Link and Navi
Loftwing
I dont like how religon isnt allowed in school as mutch, all i can bring is a bible, theyv'e changed AD and BC to ACD abd BCD. The founding fathers wanted the BIBLE to be Taught in SCHOOL.
-
Welcome to the Zelda Sages Forums!
The Zelda Sages Community Forums are a fun and easy way to interact with Zelda fans from around the globe. Our members also have access to exclusive members' only content. Register and/or log in now! Please note that user registration is currently disabled. If you would like to register please contact us.
Religion
- Thread starter Link and Navi
- Start date
Slyguy46
Subtle as a Ninja Pirate!
First off, AD and BC are changed to CE, Common Era, and BCE, Before Common Era.
Second, yes, this is a little frustrating that they are changing everything.
Third, why would you bring a bible to school?
Capt. Zeroth
Loftwing
Actually:
[FONT=arial, helvetica]By requiring the education of religion in a public school, you may assume that the government supports and endorses said religion publicly. Our founding fathers also wrote the Bill of Rights.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica]*Note: I'm sure topics like this can get out of hand very easily. It has happened recently (global warming thread). Lets keep this civilized and a friendly discussion.
[/FONT]
Bill of Rights said:
[FONT=arial, helvetica]By requiring the education of religion in a public school, you may assume that the government supports and endorses said religion publicly. Our founding fathers also wrote the Bill of Rights.[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica]*Note: I'm sure topics like this can get out of hand very easily. It has happened recently (global warming thread). Lets keep this civilized and a friendly discussion.
[/FONT]
webmasterbob
The Webmaster
Thankyou for that last line Zeroth; I like having these discussions...although at times people tend to get just a bit out of hand 
.
As far as your comment, yes, the requirement for learning one specific religion would be unconstitutional unless a school were say a private school "being the government does not control the school, so therefore it can do whatever it sees fit in this regard*. This topic has actually been up in the air since the day the United States was founded. Actually as a matter of fact our Constitution was really only made to outline what the federal government could do, it was not until we saw cases such as the 1925 Supreme Court case of Gitlow vs NY *where it was declared that the first amendment applies to states btw* that the idea of selective incorporation came into play allowing all the religious controversy in the public spectrum to take hold over these last fifty years or so.
Before I go any further I would just like to state that I am a Unitarian and have, therefore, been exposed to and educated about virtually every religion on this wonderful little rock we call Earth. What I am about to say is simply fact and not influenced by any religious body or belief.
The establishment clause came from Thomas Jefferson whom was infuriated over England's establishment of the Church of England as their national church. He, along with many other members of the founding group, were hard pressed to let anything like that happen in the United States. The intent of the establishment clause was to disallow the establishment of a national religion or laws which hindered or enhanced religion. Basically, the idea was to prevent a singular religious belief from being declared the national religion. The US Constitution mind you, as stated, only applied on the Federal level until 1925 when the idea of selective incorporation was first presented which leads me further to believe these were all based in on a federal standard.
Anyway, the court eventually set into place a "wall of separation" policy where they felt the government should stay out of religion all together. This sparked decisions such as 1962s Engel vs Vitale in which all prayer, including nondenominational prayer, was banned from the public school system. This ruling, in my opinion, would be justifiable if they allowed nondenominational prayer, but no we can't even have something as simple as "And let us pray that all ye have a safe journey through the trials of each day to become stronger from it" or something of the sort. That is to the point where it really gets obsered and breaks the entire meaning of the establishment clause. When you remove religion in all forms from the spotlight no-one can be educated. Without education comes intolerance and with intolerance you have the situation we have today. Why we can't just do what the European countries do and educate about each and every religion in school is beyond me. Heck, it would in no way be breaking the establishment clause as there would be not educational bias towards each religion and our country would be more tolerant because of it. Of course, not everyone in the US thinks that way and, well, here we are.
Mind you, there are far worse things in this country in the political cross hairs, although religion is a very important issue.
.As far as your comment, yes, the requirement for learning one specific religion would be unconstitutional unless a school were say a private school "being the government does not control the school, so therefore it can do whatever it sees fit in this regard*. This topic has actually been up in the air since the day the United States was founded. Actually as a matter of fact our Constitution was really only made to outline what the federal government could do, it was not until we saw cases such as the 1925 Supreme Court case of Gitlow vs NY *where it was declared that the first amendment applies to states btw
* that the idea of selective incorporation came into play allowing all the religious controversy in the public spectrum to take hold over these last fifty years or so.Before I go any further I would just like to state that I am a Unitarian and have, therefore, been exposed to and educated about virtually every religion on this wonderful little rock we call Earth. What I am about to say is simply fact and not influenced by any religious body or belief.
The establishment clause came from Thomas Jefferson whom was infuriated over England's establishment of the Church of England as their national church. He, along with many other members of the founding group, were hard pressed to let anything like that happen in the United States. The intent of the establishment clause was to disallow the establishment of a national religion or laws which hindered or enhanced religion. Basically, the idea was to prevent a singular religious belief from being declared the national religion. The US Constitution mind you, as stated, only applied on the Federal level until 1925 when the idea of selective incorporation was first presented which leads me further to believe these were all based in on a federal standard.
Anyway, the court eventually set into place a "wall of separation" policy where they felt the government should stay out of religion all together. This sparked decisions such as 1962s Engel vs Vitale in which all prayer, including nondenominational prayer, was banned from the public school system. This ruling, in my opinion, would be justifiable if they allowed nondenominational prayer, but no we can't even have something as simple as "And let us pray that all ye have a safe journey through the trials of each day to become stronger from it" or something of the sort. That is to the point where it really gets obsered and breaks the entire meaning of the establishment clause. When you remove religion in all forms from the spotlight no-one can be educated. Without education comes intolerance and with intolerance you have the situation we have today. Why we can't just do what the European countries do and educate about each and every religion in school is beyond me. Heck, it would in no way be breaking the establishment clause as there would be not educational bias towards each religion and our country would be more tolerant because of it. Of course, not everyone in the US thinks that way and, well, here we are.
