put it where it isn’t paid for in any way by taxpayer dollars and there isn’t a captive audience of schoolchildren who are going to be subjected to it.
2nd Law’s final paragraph is a perfect summary. Nobody is preventing them from erecting their statue on private property, which is where it belongs.
Oh great, I’m arguing against DavidB… Again.
Now I’m gonna get my ass kicked… Again.
We’ll start with the subtle Ad Hominem:
Well David if you want to be the Grinch that Stole Christmas that’s just fine. Why are we arguing this tiny infraction when this much larger injustice is ubiquitous?
And proceed straight to the Slippery Slope:
How does the 10 commandments displayed oppress anybody more than the the existence of a Church on the corner? Don’t those that don’t belong to that denomination get oppressed by it’s by having to look at it? Shouldn’t that be torn down too?
Shouldn’t religion be outlawed because, let’s face it, it is generally offensive and a lot more good than evil has been done because of it?
And to be serious:
The crux of your point seems to be that the majority have no right to repress the minority. I agree.
I think creating a display of other historical documents, is silly. The Church group didn’t make the donation of the 10 commandments because it was historical, they did so because it is part of the basic foundation of the religion which they would like to spread, preferably to children. It is a blatant transparency. Agreed?
But, It IS also a historical document. There’s no denying this either. Does it belong in a school? I dunno.
Does it’s simple existence in a school oppress?
Maybe. Depends on the context. A lot of things can be interpreted as oppressive, like having to listen to the theory of evolution when your religion states it’s false (I don’t agree, but why should they have to be subjected?) A tough question, and one I don’t want to get into.
Tolerance again is the key. If the majority of people as designated by the elected school board want the ten commandments I still say it’s none of our business. I will grant a point and say that it would be unfair to subject the minority to this display in such a fashion. Why not be honest and create a display of the great documents of the religions of the world? Surely that would have educational value.
Such a display would serve to unite a community and oppress no one. Denying freedom of religious expression in school is religious persecution. We need to provide a neutral environment of mutual acceptance and tolerance, with knowledge and respect for our neighbor.
If the religious group wishes the 10 commandments, make them grant an equal amount of money to be sure that everybody in the community is represented. While were at it, make 'em by some science books too, so reason is represented. That way everybody benefits.
If the school wants to put on A christmas Carol who does this hurt? Trying to deny this stuff is just mean, but you are very correct to point out that the majority owes a debt of fairness to the minority.
No Scylla we should take them down because they are opressing people. They are forcing people to look at the 10 commandments, and those other documents, the magna carta are also opressing people with their sight. Imagine the horror of not being able to look at the wall behind the statues. Just because a church funded it and it has religious overtones does not deny its historical value. The churches motives do not come up in wether or not this is legal.
Scylla said:
As long as we’re clear on that.
That could be said about any argument and is an illogical question. I argue against as many infractions as I can.
Because the church on the corner is not endorsed by the government.
This is a frequent straw man that I wasn’t surprised to see Asmodean use in the message following yours, but I was surprised to see you say it. “Oppression” is not simply the existence of something – it is having government tell you that this religion is true and, by default, yours is not.
No, because that, too, would violate the First Amendment. People can believe what they like – but when they try to use the government to force those beliefs on others, that’s where the problem lies.
What, you weren’t before? Well, dangit, I’m not gonna let those perfectly good replies go to waste! I’m leavin’ 'em there. That’ll show ya!
Great! We’re done!
Oh, wait, you wrote something after this. < sigh >
Agreed.
It is not a “historical document” in the same way the Constitution or the Declaration or whatever is a “historical document.” It is a religious document. By calling it a “historical document” we could pretty much call anything a historical document. How about we force kids to read the Bible? After all, that’s a historical document. Maybe we’d better have them study all of the Talmud, too. That’s a historical document. Etc.
Yes.
The theory of evolution is science, not religion. As such, it belongs in science class. If you don’t want your kid to hear it, fine, pull him from the class. Just don’t complain when he gets an F on the test for that part of the course.
