Illinois moment of silence ruled unconstitutional

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090122/ap_o...of_silence

"The statute is a subtle effort to force students at impressionable ages to contemplate religion,"

Uh, so much for teaching kids "critical thinking." How do you think critically if you aren't allowed to contemplate? Don't we teach students at impressionable ages lots of things? Many controversial: Global warming, evolution, democracy is good, ice dancing is a sport, etc.

This statute is forcing no one to participate in any one religion, and it allows any student to contemplate the idea of not participating in religion.

Thanks ACLU, for wasting tax dollars on this court case and for dumbing down public school kids even further.

Government schools these days exist for one reason, to educate obedient government subjects.

.

I was in a College Class one fine morning and had a DEA Senior Agent was Instructor for that Block ..... the main topic: "Interpersonal Relationships".

The DEA and a couple of other agencies had been involved with several covert Sting Operations that had went badly and Agents were killed - - this happened just weeks before this agent came to our class and even though he was able to hold his composure in check, he still requested that we 'Stand and Offer a "Moment of Silence" in honor of these Fallen Men' ....

We rose and most bowed our heads and a couple of guys started to pray sorta out loud - - the DEA Agent began screaming at them to "SHUT UP" and that he did not ask for Payer .....

He said "a moment of silence is meant for contemplation, not religious vetting" .....

So with that definition of "Moment of Silence" tattooed into my Brain, this "State Law for a Moment of Silence", seems to me to be calling for "Self Awareness and Soul Searching" rather than forcing religion down anyone's throats.

I love how we are supposed to Embrace Gay Marriage and Abortion, but we can't Handle a "Moment of Silence" ????????

We are truly on the Broken Brink as a Sane Society .....

.

(01-22-2009 09:19 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Uh, so much for teaching kids "critical thinking." How do you think critically if you aren't allowed to contemplate?

I guess that's the part that you're referring to as ridiculous.

It's ridiculous to suggest that a proxy for school prayer is not the same thing as introducing critical thinking, no matter how upset you are over this case. The "moment of silence" is crafted as a way to permit student prayer in school without specifying that it must be a Christian prayer.

Now, my view is that I would rather not have it in schools, but I'm not convinced that the constitution prohibits the general concept of a "moment of silence", nor am I willing to put much effort into fighting it unless it is abused (as such things are wont to).

However, in this case, this is what puts this case in violation:

Quote:The "teacher is required to instruct her pupils, especially in the lower grades, about prayer and its meaning as well as the limitations on their 'reflection,'" Gettleman ruled.

"The plain language of the statute, therefore, suggests and intent to force the introduction of the concept of prayer into the schools," he said.

It is hard to conceive that this is anything other than an attempt to put teachers in the position of instructing kids how to practice their religious beliefs by praying.

(01-22-2009 03:45 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 09:19 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Uh, so much for teaching kids "critical thinking." How do you think critically if you aren't allowed to contemplate?

I guess that's the part that you're referring to as ridiculous.

It's ridiculous to suggest that a proxy for school prayer is not the same thing as introducing critical thinking, no matter how upset you are over this case. The "moment of silence" is crafted as a way to permit student prayer in school without specifying that it must be a Christian prayer.

Why would that be a problem? The whole argument of separation of church and state is that the state isn't supposed to prescribe a specific religion.

Now even that turns out to be a problem.

Quote:Now, my view is that I would rather not have it in schools, but I'm not convinced that the constitution prohibits the general concept of a "moment of silence", nor am I willing to put much effort into fighting it unless it is abused (as such things are wont to).

Not only does the Constitution not prohibit it, it expressly protects such activities.

Quote:However, in this case, this is what puts this case in violation:

Quote:The "teacher is required to instruct her pupils, especially in the lower grades, about prayer and its meaning as well as the limitations on their 'reflection,'" Gettleman ruled.

"The plain language of the statute, therefore, suggests and intent to force the introduction of the concept of prayer into the schools," he said.

It is hard to conceive that this is anything other than an attempt to put teachers in the position of instructing kids how to practice their religious beliefs by praying.

This gives no evidence of being a violation of anything, except for the stretched sensibilities of a trivial few...who then impose their will on the many.

