Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Atheists Vocal Over Moment of Silence Law
CHICAGO - When high school freshman Dawn Sherman learned that Illinois had a law requiring public schools to provide a moment of silence each day for "reflection and student prayer," she was outraged.
Not because the law meant lost learning time in her honors math class - which would be 15 seconds shorter - but because "it was clear that we're supposed to sit and pray, or sit and watch other people pray," said Sherman, who is an atheist.
Along with her father, Rob, the Buffalo Grove High student has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the law, which some Illinois school boards have raced to embrace and others have defied.
"I don't go to school to talk to God," she said. "I'm in school to learn."
The debate reflects a longstanding national fight over school prayer. The Supreme Court in 1962 ruled that official sponsorship or endorsement of prayer in schools is a violation of the First Amendment. Over time, state lawmakers found that they were allowed to require moments of silence as long as students were not forced or encouraged to pray.
But there were limits: In the mid-1980s, an Alabama mandatory "moment of silence" law was found unconstitutional by the high court because "there was a clear legislative record that they were trying to advocate getting prayer back into schools," said Charles C. Haynes, a senior scholar at the First Amendment Center in Washington.
"Since then, legislators have been far more careful about what they're saying about why such measures are pushed forward," Haynes said.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia also require such moments of quiet in the classroom. In more than 20 other states, teachers are allowed to decide whether they want such a classroom time-out.
US District Judge Robert W. Gettleman in Illinois is set to hear oral arguments early next year over whether to grant class-action status to the Shermans's case.
In the meantime, Gettleman has ordered Township High School District 214, which oversees Buffalo Grove High, not to participate in the moment of silence. He also has barred the superintendent of the Illinois State Board of Education from enforcing the rule or issuing any directive on how the issue should be handled in other schools.
Critics of such laws argue that they are a first step to threatening the Constitution's separation of church and state.
"We heard a steady stream of complaints, from teachers to parents to students, in the days after the law went into effect," said Colleen Connell, executive director of the ACLU of Illinois.
"We've heard about a principal telling students to remember veterans in their prayers or private reflections," she said. "We've heard that teachers fold their hands and bow their heads, perhaps inadvertently, but sending a message to the kids that they should be praying."
But advocates of the laws say they give educators a tool to focus their students' attention and provide children a chance to reflect on either personal issues or the challenges they might face that day.
"It's certainly a student's constitutional right to engage in silent reflection, even if it includes prayer," said David Cortman, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a nonprofit Christian law firm that has filed briefs in the Sherman case. "It's as if the mere mention of the word 'prayer' suddenly taints the law."
In 2002, Illinois lawmakers passed the Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act, which gave teachers the option to have a moment of silence in their classrooms as long as it was not "conducted as a religious exercise."
The law - which supporters and critics agree is ambiguously worded - did not outline how compliance would be monitored, did not give school districts a way to opt out and did not specify whether they would be penalized for not participating.
As part of an effort to help teachers across Illinois gain control of their classrooms, state Senator Kimberly A. Lightford said, lawmakers tweaked the measure's wording. It went from saying educators "may" observe a moment of silence to saying that they "shall."
"What's the problem? Every single time we meet on the Senate floor, we open up the session with prayer - whether it's given by a rabbi, or a priest, or a Buddhist or a minister," Lightford said.
Governor Rod R. Blagojevich vetoed the measure, citing constitutionality concerns, but lawmakers overrode him.
When the law went into effect Oct. 11, many Illinois school administrators raced to try to hash out practical issues, such as what amount of time constitutes a "moment."
Others opted to ignore the legislation. In November, after failing to get a waiver from the state, Evanston-Skokie School District 65 board members agreed that they would not force teachers in their schools to observe the law.