And I still say you’re wrong, for exactly the reasons I listed earlier.
Who decides which religions? Who decides which documents? What about the nonreligious folks? Why even have such a display? Aren’t there better things that schools should be doing? (And if you say that a private group could do it, I would ask: Do you really think there are too many private groups who want to put up displays of all the religious documents?)
I hate to say it, man, I but I have to wonder what world you’re living in. There would be endless arguments about what to include or not include. It wouldn’t unite the community, it would divide them further. And it can only oppress no one if you include representative documents from every possible religion, and, of course, from agnostic/atheist/humanist groups and the like. Good luck!
Luckily, that isn’t what’s being discussed here. We’re not talking about somebody getting in trouble for wearing a cross. Indeed, there has been a private campaign for kids to use 10 Commandment book covers, and as far as I know, there is no problem with that. You have got to recognize the difference between an individual’s expression and government endorsement. That is the key here.
That’s right – and a religious display like the one under discussion here has absolutely no place in such an environment.
And you really think this will work?
The non-Christians, for one thing. I know there are more than a few non-Christians around here who can relate stories about growing up in public schools within Christian communities. They are not pretty stories.
It’s not “mean.” If they want religion, that’s what churches are for. It’s “mean” for them to try to use the public schools to push their viewpoint on others.
No, I doubt the school board would get it perfect. It probably wouldn’t even be a satisfactory compromise, but is it this fashion, small steps, that progress is made.
The 10 commandments are too historical, just as the Bible as literature is every bit as worthy as study as the Iliad.
The 10 commandments on the front steps might not be the best idea, as that does seem to clearly be the government endorsing one religion over another, but religion is a part of who we are as humans. It’s how we first came to seek answers for the world we live in. It’s the first quest for knowledge.
Its historical existence and continuing effect on humanity certainly has a place in the Public school systems.
Unfortunately, no. It was the Minneapolis Star and Tribune, Faith and Values Section. I’d say Springtime, but I’m doing it from memory. A search on Secular and Pennsylvania turns up nothing on their web site, but they only promise articles 3 weeks old, and it was much longer than that.
Speaking as a slightly cranky Jew (fasting’s a bitch - you get after-effects for days) I have to ask: who gave these people the right to co-opt my history? I mean, you see Christians arguing about the Creation, the Flood, the Commandments… for chrissakes, it’s not as if you wrote those stories. I mean, you have 2000 years of history to draw from, plus all that pagan stuff you assimilated, so why not come up with somewthing original?
Goddammit, come up with your own mythology!
Speaking as a slightly cranky Jew (fasting’s a bitch - you get after-effects for days) I have to ask: who gave these people the right to co-opt my history? I mean, you see Christians arguing about the Creation, the Flood, the Commandments… for chrissakes, it’s not as if you wrote those stories. I mean, you have 2000 years of history to draw from, plus all that pagan stuff you assimilated, so why not come up with somewthing original? >>
Oh, that’s rich. I can just picture some ancient Babylonian saying…“First they take our flood, then they make demons out of all of our gods…Can’t those people come up with their own religion?”
Goddammit, come up with your own mythology! >>
Shun’t that be “G-ddammit”?
The 10 commandments are too historical, just as the Bible as literature is every bit as worthy as study as the Iliad. >>
Sure, okay, as literature. Boy, what a terrible mess that would be, since “as literature” implies it’s a story, and if you go around doing that, well, some people are so not going to like it. I mean, can you imagine the speech the teacher would have to give, and how she’d have to tippytoe around “this is mostly a story, but some people believe it really strongly, and they sure can get a bug up their ass about it.”
<< The 10 commandments on the front steps might not be the best idea,>>
even if the other choice is a new Pauly Shore movie.
> as that does seem to clearly be the government endorsing one religion over another, but religion is a part of who we are as humans.
Whaddya mean, “we,” there, St. Anslem?
> It’s how we first came to seek answers for the world we live in. It’s the first quest for knowledge.
Somehow I think people who want religion in schools would object to it being presented as a sort of precursor science.
