stanwyck@ihuxr.UUCP (Don Stanwyck) (03/15/84)
> > > I am a second-generation atheist. My fiancee was raised as a Hindu. > > > If > > > you agree that we would find the prayers objectionable, then can you > > > explain to me why our right to freedom from religious interference by > > > the state is somehow not worthy of defending simply because we do not > > > conform to the religious beliefs of the majority? Prentiss Riddle > > > > Is it possible that your religious belief, a belief in "non-God", and your > > expectation that the state promote your religion, might be insensitive to > > my religion, and in fact discriminatory against it? I haven't really > > thought about this, but the idea struck me and I couldn't argue myself out > > of asking.........Don Stanwyck > > For the state to refrain from practices which assert the existence of God does > not mean that the state is engaging in practices which assert the opposite. > I would consider organized atheistic observances just as inappropriate for > the classroom as the organized Christian ones now so hotly promoted by the > supporters of the School Prayer Amendment. > > (And, by the way, I don't believe for a moment that the principal supporters > of such an amendment would be willing to settle for non-sectarian prayers. > What they would really like to see is for their own brand of fundamentalist > christianity to become the state religion, and they will push things just as > far in that direction as they possibly can. Why else do they refuse to settle > for silent prayer, something which would offend only people on the margins > like me? Instead they are working for an amendment which is guaranteed, in > practice if not in theory, to create religious strife in every school district > in America. It won't be just the children of atheists and Hindus who will be > put on the spot: it will be the children of Jews, of Catholics, and of > mainstream Protestants whose views happen not to conform with those of the > hardest-hitting Bible-pounders in their communities.) > > --- Prentiss Riddle ("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.") (Above excerts are edited versions of previous postings) Prentiss: First, I wish to apologize for making it sound like I thought that you were pushing for promotion of atheism - I didn't think you were, but many (very many, see my mail box) thought I interpretted you as saying such. Second, on thinking more about it, several things came to light that I wish to say aloud (i.e. on the net). I do NOT approve of the school prayer admendment as I understand it presently exists. At most, I could approve of a moment of silence. I fear, as you do, that any spoken prayer would be either offensive to many because of its assumtions of a particular God or worship technique, or that it would be offensive to many because of its lack of adherance to a particular worship system. I do not think that merely failing to discuss God promotes non-God. I do worry about a system (as we have today) where groups who promote non-God have access to public facilities, where God-promoting groups do not. The example I have given several people in private letters is my high school years - several years ago - when a group of us, non-denominational, not even all Christian, wanted to have a room at school for study of religion (including introduction to each others belief systems) similar, at least to us, to the groups studying chess, TM, biology, or other academic/quasi- religious subjects. Because we were up front about wanting to study religion (including Bible, Koran, etc.), we were told we could not meet before or after school on the school premises. Another year some of us wanted to have a room we could meet in for prayer before school, on a volentary basis, and (of course) we were denied access. Groups that were studying self-fulfillment (without God), knowing yourself, and one group that was a discussion group about @i(The Humanist Manifesto) (is that its name?) that was led by a teacher were permitted to meet. Is this right? Is this the way it should be? I think not. Anyway, I think that there is cause to consider some way to equalize access for all groups/philosophies/what-evers, BUT the school prayer admendment is not it! Have a nice day......... -- ________ ( ) Don Stanwyck @( o o )@ 312-979-3062 ( || ) Cornet-367-3062 ( \__/ ) ihnp4!ihuxr!stanwyck (______) Bell Labs @ Naperville, IL
jonw@azure.UUCP (Jonathan White) (03/16/84)
Don Stanwyck writes:
I do worry about a system (as we have today) where groups who promote
non-God have access to public facilities, where God-promoting groups do
not. The example I have given several people in private letters is my high
school years - several years ago - when a group of us, non-denominational,
not even all Christian, wanted to have a room at school for study of religion
(including introduction to each others belief systems) similar, at least to
us, to the groups studying chess, TM, biology, or other academic/quasi-
religious subjects. Because we were up front about wanting to study religion
(including Bible, Koran, etc.), we were told we could not meet before or
after school on the school premises. Another year some of us wanted to have
a room we could meet in for prayer before school, on a volentary basis, and
(of course) we were denied access.
Although I have no statistics to cite, I suspect that Don's experience is
highly atypical. My highschool (in suburban Houston) had a Bible Club that
was a virtual haven for the Jesus Freaks. My mother, who is a substitute
teacher there, recently informed me that the club is still going strong.
And according to an article on the front page of the March 5 Wall Street
Journal, the Constitutional amendment that bans state-conducted prayer in the
schools is widely ignored in some parts of the country.
I have a difficult time sympathizing with anyone who claims that Christianity
is not getting a fair shake in this country. We have a president who has used
our tax dollars to promote a "Year of the Bible," legislators who are trying to
force prayer on our children via public schools, tax exemptions for wealthy and
politically powerful churches, and a Supreme Court that allows local governments
to spend our tax money to promote a particular religion during the Christmas
season.
Jon White
[decvax|ucbvax]!tektronix!tekmdp!azure!jonw