You asked a question and I answered it. That is how the two things are different legally.
Listen, I’m an atheist and I don’t give a shit either way. But I think the official Muslim perspective is that Christians and Jews are ‘people of the book’ who all believe in the same god, and likewise as far as I know most Christians accept that everybody concerned is praying to the same god in different ways.
Sorry if I made it sound like I was attacking you. Since you’re an atheist, allow me a question? Marley23 ONLY!
Do you see this as the same no matter the religion?
The above is not to sideline the OP, just saving a hamster by not opening a GD thread about the same thing. (Though I should’ve known that was a better forum for this.)
If any mod wants to move it, well, actually, I guess you would anyway. 
OK, duffer. I actually use simulations produced by the company that produces the Islam one. so I kinda know what they have in them. Nothing in the exercise, in the simulation, is an endorsement of any religion.
Do I think the teacher may have gotten a little gung-ho with her simulation? Yes indeed.
Do I think she “promoted” Islam in a classroom? No.
Do I think that if this had been a Catholic/Baptist/Mormon simulation, there would have been an outcry? You betcha. But that is because Christianity is the dominant religion in the US, and it has a tradition, for better or worse, of trying to insinuate itself into the classroom. Islam is not a mainstream religion in the US, and therefore students in all likelihood have little or no exposure to the belief system. It therefore has a place in the contemporary classroom in a way that mainstream Christianity doesn’t. The simulation was education, not indoctrination.
Yes, there would have been a great hoo-haa if the teacher had run a Southern Baptist simulation. But then, when was the last time Muslims tried to get a copy of the Qur’an into every classroom in the US?
This paragraph is erroneous in two different ways. Firstly, there was no “worship” involved in the exercise, and secondly, Allah is your God, dude. “Allah” just means “God” in Arabic and Muslims explicitly identify Allah as being identical to the God of Judaism and Christianity. Do you know what Arabic Christians call God? They call him Allah.
So there is no “false worship” involved. In fact, there is no worship at all involved in the exercise.
It’s going to be difficult for you to teach them about other faiths since you obvioulsy don’t know anything about other faiths. Are you going to educate yourself first or just spout off out of your ass like you’re doing here?
You have me pegged wrong, duffer. As it happens, my wife is a Catholic who has decided to raise our daughter in the Church. I have made no objection. I would also have no objection to comparative religion exercises in her classroom as long as no specific endorsement of a particular religion was involved.
Well, I don’t think an extra atheist perspective will hurt anything…
No, it’s not the same. Christianity is the dominant paradigm in Western culture, and the slightest nod in its direction undermines the roots of an atheist upbringing. I want my son to be knowledgeable about his culture and history, and a lot of that is going to involve Christian history and beliefs. The constant bombardment with Christian speech and symbolism makes it hard to maintain perspective. “Pretending” to recite the Lord’s Prayer (or the Apostles Creed) carries weight in our culture that no Muslim ceremony can. Reciting Muslim prayers, kneeling, etc., indoctrinate an American child about as much as pretending to be an Indian during a Thanksgiving program (less, actually – the Thanksgiving program reeks of theism, however much you try to wash it out).
This is why I’m a better salesman than writer. Face-to-face I can have real-time interaction and have tonal-inflection in what I say. I’m not looking for a defense of sub-sets of Chritianity versus other religions. But I see where you’re coming from.
Again, this is not about religion. It’s the politics of the ruling. If seperation of Church and State exists, that should mean all religions. I’ve seen a good number of threads here that claim religion as a whole has no place in the public US arena.
Now off to respond to DtC’s post.
It probably won’t mean much, but I got an A in World Religions, a B in Native Studies, and a B- in Native Origins (very religious) at the University of North Dakota. And I happen to read a lot. I’m not as dumb as I appear.
Yes and no. It’s the same in that teacher-led worship in the classroom is not permissible no matter what the religion is. This does indeed come close to the line. While I’m not sure this exercise is unconstitutional, if I was a student here I would refuse to participate. I quit saying the pledge at about age 14 and I see some similarities here. Even if they’re ‘just words,’ I won’t say them.
It’s not the same for the reasons Nametag gives.
I can accept that. I don’t agree, but I see where you’re coming from. Hell, the pit never was thought to change minds, right? Thanks for the insight to your side of the debate.
substitute meant for thought :smack:
We have something in common. I also got an A in World Religions at the University of North Dakota (I actually majored in Religion there). One of the things that was taught in that class (is it still taught by Scott Lowe?) was that the God of Islam is the same as the the God of Christianity and Judaism.
I’m glad you took an interest in NA spirituality. Would it bother you if your kids were asked to roll play a vision quest or a pipe ritual in school? (without actually smoking the pipe, of course)
This was back in 1995, but I’m pretty sure Lowe wasn’t the prof. I’ll have to do some digging if you want the prof I had.
I had a lot of exposure to Native Americans growing up as my parents are both from this area (ND and NW MN) I would have no problem with them participating in “mock” ceremonies. As long as they didn’t involve my kids actually prostrating and worshipping a different deity than what they are raised in. Now with that said. I can offer my NA Studies prof.
His family on his dad’s side was Chippewa from Wisconsin, which got my interest. Don’t quote me, but I think his mom was from Michigan or Maine. Anyway, I’ll say he’s a wonderful and eloquent teacher of the culture. But. There’s always a but, he is really, really, really far left.
