Everyone== Believers in the god of Abraham?
Nope-it’s a protection of everyone’s rights.
I had missed this, but I doubt they do, buddy. What with Shiva being the Destroyer, the invincible standard of might and terror and so forth. Plus he/she/it doesn’t kip in heaven either, but atop Mount Kailasa in Tibet (which is also the center of the Universe. Roll with it).
In fact, come to think of it I’m pretty sure “heaven” is, in fact, a specifically Christian word.
How do you know that she hates religion? Is it because she wanted this banner taken down? If that’s your only evidence, how do you explain the large number of theists in this thread that agree with her? Do they also hate religion?
Did you ever read those comics before they had gay characters in them?
No one has tried to interfere with anyone else’s rights to free speech. Those who like that banner are quite free to hang it up. The issue is that they want the school to hang it up as an endorsement of Christian beliefs. That sort of tyrannical proselytizing is not a good thing.
(And for the record, no one is prevented from praying in school, either. The ACLU has defended a number of students whose right to pray or read scripture in school was abrogated by school authorities. However, the right to pray in school as a private and personal experience is different from the use of the school facilities to coerce other people to participate in those same prayers.)
“As long as there are math tests, there will be prayers in school.”
Well, technically the Green Lantern is a muscular young man in ultratight spandex, who has jewelry-based powers and whose anathema is a colour. I’m not sure there ever *was *a “before Green Lantern was gay”.
Nobody is doing that.
Correct, as an atheist I would be marching arm in arm with Christians if the local school district said students, by their own free will were not allowed to pray.
What I do not want, and what is against the law, is the school using government resources in a way to officially endorse any religion OR non-religion.
I know I do not speak for all atheists but I have and will always fight for the freedom of religion, even when it is not mine.
Technically, the “Green Lantern” being referred to is the one from 1940-Alan Scott. His power comes from a magical green flame, his weakness is wood, and he looks like this.
You may want to read the facts of the case, it was an official school payer that students were required to recite until the courts made them stop, it was a direct replacement for the lords prayer and the board outright admitted it was intended to be christian.
They had the offer to have it up without the god references and the refused, knowing they would lose the court case.
Unless, of course, it’s an atheist doing it.
So forcing the school to obey the law of the land is tyrannical proselytizing?
“Asking the school to remove the prayer” does not equal “tyrannical proselytizing” any more than “asking you to stop hitting me” equals “me punching you in the face”.
As violent and outspoken that christians become when challenges to their faith occurs like this, there is no reason to wonder why religion should be illegal in the public eye. Someone disagrees with a fairytale and here come the death threats to a teenager, who seems to be much more intelligent than any believer I’ve ever met.
Those who think innocent school banners like this are NOT offensive are simply not intelligent. I’m American, I pay taxes, and I don’t support any aid to ridiculous ideas as to upholding barbaric ideas as to even suggesting to others that there’s a god who loves us.
Please show me this god, and it better not be called Yahweh, Jehovah or Jesus.
Now, if it’s name is Homer Simpson, I might consent to that.
Thing is, as soon as these ideas are even discussed at some school board, student council, whatever, it should be shot down. Why do the closed minded insist on thrusting illogical ideas down our throats in what many seem to be thought of as an innocent school banner? It’s not innocent. It’s disgusting to even have the word “god” mentioned on money, courtrooms and in political debates.
Be human first. YOU are first. Not some misogynistic, closed-minded set of rituals you’ve never studied but still believe in as a “path.” 100% support for Jessica. None for anyone who ever put a nickel in a collection plate.
I think the answer is in the question: closed-minded, irrational people act in a closed-minded, irrational fashion.
Which is not to say that all (or even most) Christians are closed-minded or irrational, but the ones that are tend to turn the crazy up to 11. Frankly I think I’d be even more offended by what went on at that school board meeting if I were a Christian, given the idiotic behavior some of those folks engaged in in Jesus’ name.
Agreed. But to what end? I think many believers, including members of the school board, aren’t outspoken, but just as irrational and violent (with words, not actions) by saying nothing.
Even the believers that have spoken against having this school motto/banner in the first place thought it was absolutely fine until other believers threatened or dove to the internet/churches for support. IOW, it’s not an issue until someone says, “What? I don’t agree with this.”
It tells me that the individual-- no matter how devout they think they are-- is more moral than a group of deluded individuals who are polled, sign petitions and pray at a church. If a believer thought this was not a fair idea of faith, constitution, etc., then why wait for a headline rather than debunking it in the first place?
What was evident from the school board meeting was the extreme backpedaling from board members who might reasonably have taken the banner down until it became obvious that the frothing crazies in the gallery would vote them out of office for doing so. Sadly, such people do have a disproportionate amount of influence by the sheer force of their whackadoodleness - “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity” and so forth.
So the case went to trial because the school board were too cowardly to follow the law - they knew they’d lose but at least they could blame the courts for the decision and thus wash their hands of it (and never mind the money it all cost - they could blame that on the girl. Winning!).
GEEPERS: if a public schhol’s student body decided to do a blackface minstrel show, but the lone African American student objected. . .