Federal Judge Prohibits Prayer at Texas Graduation Ceremony

[Feuer Frei!]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

Being an atheist myself I find the whole thing pretty absurd. As long as I'm not forced to join in a religious ceremony I don't have any problem with people who are praying to their god(s) and don't see any reason to forbid them to do so.

Yea good point.
What made me laugh out aloud was the "suffer irreparable harm" B.S.!
That is the icing on the cake.

[Schroeder]

I actually wonder what qualifies as "damage"?

[Feuer Frei!]

Originally Posted by Schroeder

I actually wonder what qualifies as "damage"?

Maybe they thought that praying involves kneeling and that their knees would be damaged beyond repair.

[Platapus]

I thought this was overturned?

[Feuer Frei!]

Originally Posted by Platapus

I thought this was overturned?

Correct:
http://www.npr.org/2011/06/03/136934...on?ft=1&f=1016

Hallelujah!
Pun intended.

[Skybird]

If it is a public school, the state has to make sure not to propagate or support any religion in the public space. It's called secularism, and is based on the 1st amendement:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; [...]

People' freedom ends where they practice it at the cost of the freedom of others, hence: keep away religion from state-run institutions and the communal public space. Leave it to the private sphere of the individuals.

That is where personal belief in the divine belong anyway. What is between you and your God, is your intimate business only for which nobody else must care. Where you claim the public sphere for your belief, you are supressing others, and turn from religion to politics.

[Bakkels]

Foxnews. Sorry, but don't you think they just might have overstated some tiny little things in the article?

Anyway, old news the ban is already lifted:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13757903

In the story it says
"The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Christa and Danny Schultz, who said watching their son receive a diploma this weekend would amount to forced religious participation. The Castroville parents argued that traditions such as invocation and benediction excluded their beliefs."

Now that's a whole different description of their argument then the one in the first article. Amazing how Fox applies its own interpretation on things like this.

[August]

Originally Posted by Skybird

People' freedom ends where they practice it at the cost of the freedom of others, hence: keep away religion from state-run institutions and the communal public space. Leave it to the private sphere of the individuals.

Sorry but no. In my country the religious have a right to freely exercise their religion.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; [...]

[Wolfehunter]

Originally Posted by Skybird

If it is a public school, the state has to make sure not to propagate or support any religion in the public space. It's called secularism, and is based on the 1st amendement:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; [...]

People' freedom ends where they practice it at the cost of the freedom of others, hence: keep away religion from state-run institutions and the communal public space. Leave it to the private sphere of the individuals.

That is where personal belief in the divine belong anyway. What is between you and your God, is your intimate business only for which nobody else must care. Where you claim the public sphere for your belief, you are supressing others, and turn from religion to politics.

this.