1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Religion in school

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Rex, Mar 21, 2004.

  1. Ardhanariswar

    Ardhanariswar I'm back!

    Jun 1, 2004
    perhaps an interfaith club? or where people can talk about their own religions and listen to others.

    that would be kinda neat. i wonder what happend to our interfaith club at our school. course, i go to a catholic school. ...hmm....
  2. Pah

    Pah Uber all member

    Jun 2, 2004
    It can be intra- or interfaith. The purpose of a club is generated from student interest.
  3. F_R_O_G

    F_R_O_G Member

    Mar 24, 2004
    this is very simple. the courts think that the Constitution creates a wall of separation, i think it doesn't. why is there a problem with that? the courts can change there mind you know, so they must be wrong at some point.

    i do agree that "Constitutional law is the sum of all the court cases and Amendments to the Constitution, and the body of the Constitution itself." but i'm not talking about constitutional law... constitutional laws can change with court decisions, the Constitution doesn't (except for amendments) so why are you bring it up?

    thank you, i'm glad we agree, now if only ceridwen will believe me...

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" now if they wanted to say that the government can't be involved in any religion they would say "Congress shall make no law respecting any establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" i just don't understand how this could be referring to the church, read the amendment and think about what it really says to YOU. when i read it it only refers to Congress not the church!

    please stop listening to those preagrenaed history professors. they look for evidence that supports what they want to believe not what the truth is. our founding fathers were all Christians, the only reason some think they wern't is because may of them said there were not the same "Christians" as in england, but i assure you they did try to be "christ-like"

    theres no conflicting statement, both of them talk about that laws that restrict people can't be passed. there certainly no laws that can be made by a teacher. if anything the teachers rights are being restricted.

    just a question for you guys... why are schools allowed to teach evolution but not creation?
  4. Pah

    Pah Uber all member

    Jun 2, 2004
    You are making a distiction with no practical application and ignoring the examples of other law concepts that do not "appear in the Constitution"

    It applies not to the church but to the governement. Churches establish splinter groups all the time. The wall is erected on Government territory.

    You do understand, don't you, that governemnt can not function without law being passed by Congress and signed by the President. In fact, it can not even be established without a formulating law.

    You do realize that these Christians framed a "Godless" Contistitution and the people, some of whom were Christian, approved it.

    Simply not true. Religious expression is restricted, Free speech is restricted. Criminal behavior (which is NOT found in the "your" Constitution) is restricted and punished. Marriage benefits are restricted.

    The short answer is that creation is not a science - it deals with origins which evolution, in schools, does not. But that is probably another thread.
  5. Ceridwen018

    Ceridwen018 Well-Known Member

    Mar 24, 2004

    Bottom line? Everyone who has any say in politics pretty much accepts the 'wall of separation', so for now, whether or not you like it you're gonna have to live with it. Good luck with changing that though.

    Haha, I never said I disagreed, actually. I meant what pah said-- sorry for the miscommunication.

    If you could, name for me any religious establishment which could not also be defined as a religious establishment.

    You are waging a foundationless battle of semantics here.

    They are in boundless company.

    Or, perhaps the reason 'some' people don't believe they were Christian is because they point blank stated that they were not. Either or, I suppose...

    Being 'Christian' and being 'christ-like' are two very separate endeavors. I am not Christian, yet I still attempt to be 'christ-like' in many ways.

    If a teacher wants to teach something specific, they can go to a school that allows that particular class, or become a college professor-- god knows there's a professor of everything.

    They could also band together and petition Congress like everyone else. Basically though, teaching is a JOB. The teachers must teach what their customers desire, or no one will want their kids or themselves to be taught by them. Bottom line, this is a non-existent conflict...or are you a teacher who feels you are being restricted?

