Skip to comments.Psalms banned, but witchcraft OK
Posted on 01/22/2010 10:26:49 PM PST by little jeremiah
A lower court's "hostility" towards Christianity will stand after the U.S. Supreme Court today refused to intervene in a school district's censorship of a kindergartener's choice of literature for a class reading.
"By refusing to hear Mrs. Busch's case, the U.S. Supreme Court has endorsed the kind of hostility toward religion that should never be found in an American public school," said John W. Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute, which took on the Newtown Square, Pa., case.
As WND reported, Donna Busch accepted an invitation to visit her son Wesley's kindergarten classroom at Culbertson Elementary School to read a passage of Wesley's favorite book to his classmates in October 2004. Wesley's teacher had invited Busch because the boy was the featured student of "All About Me," a school event to feature a particular student and emphasize the student's personal characteristics, preferences and personality in classroom activities.
During the "All About Me" activity, a child's parent may read aloud from the student's favorite book. In this case, Wesley, a Christian, chose the Bible. His mother planned to read from Psalm 118.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
This is really the root of all our current problems...
Each and every day I grow happier and happier at the fact that my wife and I had the good sense to send our 5 y.o. daughter to a good catholic school!
I wonder if they would have banned “The New England Primer”
Christians founded this republic and atheists will destroy it.
This is so wrong. You would think that those 9 justices who are so blessed by God by bestowing on them to honor and to protect our country and it’s people would not lift a finger.
They will one day be judged not by the people; but by God who they have turned their back on.
In some California schools they had kids taking arabic names, learning all about how wonderful Islam is and reading the Koran and wearing robes for 2 weeks while they spent 2 days on the terrible stuff in the bible.
Thats called equality.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
‘or prohibiting the free exercise thereof’ is the part these people conveniently dispose of. The intent, and they know it, was to prevent what happened in England. It was not to prevent someone from saying ‘God bless you’ when you sneeze. In this case, the Supreme Court derelicted their duty of the office.
I've read many, many incidents very similar to this one. So it doesn't seem canned at all.
“Gay” books, Harry Potter books, Halloween stories, Muslim indoctrination are all a-okay. But one little Bible verse or story - picked out by a kid, even? Or drawing of Jesus?
Down comes the hammer! It's a common occurrence.
The leaders of Kwanza proclaim it to be the "black alternative to a white Christmass."
Smells like a religion to me.
I wrote this and posted it on another couple of threads in the last two days. It fits here, too.
If we take the word religion to be mean a belief system and world view determined by said belief system*, there are two religions in the world. Everyone, regardless of label, falls into one category or another**.
1. Those who not only believe in God, but accept and try to follow the rules set out in the scriptures of the world; which are, in the main, largely in agreement over the basic rules of morality, behavior and values for human society. For instance, prohibitions of sex before and outside of marriage, against homosexual acts, against murder, theft, false witness, blasphemy, and so on. And finer concepts as avoiding lust, greed, anger, envy, covetousness, and so on.
Another aspect of this meaning of religion is the world view that this mortal world is not our eternal home, but a sort of testing ground; with the real home in the eternal Kingdom of God, and that true happiness can be found only in relationship with the Supreme Godhead.
2. The other world view and belief system is based on atheism, hedonism and moral relativity - which is based on hypocrisy, since what it really means is that only their view point is valid.
This world view is not just espoused by outright atheists*** but many who claim to believe in God - but the God they supposedly worship does not have the actual qualities of God. For instance, various denominations who allow homosexuals to be priests and ministers, consider abortion perfectly okay, and so on. Up to the Metropolitan Community Church that is focused solely on homosexuality, or Jeremiah Wrights Trinity Church which is merely a racist and marxist political group using sort of Christian sounding slogans occasionally.
Religion #2 views this world as all in all, and seeks to find perfection in this world; perfection in their eyes meaning the most enjoyment possible (in their view) before the worms take over. Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow you die. There is no God in control (other than a superficial label pinned on), you make your own rules, each sees his own desires and whims as the guiding light in life, or the whims of others who have similar values and world view.
The really bad news is that Religion #2 is completely intolerant of any of the viewpoints, morality or world view of religion #1 having any sway in public life. They pretend that there is neutral ground for public life, and that Religion #1 should not have influence over public policy, in supposed deference to secularism or neutrality.
But, the problem is that there are only two world views, or two religions. If theists cannot influence public life, than atheism and hedonism are the standard. There can only be one standard, there is no neutral ground.
* Of course, there are other meanings of the word religion but leaving that for another day.
** I am also leaving Islam aside for now as that is a whole nother category in a sense. Or a subset.
*** An interesting point is that there atheists who are content to live in a world peopled by group #1 with the morals and values of group #1. Such atheists are another subset. :-)
Free the First.
I agree with you.