Prayer in schools? Aww, crap...

[Master of Ossus]

And what, in your esteemed opinion, makes me an idiot?

Circular logic is sometimes logical.

[You can't use your conclusion as a premise] Isn't that what you've done regarding the existence of a god?

Is circular logic always illogical?

Need I go on?

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

And what, in your esteemed opinion, makes me an idiot?

Circular logic is sometimes logical.

[You can't use your conclusion as a premise] Isn't that what you've done regarding the existence of a god?

Is circular logic always illogical?

Need I go on?

First (as stated at least twice previously) was deliberate humor. Second was a genuine question of the basis of Wong's antireligious fervor. Third was a request for clarification of the concept.

[Wicked Pilot]

And yes indeed, that is circular logic. Kind of like the kind that sees a man typing, "I am typing on a keyboard" at a keyboard. Even circular logic is sometimes logical.

That is the biggest of many reasons why you are a fucking idiot. Do you have any other logical fallacies for us that are in fact logical? Please, I would like to hear them.

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

And yes indeed, that is circular logic. Kind of like the kind that sees a man typing, "I am typing on a keyboard" at a keyboard. Even circular logic is sometimes logical.

That is the biggest of many reasons why you are a fucking idiot. Do you have any other logical fallacies for us that are in fact logical? Please, I would like to hear them.

*sigh* Anything productive to contribute, Wicked? Or are you just going to continue to spew impotent venom?

[The Yosemite Bear]

Hey, I am something of a "Do what thou wilst" attitude in reguards to religion, Pampheteering on campus us just wrong because it DOES interfer with study and promote hatred. What in that act premotes hatred, simple combination of peer pressure, the need to eliminate the "Outsider", and the devicivness of children, particularly teenagers.

I remember both extremes of left and right trying to pamphlet my High School. The school administration let the Fundimentalists (But not the Greens) spread pamphlets until it became obvious that the mere act of providing children with information that cane be devicive results in crimes against others.

In college my roommate was a follower of Alister Crowley, My next dore on one side was a Rastamon, and his roomie was an Athiest, and on the otherside I had a Chick puplication loving Baptist, who was rooming with a Closet gay, neat freak (Ok, Fernando wasn't exactly Closested, his roomie was the ONLY one that didn't figure out that the Catholic he kept trying to convert was also into men.) This ecclectic bunch managed to survive living together with only some major conflicts over a two year span. (Still say no conflict was as bad as the radio wars were, Rufus and I won that battle by me moving Next door, and Mr. Rasta & Me playing Blues until everyone gave in.)

[Antediluvian]

(As I understand it, deists believe that there is a God, but He doesn't care what happens to humans, so why would they worship or pray to Him?)

To thank him for everything he gave to them, directly or indirectly, like life and such.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Deists believe it is arrogant to ask God for anything, so their prayers are limited to prayers of thankfulness, if I recall correctly.

A deist girlfriend of mine explained it to me a while back.

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

Well, that's totally irrational! HERESY! NOW YOU MUST DIE!!!

Seriously, though, there is something that has always bothered me about such concepts, especially in Christianity:

God is to be given credit for all the good things that happen to us, but we can't blame it for the bad things that happen to us. I actually managed to concoct an explanation for this for a friend's college Theology paper (she got an A+ on it, by the way) but it still strikes me intuitively as a hypocritical idea...

[Antediluvian]

(That's completely contrary to deists' beliefs, no offense. Deists believe that God created the universe but does not interfere with its operation. Praying would be a useless activity for a deist, and they may or may not choose to worship. [/list])

What are you talking about? Deists do pray, prayers of thankfulness and appreciation.

As for worship, I would consider prayers worship, wouldn't you?

Some deists also believe God may interfere in human affairs.

And I know what deists believe, thank you.

[Wicked Pilot]

*sigh* Anything productive to contribute, Wicked? Or are you just going to continue to spew impotent venom?

*sigh* Anything intelligent to contribute, Duke? Or are you just going to contiune to spew idiotic bullshit?

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

*sigh* Anything productive to contribute, Wicked? Or are you just going to continue to spew impotent venom?

*sigh* Anything intelligent to contribute, Duke? Or are you just going to contiune to spew idiotic bullshit?

Well, that answers my question.