    Because the theory of evolution is based upon secular science, as well as being widely accepted by the scientific community, whereas the theory of creationism is based upon religious beliefs, and is NOT widely accepted by the scientific community. Also, it comes back to the 'wall of separation'. Creationism is religiously founded, and therefore cannot be taught in a secular school.
  6. LCMS Sprecher

    LCMS Sprecher Member

    Jun 6, 2004
    Religion in public schools is ok if it is practiced on an individual basis and one single religion is not expressly endorsed as being the right one. I do not believe that students should be held back from practicing their religion openly in school. The constitution provides for the "freedom of religion" not "freedom from religion."
  7. Pah

    Pah Uber all member

    Jun 2, 2004
    I agree with the first part ("Religion in public schools is ok if it is practiced on an individual basis") with the reservation that the Constitution does not allow for the public expression of an individual's faith during school (except perhaps for the "T-shirt" with a religious message that conforms to an established dress code). It does not matter whether is it one or many religions - none can be endorsed singly or collectively

    The principle is that the state or its agents may not host (indirectly endorsing) religious expression within curriculum or within scheduled activities of the school because of the compulsary nature of public school (in other words - not before a captive audiance).

    I totally disagree with the last part. The "freedom to ..." implicitly grants the "freedom from ..." and is explicitly exemplified by the cases involving contraception.
  8. LCMS Sprecher

    LCMS Sprecher Member

    Jun 6, 2004
    Should the state then prevent Christian kids from praying at lunch then because their words might be heard by a Muslim (or any other religion)?
  9. Ceridwen018

    Ceridwen018 Well-Known Member

    Mar 24, 2004

    No, I don't think so. I think kids should be allowed to say their prayers, just as long as they aren't expecting everyone to quiet down for them or something. However, the first kid to complain about being offended is going to ruin it for eveyone.
  10. Pah

    Pah Uber all member

    Jun 2, 2004
    As long as it it done silently -

  11. Mr Spinkles

    Mar 25, 2004
    Wait a minute-- kids can't pray out loud at lunch? That's a tad strict, I think.

    I could understand if Voodoo worshippers couldn't kill animals at lunch....but praying out loud in a noisy lunchroom....I don't see the problem with that.
  12. Pah

    Pah Uber all member

    Jun 2, 2004
    Religion In The Public Schools: A Joint Statement Of Current Law


    The Joint Statement of Current Law is a collaborative document undersigned by over 30 religious and civil rights groups that outlines the religious rights of students in the public schools. Most of these organizations are separationist in philosophy and practice, some of them (eg., ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State) aggressively so.
    The document lays to rest the myth that prayer and other types of religious expression are banned in the public schools. On the contrary, religious expression generally enjoys the same protection as other forms of speech. This document forms the basis of President Clinton's guidelines for religious expression in the public schools. A copy of these guidelines were sent to all public school districts in the United States in September of 1995.

    Religion In The Public Schools:
    A Joint Statement Of Current Law

    The Constitution permits much private religious activity in and
    about the public schools. Unfortunately, this aspect of constitutional
    law is not as well known as it should be. Some say that the Supreme
    Court has declared the public schools "religion-free zones" or that the
    law is so murky that school officials cannot know what is legally
    permissible. The former claim is simply wrong. And as to the latter,
    while there are some difficult issues, much has been settled. It is also
    unfortunately true that public school officials, due to their busy
    schedules, may not be as fully aware of this body of law as they could
    be. As a result, in some school districts some of these rights are not
    being observed.

    The organizations whose names appear below span the
    ideological, religious and political spectrum. They nevertheless share a
    commitment both to the freedom of religious practice and to the
    separation of church and state such freedom requires. In that spirit, we
    offer this statement of consensus on current law as an aid to parents,
    educators and students.

    Many of the organizations listed below are actively involved in
    litigation about religion in the schools. On some of the issues
    discussed in this summary, some of the organizations have urged the
    courts to reach positions different than they did. Though there are
    signatories on both sides which have and will press for different
    constitutional treatments of some of the topics discussed below, they
    all agree that the following is an accurate statement of what the law
    currently is.

