"Christians Furious After GA School Bans Loudspeaker Prayers at Football Games"

[A Vestigial Mote]

That would be chaotic. Fortunately I dislike football and so would not be there to get annoyed at all of the shouting

Way to dodge the point!

Instead of responding to the point about A LONE Muslim standing up and demanding time for prayer to Allah with a megaphone, or A LONE atheist standing up and demanding a moment to reflect on reasons not to believe in God with a megaphone, or A LONE Hindu standing up and demanding everyone take a few moments to praise Vishnu, you chose to respond to it as if the post was about ALL of those things happening at the same time.

So how about it? Care to answer to the ACTUAL point? That is - would you, as a Christian, support a Hindu-led prayer to Vishnu over the loudspeaker before a school function? Would you, as a Christian, support an atheist getting on the microphone just after the Christian prayer at the game, and asking that everyone please just remember that God may not actually exist? And if you wouldn't support those things, then the question is: WHY do you support Christian-led prayer in the same situation? And to that, your answer would have include some roundabout way of saying "because I am a Christian." Well, news flash - NOT EVERYONE IS. And thank God for that, am I right?

 

[metis]

But they all miss a critical point: Even the Freedom From Religion Foundation doesn’t have a legal issue with student-led prayers. If the athletes and fans choose to pray before a game, that’s their right. But at Lowndes, the students use the loudspeaker system to preach Christianity.

I've seen this argued many times before, and it's unfortunate that some people don't seem to realize that we have a 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States-- or maybe they just don't care.

 

[InChrist]

But I don't want to hear a Christian prayer, a prayer to a God I don't believe in, and/or a religion I have a distaste for, at an event that my taxes pay for, or I bought tickets to.

Well, that;s fine. I was just saying I thought is it was prayer, not preaching in response to the quote included in the OP...

"But they all miss a critical point: Even the Freedom From Religion Foundation doesn’t have a legal issue with student-led prayers. If the athletes and fans choose to pray before a game, that’s their right. But at Lowndes, the students use the loudspeaker system to preach Christianity."

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Well, that;s fine. I was just saying I thought is it was prayer, not preaching in response to the quote included in the OP...

"But they all miss a critical point: Even the Freedom From Religion Foundation doesn’t have a legal issue with student-led prayers. If the athletes and fans choose to pray before a game, that’s their right. But at Lowndes, the students use the loudspeaker system to preach Christianity."

The question is whether or not they needed a loudspeaker to pray.

I may only have limited experience with these things, but I've never seen a movie where, at bed time, a child kneels at their bedside, clasps their hands together, closes their eyes, then yell their prayer into a microphone.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The question is whether or not they needed a loudspeaker to pray.

I may only have limited experience with these things, but I've never seen a movie where, at bed time, a child kneels at their bedside, clasps their hands together, closes their eyes, then yell their prayer into a microphone.

God's getting up there in years, he might be having hearing issues.

 

[Erebus]

How about if an atheist, muslim, hindu, or satanist student brought their own megaphone?

Actually that should be enforced for all sporting events. Everybody is given their own megaphone and is required to yell their religious position before the game begins.

"Christ is saviour!"
"Allahu Akbar!"
"Ave Satanas!"
"The existence of any deity is a meaningless issue as the word 'god' has no universal and unambiguous definition!" (the ignostics have never been good with chants.)


It would make sport much more entertaining.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Actually that should be enforced for all sporting events. Everybody is given their own megaphone and is required to yell their religious position before the game begins.

"Christ is saviour!"
"Allahu Akbar!"
"Ave Satanas!"
"The existence of any deity is a meaningless issue as the word 'god' has no universal and unambiguous definition!" (the ignostics have never been good with chants.)


It would make sport much more entertaining.

You could incorporate them into the cheers for added emphasis.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

You could incorporate them into the cheers for added emphasis.

Indeed. With uniforms, and teams and choreography.

 

[74x12]

Way to dodge the point!

Instead of responding to the point about A LONE Muslim standing up and demanding time for prayer to Allah with a megaphone, or A LONE atheist standing up and demanding a moment to reflect on reasons not to believe in God with a megaphone, or A LONE Hindu standing up and demanding everyone take a few moments to praise Vishnu, you chose to respond to it as if the post was about ALL of those things happening at the same time.