I doubt any teacher could successfully teach entire classes as to how they should pray to satisify their religion, nor is there any indication they were supposed to try.
Quite the opposite, it's clear they were given the opportunity to explain that freedom of religion is protected in this country, and they have an opportunity to choose to participate or not.

So much for pro-choice.

Quote:Adam Schwartz, senior staff counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the organization was pleased with the decision "to strike down a statewide law that coerced children to pray as part of an organized activity in our public schools."

This is insane. Being silent for a moment amounts to being "coerced to pray?" That's an outlandish assumption and typical of the ACLU. I'm an atheist and I don't think there's anything wrong with a moment of silence - it a gesture of respect. When I was a kid the last thing I did in church was listen to the priest, I was thinking about everything else other than religion.

This is just more mind control jibberish from a group that says they're opposed to mind control.

(01-22-2009 09:46 AM)Rebel Wrote:  Government schools these days exist for one reason, to educate obedient government subjects.

+1...Prussian system

(01-22-2009 03:45 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 09:19 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Uh, so much for teaching kids "critical thinking." How do you think critically if you aren't allowed to contemplate?

I guess that's the part that you're referring to as ridiculous.

It's ridiculous to suggest that a proxy for school prayer is not the same thing as introducing critical thinking, no matter how upset you are over this case. The "moment of silence" is crafted as a way to permit student prayer in school without specifying that it must be a Christian prayer.

Now, my view is that I would rather not have it in schools, but I'm not convinced that the constitution prohibits the general concept of a "moment of silence", nor am I willing to put much effort into fighting it unless it is abused (as such things are wont to).

However, in this case, this is what puts this case in violation:

Quote:The "teacher is required to instruct her pupils, especially in the lower grades, about prayer and its meaning as well as the limitations on their 'reflection,'" Gettleman ruled.

"The plain language of the statute, therefore, suggests and intent to force the introduction of the concept of prayer into the schools," he said.

It is hard to conceive that this is anything other than an attempt to put teachers in the position of instructing kids how to practice their religious beliefs by praying.

I tend to agree...This appears to be veiled attempt to get a foot into the door for school prayer. Prayer..moments of silence..reflection..ect...All can be done anytime, by any student...its not necessary that it be done as a group activity. I don't have a problem though with students on their own accord, joining together for these activities outside of the classroom.

(01-22-2009 05:14 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 09:46 AM)Rebel Wrote:  Government schools these days exist for one reason, to educate obedient government subjects.

+1...Prussian system

You're right about the obedient part. But I kind of doubt that education is the focus. It seems to me that the curriculum has been dumbed down over the years. More and more kids have less grounding in language, math, and the sciences than previously, unless the kid is self-motivated. I think schools today exist to mold people into a box. One box that fits all, and keeps us all in line...

Can't have a moment of silence at a school because someone might think there's a hint of religion to it but we can have people of religion saying prayers at Obama's inauguration. Why didn't the ACLU sue to stop that?

Quote:Warren offered a prayer that was conciliatory in tone and began on an inclusive note. He quoted the Shema, the most common prayer in Judaism, and also alluded to the Islamic formulation of referring to God, or Allah, as “the compassionate and merciful.”

“Almighty God -- our Father. Everything we see, and everything we can’t see, exists because of you alone. It all comes from you. It all belongs to you. It all exists for your glory. History is your story,” Warren prayed. “The Scripture tells us, ‘Hear, Oh Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one.’ And you are the compassionate and merciful one. And you are loving to everyone you have made.”

Warren ended on a more controversial note, closing his prayer “in the name of the one who changed my life” and referring to the Hebrew, Arabic, Spanish and English names for Jesus. He then led the two million-plus observers in the Lord’s Prayer
http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=...&Itemid=53

.

SO .....

What a lot of you are saying, is that every time you take a moment out of a hectic day to just be silent and contemplate and quiet your soul .... you are actually and subconsciously forcing your self to be "Religious" ??????

You guys are so full of shyte .... muwahahahahahhahahaaa

.

(01-22-2009 06:11 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Can't have a moment of silence at a school because someone might think there's a hint of religion to it but we can have people of religion saying prayers at Obama's inauguration. Why didn't the ACLU sue to stop that?

