lab@ihlpf.UUCP (03/17/84)
#R:qubix:-92000:ihlpf:22600038:000:6166 ihlpf!dap1 Mar 16 11:16:00 1984 >Guess what? The teacher IS impressing his or her values on the children, >like it or not. (No, not all of their values; but then, neither does >leading in prayer impress all values.) Some of it is overt (like when my >tennis coach was giving a rather one-sided view of politics to the team >as we were returning from a match); some is hidden (like assigning a >particular book to read - Paul Dubuc provided two typical examples); and >sometimes the most powerful is constant exposure to a person in a >position of respect (e.g., a teacher or professor), even if only an hour >a day one day a week. [The selection of reading material is also a very >effective way for the state to impose its religion.] Right, Larry. That makes good sense to me. Since we can't keep teachers from impressing their values on children, let's endorse it, encourage it and even enforce it (assuming of course that the teacher's values happen to align perfectly with those of Reagan and Larry Bickford). While we're at it, we don't seem to keep people from murdering so maybe we had ought to channel this inevitable occurrence toward the common good. Maybe the government could publish a list of people who could be legally murdered, maybe enemies of the state like all known atheists could be murdered with impunity. Even if Larry's reasoning DID make any sense, I fail to see the connection to school prayer. In fact, if Larry is right (and I go along with his premise, not his conclusion) then school prayer doesn't make much sense anyhow since, as Larry puts it, "Guess what? The teacher IS impressing his or her values on the children". So what if the teacher is an athiest (as Larry apparently believes most are)? Then he or she will impress his or her values on the children irregardless of school prayer. A similar statement holds for Christian teachers. Just because a teacher's personal views are impressed on the students doesn't make an argument that we should (or could) force Larry Bickford's views on all students. > >> utastro!bill: "Nothing *now* prevents kids from praying >> in school if they want to." > >I don't know if the prayer issue has gone to court, but meeting before >or after school for Bible study *has* been ruled "unconstitutional." How >much farther is it from listening to God to talking to Him? > Where did Bill mention ANYTHING about a meeting? I didn't see it; did you Larry? Perhaps you are under the impression that one can't pray unless one does so in front of a large group so you naturally associate prayer with a meeting. If so, I think most Christians would agree that you are wrong on this point. If not, then please cite an applicable law, namely one which says that students will not be allowed to pray in school (you won't find any) rather than one that doesn't have anything to do with the original argument. >> utastro!bill: "As for 'voluntary', how many kids would want to stand >> out in a crowd and asset their rights *not* to 'meditate'?" > >Do you know what the pressure is *now* on a kid who *does* want to >meditate? What inmet!andrew stated works both ways: "Peer (and teacher) >pressure is a powerful force upon impressionable young children..." In >the rush of the day, it is very easy (even for an adult) not to do >something. Given a child's lower level of self-discipline, it's worse. > Again, Larry is arguing that since there are pressures that are inevitable in school, let's legislate these pressures and use them to enforce Larry's views on all our children. Again, it doesn't make much sense. >> Andrew also noted: "This is a prime example of the religious tyranny >> that the founders of the US sought to abolish!" > >The Declaration of Independence and the work of the Chaplains in both >Houses of Congress since Day One of this country speak otherwise. > Larry might be right to an extent here. Some of our founders, like Larry, didn't want to abolish religious tyranny. Several of the original colonies had their own "official religions". Nonetheless, for every example which Larry gives, there are many more which indicate that the founders did indeed wish to allow religious freedom which had been absent in their homelands. Some of them had what is known as religious tolerance which means that they didn't wish to form a national religion, thereby making people of other faiths "second class citizens". The bottom line is the separation of church and state. Larry can point to all the exceptions he wants to, but he can't eliminate this bottom line. >The idea of "no state religion" sounds nice, but is impossible on its >very face. The value system that establishes, executes, and interprets >laws is a de facto religion. (Something inside enjoyed watching the >National Council of Churches squirm during U.S. vs. Bob Jones U.) > >You can't escape it - but you can expose it. The religion of humanism >has made its advances in public schools by carefully avoiding direct >exposure. The quotes are endless but let this suffice ("A Religion for a >New Age," _The Humanist_, January/February 1983, p.26): > > "...The battle for humankind's future must be waged and > won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly > perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith. ... > "The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict > between the old and the new - the rotting corpse of Christianity > ... and the new faith of Humanism." >-- This is becoming a recurrent theme of Larry's. If you can't avoid it, legislate it. It remains a non-argument. In general, the school prayer law cannot be looked at in any way other than one group of people trying to force their own specific ideas on the entire country and asking the government to back them. It is a self centered, selfish thing. How they can possibly claim that the government has an obligation to back their own narrow views and try to insure that other Americans come around to those same views is beyond me. I'll listen to other people's views when I want to, not when Larry Bickford decides I will and I reserve the right to think for myself, thank you. Darrell Plank BTL-IH ihnp4!ihopa!dap