So how about it? Care to answer to the ACTUAL point? That is - would you, as a Christian, support a Hindu-led prayer to Vishnu over the loudspeaker before a school function? Would you, as a Christian, support an atheist getting on the microphone just after the Christian prayer at the game, and asking that everyone please just remember that God may not actually exist? And if you wouldn't support those things, then the question is: WHY do you support Christian-led prayer in the same situation? And to that, your answer would have include some roundabout way of saying "because I am a Christian." Well, news flash - NOT EVERYONE IS. And thank God for that, am I right?

I don't think you get it. The point of personal liberties is that no one else has to support you. You don't need their support. So as a Christian I wouldn't support anyone's prayer except to Jesus Christ. But it's your freedom. So then who gets to decide if someone prays out loud at a school event or whatever? The local community should decide. So the majority religion or lack thereof should be the determining factor.

But people are busy bodies and too nosy to let local communities sort things out for themselves.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I don't think you get it. The point of personal liberties is that no one else has to support you. You don't need their support. So as a Christian I wouldn't support anyone's prayer except to Jesus Christ. But it's your freedom. So then who gets to decide if someone prays out loud at a school event or whatever? The local community should decide. So the majority religion or lack thereof should be the determining factor.

This is a little ambiguous. Do you mean that the majority religion should determine whether or not conducting a prayer over a loudspeaker at a public event is acceptable?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I don't think you get it. The point of personal liberties is that no one else has to support you. You don't need their support. So as a Christian I wouldn't support anyone's prayer except to Jesus Christ. But it's your freedom. So then who gets to decide if someone prays out loud at a school event or whatever? The local community should decide. So the majority religion or lack thereof should be the determining factor.

But people are busy bodies and too nosy to let local communities sort things out for themselves.

Using school/government property and time (loudspeaker and at an unrelated/secular school event) as a vehicle for group-practice of a religiously-affiliated activity (in this instance, prayer) has been determined to be against the law in some societies. You abide by it, and atheists will abide by it. You DON'T abide by it, and one of two things is probably going to happen:

1. Authorities are going to be contacted
2. Atheists are going to demand their mic-time (which you already stated you don't support)

This is what is called maintenance of fair and balanced practices. You don't like it? Tough. Call people "busy bodies" all you want... it doesn't make your cause (Christianity) any more important than ANY other. It's more important to YOU, and that's WHERE IT ENDS for every single one of us in a public, government appropriated space.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I don't think you get it. The point of personal liberties is that no one else has to support you. You don't need their support. So as a Christian I wouldn't support anyone's prayer except to Jesus Christ. But it's your freedom. So then who gets to decide if someone prays out loud at a school event or whatever? The local community should decide. So the majority religion or lack thereof should be the determining factor.

But people are busy bodies and too nosy to let local communities sort things out for themselves.

Look, I noticed you rated my post "funny" without actually replying to it. As if that's to make some "strong" statement about how right you are. The law has found your position to be in the wrong. That is, that "the local community should decide." And I am pretty sure you understand precisely why - I feel you're just blindly defending your own beliefs because that's all you understand how to do.

"The local community" is NOT composed of only Christians. You understand that, right? Anything getting through here? Christians do not hold a monopoly on "local communities." I shouldn't even have to be saying this kind of thing. You get this. You have to. Otherwise I would be forced to conclude that you lead some weird, sheltered life or that you do something weird like make sure that any contact you have with another human being is only done by first making sure they are a Christian.

Rating a post "funny" doesn't support your point any more than calling people "busy bodies" does. And I am pretty darn sure you understand EXACTLY what I mean.

 

[Skwim]

Here's the thing: There is a very legal way to get Public Prayers into Football games, over the Loud Speaker:

The announcer states, "We will now have a moment of Silence, for the benefit of the Players"

AND DO JUST THAT: A MOMENT OF SILENCE.

That way? All the Christians can pray to their god, that he will Smite The Other Players, and all the Jews can pray to their God to Not Challenge the local team too much, and all the Satanists can pray to their god, to bring a pox on all the opposing referees, and all the Flying Spaghetti Monsters can pray that the players be Touched By His Noodly Appendeges, and all the Native Americans can ask Raven to not be quite so tricksy today, and all the atheists can check their smart phones for unread messages, and so forth.*

WIN-WIN-WIN!

