New School Prayor

[jlcnuke]

All I can say to that is read the following:

Link Removed

12 Students Suspended for Praying at School | Christianpost.com

Expulsion threatened over prayer for sick teacher

This is only a few examples and there are many more. Now what was that about dishonesty?

And they all did it in a matter to cause attention to themselves. If they weren't vocalizing their prayers no one would know the difference.

They didn't all do it in a manner to bring attention to themselves (third one definitely wasn't drawing attention praying with a teacher only in an office).

The fact that some schools and administrations have screwed up on understanding what the SCOTUS ruled as un-Constitutional does not mean that every school is stopping any prayer from being allowed. In fact, screwing up like the third link did costs them money Link Removed to the tune of $90,000.

I would wager that there are a lot more stories about students praying privately in school with no problems than with issues. Though since it's a story about doing something legal without being harassed about it I doubt they make the news.

 

[melloyello]

I know that there are still a few schools that haven't jumped on the band wagon yet. Most of them are in the south but even here and the "Bible Belt" there are schools that have stopped it because someone complained and the SCOTUS upheld the bans. The following will give a better understanding of banned prayer. Pay particular attention to the fact that SCOTUS even banned "voluntary" school prayer where anyone not wishing to participate could leave. They used the First Amendment in many of these cases. I ask how does allowing prayer, especially voluntary prayer, establish a religion?

School Prayer/Pledge Of Allegiance: Encyclopedia of Everyday Law

Ronwill,

From the article you noted, it sounds to me that government sanctioned or declarative religious prayers were deemed unConstitutional by SCOTUS.
However, nor declarative or government sanctioned prayers are passing muster...

From
School Prayer/Pledge Of Allegiance: Encyclopedia of Everyday Law

Permissible "Minute of Silence"
During the 1980s, school prayer advocates were in search of new approaches that might prove constitutional. The so-called moment of silence has proven the most successful strategy, despite an early setback in which Alabama's requirement that school children be required to observe a moment of silence each day was held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Wallace v. Jaffrey (1985).

However, states subsequently crafted laws that did survive constitutional review. One example is Virginia's minute of silence law, which requires children to begin the school day with a minute to "meditate, pray or engage in silent activity." In July 2001, a panel of the 4th U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the constitutionality of the law, noting that it " introduced at most a minor and nonintrusive accommodation of religion" and, because it allowed any type of silent reflection, served both religious and secular interests. The U. S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal in the case, thus upholding Virginia's law. Legal observers predicted the law's success would lead to more such legislation in other states; as many as 18 states already permit moments of silence under law.

 

[ronwill]

"One year later, in Engle v. Vitale (1963), the Supreme Court struck down voluntary Bible readings and recitation of the Lord's Prayer in public schools." Bold mine.

Whether you want to admit it or not the SCOTUS has upheld bans on prayer in school, both voluntary and school lead. Yes many schools will not bother anyone for saying a silent prayer over lunch but they could end this "voluntary" prayer if they wanted. My point in all this is not forcing ANY belief on anyone. Why is it wrong to have crosses placed at sites where LEO's lost their lives in the line of duty, or a cross honoring those who served their country, to prey in school (yes it's banned), to have the Ten Commandments (the foundation of law) in court houses? I could go on and on. I ask why, when these things are banned, is it fine for someone to say they are a medal of honor winner to get a job (possibly from someone who needs it more), to have signs posted on public transportation espousing atheism as a way of life, etc.? If you don't want religion fine, but don't make it where things are banned because they "may" be a religious symbol. In doing this you're forcing your belief on me. I won't force mine on you so stop trying to force a way of life on me. I say this all inclusively and not necessarily that anyone here is doing that.

 

[jlcnuke]

"One year later, in Engle v. Vitale (1963), the Supreme Court struck down voluntary Bible readings and recitation of the Lord's Prayer in public schools." Bold mine.

Whether you want to admit it or not the SCOTUS has upheld bans on prayer in school, both voluntary and school lead. Yes many schools will not bother anyone for saying a silent prayer over lunch but they could end this "voluntary" prayer if they wanted. My point in all this is not forcing ANY belief on anyone. Why is it wrong to have crosses placed at sites where LEO's lost their lives in the line of duty, or a cross honoring those who served their country, to prey in school (yes it's banned), to have the Ten Commandments (the foundation of law) in court houses? I could go on and on. I ask why, when these things are banned, is it fine for someone to say they are a medal of honor winner to get a job (possibly from someone who needs it more), to have signs posted on public transportation espousing atheism as a way of life, etc.? If you don't want religion fine, but don't make it where things are banned because they "may" be a religious symbol. In doing this you're forcing your belief on me. I won't force mine on you so stop trying to force a way of life on me. I say this all inclusively and not necessarily that anyone here is doing that.

FindLaw | Cases and Codes

I don't know where you get your interpretation of SCOTUS cases but Engle V. Vitale had nothing to do with voluntary prayer in schools. The issue in that case was government sponsored prayer (though not attributed to a particular religious sect) and the ruling was that even non-specific government written/sponsored religious prayers were un-Constitutional. In fact, no SCOTUS ruling has ever ruled that private non-disruptive voluntary prayer on personal time in schools is prohibited.

Additionally, the Ten Commandments are not "the foundation of law." There were written codes of law in Babylon in 2500 BC which is about 500 years before the stories of Abraham and well before the 10 Commandments were first mentioned. The Cross is a religious symbol as are the Ten Commandments.

The signs on public transportation are ads purchased and available for purchase by anyone of any religion or no religion so it is not government sponsorship, favoritism or anything of the sort and as such are no more linked to the first amendment than the billboards promoting religion on the highways.

The "banning" of religious symbols (or anti-religious symbols) only applies to the government. The government cannot explicitly or implicitly support or oppose atheism anymore than it can support Christianity, Islam, Judaism or any other religion. What is done by any person/organization outside of the government however is protected under the 1st Amendment.

 

[fnsmoak]

This looks like a good place for this video.

Governement to NOT publish symbols of faith?? I'm pretty sure that most of us don't understand the depth of our Founders' resolve and intent.

http://www.youtube.com/v/dlfEdJNn15E?fs=1&hl=en_US