Violation of Establishment Clause in California

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-12-13 03:32pm

http://www.wric.com/Global/story.asp?S=1561274

But it's for Islam, so it's OK.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2003-12-13 03:38pm

Let's see. It had the consent of the parents, was completely educational, and taught the kids something new. Man, we did something like this in First Grade on Japan, no one bitched about that.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-13 03:42pm

Xenophobe3691 wrote:Let's see. It had the consent of the parents, was completely educational, and taught the kids something new. Man, we did something like this in First Grade on Japan, no one bitched about that.

Wrong. It did not have the consent of the parents. That's why the parents sued.

However, having said that, a role-playing exercise is not indoctrination for the simple reason that it is portrayed as a role-playing exercise, not as truth. If people are told to role-play Nazis as part of a school exercise, that doesn't mean the teacher is necessarily indoctrinating them to be Nazis.

There is a huge difference between saying "let's role-play and pretend we're Muslims" as opposed to saying "the biology textbook is wrong; we came from God's breath because the Holy Bible says so". Christians in the US are always trying to make it seem as if they're being persecuted. I've never heard of such an overwhelmingly powerful yet whiny group in my life.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-12-13 03:56pm

Darth Wong wrote: I've never heard of such an overwhelmingly powerful yet whiny group in my life.

Oh yes I have...

WE MUST ALL WATCH OUT FOR THE EVIL ZIONIST CONSPIRACY!

Whiny bitches who like to scream anti-semite! at anything.

Johonebesus · Post by **Johonebesus** » 2003-12-13 05:55pm

Having the students recite Moslem prayers is to me the only questionable part. To a devout Christian or Jew, that would be sacrilegious, so I could understand parents being bothered by that. The age is right on the border, not quite little impressionable children, but not teenagers either. The article didn't say how much choice the students had in the exercise. Generally, Mike is right that there's a difference between role-playing and overt proselytizing, but this case seems to me to be border-line.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2003-12-13 07:26pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Xenophobe3691 wrote:Let's see. It had the consent of the parents, was completely educational, and taught the kids something new. Man, we did something like this in First Grade on Japan, no one bitched about that.
Wrong. It did not have the consent of the parents. That's why the parents sued.

However, having said that, a role-playing exercise is not indoctrination for the simple reason that it is portrayed as a role-playing exercise, not as truth. If people are told to role-play Nazis as part of a school exercise, that doesn't mean the teacher is necessarily indoctrinating them to be Nazis.

There is a huge difference between saying "let's role-play and pretend we're Muslims" as opposed to saying "the biology textbook is wrong; we came from God's breath because the Holy Bible says so". Christians in the US are always trying to make it seem as if they're being persecuted. I've never heard of such an overwhelmingly powerful yet whiny group in my life.

Article wrote: School officials said parents were given the option of not having their children participate.

Federal Judge Phyllis Hamilton found that there was no evidence that students were doing activities with devotional or religious intent.

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2003-12-14 01:24am

If you hate the activity so much then fucking read permission slips BEFORE the activity that the slip is for takes place.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-14 02:04am

Obviously, what they're doing is attempting to mimic the argument used by non-Christians who object to school prayer, which is that the option to "opt out" of a group activity effectively "outs" you and opens you up to the possibility of ostracization.

Of course, the key difference here (as noted previously) is that it is not analogous; the exercise was always portrayed as a mere role-playing game, and the aforementioned argument is really only applicable to "opting out" of a majority-approved activity which is taken seriously.