[Master of Ossus]

Come on, Raoul. The only thing you've said here is that Circular Logic is not always illogical. That was not productive. I don't think you've been much better than Wicked Pilot.

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

Come on, Raoul. The only thing you've said here is that Circular Logic is not always illogical. That was not productive. I don't think you've been much better than Wicked Pilot.

That's far from being the "only thing" I've said here, MoO, and you know that. It's just the only thing I've said that stands out in popular opinion, because it's something mockable. (The fact that I've said a couple of times now that it was a deliberately constructed joke is something no one seems willing to take notice of.)

Personally, this thread is a dead issue for me; Utsanomiko and Wong were the only ones to offer significant challenge to my serious statements; Wong either ran away or just gave up, and Utsanomiko and I are debating civilly and intelligently on other subjects.

[Graeme Dice]

[quote="Durandal"]Irrelevant. Christians have this undying need to shove their religion into everyone else's face; they call it evangelism. [/quote[
So do atheists like yourself.

[Graeme Dice]

Actually, the argument could be made that there are myriad "other religious practices" allowed on school grounds. The high school I attended, for example, permitted (i.e. they neglected to put a stop to) covens, Islamic prayer groups, Buddhists and others. But not Christians. They didn't know what to make of the Thor's Hammer pendant I wore.

Well, I can't say I support that. All religious practices should be banned from schools.

Then you do not support the constitution, because it specifically states that the state will not endorse religion. Of course, you've twisted that to mean that the state will actively suppress religion.

[Durandal]

So do atheists like yourself.

Funny, when did I advocate a stance for the government officially stating that there is no god? Oh, that's right. I didn't. I only want the government to remain completely silent on religion, the way it's supposed to.

Then you do not support the constitution, because it specifically states that the state will not endorse religion. Of course, you've twisted that to mean that the state will actively suppress religion.

Bullshit. I've taken it to mean that the state will be completely neutral on religion. That means government officials cannot use their office to peddle religious beliefs. You've adopted the stance that my support of discrimination against religion is somehow hypocritical, even though such discrimination is required to preserve the wall between church and state, as usual.

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

So do atheists like yourself.

Funny, when did I advocate a stance for the government officially stating that there is no god? Oh, that's right. I didn't. I only want the government to remain completely silent on religion, the way it's supposed to.

Then you do not support the constitution, because it specifically states that the state will not endorse religion. Of course, you've twisted that to mean that the state will actively suppress religion.

Bullshit. I've taken it to mean that the state will be completely neutral on religion. That means government officials cannot use their office to peddle religious beliefs. You've adopted the stance that my support of discrimination against religion is somehow hypocritical, even though such discrimination is required to preserve the wall between church and state, as usual.

Strawman. He never said you advocated governmental repression. He said that you're "evangelizing" atheism. Which is also untrue; if that were the case, you'd be for the most part preaching to the converted. (Pardon the phrase.)

[Durandal]

Strawman. He never said you advocated governmental repression. He said that you're "evangelizing" atheism. Which is also untrue; if that were the case, you'd be for the most part preaching to the converted. (Pardon the phrase.

Do you have reading comprehension problems?

Of course, you've twisted that to mean that the state will actively suppress religion.

It was right in front of you.

[Larz]

Exactly why can't people who want to prey in school just do it quietly away from everyone else who doesn't care? If these religous groups didn't actively try to force people to acknowledge and join their religon there wouldn't be a problem. Instead these people want to sit down in the middle of walking traffic, preach outloud, and pull everyone else around them into the group in order to save them. Personally, I don't care if their is prayer in school as long as it is done respectfully, in ones own private thoughts, or perhaps a little room that they meet that is far away from the normal masses of people who don't care, never will care, and don't want to be bothered by converters. That is my major gripe with christians, mormons, and jahova witnesses, they cram their religons down peoples throats and then try and turn around and say "I did no such thing, I was just trying to spread the greatness of the lord..." Well, some don't want your 'salvation' or your 'prayers' and your hypocritical non-judging attitudes when say that people will burn in hell behind their backs... Sorry, its just this sort of debate gets me heated and boosts my blood preasure, I think I'll go post on some less stressful thread now.

[Graeme Dice]

Funny, when did I advocate a stance for the government officially stating that there is no god? Oh, that's right. I didn't. I only want the government to remain completely silent on religion, the way it's supposed to.