    Student Prayers

    1. Students have the right to pray individually or in groups or to
    discuss their religious views with their peers so long as they are
    not disruptive. Because the Establishment Clause does not
    apply to purely private speech, students enjoy the right to read
    their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, pray
    before tests, and discuss religion with other willing student
    listeners. In the classroom students have the right to pray
    quietly except when required to be actively engaged in school
    activities (e.g., students may not decide to pray just as a teacher
    calls on them). In informal settings, such as the cafeteria or in
    the halls, students may pray either audibly or silently, subject to
    the same rules of order as apply to other speech in these
    locations. However, the right to engage in voluntary prayer does
    not include, for example, the right to have a captive audience
    listen or to compel other students to participate.

    Graduation Prayer and Baccalaureates

    2. School officials may not mandate or organize prayer at
    graduation, nor may they organize a religious baccalaureate
    ceremony. If the school generally rents out its facilities to private
    groups, it must rent them out on the same terms, and on a first-
    come first-served basis, to organizers of privately sponsored
    religious baccalaureate services, provided that the school does
    not extend preferential treatment to the baccalaureate ceremony
    and the school disclaims official endorsement of the program.

    3. The courts have reached conflicting conclusions under the
    federal Constitution on student-initiated prayer at graduation.
    Until the issue is authoritatively resolved, schools should ask
    their lawyers what rules apply in their area.

    Official Participation or Encouragement
    of Religious Activity

    4. Teachers and school administrators, when acting in those
    capacities, are representatives of the state, and, in those
    capacities, are themselves prohibited from encouraging or
    soliciting student religious or anti-religious activity. Similarly,
    when acting in their official capacities, teachers may not engage
    in religious activities with their students. However, teachers may
    engage in private religious activity in faculty lounges.

    Teaching About Religion

    5. Students may be taught about religion, but public schools may
    not teach religion. As the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly
    said, "t might well be said that one's education is not complete
    without a study of comparative religion, or the history of religion
    and its relationship to the advancement of civilization." It would
    be difficult to teach art, music, literature and most social studies
    without considering religious influences.

    The history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible (or other
    scripture)-as-literature (either as a separate course or within
    some other existing course), are all permissible public school
    subjects. It is both permissible and desirable to teach objectively
    about the role of religion in the history of the United States and
    other countries. One can teach that the Pilgrims came to this
    country with a particular religious vision, that Catholics and
    others have been subject to persecution or that many of those
    participating in the abolitionist, women's suffrage and civil rights
    movements had religious motivations.

    6. These same rules apply to the recurring controversy surrounding
    theories of evolution. Schools may teach about explanations of
    life on earth, including religious ones (such as "creationism"), in
    comparative religion or social studies classes. In science class,
    however, they may present only genuinely scientific critiques of,
    or evidence for, any explanation of life on earth, but not religious
    critiques (beliefs unverifiable by scientific methodology). Schools
    may not refuse to teach evolutionary theory in order to avoid
    giving offense to religion nor may they circumvent these rules by
    labeling as science an article of religious faith. Public schools
    must not teach as scientific fact or theory any religious doctrine,
    including "creationism," although any genuinely scientific
    evidence for or against any explanation of life may be taught.
    Just as they may neither advance nor inhibit any religious
    doctrine, teachers should not ridicule, for example, a student's
    religious explanation for life on earth.

    Student Assignments and Religion

    7. Students may express their religious beliefs in the form of
    reports, homework and artwork, and such expressions are
    constitutionally protected. Teachers may not reject or correct
    such submissions simply because they include a religious
    symbol or address religious themes. Likewise, teachers may not
    require students to modify, include or excise religious views in
    their assignments, if germane. These assignments should be
    judged by ordinary academic standards of substance, relevance,
    appearance and grammar.

