HOBBY LOBBY owner 'installs' BIBLE curriculum in PUBLIC SCHOOLS in OK

That's EXACTLY what you want too.

 

It seems that many on this thread are afraid that students be exposed to an important part of our nation's history. This is not an elective that is teaching religion. It is an elective teaching important elements of our nation's history. But we must hide our children from the history of our nation. Let's start the bonfires and burn any books containing such historical facts so that no one knows.

 

Couple a things.........

This Hobby Lobby church boy needs to be stuffed in a garbage can after given an atomic wedgy.

Having stated that, I support his right to free exercize of his religion.

Moreover...the SCOTUS will knock down whatever he comes up with.

The world is right.

 

Glitch....you're proposing that we start telling our children the truth in public school.

The biggest opposition you'll always have does not come primarilly from the left...it will come from concerned parents regardless of them being right or left.

 

The school is federally funded, they cannot endorse a religion. Show me where they can use tax payer dollars to teach and endorse a religion please. The burden is on you because you semm to think because it is an elective it all hunky dory. Really the I cant find a law or a court case you really want to go down that road???

This would apply to federally fund schools and State funded schools it is called the

Establiishment Clause


It is one of the fundamental principles of the Supreme Court's Establishment Clause jurisprudence that the Constitution forbids not only state practices that "aid one religion . . . or prefer one religion over another," but also those practices that "aid all religions" and thus endorse or prefer religion over nonreligion. Everson, 330 U.S. at 15. See Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 53 (1985)("[T]he individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all"); see also County of Allegheny v. ACLU Greater Pittsburgh Chapter, 492 U.S. 573, 589-94, 598-602 (1989); Texas Monthly, Inc. v. Bullock, 489 U.S. 1, 17 (1989); Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488, 495 (1961).

 

I want the gov to not be in the religious propaganda buziness

- - - Updated - - -

many Christians do not want that known, Christians were on a convert or kill mission with the Indians, ect...


.

 

There are certainly the close-minded on both sides of the ideological spectrum. We are certainly seeing it within this thread. I don't believe we should stifle the truth just because it doesn't fit nicely within our agenda.

 

Then teach a HISTORY of RELIGION course! You really DON'T think this clown is writing a curriculum teaching Judaism or Islam or Buddhism or even 'Scientology' do you?? If so, I got some swamp land here in FLORIDA and its really cheap!

 

Today, 07:44 AM #92 happy fun dude
View Profile View All Activity Private Message View Forum Posts View Blog Entries Add as Contact

Guru

Location: Classified for national security
Posts: 9,948

Originally Posted by RP12
Great idea! Fund one!
In a four year course, other religions and their impact should also be included, if it's to be part of a secular education program and objective and academic. Reply Reply With Quote Blog this Post .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like this post Today, 08:30 AM #93 happy fun dude
View Profile View All Activity Private Message View Forum Posts View Blog Entries Add as Contact

Guru

Location: Classified for national security
Posts: 9,948

Originally Posted by Radio Refugee
Our Constitution is quite secular.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams
He didn't mention Christianity, he just said religious/moral.

Nevertheless, George Washington said the opposite. How come the first president and father of the whole revolution was wrong, but sloppy seconds prez is definitely right?

I'll give you an answer.. It's because the purpose and intent is not decided by any particular person, founder or not. They were bitterly divided on the topic, and argued for ages over every word the Constitution should contain or not. Their opinion can be generalized only by the sum consensus of the negotiation, and that is the Constitution itself. Generalizations of their purpose can't be made outside its text.

You claim the Constitution itself is Christian. You can't find the words in it to show this, because of the fact that it is obviously not the case. IF the founders in large part wanted it to be, they could have established Christianity as the official national religion. They didn't, instead choosing to prohibit the congress from doing that in the future. Reply Reply With Quote Blog this Post .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like this post Today, 08:40 AM #94 BethanyQuartz
View Profile View All Activity Private Message View Forum Posts View Blog Entries Add as Contact

Sr. Correspondent

Posts: 661

Originally Posted by LivingNDixie
I can't see this not getting stopped by a lawsuit.
Me either. Want religious classes in public school? Teach comparative religion, and include atheism and humanism in that as well. Otherwise, save it for the private schools.

I've continued to defend Hobby Lobby because they are one of the only retail outlets that pays a living wage to full time workers, but my patience is now wearing thin. They could fund private schools instead and offer them free to parents who want their children educated in a Christian fashion. Last edited by BethanyQuartz; Today at 08:41 AM. "Our merchants and master-manufacturers complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price, and thereby lessening the sale of their goods both at home and abroad. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people."