Then you have no place stating that they should not allow students to pray on school grounds, because to do so is to not remain silent on religion.

Bullshit. I've taken it to mean that the state will be completely neutral on religion. That means government officials cannot use their office to peddle religious beliefs. You've adopted the stance that my support of discrimination against religion is somehow hypocritical, even though such discrimination is required to preserve the wall between church and state, as usual.

That is not your stance. Your stance is that the government should actively suppress religion in public places, because to do otherwise is to support it.

[Durandal]

Then you have no place stating that they should not allow students to pray on school grounds, because to do so is to not remain silent on religion.

No, it constitutes students being allowed to make use of school resources for private, religious practices. Government institutions (schools, city halls, courtrooms, et cetera) are not places for prayer. Churches and homes are.

That is not your stance. Your stance is that the government should actively suppress religion in public places, because to do otherwise is to support it.

No, they should bar religious practices on government institutions, which are not public places in the sense that a street corner is. Government institutions are places where the government directly functions, where government employees work and where large amounts of tax money go. To not allow any religious group special access to those facilities for religious practices is necessary to preserve the wall between church and state.

[Graeme Dice]

No, it constitutes students being allowed to make use of school resources for private, religious practices. Government institutions (schools, city halls, courtrooms, et cetera) are not places for prayer. Churches and homes are.

Circular reasoning. You have used your assumption that religious practices should be private to prove that they are. Please show me a logical reason why religious practices should be private.

No, they should bar religious practices on government institutions, which are not public places in the sense that a street corner is. Government institutions are places where the government directly functions, where government employees work and where large amounts of tax money go. To not allow any religious group special access to those facilities for religious practices is necessary to preserve the wall between church and state.

Would you care to inform me where the first amendment has been changed so that itallows the government to determine what kinds of speech is acceptable?

[Darth Wong]

No, it constitutes students being allowed to make use of school resources for private, religious practices. Government institutions (schools, city halls, courtrooms, et cetera) are not places for prayer. Churches and homes are.

Circular reasoning. You have used your assumption that religious practices should be private to prove that they are. Please show me a logical reason why religious practices should be private.

Logic flows from premises. Durandal is going on the premise that freedom of religious choice is good. That freedom is severely impinged by any perception of government-sanctioned religious activities. Public displays of religion on school grounds give that perception, particularly if there is a double-standard, ie- satanic rituals are not allowed, but Christian ones are.

Would you care to inform me where the first amendment has been changed so that itallows the government to determine what kinds of speech is acceptable?

The government is allowed to determine WHEN and WHERE certain kinds of speech are acceptable. Do not change the subject; no one is saying people can't engage in free expression on their own property, or in many other vanues. They are only saying that people can't do certain things in certain places where it will produce the perception of government approval.

And let's not play games here; you know perfectly well why these people INSIST on doing these things publicly, and on school grounds; they WANT to be brazen about their religion. They WANT to shove it in other peoples' faces. It is hardly an unintended side-effect.

[Graeme Dice]

Logic flows from premises. Durandal is going on the premise that freedom of religious choice is good. That freedom is severely impinged by any perception of government-sanctioned religious activities. Public displays of religion on school grounds give that perception, particularly if there is a double-standard, ie- satanic rituals are not allowed, but Christian ones are.

I reread his statement and I agree that that was what he was trying to state.

The government is allowed to determine WHEN and WHERE certain kinds of speech are acceptable. Do not change the subject; no one is saying people can't engage in free expression on their own property, or in many other vanues. They are only saying that people can't do certain things in certain places where it will produce the perception of government approval.

And let's not play games here; you know perfectly well why these people INSIST on doing these things publicly, and on school grounds; they WANT to be brazen about their religion. They WANT to shove it in other peoples' faces. It is hardly an unintended side-effect.

Of course that's why they want to do it in this particular case. You think I didn't find those types of people annoying when I was in high school?

[Raoul Duke, Jr.]

Strawman. He never said you advocated governmental repression. He said that you're "evangelizing" atheism. Which is also untrue; if that were the case, you'd be for the most part preaching to the converted. (Pardon the phrase.

Do you have reading comprehension problems?

Not at all. Now what's your excuse?

Of course, you've twisted that to mean that the state will actively suppress religion.

It was right in front of you.

[Durandal]

I simply can't comment on this.