Stupid Republican idea of the day

There are two issues with the bill as I understand it:

  1. It allows students to give religious speeches at official school functions (including opening the school day and other non-voluntary forums). The school is instructed to make clear that the views of the student are not the views of the school, but it still means that students will be forced to listen to other students pray and proselytize at school and school events.
  1. It prohibits students from being marked down for religious views expressed in homework. While it says that ordinary academic standards apply, the model local policy the bill would require only address religious views in an English class (students can use Psalms as an example of a poem, etc.) where I would be more concerned with religion turning up in science or social studies homework.

Bottom line it adds nothing to religious freedom as students are already allowed to practice their religions themselves, but it will allow students to force their beliefs on other students and potential provide justification for students and parents to try and force their religious beliefs into the science class.

Well, they are so close together.

Inexplicably so, in fact. If there’s any other state where Sarah Palin could be a governor . . .

At least Half Governor.

And what will happen the very first time some kid invokes this freedom to recite from the Koran? I suggest the blatant hypocrisy of the legislators will be highlighted for all to see.

Silly rabbit! Religious freedom is only for Christians.

Sort of already happened with school vouchers.

Oh, caro mi Jesu . . .

Yeah, well, we settled that dispute.

As Brooke Allen notes in The Nation:

Abraham Lincoln was an atheist, BTW. In his youth he wrote a book debunking Christianity – and then burned the manuscript (no copy survives) when a friend pointed out how publishing it would doom his political ambitions. You can read the whole story in What Lincoln Believed: The Values and Convictions of America’s Greatest President, by Michael Lind.

This thread deals with the Stupid Republican idea of the day, why do you mention Lincoln? That is like comparing Arianna Huffington to Aristotle by dint of both being Hellenic.

[QUOTE=Bryan Fischer]
The First Amendment was written by the Founders to protect the free exercise of Christianity.
[/QUOTE]

Wow. I remember reading something almost identical to this about 40 years ago. It was in the National Lampoon, and I thought it was pretty funny. Now it’s what passes for serious Republican thought.

ETA: @For You: whoosh.

Oh, well, if it’s “in”.

That’f what fhe faid!

It’s impossible to know Washington’s mind, but his use of euphemistic religious language in public statements may have just been a nod of inclusivity toward his non-religious compatriots. He was at least nominally a Christian, having served on the vestry of the Truro parish Anglican church in the 1760s and 1770s.

Not necessarily disagreeing with you or Michael Lind, but (a) debunking Christianity would make Lincoln no more of an atheist than it did for Jefferson and Paine. It would just make him a non-Christian.

And (b) given how many times he invokes the Almighty in public and private, it would make his surprisingly hypocritical.

“Surprisingly”?

I guess I hold Lincoln to a higher standard than the average politician. Especially the average Republican.

Lincoln wasn’t born Lincoln, he became Lincoln. The man who outfoxed Stephen Douglas was a shrewd politician and conniver. Had he known he would be staying up all night writing pardons so dull-witted farm boys wouldn’t be shot for falling asleep on guard duty, would he have done it? Probably not, but then he never would have become Lincoln.

Way back in Post #9758, I quoted Thomas Jefferson’s autobiography on the intent of Virginia’s law respecting freedom of religion:

I don’t think you can be any more clear than that.

He married Douglas’ GF, but did he ever outfox Douglas in any other way? I recall the Lincoln-Douglas debates were part of a campaign for the U.S. Senate which Douglas won (that is, the Illinois legislature picked him).

There was the small matter of the 1860 Presidential election, too.

Plus the general defeat of the pro-slavery philosophy that Douglas represented.