If anyone saw the ESPN broadcast about the use of Indian names, you may remember the part of the UND Fighting Sioux. Ralph Englestad (owner of Ceasar’s Palace in Las Vegas when he was still alive) donated $100 million for a hockey arena (better than Xcel Arena twinnies according to most ) and another $100 million to the University with the stipulation that the Sioux name be kept.
Anyway, Gagnon was one of the leaders of the “funeral procession”. (They actually carried an empty coffin from Memorial Union to the Arena to signify the death of the Sioux name) Anyone (most of you) unfamiliar with UND, keep in mind there are some serious set-asides for Natives thanks to the evil Ralph.
Oh yeah, must stop ranting and give the cite. Sorry, for the mini-rant.
SHIT, regarding post #52 first line, that date should be 1999. '95 was my first year at UND. I kinda bounced in and out of the hallowed halls. Sorry for any confusion.
duffer isn’t, but apparently Nametag is.
I am wondering why Islamic theism doesn’t have the same terrible effect, if in fact Allah is the same as God. Muslim prayer, even simulated, must be the same as Christian prayer - it is “the slightest nod” that overthrows years of careful atheist training.
As would, presumably, saying “under God” in the PoA, singing Christmas hymns in December, etc. But not simulated Islamic prayer. Hmmm…
I wonder what the reaction would be if a teacher told a student to write a paper on fundamentalist Christianity, but not to say anything negative about it. For that matter, a warning not to write a paper about the US in general that mentioned anything negative would be attacked as an example of irresponsible teaching.
Regards,
Shodan
I’ve got to disagree with you here. I have no problem with the kids picking an Islamic name (every foreign language class does that). I’m ok with them learning and being tested on whether or not they know a prayer (even if that’s an oral exam and they must recite it back to the teacher). I’m ok with them learning how a prayer rug is used. I can even differentiate between the teacher (in the course of a role play) stopping the class dead for 5 minutes three times/day to show what it would be like during the call to prayer and a “moment of silence.”
But having students go through the motions of praying while reciting a prayer crosses the line for me. At that point, for me, it goes from an educational experience and learning about another religion and culture to state sponsered prayer. The kids, at that point, are no longer learning about the ritual - but performing it, and that bothers me.
That’s the part that gets me. It looks (from my perspective, anyway) like this teacher thought/knew/suspected that the students might not like the instruction, and if the paragraphs they did on this exercise were displayed (as is sometimes-to-often the case in public schools), it might not be totally the good thing for paragraphs to have things like “I didn’t like where we had to kneel praying for ten minutes. It felt weird, and I wanted to stop but I wasn’t allowed to.”
Almost sounds like censorship, but I am going to guess that this is a separate discussion.
[QUOTE=Shodan]
duffer isn’t, but apparently Nametag is.
So why are you quoting me? I haven’t said that Christianity should be treated any differently. I disagree with Nammetag, although I understand where s/he is coming from. I just don’t think the government can treat religions differently. If a religion cannot be discriminated against because it is a minority it can’t be discriminated against because it’s a majority either.
What exactly is “careful atheist training?” I’ve never heard of it. Where does one acquire this training?
Hymns and the POA are not simulations. They are genuine expressions of faith. The POA is especially problematic because it is a coerced expression of faith which implicitly makes national allegience contingent on monotheistic belief.
I could see some limited use of Christmas carols in an educational context, as long as the music of other faiths was also represented and the school took no position on the truth or falsity of any particular religion or faith.
If a student was asked to give a factual summary of the beliefs of Christian Fundamntalists without making any value judgements, I wouldn’t have a problem with it.
Invalid analogy. The government is not forbidden to take official positions on US history.
Even so. If a student was asked simply to give factual summary of the events of WWII without inserting any personal opinions, what would be the problem with it?
The difference is that when the students are reciting the pledge, they are not reciting it as a learning experience to learn about the pledge, but are actually taking the pledge. It’s a huge, important difference, to me at least. The kids in the class reciting the Muslim prayer are not praying. Just like Geena Davis, actress, was not actually summoning Beetlejuice. She was reciting lines.
And whether or not the kids are taking it seriously means nothing. It is the state asking them to take a pledge that raises the “endorsement” red flag.
Do you think this is an anti-Christian thing? I would have the exact same problem with the pledge if it said “under Allah” or “under Cthululu” or “under Og” or “under Clapton”.
I admit I’m not clear at all what you are asking here. Are you speculating those four reasons as why I feel the way I do, and asking me if any are correct? None of them are. I make a sharp distinction between reciting words as a learning exercise, and reciting words as a pledge or prayer. The class with the Muslim material sounds like they are reciting the words simply as students would recite any material, no different from reciting any other material, and is clearly not a prayer. They can recite any religious words they want, including Christian, for all I care, as long as it is in the context of simply learning about the religion, and not an endorsement of it or pledge to it.
I hope I answered your question; if not, perhaps you can re-word it.
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,595067394,00.html
Duffer, is this another “dipshit with too much power”?
duffer, by your logic, then an actor who is playing a priest is actually praying when he performs a “Mass” in a scene in a movie. :rolleyes: So I guess any Catholic actor has to play a Catholic, otherwise, if he plays someone of another faith it’s “big shit.”
Hey, guess what? My sister goes to a Catholic university and they actually visited a mosque in one of her classes! Whatta ya know?
And no, if it were a Christian exercise, I wouldn’t have a problem, either, because it’s PRETEND. You know, make believe?
You ASSUME people are going to flip out if it were Christian. You know what happens when you assume, right?
Although I think the teacher probably went a bit far in her lesson plan-having the kids learn about the routines and maybe just having one demonstration is enough.