Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Need help-seperation of church and state argument-I didn't write this

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
adarling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:46 PM
Original message
Need help-seperation of church and state argument-I didn't write this
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 10:56 PM by adarling
read this and see how disgusting it is. From Indiana Daily Student. I am going to write a letter to the editor, but i was wondering what everyone thought about it- Please help-This girl is soo strange


While settling in to watch Joan of Arcadia -- a television series about a girl who meets God in everyone from a punk rocker to an elderly lady -- a disclaimer from the network appeared on the screen. The message rejected any relationship between the show's theme and the views of the network. Clearly, CBS didn't want to offend anyone.

I am not going to lie. IU's diversity immersion is new to me. Before arriving at IU, I attended an all-girls catholic high school down south. We found diversity in the different colored ribbons we wore in our hair. The ideas behind the push for diversity are completely valid. Discrimination is awful and anything that leads to its demise is worth pursuing. Yet an overstatement of diversity often does two things: accentuates our differences and discriminates against the established norm.

Somewhere along the line, the Supreme Court decided that prayer in public schools was illegal. Separation of church and state apparently trumps First Amendment rights of free speech. Let's be honest here. Separation of church and state does not and will never exist. We are a country founded on the basis of freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. The government is prohibited from endorsing a religion. Yet how does a display of the Ten Commandments endorse a religion anymore than a copy of Bill Clinton's My Life endorse his adulterous lifestyle? Agnostic? So what! Those who do not believe in God do not believe in the authority of the document and do not take it as truth. Therefore, it cannot be offensive. Worship a deity of another name? Seriously, does the name really matter? Let's agree on fundamental truths and concentrate on the actual content of the document. Ousting the "Our Father" does not teach tolerance. It teaches that differences can be mended by throwing out the opposition. Requiring a classroom of kids to be silent out of respect for their peers and their decisions to pray (or not) is tolerance in action.

Diversity training often begins with acknowledging differences. Too often, this agenda promotes pointing out discrepancies and "recognizing and respecting" them by not questioning or seeking to understand them. This is counter-productive. Respectful dialogue not only helps to inform dissenters, but also strengthens their own convictions by encouraging them to explain the origins of their personal faith. By shutting down dialogue between social groups, we lose the ability to establish common ground and build a relationship of understanding. Differences segregate; similarities solidify.

Tolerance involves tolerating the majority. Skirting around a belief in God to avoid "offending" others is not only counter-intuitive, but downright ridiculous. Our country is characterized by its diversity and promise of freedom. Hiding behind our opinions and beliefs in order to be politically correct is not the spirit of America. Neither is hate. We may only stand united if we kneel in respect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. The government is not purchsing the copy of
Bill Clinton's book but is paying for the erection of the Ten Commandment memorial....

Second, freedom of relision means just that, that anyone can exercises the freedom to worship as they wish...

But if you are a minority student, meaning a protestant in a primarily catholic area of town, would you want your version of the our father or would you succumb to the wishes of the majority and reciet the Catholic version.....

That is what is meant by freedom of religion. The freedom to practice, as you wish with out inflicting the "tyranny of the majority" on those who are citizens but choose to view things defferently than you.

You can not have freedom unless all citizens can enjoy the same freedom.....

BTW, I loved Joan of Arcadia. I liked they way the compared the Catholic religion with the spirituality revolving around Joan's relationship with god.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. Bull. Shit.
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 10:55 PM by mondo joe
"Somewhere along the line, the Supreme Court decided that prayer in public schools was illegal. Separation of church and state apparently trumps First Amendment rights of free speech."

Incorrect. You have free speech. You can't use publically funded resources to support your religion - that's different.

"Let's be honest here. Separation of church and state does not and will never exist. We are a country founded on the basis of freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. "

More bullshit. You can't have freedom OF religion without the government being religion-neutral, and that includes freedom FROM religion.

