Oh, Christ on a stick. I’ll make this short so I can take time to cool off a bit. (New skill learned here! 
)
Before anyone defends or flames it, please try to get to the end. Cali Dopers I’d especially like to hear from if you know of this judge.
I’d love to see the national uproar if this involved the Christian faith. Here it is. And I know the immediate reaction will be to the source writer, but I’ve seen fewer retractions there than the NYT. It’s most likely verified and trustworthy.
Funny, I’ve seen fewer retractions in the Weekly World News than in the New York Times. Wonder what that says about their journalistic integrity?
Come on, don’t you have a source other than Newsmax? And let me say right off the bat that WorldNetDaily doesn’t count either. Google News searches are bringing up nothing for me.
Maybe they don’t print retractions because most of their articles are bullshit.
Googling “Phyllis Hamilton” + Muslim bring up a lot of hits… and they all seem to be batshit loony right-wing sites. Verified my ass. They didn’t check and neither did you. As far as retractions go, printing them also means you have the integrity to admit when you’re wrong, so not printing them hardly means that you’re always right. :rolleyes:
Guin and Already, maybe this is better? Neither of you offered “acceptable” news sources so I’ll go completely opposite of NewsMax.
And calling it bullshit because you don’t agree doesn’t make it so. :rolleyes:
Just because the judge may have been solidly wrong in one case doesn’t mean he isn’t solidly correct (legally) on his abortion ruling.
The Supreme Court struck down a nearly identical partial birth abortion bill from Nebraska STENBERG v. CARHART back in 2000. The judge in this case is simply following precedent.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
See above post. When did the SF Chronicle become right-wing? :eek: :wally
Okay, a reliable source. If this is actually what happened, the exercise sounds stupid but I can see why it doesn’t qualify as an endorsement of religion.
This isn’t an argument against abortion. It’s a rant about what I perceive to be a dipshit bitch with too much power. YMMV and all that good stuff, but I’ll be damned if a teacher is going to try to make my kids think they’re “Muslim for the day.” And then tell them not to say the Pledge of Allegiance because it has “under God” in it. Again, this isn’t about the abortion ruling, so let that one go.
Being a bit premature, aren’t you? You don’t know which way the court is going to rule on that case yet.
YMDV. Looks like the teacher was leading them through pretending to be Muslim. What’s your issue with that?
That ain’t pretending anything; that’s implying the existence of a specific religious being.
FWIW, I think the exercise, as detailed in the article, could have been done better, but I don’t think there’s enough in the article to clearly damn (or praise) this teacher or the judge.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36118
http://www.blessedcause.org/Indoctrination/ByronCountyShocker.htm
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/000407.php
http://www.wric.com/Global/story.asp?S=1561274
… and perhaps this is reputable enough fer ya …
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=5291&catcode=24
The majority are from Christian/WooWoo sites, but sfgate is fairly reliable.
If anything, this thread serves as a nice example of how NewsMax distorts a story to serve their agenda. The first paragraph says that Judge Hamilton “approved of Muslim prayer in schools when Federal rulings ban all other denominational prayers and activities.” Such a sentence suggests that Muslim prayers are allowed in school while other prayers are not. However, that is not what happened. In this instance, the judge merely ruled that the activity was educational, rather than religious, in nature.
Thanks for the link; I do trust the Chronicle more (although I admit it does have some left-wing bias).
Was the exercise an unconstitutional endorsement of Islam? Eh, when we learned about Islam in my high school, we had to learn the shahada (“There is no God but God, and Muhammad is the Messenger of God”). So I suppose having to memorize it and say it/write it on command counts as a “recitation.” I’m guessing that that’s the type of “non-devotional recitation” in question. And we had to do the same with Catholicism and different types of Protestantism, if I recall correctly. Every world history class worth its salt contains some study of Christianity, and I don’t see anybody complaining about that. So there isn’t really a “double standard” here as far as I can tell.
That said, while I do think role-playing activities are often very educational in the study of history, making students “play” at being members of another modern culture, especially involving religious elements of that culture, is offensive to the culture being portrayed. It trivializes the seriousness of a religion and a way of life. So the ruling may have been correct legally, but I think the exercise was inappropriate on other grounds.
Are you just too mad to tell the difference? One is a role-playing exercise, the other is not. I still think it was stupid, but there is a difference here.
Here’s a PDF of the actual judgment, the court document:
I may very well be, but re-read paragraph 4 of the San Fran site. The teacher had them say actual Muslim prayers. I’m just curious about the lack of uproar here. If this was a “fundie” making Jewish, Muslim, Atheist kids recite Christian prayers there would have been at least a dozen Pit threads calling for the heads of all Republicans (As we seem to have a monopoly according to some Dopers).
So what it comes down to is, a public servant (I didn’t see anything about it being a private school) is requiring children to “act like a Muslim” when it can easlily be asserted that it would go against a child’s religious beleifs. See Commandment #1. Christians don’t beleive Allah is the one true God.
How this isn’t seen as an endorsement is beyond me. Maybe someone can explain the difference, but it’s gonna have to be a pretty good argument. John Ashcroft = Satan ain’t gonna do it for me.
I can’t think of a place in America where children would have to be taught about an unfamiliar culture that included Christian fundamentalism. But if you can come up with one, I wouldn’t object to my child studying that culture and pretending to be a fundamentalist Christian as long as she didn’t have to seriously smote anybody.
The teacher was not asking the children to actually believe in something other than what they really believe. She was asking them to pretend. I once pretended that I was a Sugar Star Fairy. That didn’t mean that I really believed in fairies.
Some Christians believe they are the same. I think that Muslims believe they are the same. But if Allah is different and isn’t the one true God, then he isn’t going to hear their prayers anyway and the real true God is too smart to be offended my little kids pretending.
But if the one true God is the sort who would damn these little children to hell for unknowingly breaking the First Commandment, then who the hell could worship something like that?
With that said, I think that a study of comparative religions is probably best left to an elective course in high school.
Zoe, I see where your argument is going, but I want to make it clear to all that this is NOT a rant about religion. It’s about the politics of the situation.
I’m still waiting for someone to defend the act of having these kids pray to a god they may not worship. Forced on them by a public school teacher. I learned about the Jewish faith in scholl, but was never asked to wear a yarmulke. I learned of Islam without ever kneeling toward Mecca and praising Allah.
This is alomst a pitting of the lefties on these boards that would call for blood if CNN reported that Iraqi schoolkids were told to genuflect and recite the Lord’s Prayer in the interest of teaching them about Christianity. I’m sure that would go over smoothly. Well, same thing. The kids weren’t asked to study prophets, tenets, history, dogma. They had to pick a new name (not a big deal, I did in in French class), recite Muslim prayers (still ok, but borderline IMHO. You have to know what someone prays and to whom to understand a religion).
But kneeling and praying (even simulated) is way too fucking far. Again, I challenge the Dopers that would call for Rumsfeld’s head if Iraqi’s were even asked to genuflect, to defend this.
News to me. Do they think that the French are heretics because they worship Dieu?