Quote:Warren offered a prayer that was conciliatory in tone and began on an inclusive note. He quoted the Shema, the most common prayer in Judaism, and also alluded to the Islamic formulation of referring to God, or Allah, as “the compassionate and merciful.”

“Almighty God -- our Father. Everything we see, and everything we can’t see, exists because of you alone. It all comes from you. It all belongs to you. It all exists for your glory. History is your story,” Warren prayed. “The Scripture tells us, ‘Hear, Oh Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one.’ And you are the compassionate and merciful one. And you are loving to everyone you have made.”

Warren ended on a more controversial note, closing his prayer “in the name of the one who changed my life” and referring to the Hebrew, Arabic, Spanish and English names for Jesus. He then led the two million-plus observers in the Lord’s Prayer
http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=...&Itemid=53

I think you bring up a valid point for discussion.
I'm against school prayer simply because I don't feel it has anything to do with education...not because I really care if someone utters a prayer...
I guess the difference is that in this situation in the school...the student are being coerced into the "moment of silence" by a government dictate. ...No one was coerced to participate in prayers at the inauguration since they were there on their own free will...not coerced by the state to attend.

Hey... just my thoughts....I'm certainly open to other opinions. I find your question an interesting thought experiment.

(01-22-2009 06:16 PM)Tripster Wrote:  .

SO .....

What a lot of you are saying, is that every time you take a moment out of a hectic day to just be silent and contemplate and quiet your soul .... you are actually and subconsciously forcing your self to be "Religious" ??????

You guys are so full of shyte .... muwahahahahahhahahaaa

.

Of course not...but...I do so on my own timetable and privately without coercion.

I'm genuinely not trying to be confrontational. I would like to be able to understand from another opposing viewpoint...What is the importance of needed your child to participate in this group activity?

(01-22-2009 04:09 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 03:45 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 09:19 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  Uh, so much for teaching kids "critical thinking." How do you think critically if you aren't allowed to contemplate?

I guess that's the part that you're referring to as ridiculous.

It's ridiculous to suggest that a proxy for school prayer is not the same thing as introducing critical thinking, no matter how upset you are over this case. The "moment of silence" is crafted as a way to permit student prayer in school without specifying that it must be a Christian prayer.

Why would that be a problem? The whole argument of separation of church and state is that the state isn't supposed to prescribe a specific religion.

Now even that turns out to be a problem.

All I was doing is call it for what it is.

(01-22-2009 04:09 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 03:45 PM)I45owl Wrote:  Now, my view is that I would rather not have it in schools, but I'm not convinced that the constitution prohibits the general concept of a "moment of silence", nor am I willing to put much effort into fighting it unless it is abused (as such things are wont to).

Not only does the Constitution not prohibit it, it expressly protects such activities.

It protects individuals from taking their time to pray or reflect. It does not permit an agent of the state (in this case the teacher) from coercing a captive audience to do so in the way that the agent is familiar with. Clearly, the Illinois case is somewhere in between, but I view it as more like the latter than the former.

(01-22-2009 04:09 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 03:45 PM)I45owl Wrote:  However, in this case, this is what puts this case in violation:

Quote:The "teacher is required to instruct her pupils, especially in the lower grades, about prayer and its meaning as well as the limitations on their 'reflection,'" Gettleman ruled.

"The plain language of the statute, therefore, suggests and intent to force the introduction of the concept of prayer into the schools," he said.

It is hard to conceive that this is anything other than an attempt to put teachers in the position of instructing kids how to practice their religious beliefs by praying.

This gives no evidence of being a violation of anything, except for the stretched sensibilities of a trivial few...who then impose their will on the many.

There are all sorts of platitudes I could parade about the constitution being there in order to protect minorities, religious or otherwise.

What will happen if this stands is that the moment of silence will be reintroduced without the obligation of teachers to orchestrate the exercise of prayer, and the trivial sensibilities of the many will be the only casualty.

(01-22-2009 04:09 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  I doubt any teacher could successfully teach entire classes as to how they should pray to satisify their religion, nor is there any indication they were supposed to try.

That is really kind of the point, after all.

(01-22-2009 04:09 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  Quite the opposite, it's clear they were given the opportunity to explain that freedom of religion is protected in this country, and they have an opportunity to choose to participate or not.

So much for pro-choice.