* If I missed anyone's god? So very sorry. Feel free to comment how you would pray to your god or gods or spirits or whatever.

"Generally, the moment of silence in schools is allowed by law as long as it is genuinely neutral."
source

 

[Skwim]

I've seen this argued many times before, and it's unfortunate that some people don't seem to realize that we have a 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States-- or maybe they just don't care.

You do realize, do you not, that certain caveats go along with the right. For instance, legally you cannot yell "fire" in a crowded auditorium. You cannot lie while under oath. You can’t make offensive remarks or personal insults that would immediately lead to a fight. Also, students have limited rights of free speech while in school---it has been ruled that a school could punish students for making an obscene speech by suspending them. The law also prohibits speech that shows clear intent to discriminate or sexually harass.
source

And so it also goes with using a loudspeaker system to pray during a school function. It's been ruled unlawful.

.

 

[74x12]

Look, I noticed you rated my post "funny" without actually replying to it. As if that's to make some "strong" statement about how right you are. The law has found your position to be in the wrong. That is, that "the local community should decide." And I am pretty sure you understand precisely why - I feel you're just blindly defending your own beliefs because that's all you understand how to do.

"The local community" is NOT composed of only Christians. You understand that, right? Anything getting through here? Christians do not hold a monopoly on "local communities." I shouldn't even have to be saying this kind of thing. You get this. You have to. Otherwise I would be forced to conclude that you lead some weird, sheltered life or that you do something weird like make sure that any contact you have with another human being is only done by first making sure they are a Christian.

Rating a post "funny" doesn't support your point any more than calling people "busy bodies" does. And I am pretty darn sure you understand EXACTLY what I mean.

I never said the local community was composed of Christians. It could be basically anything. There could be limits; if you have some dangerous community for example ISIS supporters. Then it would be understandable not to let them do what they want.

I laughed because you're so upset and saying things about me you don't know. People do this to my posts constantly (the funny frubal) and I don't really mind so much. But, I'm sorry I did that to you. Please accept my apology. I have removed it.

I think the local community should work things like this out for themselves. If they're majority --let's say-- atheist then they could not have any prayers. That's fine because it's power to the people and decentralization. I just don't think the federal government should have any say in it. Even state government is too much in this case.

As for calling people busy bodies and nosy. I still stand by it. I think people need to let other people do what they like. That's originally what America was all about. Now people just want more and more laws to control what they see as bad behavior from other people. The rise of the nanny state irks me. I believe people died for personal liberty to be secured and now their descendants are happily giving all of that away.

 

[74x12]

This is a little ambiguous. Do you mean that the majority religion should determine whether or not conducting a prayer over a loudspeaker at a public event is acceptable?

Yes, or lack thereof. On a local level. I mean the community that actually uses that school.

 

[metis]

You do realize, do you not, that certain caveats go along with the right.

Of course.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

"Generally, the moment of silence in schools is allowed by law as long as it is genuinely neutral."
source

As it should be...... that way, anyone may choose to use the moment as befitting their Cosmological Outlook.

 

[Ponder This]

Who is engaging in religious intolerance here?

How exactly is the atheist group Freedom From Religion Foundation or the atheist(s) they represent being oppressed?

Proselytizing is the action of attempting to convert someone from one religion, belief, or opinion to another. Watch the video and tell me how the prayer used was proselytizing.

Perhaps, the FFRP is the one engaging in religious intolerance here. They don't really care if the prayer was Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or whatever. Do they? They only care that people not express their religion publicly. They want people to remain silent - to stop expressing themselves in a religious manner.

It seems that they don't really understand what religious freedom is.

Watch the video and tell me how there would be a student speech in that stadium without a loudspeaker? It's ridiculous. So... no loudspeaker = no prayer. Isn't the FFRP clever?

Meanwhile... US Continental Congress (both House and Senate) has always opened with prayer (and they even use microphone)! See an example of video here:
Casting out spirits on House Floor | C-SPAN.org

The agenda of religious oppression that the FFRF is engaging in is wrong!

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

The agenda of religious oppression that the FFRF is engaging in is wrong!

Nope. What they are engaging in? Is enforcing the Constitution.

Unless that is fundamentally changed? They are not wrong.