Mind you, there are far worse things in this country in the political cross hairs, although religion is a very important issue.
Link and Navi
Loftwing
yes thanx Zeroth;p
i brought a bible because i wanted to read.
i am a Christain and i just dont like the fact that they are trying to ban Chrisieanity from School.
i brought a bible because i wanted to read.
i am a Christain and i just dont like the fact that they are trying to ban Chrisieanity from School.
Dakare
Deus Ex Machina
It's not really banning per say, and it's not just christrianity. In my history class last year, we learned a lot about religion, but it was wide spread (buhddism, christrianity, judism, islam, etc.), and in my english class last year we read Genesis and did a project on different religions. The schools just don't want to "favor" one religion over another, and thus why many public schools have done what my school did and teach about many different religions.
Slyguy46
Subtle as a Ninja Pirate!
Yeah, they're not banning religion from schools, they're just teaching us about the religions in a manner that is not partial to any religion. In the course of one month, I was taught about both Judaism, Hinduism, Daoism, Buddhism, Confucianism and Christianity in History.
webmasterbob
The Webmaster
The point I think Link and Navi is trying to bring up is that this is not so in all schools. Most schools in the US have banned religion all-together; they do not even teach about religion in World History classes or in literature. There's also the whole Ten Commandments issue that has been in the air for the last few years. I find it odd how law institutions can depict Greek philosophers, Gods, etc...however when it comes to the Judao Ten Commandments, this is out of the question. What a great portion of the country does not understand is the matter of interpretation. Why could it not accrue or dawn on people that the Ten Commandments are displayed because they were one of the first sets of written laws, whether or not you believe they were ordained by God.
animaldude
Sage in Training
Yeah, I completely agree. I think all religions should be taught in all schools. The bible and all other religious readings are the most enlightening things in the world (not as enlightening as the enlightenment thread). For those things not to be taught in classrooms is insane. Maybe if more people learned from religious readings, we might have more normal people in this world.
Versac
名人/マスタ
True. It's rather odd how once a religion is no longer widely practiced it is deemed 'harmless' and allowed in to schools. Despite that, I find that most of the exclusion is (fairly or not) aimed towards the Ahl al-Kitab, meaning "People of Holy Books". This includes Muslims, Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians (another perfect example of a 'harmless' religion). Less attention is drawn to Hinduism and Bhuddism, but this imbalance may be because particularly Christianity and Islam encourage the active conversion of unbelievers.
Remember, the Establishment Clause is not only there to protect government from religion; it is also there to protect religion from government. The last time religion became solidly entrenched in politics was shortly before a little upset I like to call the Protestant Reformation. The time before that led to the fall of the Abbasid Dynasty and the fracturing of the united Muslim rule. The time before that split the Roman Empire. The list goes on. Religion and politics simply don't mix.
I'm personally strongly against the display of the Ten Commandments, simply because their display would imply establishing a specific translation as 'correct'. Remember, 'Thou shalt not kill' isn't a Commandment. It turns out that the King James version's wording was more appropriate for the 1500s than modern times. The current official wording is 'You shall not murder'. Makes a bit of a difference, I think.
Oh, and if you want an ancient code of laws to display, I think this one might work a little better.
webmasterbob
The Webmaster
Yup, that would certainly be a fine replacement in my books
.A little late to respond but here's my two cents:
To me religion is a personnal thing and therefore should not be taught in schools. I think that schools should not teach religion because there is lots of other material that needs to be taught and religion is already taught to people in CCD, Sunday School, etc.
To me religion is a personnal thing and therefore should not be taught in schools. I think that schools should not teach religion because there is lots of other material that needs to be taught and religion is already taught to people in CCD, Sunday School, etc.
Link and Navi
Loftwing
but who goes to them?(on their own account)
mr.cuddles
Loftwing
ya not being able to have a bible read in school and have religion taught is going against our first amendment right. freedom of speech, expresion, and RELIGION.
yoyolll
Conspiracy Theorist
Religion should be taught in schools, but strictly as education. There should be a religion class where we learn about all religions.
And whatever crazy fundamentalist parent thinks that's preaching is an idiot, schools are supposed to teach us about these major things that have an impact on the world, and religion is the biggest impact of all. We need to learn about it, staying blind will only hurt us.
Also, every religion should be taught equally, none more than the others. That might be kind of hard since America is mostly christians and catholics.
And whatever crazy fundamentalist parent thinks that's preaching is an idiot, schools are supposed to teach us about these major things that have an impact on the world, and religion is the biggest impact of all. We need to learn about it, staying blind will only hurt us.
Also, every religion should be taught equally, none more than the others. That might be kind of hard since America is mostly christians and catholics.
yoyolll
Conspiracy Theorist
Excuse me, is that what "separation of church and state" means?
(Sorry for double posting but this just came to me)
Animaldude: yeah, this if fine since you're bringing up a completely different point... no need to merge.
Yoyolll:thanks for letting me know. It means a lot to me.
Animaldude: Anytime... anytime...
Demoncrat7
Loftwing
Freedom of Religion: Having someone else's religion taught to you as truth in public, government funded educational institutions.
Yes, excellent point. That's exactly what freedom of religion was intended to mean.
Dakare
Deus Ex Machina
Well, yeah, that's what I mean. Getting taught religion in a non-preaching type of why is important to learning what has happened, but doing it that way also involves teaching about the principles and rituals that they preform. It does get a little iffy every now and then, but it's nothing to sue about, in my opinion.