I do not understand this statement. I don't think it's the opportunity to explain anything that's at issue, it's obligation to do so that is a problem.

(01-22-2009 04:52 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

Quote:Adam Schwartz, senior staff counsel of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the organization was pleased with the decision "to strike down a statewide law that coerced children to pray as part of an organized activity in our public schools."

This is insane. Being silent for a moment amounts to being "coerced to pray?" That's an outlandish assumption and typical of the ACLU. I'm an atheist and I don't think there's anything wrong with a moment of silence - it a gesture of respect. When I was a kid the last thing I did in church was listen to the priest, I was thinking about everything else other than religion.

This is just more mind control jibberish from a group that says they're opposed to mind control.

I'm not convinced that you've read the article, much less the part I excerpted above. I'm not really complaining about a moment of silence per se, but in this case the law says that the teacher has certain obligations to direct the prayer. That is what I'm saying is a no-no.

(01-22-2009 06:45 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Of course not...but...I do so on my own timetable and privately without coercion.

I'm genuinely not trying to be confrontational. I would like to be able to understand from another opposing viewpoint...What is the importance of needed your child to participate in this group activity?

Maybe just to become quiet at the start of the day.

For me, having "Quiet Moments" are part of healing .... we are put thru enough in life by simply participating in it .... offering a "Quiet Moment" can not hurt anyone.

If they are forcing Religion, then no, I don't approve ... I despise "Religion" ... I mean Religion can be the Worship of Dung Beatles for all it is worth.

Mexico used to have nation wide Siesta ..... and now, Doctors say that a 15 Minute Power Nap is essential in maintaining good health.

For me, a 15 Minute Power Nap is an extended "Quiet Moment".

.

(01-22-2009 06:59 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I'm not convinced that you've read the article, much less the part I excerpted above. I'm not really complaining about a moment of silence per se, but in this case the law says that the teacher has certain obligations to direct the prayer. That is what I'm saying is a no-no.

I did read the entire article, 3 times. I believe you're referring to this passage:

Quote:The "teacher is required to instruct her pupils, especially in the lower grades, about prayer and its meaning as well as the limitations on their 'reflection,'" Gettleman ruled.

I'm an atheist and I don't see this as a back door to getting religion into schools. If a kid is raised in a religious or atheist family one minute of silence will hardly counter what s/he's taught at home. At the same time, eventually that kid will be taught about world events and much of it is entrenched in religion beliefs. If one school kid is Jewish and another is Christian I have zero problems with a teacher explaining the differences to them - others might. I would, however, have a problem with a teacher telling my kid to pray but have no problem with a teacher telling him what a prayer is.

(01-22-2009 07:12 PM)Tripster Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 06:45 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Of course not...but...I do so on my own timetable and privately without coercion.

I'm genuinely not trying to be confrontational. I would like to be able to understand from another opposing viewpoint...What is the importance of needed your child to participate in this group activity?

Maybe just to become quiet at the start of the day.

For me, having "Quiet Moments" are part of healing .... we are put thru enough in life by simply participating in it .... offering a "Quiet Moment" can not hurt anyone.

If they are forcing Religion, then no, I don't approve ... I despise "Religion" ... I mean Religion can be the Worship of Dung Beatles for all it is worth.

Mexico used to have nation wide Siesta ..... and now, Doctors say that a 15 Minute Power Nap is essential in maintaining good health.

For me, a 15 Minute Power Nap is an extended "Quiet Moment".

.

Not to be annoying..but..Being quiet was not the stated purpose of this...If so..The teacher should just say....."Everyone please be quiet for(x time unit) so we can get our minds ready for learning"... I would have no problem with that.

(01-22-2009 07:34 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 06:59 PM)I45owl Wrote:  I'm not convinced that you've read the article, much less the part I excerpted above. I'm not really complaining about a moment of silence per se, but in this case the law says that the teacher has certain obligations to direct the prayer. That is what I'm saying is a no-no.

I did read the entire article, 3 times. I believe you're referring to this passage:

Quote:The "teacher is required to instruct her pupils, especially in the lower grades, about prayer and its meaning as well as the limitations on their 'reflection,'" Gettleman ruled.