"The government is prohibited from endorsing a religion. Yet how does a display of the Ten Commandments endorse a religion anymore than a copy of Bill Clinton's My Life endorse his adulterous lifestyle? "

The 10 C's are publically funded and give the appearance of endorsement. If the government did the same with Clinton's book it might do the same - but it's not constitutionally forbidden.


"Agnostic? So what! Those who do not believe in God do not believe in the authority of the document and do not take it as truth."

What the fuck are you trying to say here? It's not relevant to the separation clause. The GOVERNMENT is not permitted to endorse religion, a religion, or favor any.

"Requiring a classroom of kids to be silent out of respect for their peers and their decisions to pray (or not) is tolerance in action."

They can pray on their own time and thheir own dime all they like. They have no business forcing other kids to sit through their religious ceremony.

Your subject line had it right: you do need help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adarling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. i didn't write the column
I am writing a letter to the editor and i wanted your opinions...do u think i would be a memeber of democratic underground and have these views..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I dunno - I've seen a number of bizarro opinions posted here now and
again. Consider my comments made to the author.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adarling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. i will and thanks again
it seems there are alot of wolves in sheeps clothing posting really wierd stuff. Sorry to have confused u on this. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:55 PM
Response to Original message
3. ".............. and I expect YOU to kneel in respect to MY beliefs, peon"
What a malignant soul.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mondo joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Indeed. A funny argument: "tolerance means you accepting my shit doesn't
stink, but keep yours to yourself".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adarling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. hahahaha
love it, thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
5. Check out this site...Americans United
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adarling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. thank u
i want to take her down a peg, she has been writing conservative crap like this all summer and they don't have a liberal counterpart to any of it, except the letters to the editor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Well this site will do it...
The primier organization protecting the constitutional seperation

Rev. Barry Lynn is the head...a really great guy!!!

You might also google the founders comments on it...plenty out there...one on my sig line
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HawkerHurricane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
12. Tell you what, lady...
we can have prayer in public school...
IF I GET TO PICK THE PRAYER.
And no, you don't get to know what prayer I intend to pick.
I don't get to pick? Then you don't either. My way or no way.

(Little miss Catholic doesn't know that the reason the Catholics have thier own school system is because they got tired of Protastant prayers in public school.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonzotex Donating Member (740 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
13. wow...where to begin!!?
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:16 PM by bonzotex
If you want to do a LTTE keep it short and sweet. This whole thing could be torn to pieces easily but I'd just stick with the paragraph:

"Somewhere along the line, the Supreme Court decided that prayer in public schools was illegal. Separation of church and state apparently trumps First Amendment rights of free speech.....etc...

That whole paragraph is full of right wing Christian nonsense. Pick one part and use it to demonstrate why this guy: (pick one)

a) is an idiot (ridicule him in a funny way)
b) doesn't understand US history or the Constitution (cite quotes, examples)
c) doesn't understand logical argument (point out a logical fallacy, there's plenty!)
d) is looking for repression where none exists (refute his whole premise)

some points to use:

Prayer in public school is not illegal, it's just illegal for the school to lead or endorse it.

Separation of Church and State was a passionately stated goal of the founders, and even though the Constitution doesn't say the words "Separation of Church and State" anywhere it also doesn't say "God" anywhere.

Nobody is placing 10,000 lb bronze graven images of Bill Clinton's book in Courthouses.

Having someone else's religion forced on you through the law of your County, State or Nation is pretty damn offensive to a lot of people, especially if you don't share that belief.

"Requiring a classroom of kids to be silent out of respect for their peers and their decisions to pray (or not) is tolerance in action." ...is not illegal, just retarded, a waste of valuable class time and not the issue.

Have fun!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adarling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. thanks
by the way...she was a girl...i am a guy at school trying to get her to stop torturing this liberal campus with her nonsense
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonzotex Donating Member (740 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. he, she, it... do the right thing! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GiovanniC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:22 PM
Response to Original message
16. So... Who Else Here is a Member of the United Church of Clinton's Penis?
Am I the only one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alcibiades Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #16
19. Kneel
Monica Lewinsky is. Many was the hour she spent, reverently kneeling in respect.