Still, I don’t recall religion being totally absent from school. We learned that the Pilgrims wanted to escape persecution in England, and came to the colonies to persecute non-believers, and the Spaniards thought it was good to teach the Indians about the Lord, which made it okay to enslave them, and I seem to even recall learning about the Church standing in the way of serious scientific inquiry for so many years…
<< Its historical existence and continuing effect on humanity certainly has a place in the Public school systems. >>
I wholeheartedly agree.
After screaming ‘ARRRGH!’ from the ass-kicking he knew he was gonna get, Scylla said:
What progress? More fighting? More lawsuits? More people who feel that their government thinks they are less valuable because of their religion (or lack thereof)? I don’t see any of these things as progress.
As I said, it is not a historical document in the same way as the Constitution, Declaration, etc. I didn’t say it absolutely wasn’t a historical document. In fact, I noted we could call pretty much anything a historical document, but that doesn’t mean it should be posted on the front lawn of the school.
Somebody from the SDMB who hasn’t posted in this thread yet sent me an e-mail suggesting we post the basic tenets of Satanism on the front doors. Hey, why not? They’re historical, too!
Going for the “Understatement of the Year Award” today?
No, it’s part of who some people are.
How do you know? Do we know that cavemen weren’t first trying to figure things out before just giving up and going with a religious belief?
I don’t see it as a first quest, I see it as a falling back. People have tried to figure things out, but if they couldn’t, well, then they bring religion in.
Now, would you want me teaching your kids about religion in a public school?
Oh, great! I’ll volunteer to teach all about its continuing effect on humanity. Let’s start with the war in the Middle East. And Northern Ireland. And… Heck, I’ll move right over to the school board who is willing to throw away money that should be spent on education because they want to force their religious beliefs on others.
Or it was an attempt by some to centralise power by gulling the fearful and feeble-minded into welcoming their status and ignorance in return for the comfort of unquestioning obedience.
picmr
On second thoughts that last post of mine was pretty graceless. I apologise for its unwarranted insulting tone.
My first choice would have been the Kama Sutra, (illustrated, of course and quite possibly annotated as well). It is a historical and least a quasi-religious document. Who knows, some of the kids might actually learn something useful.
In a sociology class, perhaps. It could even have a place in a comparative lit. class, but, as alluded to by others, the nature of the text makes it difficult to treat as simply a piece of literature. But we are not talking about the academic study of the nature of religion in general or Christianity in particular. Mounting the tablets in front of the school goes beyond study and into advocacy. The addition of other documents to provide “historical context” seems a pretty transparent attempt to skate around the wall between church and state. I agree with others who have pointed out that the extra documents do not, in fact, provide any “historical context” because they differ too greatly in the nature of their meaning. The others were codes of civil law, never claiming to be divine revelation.
I don’t understand where the compromise comes into the picture. This seems to be one of those situations that is “all or nothing”. If the monuments of the Ten Commandments, with or without the additional “historical context” are placed on the school grounds, from my perspective, it doesn’t seem much like a compromise. Could you clarify this so I understand a little better?
Ankh_Too
I talked about a specific potential compromise in my previous post to the one you quoted.
DavidB:
I wonder if the parents of any of the actual students have a problem with any of this, or if it is just a bunch of outsiders worrying about oppression.
I find the idea that the school district is being denounced for defending a lawsuit ridiculous. Of course they are. Why don’t we denounce the group that’s making us waste taxpayer dollars by attacking the school? Oh yeah, they are saving us from oppression.
You call me optimistic in my assessments, but God save me from people trying to save me.
That religion was the stepping stone to science is pretty well documented, it might make an interesting debate in and of itself. I’m surprised you’d disagree.
To me the fact that they chose the 10 commandments says that they were trying to be inclusive, not exclusive. The 10 commandments are something beleived by both Jews and Christians.
Show me the Hindustani or atheist kid that’s being oppressed and I may take this seriously. Until then I see the mistake being made by the school district as relatively minor compared to the world of grief they are being subjected to because of it. I see this as the same kind of mentality that creates mandatory sexual harassment classes and other PC bullshit.
This is not an issue, this is people for chrissakes.
This knee jerk response against religion in any aspect is ugly. Corporate sponsors fund programs at schools, and exchange they may get a soda machine or some free advertising.
This is the way the world works. This is a community, and before we going jumping in there so cocksure of ourselves on our crusade for right and freedom from oppression I think it’s incumbent that we actually figure out whether anybody is being actually oppressed, and whether we will ultimately do more damage than good.
These are humans, we can’t treat this like an engineering problem.
Take That!!
**
What does it matter who its coming from? There are a lot of school jurisdictions in Texas with the attitude of “nobody here has a problem with it,” but we must be consistant about these things. If it’s wrong, it’s wrong. Period.
By your logic, if a whole community thought it was just nifty to segregate, it would be so… I’m glad that some people who were not from Alabama made sacrifices in the '50s to help make equal rights, and I’m glad they made it their business.
**
Wait a second… You are saying here that school boards which try and implement illegal things are good? And that the organizations who try and uphold the Constitution of this country are bad? Wow… What a tenuous grasp on reality you must have.
**
Religion has also done more to interfere with Science. This is not relevant to the discussion, i don’t think, anyway.
**
And what of Islam? What of everyone else?
**
Your strawmen notwithstanding, there are a ton of examples of what happens to people who are somehow “different,” and the laws are there to protect them. Why must someone have a specific beef for you to realize that? Why must someone be made to feel ostricized somehow for you to say, oh, we should change it then?
**
It shouldn’t be an issue. Religious zealots make it an issue. The rights are there for you to post the 10 Commandments on any and every church and private property. Have fun! But you make it an issue for the schools. Why? Why is this so important? It couldn’t have anything to do with proselytizing, now could it… :rolleyes:
**
It has been shown that we are against knee-jerk reactions too. The ACLU has defended kids sent home for wearing crosses when a school board overreacts in the wrong way.
But this is not “any aspect,” this is a perfect example of what IS unconstitutional.
Yer pal,
Satan - Commissioner, The Teeming Minions
I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Six months, one day, 15 hours, 4 minutes and 22 seconds.
7385 cigarettes not smoked, saving $923.14.
Extra life with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 4 days, 15 hours, 25 minutes.
Satan:
"What does it matter who its coming from? There are a lot of school jurisdictions in Texas with the attitude of “nobody here has a problem with it,” but we must be consistant about these things. If it’s wrong, it’s wrong. Period. "
Perhaps you’re right. I don’t particularly favor the 10 commandments on the front step, but it doesn’t particularly bother me, either. It seems that we’re telling people that they SHOULD be offended about this. If we are truly fighting for PEOPLE then we should consider whether going in and wrecking a town’s budget and causing it National Aprobrium is worth it. Are we doing more damage by going after this, than it’s causing in the first place? I think it’s pretty obvious we are.
“By your logic, if a whole community thought it was just nifty to segregate, it would be so… I’m glad that some people who were not from Alabama made sacrifices in the '50s to help make equal rights, and I’m glad they made it their business.”
That’s a two for one argument, straw-man and slippery slope.
“Wait a second… You are saying here that school boards which try and implement illegal things are good? And that the organizations who try and uphold the Constitution of this country are bad? Wow… What a tenuous grasp on reality you must have.”
The obligatory ad hominem. I’m not above it either.
I’m sure the school board sees this as defending themselves from the crazy east coast liberal lawyers who want to run their lives, and thinks they’re absolutely justified in doing so. This attack on the town has all the subtlety of a fart in a bathysphere. It seems like somebody is trying to make an example here. It’s like instituting the death penalty for a parking ticket. In short, will the outcome be constructive for the pwople of the community, or will it be increasingly divsive and damaging. The latter, I’m sure.
“Religion has also done more to interfere with Science. This is not relevant to the discussion, i don’t think, anyway.”
I agree, a side issue.
“And what of Islam? What of everyone else?”
I dunno. Perhaps the elected school board for the community should figure out. They may have a better shot of doing it justly and in the best interest of the community, then some outside lawyers.
“Your strawmen notwithstanding, there are a ton of examples of what happens to people who are somehow “different,” and the laws are there to protect them. Why must someone have a specific beef for you to realize that? Why must someone be made to feel ostricized somehow for you to say, oh, we should change it then?”
Again, a slippery slope. The ten commandments I’m sure have a less ostracizing effect than an attack on a school district. One must judge the ill effects and act accordingly. Is enough wrong being committed that an attack on this community, and lawsuits that will effect the money available to educate children for years to come is justified? Or, are we being stubborn and making an example?
“It has been shown that we are against knee-jerk reactions too. The ACLU has defended kids sent home for wearing crosses when a school board overreacts in the wrong way.”
And that to me is sure proof that something is wrong here.
School boards shouldn’t be so worried that these things become an issue, and the ACLU shouldn’t have to jump in to defend such things.
I’m not saying that the school board is showing great judgement here. I’m saying our outrage seems a tad overzealous.
Scylla: *That religion was the stepping stone to science is pretty well documented, it might make an interesting debate in and of itself. I’m surprised you’d disagree. *
Yes, it’s well documented—for pagan polytheistic religion. We know that the astral omens observed by Babylonians in the early second (late third?) millennium BCE, the motions of planets and stars, were considered to be specific, consistent messages from the gods, and formed the basis of the earliest known quantitative predictive science: i.e., Babylonian mathematical astronomy. In the Year of the Golden Throne of Ammisaduqa—whoops, sorry, gearing up for my lecture on Friday and it sort of spills over into everything. 
So if we’re gonna talk in school about religion as the proximate cause of the development of science, we’re not gonna be talking about the Ten Commandments, but about precisely the “idolatrous Baal-worshippers” that these Ohio religion-boosters would shudder at. In fact, the ancient Hebrews explicitly rejected such attempts at astral prediction, as shown in Isaiah 47: “Come down, and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon, sit on the ground: there is no throne, O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate. Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers…Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee.” These very astrologers or tupsarru—aw shoot, there I go again.
In brief: if you really want to defend the presentation of religion in schools partly on the grounds that religion was the springboard of scientific practice, you’re going to have to discuss religious traditions that will set these “inclusive” promoters of the Ten Commandments screaming in outrage. I don’t think they’ll thank you for that defense.
You’re right, it’s a side issue. But here’s one that’s not, Scylla: you keep complaining about the problem being that “outside lawyers” are the ones stirring up all this fuss. But in fact, the ACLU doesn’t bring suits about civil liberties infractions except on behalf of plaintiffs who feel their rights are being directly infringed. The same is true in this case, where the ACLU’s “constitutional challenge, filed in U.S. District Court in Cincinnati, was brought on behalf of Barry Baker, a school district resident who said he finds the presence of the religious monuments on public property offensive to his sensibilities…Baker is being represented by Cincinnati attorney William Jacobs, who is acting as a volunteer attorney in cooperation with the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.” (See the rest of the ACLU press release.)
So no, it isn’t true that the whole of Adams County is just peachy-dandy with this blatant violation of SOCAS and the mean old east-coast liberal lawyers from the ACLU are just trying to stir up trouble. There’s at least one person directly affected who doesn’t think it’s a good idea (and there are very likely others, although the militantly anti-SOCAS atmosphere surrounding the case is probably pretty intimidating to them). The ACLU doesn’t go around begging people to file lawsuits so it can waste everybody’s time and money oppressing religious people. What happens is that when the anti-separatist majority is trying to steamroller the constitutional prohibition against endorsement of religion, one or more brave dissenters get pissed enough about it to call in the ACLU for financial, legal, and moral support. That’s what happened in Adams County, and the dissenters are going to win. It’s the anti-separatists who are stupidly wasting everybody’s time and money here (including mine, because my ACLU dues are helping pay to slap down this pigheaded irresponsible breach of SOCAS).