    8. Somewhat more problematic from a legal point of view are other
    public expressions of religious views in the classroom.
    Unfortunately for school officials, there are traps on either side of
    this issue, and it is possible that litigation will result no matter
    what course is taken. It is easier to describe the settled cases
    than to state clear rules of law. Schools must carefully steer
    between the claims of student speakers who assert a right to
    express themselves on religious subjects and the asserted rights
    of student listeners to be free of unwelcome religious persuasion
    in a public school classroom.

    a. Religious or anti-religious remarks made in the ordinary
    course of classroom discussion or student presentations
    are permissible and constitute a protected right. If in a
    sex education class a student remarks that abortion
    should be illegal because God has prohibited it, a teacher
    should not silence the remark, ridicule it, rule it out of
    bounds or endorse it, any more than a teacher may
    silence a student's religiously-based comment in favor of

    b. If a class assignment calls for an oral presentation on a
    subject of the student's choosing, and, for example, the
    student responds by conducting a religious service, the
    school has the right -- as well as the duty -- to prevent
    itself from being used as a church. Other students are not
    voluntarily in attendance and cannot be forced to become
    an unwilling congregation.

    c. Teachers may rule out-of-order religious remarks that are
    irrelevant to the subject at hand. In a discussion of
    Hamlet's sanity, for example, a student may not interject
    views on creationism.

    Distribution of Religious Literature

    9. Students have the right to distribute religious literature to their
    schoolmates, subject to those reasonable time, place, and
    manner or other constitutionally- acceptable restrictions imposed
    on the distribution of all non-school literature. Thus, a school
    may confine distribution of all literature to a particular table at
    particular times. It may not single out religious literature for
    burdensome regulation.

    10. Outsiders may not be given access to the classroom to distribute
    religious or anti-religious literature. No court has yet considered
    whether, if all other community groups are permitted to distribute
    literature in common areas of public schools, religious groups
    must be allowed to do so on equal terms subject to reasonable
    time, place and manner restrictions.

    "See You at the Pole"

    11. Student participation in before- or after-school events, such as
    "see you at the pole," is permissible. School officials, acting in
    an official capacity, may neither discourage nor encourage
    participation in such an event.

    Religious Persuasion Versus Religious Harassment

    12. Students have the right to speak to, and attempt to persuade,
    their peers about religious topics just as they do with regard to
    political topics. But school officials should intercede to stop
    student religious speech if it turns into religious harassment
    aimed at a student or a small group of students. While it is
    constitutionally permissible for a student to approach another and
    issue an invitation to attend church, repeated invitations in the
    face of a request to stop constitute harassment. Where this line
    is to be drawn in particular cases will depend on the age of the
    students and other circumstances.

    Equal Access Act

    13. Student religious clubs in secondary schools must be permitted
    to meet and to have equal access to campus media to announce
    their meetings, if a school receives federal funds and permits any
    student non-curricular club to meet during non-instructional time.
    This is the command of the Equal Access Act. A non-curricular
    club is any club not related directly to a subject taught or
    soon-to-be taught in the school. Although schools have the right
    to ban all non-curriculum clubs, they may not dodge the law's
    requirement by the expedient of declaring all clubs
    curriculum-related. On the other hand, teachers may not actively
    participate in club activities and "non-school persons" may not
    control or regularly attend club meeting.

    The Act's constitutionality has been upheld by the Supreme
    Court, rejecting claims that the Act violates the Establishment
    Clause. The Act's requirements are described in more detail in
    The Equal Access Act and the Public Schools: Questions and
    Answers on the Equal Access Act*, a pamphlet published by a
    broad spectrum of religious and civil liberties groups.

    Religious Holidays

    14. Generally, public schools may teach about religious holidays,
    and may celebrate the secular aspects of the holiday and
    objectively teach about their religious aspects. They may not
    observe the holidays as religious events. Schools should
    generally excuse students who do not wish to participate in
    holiday events. Those interested in further details should see
    Religious Holidays in the Public Schools: Questions and
    Answers*, a pamphlet published by a broad spectrum of religious
    and civil liberties groups.