Adam Smith Reply Reply With Quote Blog this Post .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like this post Today, 08:43 AM #95 Dollface
View Profile View All Activity Private Message View Forum Posts View Blog Entries Add as Contact

Commentator

Posts: 1,246
Originally Posted by RP12
How is an elective class following orders and you comparing an elective class to the Holocaust is disgusting!
Religion has no business being taught in a Fed funded school. The hypocracy this man shows really knows no bounds. He does not want his religious freedoms touch, however he has alot of gall to impose his beliefs on a school system. Please tell me how that works?? Also I donot care if it is an elective or not. I am willing to bet anyone here that if the Muslim religion was being taught as an elective the crying from this guy would make the Kleenex company a boat load of money. Plus the outrage from the right on this forum would be funny Reply Reply With Quote Blog this Post .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like this post Today, 08:52 AM #96 SourD
View Profile View All Activity Private Message View Forum Posts View Blog Entries Add as Contact


Analyst

Posts: 3,100
Originally Posted by Dollface
Religion has no business being taught in a Fed funded school. The hypocracy this man shows really knows no bounds. He does not want his religious freedoms touch, however he has alot of gall to impose his beliefs on a school system. Please tell me how that works?? Also I donot care if it is an elective or not. I am willing to bet anyone here that if the Muslim religion was being taught as an elective the crying from this guy would make the Kleenex company a boat load of money. Plus the outrage from the right on this forum would be funny
It has every RIGHT AS AN ELECTIVE COURSE!. Go read the Constitution again and fins where it says anything about establishing a religion other than CONGRESS. BTW, an elective course isn't even close to establishing a state run religion, even if Congress isn't the one doing it. Last edited by SourD; Today at 08:52 AM. Reply Reply With Quote Blog this Post .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like this post Today, 09:19 AM #97 Dollface
View Profile View All Activity Private Message View Forum Posts View Blog Entries Add as Contact

Commentator

Posts: 1,246
Originally Posted by SourD
It has every RIGHT AS AN ELECTIVE COURSE!. Go read the Constitution again and fins where it says anything about establishing a religion other than CONGRESS. BTW, an elective course isn't even close to establishing a state run religion, even if Congress isn't the one doing it.
It has no business in a public school elective or not! This is using tax payer dollar to endorse religion. That is illegal bottom line end of file. Reply Reply With Quote Blog this Post .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like this post Today, 09:24 AM #98 SourD
View Profile View All Activity Private Message View Forum Posts View Blog Entries Add as Contact


Analyst

Posts: 3,100
Originally Posted by Dollface
It has no business in a public school elective or not! This is using tax payer dollar to endorse religion. That is illegal bottom line end of file.
post a link to the law showing a religious elective is illegal.

Show us a LINK that HOBBY LOBBY BOY is creating a study of RELIGIONS as in history of, ALL INCLUSIVE. If not, it is a course about A religion (his) and paid for with TAX DOLLARS. Now if you can figure out a way that MOMMY and DADDY can pay the school board for an elective course for little Billie or Susie and pay ALL THE CORRESPONDING EXPENSES of that elective being taught on a campus that TAXPAYERS pay for, then MAYBE they can consider it! Get back to us on that!

 

You cannot have one without the other

 

If there were individuals that behaved in such a manner then they were certainly acting contrary to the teachings of Christianity. If this was a significant and common philosophy then there is no reason their behavior should not be included in a historical elective such as this. However I have never heard of anyone justifying killing Indians in the name of Christianity. A better example the course would be more likely to discuss would be concerning Christians on both sides of the slavery issue. Of course Christian churches in the north took the lead in the anti-slavery movement.

 

No. You are arguing against what you WISH I wrote.

Quote me or apologize. I doubt you have the stones to admit you're dead wrong.

 

I'm certainly going to be useless in this issue....I don't have kids...so I don't completely understand over-protective parents.

The truth, in the hands hearts and minds of children, is always risky. They tend to take the truth and apply some happy liberal new age solution, which righties always hate

 

Truth can be a tricky thing. I went to the state tourney with one of my tennis girls and on the way had some interesting discussions. One of her teachers had her believing in the 9-11 truther conspiracy. He'd even given her a book to support this nonsense which she was demanding that I must read. Hopefully we can give students a well-rounded presentation of honest facts and not just selective facts in a misleading fashion like the 9-11 truthers present.

 

Then suggest that to them.

- - - Updated - - -

"Because the book is being taught within an academic purview, it does not violate the Establishment Clause of the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Abington School District v. Schempp."

Someone else who didnt read the article...

 

We shall see about that! It will never happen once a lawsuit is started. This would not be the first or the last time your arm chair quarterbacking of the Constitution is wrong.

 

“Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible,” the Court decided, “when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment.”

Did you read past the headline? I am going to wager no. My understanding of the Constitution while obviously greater then yours is not the topic why you bring it up is beyond me. I was quoting the article both times. You would know that if you *gasp* read the article and discussed the topic instead of just trying to be a smart ass.

 

Sorry lol. I will take the courts word for it not some bible thumping teacher either.

 

Oh come now.

 

So they want to study Jewish history.

 

No need to apologize for not reading the article i expect it from you.

 

Irrespective of why this course doesn't, since the course doesn't have content other than for one particular religion, it's not part of a secular program. This is valid curriculum, but not on its own.


I should clarify, this course needn't contain anything else, if there are the alternate courses available.

 

you disputed somebody who directly said "the Constitution" was not secular, then quoted this guy John Adams who also said "the Constitution" was not secular, then later clarified that that is the guy who is speaking on your behalf. I showed you how George Washington himself said the complete opposite. What else were you disputing about then if this wasn't it? Do you actually agree that the Constitution is in fact, not secular?

 

I don't need to suggest anything, I'm not that concerned about any issue here at all... I just need to suggest to you that the Supreme Court clearly suggested it is acceptable for public curriculum, only when part of a secular program of education.

 

And i have said nothing different....