Please present your lunch for inspection little Suzy...

BeefJerky

sucks2beme wrote: »

The pledge of allegiance was written by a Christian socialist.
Not exactly a right wing cause! It was modified a couple of times
and the phrase "one nation, under God" has stirred trouble both
with atheists and some religions. Sorry, the purpose of school is to
educate. That requires kids to shut up, sit down, and pay attention.
The pledge doesn't really make things better or worse.

Agreed. Besides, if you want your child to have to recite a "pledge of allegiance" every day, send them to North Korea. I hear they train their children very well in that regard! Or, if you want a school-led prayer, send them to a religious school of your choice. Neither should be a requirement in a public school. However, I don't have a problem at all with individual prayer, and I don't believe that should be banned. I just don't believe school led prayer is appropriate in public schools.

The real problem isn't some pledge or a prayer, nor should it even be a concern. It's the quality of education that matters, and that is where we are failing. But, as I mention below, it is not entirely the fault of the schools or teachers.

quadzilla wrote: »

Study after study shows that, even at the lowest socio-economic levels, when parents are actively engaged in their children's education, those kids always do better than their peers who's parents take a hands off approach.

So if you want to point to a time when it all started to go south, point to the disengagement by parents from the education system.

Bingo! Parents play a very important role in their child's education! However, as you mentioned, it is a big point of failure nowadays. Thankfully my parents did play a role in my education, and I know it helped me!

SDA1C

This one is still here? LOL. To the OP ... "you toucha my kids fooda Ia bdreaka you facea". Society in general couldn't wipe it's own ****. I'll be damned if I am gong to trust them with the well being of my children!

nooshinjohn

yep... still going, and hats off to every one. This proves once again that a topic does not need to descend into the gutter when talking about issues that can be sensitive in nature.

:cool:

tonyb

I can sure agree that parents play a huge role, and that when the 2 parent working scenario kicked in, was a good starting point of the education system going south.

Then there's the babysitting services when the kids come home. Internet, PS3, texting, kids become little hermits with no family interaction except when they want something. Unless they are supervised at home, you get the same results as a crappy teacher at school. Whats the answer ? Hell if I know, but I will say, if you place more emphasis on moral character, as it was in the past, parents and kids can only benefit. Now I know religion is a taboo subject, but it does place emphasis on building moral character, and I'm not singling out any certain religion either. You certainly don't need religion to build moral character, but it does go along way. Boy/girl scouts, youth organizations, church functions, and parent interaction all can help in this.

I'm from the school of show me a kid who's flunking, and I'll show you a disconnected parent. I'm not absolving schools by any means, but we have 2 different problems in this thread, parenting, and schools. Both need work, both need more attention, and neither is given any. What do I mean by that ?

Parents- need some relief. They are asked to constantly work harder to make ends meet because of a poor economy and declining value of their dollar. It's practically impossible these days to have a single wage earner and own a home. Not that it can't be done, but the good paying jobs have left the building. Outsourced, overworked, and under paid, a parent these days starts off behind the 8 ball. Also, putting less emphasis on material things, and more on the young minds you are in charge of nurturing. Parents also need to be empowered in their choices of education, with their tax money following those choices.

Schools- need to rededicate themselves to the benefit of the child, not the unions. Curriculum needs to bend back towards the basics, and not the agenda's of a few. Schools need lattitude, to hire and fire, compensate teachers as they see fit. They need to be more community based, with input from parents who may be able to change the school leadership if they so desire by vote.

I see none of this being talked about, concerned about, or willing to even try, by the powers at be. We get a bandaid here and there with the same problems resurfacing time and time again. Yet...the same parents who complain, continue to believe by sending more money to Washington, somehow this will all get better. That somehow, if your wallets lighter, and you have to work harder and longer, that this will benefit you in some way, allow you to spend the time needed with your child. The same schools who complain about not having the coin, have little interest in changing anything, little interest in giving the parent any power over the education process. Little interest in tossing out agenda's, teaching history, or culture. The two are not working in conjuction with each other but at opposite ends. Unless you mesh the two, parenting and schools, with an open mind and common sense solutions, none of this changes.

sucks2beme

A quick parallel. Everybody is out to get the boy scouts. They don't like
the part about BOYS only. They don't like the camping. They don't like the
fact they have to earn badges. They don't like the "God" part. They don't like that
they want parents involved, not some agenda based group running the show.
They have been called the SS youth by some groups out in California, and
many want to ban them from using California state parks. Nothing like having
a bunch of lawyers lining up to kick your butt. Their legal expenses have gone
off the chart. Anyone that tries to stick to principals any more is under attack.
It's a private organization, and should be free of all this nonsense, but instead it's
become a prime target.

Tony M

steveinaz wrote: »

I think he's saying that this was starting point for Government to start sticking it's nose in deeper and deeper into the public school system. I would tend to agree.

This is an easy fix. All we need to do is look at how things were done in the 1950's, 60's and 70's....and whatever has changed---PUT IT BACK to what it was. Problem solved. You know, silly things like dress codes, discipline, core curriculum that mattered--that kind of thing.

Bingo.....


I had to say the "Pledge of allegence" but there were no prayer moments that I can remember but maybe there were and that , if it did exist, didn't make me want to be a Babtist preacher over being a science teacher. I don't even remember prayer in the class, that's how insignificant it was to my well being. If a Muslim child doesn't want to or an athiest child doesnt want to pray to their god or slime at that time, I feel they could leave the room. It was a time to give thanks for being a living thankful person to whome you desire quitly from what I read.
I am an American, and the pledge of alleigence made me think of those men and women who gave their lives for our freedoms to live the free life we do. BUT kids and alot of others don't see the flag that way. I've heard them say if they burn all the flags that came out after 9/11 they would think our landscapes and towns would be alot better to their eyes. I think they like being free, but just don't value the flag as their symbol for it. It has been their inalienable right to have this freedom and the flag has nothing to do with it. Crazy.

The coffee thing;

Companies around the world had been serving this 180* beverage to MILLIONS before her. She, I understood, she spilled the beverage on herself.

I have millions of memories of my mother blowing over her millions of coffee cups she drunk over her( excuse me here, my Dad did the same his whole life too) lifetime to cool it down to a temp that was drinkable. That's the way it WAS.

Yes, sentimental jury sided on her side because of those graphic photos. I might've also. That case made every company in America and around the world, I'm sure, to reduce the temp. to a level where if a clutz was to spill their coffee again, there wouldn't be severe burns.

The one clutz changed the temp. of coffee now being served, Simple as that. And it's a good thing for the future clutzs. It's OK. I and nobody will ever be able to reverse the new Temp. laws.

"The few; ruleing the many" is what I don't like. What "few" made up this rule or law that kids lunches prepared from home has to meet levels or else?

I was raised on brown baging my whole life and I'm in preety damn fine condition compared to others but also, we had nutrition programs in our schools to serve the pyramid of foods on a daily basis. It was the childrens choice whether to eat the school food, not eat the school food or bring it from home if you couldn't afford it. I was in the latter. My daughter was given a voucher to eat at school instead of brown bagging. Some days she would, some days she brown baged. She's fine.

The focus on over weight kids has given rise to a friken million government jobs to try and solve the delima.

And others here have already hit the nail on the head. It's the parents duty, to see to it that their off spring grow up healthy. Not the gov.. Now afterwards, is another topic. You then run into the have's and the have not's. The healthy and the not so healthy.

It will always be this way.

But the Gov. is forceing as hard as they can... all should be heathy and all should have.

That's enough for now.

BeefJerky

Tony M wrote: »

I don't even remember prayer in the class, that's how insignificant it was to my well being. If a Muslim child doesn't want to or an athiest child doesnt want to pray to their god or slime at that time, I feel they could leave the room. It was a time to give thanks for being a living thankful person to whome you desire quitly from what I read.

And that right there is the problem. You're asking them to leave the room so you can have your prayer time in a public school? You have to be kidding me. Let me turn this around for you. Based on your clearly bitter statements towards Muslim and atheist beliefs, I'm going to assume you are Christian. So, how would you feel if public schools instituted a Muslim-only prayer time, and made the Christian children step outside of the room while they did their thing? Especially as a child! Somehow I don't think you would be so complacent and understanding if the situation were reversed. Again, this is a public school we are talking about where children of mixed backgrounds and mixed religions attend. There should be no religious favoritism or guidance there, and any sort of school led prayer time certainly falls into that category.

Again, if it is a private religious school, that is a different story. I also have no problem if a child wants to pray themselves. However, that would not involve another child having to step outside of the room.

inspiredsports

BlueFox wrote: »

This sounds like a klutz employee who made a mistake, and the usual suspects are trying to stir up trouble over a non-issue. :rolleyes:

So why didn't the article state that this was an inept employee who made a mistake ??

quadzilla

steveinaz wrote: »

If you "choose" to be different from the prevailing society, you shouldn't expect everyone else to accomodate YOU. YOU need to accomodate them. Our country lately, with it's "PC" BS does just the opposite---'cause god forbid we offend someone. So instead we OFFEND the other 96 percentile, because that's "OK."

Yet another topic that has many Americans "boiling over."

Oh, horse hockey. This is otherwise known as the tyranny of the majority, and it has no place any where. Nor is it about not "offending" someone, it's about being as inclusive as possible for all members of our society. Or does equal opportunity and equal treatment only apply to those who also happen to belong to the most popular group, while everyone else has to conform to them or eff 'em?

Because that's exactly what it sounds like you're saying.

quadzilla

Tony M wrote: »

The coffee thing;

Companies around the world had been serving this 180* beverage to MILLIONS before her. She, I understood, she spilled the beverage on herself.

The focus on over weight kids has given rise to a friken million government jobs to try and solve the delima.

But the Gov. is forceing as hard as they can... all should be heathy and all should have.

[citation needed]

[citation needed]

[citation needed]

I mean seriously.... "a million of government jobs"? Or is just typical hyperbole with little, if any, actual basis in truth? I mean, when I read this, I"m thinking of every class at every school getting a personal fitness instructor, provided by the government. That's about the only way I can think of that "a million" jobs could have been created for this.

inspiredsports

quadzilla wrote: »

[citation needed]

[citation needed]

[citation needed]

I mean seriously.... "a million of government jobs"? Or is just typical hyperbole with little, if any, actual basis in truth? I mean, when I read this, I"m thinking of every class at every school getting a personal fitness instructor, provided by the government. That's about the only way I can think of that "a million" jobs could have been created for this.

I'm not sure what your perspective is, but it would be helpful if you polled a classroom of college bound high school seniors and asked them what they are looking for in a college.

You might be astounded by the number who say they want to go to an instutition that will aid them in landing a "government job".

nooshinjohn

quadzilla wrote: »

[ I"m thinking of every class at every school getting a personal fitness instructor, provided by the government. That's about the only way I can think of that "a million" jobs could have been created for this.

They used to be called Physical education instructors in a government program called gym class, or PE for short. They were replaced, in part, to save the ego's of little Willie, who's willie was really little, and Curly Sue who's boobies were smaller than Sexi Sallie's.

Tony M

BeefJerky wrote: »

And that right there is the problem. You're asking them to leave the room so you can have your prayer time in a public school? You have to be kidding me. Let me turn this around for you. Based on your clearly bitter statements towards Muslim and atheist beliefs, I'm going to assume you are Christian. So, how would you feel if public schools instituted a Muslim-only prayer time, and made the Christian children step outside of the room while they did their thing? Especially as a child! Somehow I don't think you would be so complacent and understanding if the situation were reversed. Again, this is a public school we are talking about where children of mixed backgrounds and mixed religions attend. There should be no religious favoritism or guidance there, and any sort of school led prayer time certainly falls into that category.

Again, if it is a private religious school, that is a different story. I also have no problem if a child wants to pray themselves. However, that would not involve another child having to step outside of the room.

Your putting words to my opinion. You need to re-read it. I'm one of the most un-racist persons to grace this planet. One of...


They could stay..... or *IF they didn't want to just sit there* and be sooo offended, they could go out side the room do their own thing. This is America, built with the belief of a Christian Diety, PERIOD.

But people want to throw that history down the tubes and bring up all the (only now are they considered unjust but back then, that's the way it was) unjust these forefathers did to get to it's modern ways.

They were *given* a choice is what I said ,but it wasn't written out fully and feel.
Not our choice, but theirs.
But if the few don't like the manys way, they have to join or move. That's society. Tell a muslim school in Irac to not pray to Allah because this one kid is christan. Come on, get real won't you. (shaking my head)

This country has always helped other nationalities after the late 60's.

I state facts and I will say, my enemies who want to kill me ( no-matter their race, nationality or REASON) are not ever going to be my friends. I will not ask them to sit at a table and ask, please stop your killing of innocents and lets talk over lunch about what we're doing wrong.
That goes for any nation. Re-read previous statement. I'll bet you were thinking I was talking extreme Muslim action. I wasn't but it could fit there as well as extreme Iracians or who ever wants to kill AMERICANS. Me and you and all in these bourders. No exceptions.

I don't go to Christan churchs since the ones I did attend are so full of hipocrits, I couldn't stand it. My wife also. Same reasons.
I've sat at dinners where the grace speaker earlier in the day did things he would never admit publicly. I know there are 10x more Holyer people in chuchs than I will ever be. I know that. I and my wife aren't perfect but we do believe and are content to our souls' position as to helping and not hurting as a lifes' goal. That can be any religion and I know they(other religions) are mostly the same. That's why I'm not racist and didn't even know it existed until I moved to a country town at age 17. I thought racism was over. Boy was I wrong!!!

Anyway, I hate the fingers of Gov. prying into personal matters.

The seperation of church and state *statement* gave millions of new young lawyers something to debate when they got out of college and couldn't find reg. work. They got their wish alright.

BlueFox

inspiredsports wrote: »

So why didn't the article state that this was an inept employee who made a mistake ??

Ask the person who wrote the article.

fatchowmein

Wait a minute. Wait a minute.

This is the same government that in the 60's listened to Ancel Key's seven country lipid hypothesis that a diet high in fat led to cardiovascular disease even though he ignored the other 15 countries that didn't fit into his hypothesis?

This is the same government that put together George McGovern's Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs in the 70's and ignored a panel of experts and 8 studies with 5,000 patients showing no correlation between animal fats and heart disease but went ahead and published a low-fat diet plan with increased consumption of grain?

This is the same government that sought to put out a definitive guide on fat in 1988 to end all atherosclerosis by the year 2000 but quietly killed the program in 1999 after 11 years and supposedly spending over $100 million dollars because they couldn't prove it?

Little Suzy is screwed.

http://thewilliamsrecord.com/2011/09/21/putting-discussion-back-on-the-table/
http://www.timinvermont.com/fitness/fat.htm

Tony M

quadzilla wrote: »

[citation needed]

[citation needed]

[citation needed]

I mean seriously.... "a million of government jobs"? Or is just typical hyperbole with little, if any, actual basis in truth? I mean, when I read this, I"m thinking of every class at every school getting a personal fitness instructor, provided by the government. That's about the only way I can think of that "a million" jobs could have been created for this.

98,706
Number of public schools in 2008-09. In 2007-08, there were 33,740 private schools.
So I might have over estimated by just a little but my theory is still PLAUSIBLE.ource: U.S. National Center for Education Statistics, <http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/tables/dt10_005.asp&gt;

that was a few years ago. Say the Gov. (Fed. and then Local ) instate a nutritionist per school. Then , of course, the person will need an assistant. And the newly appointed local Gov. will have to have a Labratory to study new foods.Existing or not locally, somebody will make the call to build a new one if needed. Of course it will be needed in hundreds of locals. Oh maybe you havn't heard of the Food and Drug agency that's already in place with God knows how many employees. Do you want me to search it's number of employees. I wonder if they even state it anywhere. So maybe 500,000 jobs just to get started not including the F&D admin. employees. So....

Tony M

fatchowmein wrote: »

Wait a minute. Wait a minute.

This is the same government that in the 60's listened to Ancel Key's seven country lipid hypothesis that a diet high in fat led to cardiovascular disease even though he ignored the other 15 countries that didn't fit into his hypothesis?

This is the same government that put together George McGovern's Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs in the 70's and ignored a panel of experts and 8 studies with 5,000 patients showing no correlation between animal fats and heart disease but went ahead and published a low-fat diet plan with increased consumption of grain?

This is the same government that sought to put out a definitive guide on fat in 1988 to end all atherosclerosis by the year 2000 but quietly killed the program in 1999 after 11 years and supposedly spending over $100 million dollars because they couldn't prove it?

Little Suzy is screwed.

http://thewilliamsrecord.com/2011/09/21/putting-discussion-back-on-the-table/
http://www.timinvermont.com/fitness/fat.htm

Nice facts.
I agree.
If the Gov. gets more involved she'll be more overweight and have issues. No freedom of choice to choose what she wants to eat.

Tony M

nooshinjohn wrote: »

They used to be called Physical education instructors in a government program called gym class, or PE for short. They were replaced, in part, to save the ego's of little Willie, who's willie was really little, and Curly Sue who's boobies were smaller than Sexi Sallie's.

Great point John.

I had gym until 10th grade. That's why most of us are in pretty good shape. Reccess twice a day up till 5th, and then Gym. What a point I've completely forgot about. And yep, I think it to was iliminated to keep feeling from being hurt. They never pick me for dodge-ball. I can't jump up to the net. We understand and we're really sorry but you can still play.I never saw a gym teacher degrade a single person or give them as much concern as needed. They could play or they could watch. I hated bullies but they're part of nature and will always be here. Thank God I didn't see to many in my young life. But I have been bullied and if the bully only knew I had thoughts of severly making him never be able to it again.

tonyb

quadzilla wrote: »

Oh, horse hockey. This is otherwise known as the tyranny of the majority,

As opposed to what ? The tyranny of a few ? If a majority rule is to be considered tyranny, then every election should be tossed out until those few get a seat at the table. Maybe a closer look at the constitution is in order for you to see how things are suppose to work.
The only "horse hockey" I see, is the idea that the few are under a tyranny by the majority. In case Mommy and Daddy never informed you, life isn't fair sometimes, trying to make it so doesn't work out so well.

nooshinjohn

tonyb wrote: »

The only "horse hockey" I see, is the idea that the few are under a tyranny by the majority. In case Mommy and Daddy never informed you, life isn't fair sometimes, trying to make it so doesn't work out so well.

The minority trying to control the majority were called bullies when I went to school. They usually got their way too, until the bullied stood up and beat the **** out of the little punk ****. I think we are fast approaching the point where the bullies are about to get another a$$whoopin'.

tonyb

Once you gain control of the money, you can change the system. Guess what you don't control ? The money...hello !! The rest of this is just pissin' in the wind.

I'm sure alot of you, myself included, are tired of this equal outcomes B.S. Ya know what ? Life isn't fair, not everyone gets a trophy, some will get beat up, picked on, some will have more opportunities than others, some will go to better schools than others, some can have steak for lunch while others eat twinkies and cheese sandwiches, so what. Go to work, support your family as best you can, stop crying about the guy next door making 20 g's a year more than you while doing less work. Pay attention to your own family and provide for them. Stop crying about any freebies that may go away, they were never yours to begin with. Take responsibility for yourself, your family, your actions and do the best you can with what you have.

BeefJerky

Tony M wrote: »

Your putting words to my opinion. You need to re-read it. I'm one of the most un-racist persons to grace this planet. One of...

I did reread it, and parts of this post also confirmed my thoughts. You really do come off as a prejudiced and hateful person when it comes to other religions. Maybe you should reread what you typed out.

They could stay..... or *IF they didn't want to just sit there* and be sooo offended, they could go out side the room do their own thing. This is America, built with the belief of a Christian Diety, PERIOD.

[citation needed]

Seriously. This has already been mentioned here, and actual biographies of many of the founding fathers refute your claim here. Yes, many had some form of deistic beliefs, however, they were not all Christian by any means. In addition, there is no where in any of the founding documents that state this country was specifically founded on Christian beliefs. You are simply trying to pass off your erroneous claim as some sort of fact.

But people want to throw that history down the tubes and bring up all the (only now are they considered unjust but back then, that's the way it was) unjust these forefathers did to get to it's modern ways.

I'm not entirely sure how this relates to the discussion at hand.

They were *given* a choice is what I said ,but it wasn't written out fully and feel.

Huh? This makes no grammatical sense.

Not our choice, but theirs.
But if the few don't like the manys way, they have to join or move. That's society.

And that makes it right? It's nice that you are able to show your true colors though. You are basically saying that everyone should conform or go away. Talk about going against the very spirit that this country was founded upon. This country was founded upon the belief that all people are created equal, regardless of their differences in culture or beliefs. But no, according to you they should all conform and give up their cultures and beliefs. What a bunch of hogwash.

Besides, it is the various cultural differences from the many different immigrants that came to our country that make it so great (in my opinion).

Tell a muslim school in Irac to not pray to Allah because this one kid is christan. Come on, get real won't you. (shaking my head)

But that is Iraq, not the United States. Just because some other country does something doesn't mean it is right or should be considered acceptable here in the U.S. This country was founded upon better principles than that, but because of people like you we are straying away from those principles.

This country has always helped other nationalities after the late 60's.

Again, not exactly sure how this fits into the rest of the discussion.

I state facts and I will say, my enemies who want to kill me ( no-matter their race, nationality or REASON) are not ever going to be my friends. I will not ask them to sit at a table and ask, please stop your killing of innocents and lets talk over lunch about what we're doing wrong.

Actually, you've stated a lot of incorrect information, and presented your opinions as facts. In addition, your clear hatred for those who are your enemies makes you no better than they are. In fact, it is that kind of intolerance and forceful involvement of ourselves in their business that brings about a lot of their hatred of us and this country. I can't say I really blame them, and this is a problem with this country in recent times. We need to stop pretending we are the World Police.

That goes for any nation. Re-read previous statement. I'll bet you were thinking I was talking extreme Muslim action. I wasn't but it could fit there as well as extreme Iracians or who ever wants to kill AMERICANS. Me and you and all in these bourders. No exceptions.

No, I see that your intolerance and hatred extends beyond Muslims.

I don't go to Christan churchs since the ones I did attend are so full of hipocrits, I couldn't stand it. My wife also. Same reasons.

You claim to hold Christian beliefs, but your words here certainly don't represent those beliefs very well. Maybe it wasn't the churches where hypocrisy laid.

I've sat at dinners where the grace speaker earlier in the day did things he would never admit publicly. I know there are 10x more Holyer people in chuchs than I will ever be. I know that. I and my wife aren't perfect but we do believe and are content to our souls' position as to helping and not hurting as a lifes' goal. That can be any religion and I know they(other religions) are mostly the same. That's why I'm not racist and didn't even know it existed until I moved to a country town at age 17. I thought racism was over. Boy was I wrong!!!

You claim to not be racist, and I'm assuming you claim to not be prejudiced either. However, your last couple of posts clearly demonstrate that you are both.

Anyway, I hate the fingers of Gov. prying into personal matters.

The seperation of church and state *statement* gave millions of new young lawyers something to debate when they got out of college and couldn't find reg. work. They got their wish alright.

While that phrase has been used poorly as of late, I suspect the original intent was positive. While that simple phrase may not completely describe the foundations of our country, I don't believe that it is that far off either.

nooshinjohn

Beefjerky... Your knowlege of our founders is quite lacking.

http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html

I see not one atheist or agnostic among them. The reason our Founding Documents read as they do is because refering to a Creator was the agreed upon way to recognise the wide range of religious beliefs of our founders and respect each person's particular beliefs. Some states actually had religions that were recognised as the official beliefs of that state. It was for this reason, to PROECT individual faiths from being attacked by the central government that the 1st ammendment was drafted to begin with. It was never intended to be used as a means to remove faith rfrom the public square, and it was never meant to imply that our founders did not believe in the God of Abraham and Joseph.

We are a Christian Nation and our founders would be spinning in their graves if they could see what he have become.

nooshinjohn

From the Eternally great Red Skelton...

"Boys and girls, I have been listening to you recite the Pledge of Allegiance all semester and it appears that it has become monotonous to you or could it be you do not know the meaning of those words. If I may, I would like to recite the Pledge and give to you a definition of the words.
I----meaning me, an individual, a committee of one.
Pledge----dedicate all of my worldly goods to give without self pity.
Allegiance----my love and my devotion.
To the Flag----our standard, Old Glory, a symbol of freedom. Wherever she waves, there is respect because your loyalty has given her a dignity that shouts freedom is everybody's job.
Of the United----that means that we have all come together.
States----individual communities that have united into 48 great states. 48 individual communities with pride and dignity and purpose, all divided with imaginary boundaries, yet united to a common cause, and that's love of country.
Of America.
And to the Republic----a republic, a state in which sovereign power is invested in representatives chosen by the people to govern. And government is the people and it's from the people to the leaders, not from the leaders to the people.
For which it stands!
One nation----meaning, so blessed by God.
Indivisible----incapable of being divided.
With Liberty----which is freedom and the right of power to live one's life without threats or fear or any sort of retaliation.
And justice----The principle and quality of dealing fairly with others.
For all.----which means, boys and girls, it's as much your country as it is mine."

Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our nation, and two words have been added to the Pledge of Allegiance "under God." Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said, "That's a prayer" and that would be eliminated from schools, too?

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/LPbIls0iOnI&quot; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

F1nut

tonyb wrote: »

I'm sure alot of you, myself included, are tired of this equal outcomes B.S. Ya know what ? Life isn't fair, not everyone gets a trophy, some will get beat up, picked on, some will have more opportunities than others, some will go to better schools than others, some can have steak for lunch while others eat twinkies and cheese sandwiches, so what. Go to work, support your family as best you can, stop crying about the guy next door making 20 g's a year more than you while doing less work. Pay attention to your own family and provide for them. Stop crying about any freebies that may go away, they were never yours to begin with. Take responsibility for yourself, your family, your actions and do the best you can with what you have.

Best post in this thread.

Worst posts, BeefJerk. You sir, are an argumentative fool.

BeefJerky

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Beefjerky... Your knowlege of our founders is quite lacking.

http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html

I see not one atheist or agnostic among them. The reason our Founding Documents read as they do is because refering to a Creator was the agreed upon way to recognise the wide range of religious beliefs of our founders and respect each person's particular beliefs. Some states actually had religions that were recognised as the official beliefs of that state. It was for this reason, to PROECT individual faiths from being attacked by the central government that the 1st ammendment was drafted to begin with. It was never intended to be used as a means to remove faith rfrom the public square, and it was never meant to imply that our founders did not believe in the God of Abraham and Joseph.

We are a Christian Nation and our founders would be spinning in their graves if they could see what he have become.

And your reading comprehension skills are lacking. I said:
"Yes, many had some form of deistic beliefs, however, they were not all Christian by any means."

I acknowledged that they had other deistic beliefs, and never claimed they were atheist or agnostic.

In addition, you also acknowledge that they did not specify Christianity in the country's founding documents. This lack of specification makes it quite clear to anyone with reasonable reading comprehension skills that this is not a Christian country. If that was what they intended, then it should have been put down clearly into words rather than leaving it open to interpretation. It sounds like you know what they meant better than they did. However, not one of us alive today knew them personally, so we can only go by the written documents; and the written documents do not support your claim that this is a Christian country. Sorry, but that is the truth.

As for the "separation of church and state" thing, I acknowledged that it was not a perfectly accurate statement in my last post. However, there is a difference between seeing a church or Christmas decorations around town and having it force-fed. School led prayer is certainly falls more towards the force-fed end of the spectrum, and as such, it has no place in public schools. Also, seeing how public schools are funded by and thoroughly controlled by the government, it is even less appropriate.

Once again, I have no problem with individual prayer in school. I also have no problem with school led prayer in a religious school. Therefore, if you want school-led prayer send your children to a religious school.

nooshinjohn

Rather than quote the biased views of historians, read the words of our Founders. They were quite clear in their intent and clear with what they meant. It was UNDERSTOOD by all living in their time that there was a God, and a Son of God. They could not have foreseen a time when such beliefs would ever be doubted, though Thomas Jefferson did say we should "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."

BeefJerky

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Rather than quote the biased views of historians, read the words of our Founders. They were quite clear in their intent and clear with what they meant. It was UNDERSTOOD by all living in their time that there was a God, and a Son of God. They could not have foreseen a time when such beliefs would ever be doubted, though Thomas Jefferson did say we should "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."

Feel free to post some documents that support your point of view. I'll be happy to read them, as I enjoy reading about history. Until then, it sounds like you are grasping at straws.

tonyb

BeefJerky wrote: »

. Therefore, if you want school-led prayer send your children to a religious school.

Ya know, alot of people would do just that if......they were allowed to alocate their tax money for it instead of paying a double bubble.

Red....good ol' Red Skelton, loved that guy, and his take on the pledge. Every kid should hear that.

BeefJerky

tonyb wrote: »

Ya know, alot of people would do just that if......they were allowed to alocate their tax money for it instead of paying a double bubble.

I somewhat understand where you are coming from. I don't have children, but I still pay school taxes; oh well.

As for the excuse for not sending your child to a religious school because of the taxes, I don't buy it. I have a friend and his wife who sent their child to one. They had to work their arses off and sacrifice greatly to accomplish it, but they did it. In other words, you could do it if you wanted to.