    Excusal From Religiously-Objectionable Lessons

    15. Schools enjoy substantial discretion to excuse individual students
    from lessons which are objectionable to that student or to his or
    her parent on the basis of religion. Schools can exercise that
    authority in ways which would defuse many conflicts over
    curriculum content. If it is proved that particular lessons
    substantially burden a student's free exercise of religion and if
    the school cannot prove a compelling interest in requiring
    attendance the school would be legally required to excuse the

    Teaching Values

    16. Schools may teach civic virtues, including honesty, good
    citizenship, sportsmanship, courage, respect for the rights and
    freedoms of others, respect for persons and their property,
    civility, the dual virtues of moral conviction and tolerance and
    hard work. Subject to whatever rights of excusal exist (see #15
    above) under the federal Constitution and state law, schools may
    teach sexual abstinence and contraception; whether and how
    schools teach these sensitive subjects is a matter of educational
    policy. However, these may not be taught as religious tenets.
    The mere fact that most, if not all, religions also teach these
    values does not make it unlawful to teach them.

    Student Garb

    17. Religious messages on T-shirts and the like may not be singled
    out for suppression. Students may wear religious attire, such as
    yarmulkes and head scarves, and they may not be forced to
    wear gym clothes that they regard, on religious grounds, as

    Released Time

    18. Schools have the discretion to dismiss students to off-premises
    religious instruction, provided that schools do not encourage or
    discourage participation or penalize those who do not attend.=20
    Schools may not allow religious instruction by outsiders on
    premises during the school day.


    * Copies may be obtained from any of the undersigned organizations.



    Organizational Contacts for
    "Religion in the Public Schools:
    A Joint Statement of Current Law"

    American Civil Liberties Union
    Beth Orsoff, William J. Brennan Fellow
    202/544-1681 (x306)

    American Ethical Union
    Herbert Blinder, Director, Washington Ethical Action Office

    American Humanist Association
    Frederick Edwords, Executive Director

    American Jewish Committee
    Richard Foltin, Legislative Director/Counsel

    American Jewish Congress
    Marc D. Stern, Co-Director, Commission on
    Law and Social Action

    American Muslim Council
    Abdurahman M. Alamoudi, Executive Director

    Americans for Religious Liberty
    Edd Doerr, Executive Director

    Americans United for Seperation of Church and State
    Steve Green, Legal Director

    Anti-Defamation League
    Michael Lieberman, Associate Director/Counsel,
    Washington Office

    Baptist Joint Committee
    J. Brent Walker, General Counsel

    B'nai B'rith
    Reva Price, Director, Political Action Network

    Christian Legal Society
    Steven T. McFarland, Director,
    Center for Law and Religious Freedom

    Christian Science Church
    Philip G. Davis, Federal Representative

    Church of the Brethren, Washington Office
    Timothy A. McElwee, Director

    Church of Scientology International
    Susan L. Taylor, Public Affairs Director, Washington Office

    Evangelical Lutheran Church in America,
    Lutheran Office for Governmental Affairs
    Kay S. Dowhower, Director

    Federation of Reconstructionist Congregations and Havurot
    Rabbi Mordechai Liebling, Executive Director

    Friends Committee on National Legislation
    Ruth Flower, Legislative Secretary/Legislative
    Education Secretary

    General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists
    Gary M. Ross, Congressional Liaison

    Guru Gobind Singh Foundation
    Rajwant Singh, Secretary

    Interfaith Alliance
    Jill Hanauer, Executive Director

    Interfaith Impact for Justice and Peace
    James M. Bell, Executive Director

    National Association of Evangelicals
    Forest Montgomery, Counsel, Office of Public Affairs

    National Council of Churches
    Oliver S. Thomas, Special Counsel for
    Religious and Civil Liberties

    National Council of Jewish Women
    Deena Margolis, Legislative Assistant

    National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council (NJCRAC)
    Jerome Chanes, Director, Domestic Concerns

    National Ministries, American Baptist Churches, USA
    Rene Ladue, Program Assistant,
    Office of Government Relations