No, that thought is heretical. I must purify myself by making the sign of the distinguishing characteristic. All hail the bent one!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GiovanniC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. Perhaps We Could Erect a Statue of Clinton's Penis
on the statehouse lawn?

It could be displayed merely for the historical value.




PS... yes, I DID use both "erect" and "Clinton's Penis" in the same subject line!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alcibiades Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:46 AM
Response to Original message
17. Separation of church and state part one
Extremist Christian revisionist historians have been trying to hijack this countrys history by spreading the lie that America was established as an explicitly Christian nation, whereas the truth of the matter is that our founding fathers knew exactly what they were doing in creating a secular government that would guarantee religious liberty for all, including (and perhaps especially) unbelievers. And by God, its time we stopped them from so doing.

The central lie behind this effort is the concept that there is an identifiable group of Americans who people of faith. These persons are supposed to be more genuinely American and more virtuous than the rest of us. Whoever says faith in this way is trying to deceive you. Religious Americans are not comprised of people of faith, but rather people of many faiths. By framing the issue as one of a virtuous and devout majority of faithful versus a minority of decadent and depraved faithless, Republicans have held together a heterogeneous coalition of Protestants, Catholics and Jews, who actually only have political partisanship and conservatism in common.

The fact that the very notion of people of faith is grounded in a lie does not matter, unless we are able to expose it for what it is. In practice, whenever these people of faith do win, they wind up affirming a particular faith. The fact that the writer does not realize that the question of the name of God is a matter of great theological controversy reveals his historical ignorance, intentional or unintentional. Christians practice the worship of Jesus: Jews do notwhen school boards in Alabama and Georgia get to write the rules, will rural southern Jews (yes, there are such people) be forced to follow the practices of the majority?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alcibiades Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
18. and part two
Every religious practice referred to by the writer prefers one religious practice over another. Even Our Father assumes, or takes for granted, the holy trinity of the most Catholic Church, whose not-so-tender embrace many of our forefathers fled. Every version of the Ten Commandments that appears in English is taken from some translation of the Bible: depicting one to the exclusion of others clearly is a step towards endorsing one sects translation over all others. Worship a deity of another name? Sadly, this writer does not even apparently know the Ten Commandments, for, if he did, he would realize that Jehovah is a jealous god, etc. The name of God IS part of the actual content of the document. This writer thinks its grand for dissenters to explore the origins of their personal faith, as though this were somehow non-controversial. The point is that dissenters should not have to explore (i.e. justify) their faith for his benefit or anyone elses: thats why its called faith. The very idea that there are fundamental truths upon which we all can agree is belied by the very existence of the diversity of religions.

As in almost every instance of this argument against the separation of church and state, this one is rife with logical flaws: this either does not speak well of the quality of education poor the writer has had at her Catholic School down south, or, as is more likely the case, her ability to receive such an education. She begins her rant with a tirade against the disclaimer, and then goes on to ramble on about the diversity policy of the university and the separation of church and state. Though connections may be drawn between these things, she fails to do so. The CBS disclaimerwhich I have not readis probably not even directed at atheists or agnostics at any event, for they would find the show to be a harmless fantasy, but rather at people of faith such as Mr. Darling. I have not watched the show, but I suspect it is deeply heretical to at least one of the many religions out there. She claims to have an understanding of diversity developed at her all-girls Catholic school down south, where We found diversity in the different colored ribbons we wore in our hair, which is either an intentional trivialization of what diversity advocates advocate or evidence that she has no understanding of what diversity means at a large state school such as IU. I find it especially ironic that this attack on separation of church and state comes from someone who claims to have attended a Catholic school in the south, because if the majority in the south had their way, those schools would have been claimed by Southern Baptists and the students forcibly converted years ago.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 24th 2014, 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC