Go read the actual facts of the case, this prayer was a direct replacement for the lords prayer, students were forced to recite it until SCOTUS forced them to stop in the early 60’s.
The purpose of the payer, and the deity it was directed towards is very clear, and was the direct intention of the creators of said payer.
I know 
I was just profoundly tickled by his going “this is un-American !” one sentence, then “we have the right to exclude who we want, as Americans !” the next. 'Cause that’s what the idealized image of America is about, innit ? That’s what’s noble about the American Dream. Telling different people to fuck right orf. Out, out, back on the boat ! No tired huddled masses allowed ! 
I dunno, I’m easily amused I guess.
It paid for the wall. Put the banner on a private wall and all is well.
It is factual that you are wrong here. You may want to change it, and if you do, please, lead a charge to have the constitution amended.
Nonsense. None of those religions uses the words Heavenly Father. So you’re just promoting horseshit because you want your religion, to be promoted in public.
In any case, multiple religions would also be prohibited. As I said earlier.
Of course it can be in view of an atheist. But it has to be on private land.
Look at any church, you’ll find some ignorant nonsense on the sign out front. You are more than able to put ignorant nonsense promoting your imaginary friend on your walls, should you own some.
Atheists don’t crusade. That’s your thing.
In any case, it’s a public school, so you’re wrong.
I gather reality has little to no place in this issue.
Mostly I guess I just don’t understand where he comes off saying “this is unconstitutional !” and “that’s not what the law says”. A court ruled against it. What the fuck more expert opinion do you need ? Are you saying you know more about constitutional quandaries than a judge and a jury of your peers ? (I assume there was a jury, I know next to nothing about US judicial matters)
ETA: Jesus, this thread moves fast.
I saw the name of the thread, immediately saw GEEPERS, and just KNEW this was going to be some multipage thread.
Most atheists aren’t out to destroy “Christian rights.” It’s a form of pushing back against having religion shoved down the throat unwillingly.
It seems rather obvious that there is no inherent right for a public school to show preference for any given religion. Since the banner in question was quite clearly a Christian banner, then its presence was a clear endorsement of that religion. While this was the standard practice in the past, it is no longer acceptable, not just because of atheism, but because the USA has become a great deal more multicultural in the past 50 years. Applying societal norms from the middle 20th century to modern times is not only unproductive, it also promotes anger and fear of ‘the other’.
It is my humble opinion that the true story IS that of abridgment of rights. However, the rights that are being trampled upon are not those of the privileged majority, but that of the brave young woman who stood up for her individual rights. That she did so in the face of direct and offensive threats to her person by some members of that majority speaks greatly of her courage and honor and poorly of those heinous folks who pretend to follow a path of peace and understanding.
Right. And again, atheists were involved in some of those cases, but so were Jews, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Unitarians, and others. It turns out that it’s not only nonbelievers who want the government to stay away from religion. Some people with minority religious views also object to that kind of thing. In some cases, it’s because government-established religion is going to be bad for their denomination.
A more relevant question would be: can you find a single non-*religious *prayer that uses these words, I think. The Constitution precluding from establishing “religion”, not just *“a *religion”.
That’s kind of a contradiction in terms, isn’t it? I’m just responding here to GEEPERS’ ridiculous contention that “our heavenly father” is not specifically Christian. This is a phrase that appears nowhere before the New Testament and is used by Jesus himself several times, but somehow it’s nondenominational. The fact that the banner was introduced after the Supreme Court stopped the school from using the Lord’s Prayer - you know, the one that starts “Our father who art in heaven” [your precise wording may vary] - makes it as obvious as it could possibly be.
Proof that God is imaginary? Can you prove it? No?? Then your comment is nonsense.
The fact is that atheists detest Christianity to the point that they want it scrubbed from any public view. As long as Christians stay silent, you’ll get your wish.
You are welcome to preach on the street corner, or carry a sign. But you can’t hang your graffiti on public property and expect it to be there when you come back. You don’t have special rights.
<bolding mine>
Uhhh - guys - he admits that the banner is exclusively there to promote christianity - then he argues that it is not exlusive - I honestly don’t think GEEPERS even knows what hes arguing for or against any more - I think he just wants to argue.
I will give him/her credit that he is atleast adding cites and some info to the posts, even if he can’t be bothered to do enough research to realize that his ‘points’ actually have the opposite of the intended affect.
I’m still trying to figure out what ‘rights’ were taken away - would Christians not demand the removal of a ‘Satanic’ prayer banner? in fact haven’t ‘Christians’ argued for the removal of school mascots that were ‘devils’ ?
Prove that Superman is imaginary.
While you’re failing at that, my point wasn’t that God isn’t real. My point is that you don’t know what you’re talking about. You are asserting that removing the banner is unAmerican. That’s horseshit.
We have rules, and you don’t know them.
Not public view, but away from public facilities.
You’ll note, as I mentioned before, that a church can have whatever religious drivel it wants to on its sign. In full view of the public.
Just because you want Christianity to be endorsed by the government, that doesn’t make it legal. Sorry.
Can you prove that there isn’t a tea pot orbiting the earth between Earth and Mars? It is too small to be seen with any microscope.
You are again too narrow minded -
Athiests object to all religion or ‘gods’ equally.
Also, the default position is that an item/object is imaginary until proven real - so the very lack of evidence for ‘God’ is enough to qualify it as ‘imaginary’.
It’s funny; this seems like such an easy and clear issue, why can’t some people get it?
You can’t have a gov’t institution like a public school endorsing any religion in the USA. Even non Christian religions, that may even contradict Christianity.
That’s the line, and it seems very clear to me. And no matter how many posts and pages you try to explain this extremely simple point, people like GEEPERS still somehow get “The fact is that atheists detest Christianity to the point that they want it scrubbed from any public view.”
It is truly hopeless. The desire to be seen as a victim has taken over his or her mind, to the exclusion of absolutely everything.
It isn’t nonsense. It’s his opinion. We know your opinion on the subject. Neither of your views is actually relevant to the Constitutionality of prayer, but he seems to have a better grasp on the Constitutional issues. Atheists have been consistent here in saying that you do have the right to practice your religion as you see fit in your church, your home, and other places - including hanging signs, forming exclusive clubs, and so on. But you don’t have the right to use public property or funds for religious purposes and without conditions, and you don’t have a right to use a university’s facilities.
No they don’t, and no they don’t. And none of this is specific to Christianity.
How many of these alleged “Christians” threatened the life of the lone atheist girl and demanded her silence?
You and your ilk come of as raging hypocrites precisely because you demand rights and priviledges that you will not afford to others, and are quite well prepared to threaten violence and death to get them.
In that you are no less delusional and dangerous than radical muslims.
So let me posit something for GEEPERS.
Let’s assume that in a particular municipality, Atheists are the majority.
Do they have the right then to post an Atheists Creed on the walls of their Schools and require children to recite it?
Do Mormons? Buddhists? Elvisians?
If not, then how do Christians have this right and not the others?