    National Sikh Center
    Chatter Saini, President

    North American Council for Muslim Women
    Sharifa Alkhateeh, Vice-President

    People for the American Way
    Elliot Mincberg, Legal Director

    Presbyterian Church (USA)
    Eleonora Giddings Ivory, Director, Washington Office

    Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
    W. Grant McMurray, First Presidency

    Union of American Hebrew Congregations
    Rabbi David Saperstein, Director, Religious Action Center

    Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
    Robert Alpern, Director, Washington Office

    United Church of Christ, Office for Church in Society
    Patrick Conover, Acting Head of Office, Washington Office
  13. quick

    quick Member

    Jun 7, 2004
    The problem, in a nutshell, is that most religions create a worldview that is outcome determinative on many issues. As a Christian, my faith affects my view of human nature, good and evil, scientific truth, marriage, other religions, etc., ad infinitum. Many other religions are similar.

    The problem is a fundamental one with our entire system of government. For generations, we had a de facto state Christianity that formed the basis for almost everything we did, officially or otherwise. IT was more fundamental than our Declaration or our Constitution, and predated these documents by many centuries. Our Founders simply did not recognize that this culture would become so diverse (as opposed to simply northern European) that freedom of religion would come to mean Islam and Christianty and Wiccan living side by side, rather than Methodists and Presbyterians getting along.

    Eventually, someone's ox will be gored, and then the polity will be in crisis. If your religion means anything to you at all, there are points as to which compromise is not an option. I can tell that within 30 or 40 years, Christians will be on the run in this country that we founded, and we will either fight back or die, unless God, in his wisdom, brings us a spirit of revival. It is impossible for many of these religions to peacefully co-exist unless they are "believed" to the extent of parlor conversation and nothing more.
  14. Pah

    Pah Uber all member

    Jun 2, 2004
    I have copied this post by quick and will answer it in The Dichotomy of Christians. where it is more appropiate.
  15. Ceridwen018

    Ceridwen018 Well-Known Member

    Mar 24, 2004

    Do you think that our Founding Fathers would have acted differently had they known? Do you wish that they had acted differently?

    So don't settle for a compromise...go to a private school.

    This quote disturbs me. What makes you think that Christians are in danger of persecution? That goes against everything our country stands for. It would also be quite the '180', as Christianity is about the biggest religion in the US as of now.

    I don't think it's impossible. In fact, many of these religions are co-existing peacefully in our country right now. Maybe not in other parts of the world, but we are definately setting a good example.

    Just because you aren't fighting to the death over something, doesn't relegate it to 'parlor conversation'. God calls you to witness your faith to non-believers, not beat it into them with an Uzi. So, you do the best you can, and people either accept your message or not, but once you've presented your case to someone, it stops being your problem, and becomes theirs.
  16. quick

    quick Member

    Jun 7, 2004

    Contrary to what you suggest, I think only a relative handful of people in the US are Christians. From data I've seen, only between 20 and 40% of people in the US go to any church (Christian or otherwise) once a week. In Germany, it may be more like 10 or 12%, and we seem to follow Europe, albeit a few years afterward. See link: http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_rate.htm
    Many folks who go to church aren't true believers. In short, Christianity is on the decline here and in Europe, just as it is on the rise dramatically in Asia and Africa. When the numbers get this low, the discrimination starts in earnest.

    Right now, Christians are fired if they say "too much" at work. Christians are demonized in public schools. They are sent home for wearing religious symbols and clothing in some jurisdictions. Christian holidays, formerly national and without dispute, are under attack. Christians are ridiculed and marginalized in press and media. Church tax exemptions are under attack. Many people say the most insulting things to and about Christians--things they would never say to Jews, for example--and it goes unchecked. Our mainstream culture is drifting farther and farther from a Christian model every day, and when enough people reject the faith, the majority will prevail.