I'm an atheist and I don't see this as a back door to getting religion into schools. If a kid is raised in a religious or atheist family one minute of silence will hardly counter what s/he's taught at home. At the same time, eventually that kid will be taught about world events and much of it is entrenched in religion beliefs. If one school kid is Jewish and another is Christian I have zero problems with a teacher explaining the differences to them - others might. I would, however, have a problem with a teacher telling my kid to pray but have no problem with a teacher telling him what a prayer is.

I respectfully disagree. Since our children are "forced" to be in the government indoctrination centers using our stolen wages...Any interjection of non-secularism is coercive in nature...The fact that this moment of reflection,introspection,meditation..ect.. is "sanctioned" and "mandatory" really is inappropriate simply because of the hint of blurring the line between the secular and non-secular. Again...I will assert...If students wish to "voluntarily" on their own accord band together in non-secularist activities...That is fine with me and long as it is not during an organized class.

I also have a problem with a teacher even breaching the subject of religion...unless it is in context with the actual study of religions as an educational opportunity. Even then...The teacher should be unbiased as to his or her personal faith when breaching this subject and stick to the factual tenets and history of the faiths.

(01-22-2009 08:56 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I respectfully disagree. Since our children are "forced" to be in the government indoctrination centers using our stolen wages...Any interjection of non-secularism is coercive in nature...The fact that this moment of reflection,introspection,meditation..ect.. is "sanctioned" and "mandatory" really is inappropriate simply because of the hint of blurring the line between the secular and non-secular. Again...I will assert...If students wish to "voluntarily" on their own accord band together in non-secularist activities...That is fine with me and long as it is not during an organized class.

Fo, if done right, having the kids share a moment of silence simply does just that. Here in California they're injecting homosexuality into the classroom and they're not just hinting. I have a HUGE problem with that. I'd rather have my kid be curious about other religions than have him curious about other boys....Friggin California.

(01-22-2009 08:56 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I also have a problem with a teacher even breaching the subject of religion...unless it is in context with the actual study of religions as an educational opportunity. Even then...The teacher should be unbiased as to his or her personal faith when breaching this subject and stick to the factual tenets and history of the faiths.

Considering that an overwhelming majority of people believe in a supreme being and that religion has shaped the political landscape and was the cause of wars I can't see how the subject can be avoided. If you want to tell students about 9-11 you almost certainly have to mention Islam. The Holocaust - Jews. Telling kids about religion and actually preaching scriptures to them are two different things.

(01-22-2009 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(01-22-2009 08:56 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I respectfully disagree. Since our children are "forced" to be in the government indoctrination centers using our stolen wages...Any interjection of non-secularism is coercive in nature...The fact that this moment of reflection,introspection,meditation..ect.. is "sanctioned" and "mandatory" really is inappropriate simply because of the hint of blurring the line between the secular and non-secular. Again...I will assert...If students wish to "voluntarily" on their own accord band together in non-secularist activities...That is fine with me and long as it is not during an organized class.

Fo, if done right, having the kids share a moment of silence simply does just that. Here in California they're injecting homosexuality into the classroom and they're not just hinting. I have a HUGE problem with that. I'd rather have my kid be curious about other religions than have him curious about other boys....Friggin California.

(01-22-2009 08:56 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I also have a problem with a teacher even breaching the subject of religion...unless it is in context with the actual study of religions as an educational opportunity. Even then...The teacher should be unbiased as to his or her personal faith when breaching this subject and stick to the factual tenets and history of the faiths.

Considering that an overwhelming majority of people believe in a supreme being and that religion has shaped the political landscape and was the cause of wars I can't see how the subject can be avoided. If you want to tell students about 9-11 you almost certainly have to mention Islam. The Holocaust - Jews. Telling kids about religion and actually preaching scriptures to them are two different things.

I agree...Bringing up religion as an educational topic without personal interjection of faith is certainly appropriate.

I hope you understand my objection to this has more to do with the fact that the public education system is financed through coercion...more than actually caring about moments of silence. Since the government uses coercion against me to support this system...I have an aversion to further dictates that it passes down in regard to how that system attempts to mold and motivate the thoughts of my child. I consider this little program nothing more than groupspeak indoctrination designed to churn out nice little subservient citizens that are fully dosed with statism. Fortunately...I my daughter is now out of the grasp of this violent system and is out doing what she was taught by me.. to explore and question everything(including my BS).