    Since we have universal suffrage here, trampling on the Constitution for the sake of the majority is not all that difficult. Just look what has happened in the field of gun ownership--many regs and restrictions are in place, all without a Const amendment. Our leaders pander to the majority to garner votes, and if the majority wants to trample on Christians, it will happen. The last bastion of safety, our courts, are increasingly filled with those who have little sympathy.

    Christ said we would be persecuted (See below). The relative safety with which we have been able to practice our faith here in the US is an historical anomaly. I would suggest our own blasphemy and rebelliousness may have caused the Lord to reduce his grace upon this nation.

    See these verses from Matthew 24, especially verse 9:

    "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"
    4Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. 5For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,[1] ' and will deceive many. 6You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8All these are the beginning of birth pains.
    9"Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
  17. Pah

    Pah Uber all member

    Jun 2, 2004
    It is 43% and that is up from 42% in 1994.

    Germany shows an increasing trend in church attedance from 4% in 1999 to 7.4%

    You numbers are overly pessimistic

    You might consider that when you say we are founded by Christians and are a Christian nation.

    It is not on the decline!!! Period!!!!

    What you are seeing is a lose of control socially. Others are finding their voice and not putting up with the suppression and discrimination that is given out by a Christian society

    The workplace is for making profit. The "too much" is seen as disruptive to the business of the workplace.

    Schools have never had as much afterschool Christian activity as they had before. Never has secondary eductaion seen the power of the Christian college than is present today.

    Christmas is still Christmas. Blame the capitalistic drive of America for the commercialization - this by a largly Christian ownership Thanksgiving is and was the only other I can think of and that remains a family oriented holiday.

    That makes 2 out of 13.

    I see Christian networks on television channels.

    I see the Passion of Christ at the box office. I see an influx of new religious themed movies taking advantage of this. I see TV series with a religious theme.

    About time! Why should religion enjoy tax advantages that other non-profit organizations are denied?

    I would not expect those insulting Christians would use the same words for Jews. They, the Jews, are defiled by Christians for other reasons (money and world domination come to mind - all from a basis of "the killer of Christ".

    I also see atheists vilified and threatened with stoning in the good ol' OT way. I see "heretical" denominations continually marginalized

    Gun control has gone though the courts - no amendment needed. You can't honestly say that the populace should be armed with automatic weapons or the same weapons as held by our military - or can you? The ultimate question - whether the people should have guns at all - has never been tested I think you have little reason to see "sympathy" where there has been no occassion to exercise it.

    Since about 300 CE, the Christian faith has been formally protectded by the state. America is not an anomaly.

    You and Jerry Fallwell (sp?).
  18. +Xausted

    +Xausted Well-Known Member

    Feb 18, 2008
    [Anyway, Religion in School.. negative. School should be about Logic and Science and Facts - it should be kept that way. They can get Religion at home - I did, and that worked fine (for a time :) )

    religion has a great impact on sociology, politics, history...well in fact everything that most of us believe, even if we are unaware. it should be taught in schools ( love the way you americans call public school state...here in england public school is private school). all religions should be taught even handlely , througherly and thoughtfully. once people have an understanding of other peoples beliefs they can be more tolerant
  19. wednesday

    wednesday Jesus

    Aug 23, 2007

    Wow, i don't know where you live but we are slaves to Christianity here whether we embrace it or not. I got sent home for wearing a concealed necklace that was'nt a tratitional cross. Christians have it easy, yet they think the world is out to get them. Saying too much creates workplace conflict, i know i'd be uncomfortable working with a die-hard. Religion, christianity or not, has no place anywhere but in your home and in your place of prayer.
  20. Somkid

    Somkid Well-Known Member

    Dec 24, 2007
    I sent my daughter to a Christian school this year because it is one of the best schools in Chiang Mai although she has learned a lot about math, computer, English, Thai, etc. science is lacking untruthful and it has confused her to the point where my wife and I have to do damage control. Needless to say my wife and I have decided to put her in a government school next semester where the standard is lower but the truth is of the utmost importance.