© 2007 The Los Angeles Times
119 Comments so far
Show AllThis type of petty bullshit is what gives us on the left a bad name. Seriously, who cares. Think about the hot boy/girl in the seat next to you or repeat a fact or a math problem in your head for the upcoming exam for the 15 seconds. We got far bigger fish to fry such as the war in Iraq, global warming, lack of healthcare, eradication of civil liberties, what crazy shit Bush is going to do next, etc etc etc vs. worrying what to do with 15 seconds of silence in school. Focus people focus!
I agree. its stupid. There is nothing wrong with a moment of silence.
Some atheists need to approach it from another angle besides being anti-christian or radically pro science.
Too much science worship is just as bad as too much Jesus worship--and often they mix(i.e.-born again christians heading the human genome project).
Buddhism is an atheist religion--which people would read up on the definition of religion and atheism.
I'm an agnostic myself, with Buddhist leanings, so I find a moment of silence a fine idea.
I don't want to steryotype, but most professed Athiests in the USA I've met are a peculiar lot - always prune-faced, humorless, and scowling - like a throwback to Victorian-era scholars - and they seem locked in aan ultra-materialism that can'tget beyond a rather puerile view of all spiritual pursuits as just some kind of primitive mann-in the sky worship.
And, in most cases Athiests should not be lumped-in with the US left - many are social-Darwinist or Ayn-Rand types.
As far as science, I find a number of scientific disciplines, notably quantum physics, and cosmological studues, deeply "spiritual". They have the ability to inspired a sense of awe like others get from religion. Furthermore, when a scientist reaches the frontier of inquiry, they usually tap into their religious notions in searching how to proceed. Nils Bohr had eastern religions in mind when he formulated the Copenhagen interpretation and non-locality, while Einstein was clearly tapping into his Judaism when he said God doesn't play dice with the Universe. To the extent thet Bohr was right and Einstein wrong has been primarily why I find eastern religion so interesting.
senior counsel david cortman says it's a student's "constitutional right to engage in silent reflection, even if it includes prayer." that much is beyond dispute. but what is equally clear from a straight reading of the first amendment is that nobody has a right to force anybody else to "reflect" along with them.
somebody once quipped that there would be prayer in schools as long as there were exams. what was removed from schools by the preponderance of case law was not prayer per se, but mandatory group prayer as part of the daily routine. enforced conformity has always been the objective.
as with the rejection of "creation science," xtians will almost certainly point to this case as evidence that they're a persecuted minority. it will become fodder for the unrelenting flow of campaign "news," for softball questions from "debate" moderators to favored candidates, and gotcha questions to kucinich, gravell and paul.
you can almost hear the knuckles starting to drag out in the heartland.
hazmat - "enforced conformity has always been the objective". You hit the nail on the head. And we could prove this by changing the law to allow kids a moment of silence at home prior to school. If the zealots behind the law are really concerned about kids reflecting in silence, a change like this would be fine with them. (And we know it wouldn't.)
why must we always defend an atheists rights,at the cost of everyone else......?
seraphicmom - Why must we defend the rights of blacks, women, gays, etc., at the cost of everyone else?
Come on now, you're not a closet bigot are you?
(btw, I don't consider myself an atheist.)
I do think that atheists are pretty looked down upon in our society and disrespected. People would rather have a Muslim or homosexual as president before an atheist (not that there's anything wrong with either of those two groups, but generally speaking they are the most feared by the right currently). People wouldn't want atheists to watch their kids. Etc. Etc. So there's really some work to be done on respecting the rights of those who don't believe in a deity.
That said, I am an agnostic with (currently) atheist leanings. I enjoy Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, and the like. (Minus the ridiculous geopolitical stances). However, I also think silence is a positive thing even if its secular. There's so much running around and noise and mental pollution in our day to day world, a moment of silence can be a breath of fresh air.
I am a member of the local Green Party and we share a moment of silence together at the end of each meeting. We are Buddhists, Christians, and Atheists. But we all enjoy the silence and use it in our own way.
We have bigger fish to fry than this for sure. Let's just make sure that students aren't encouraged to pray, or forced to, or maybe are allowed to sit there and read if they so desire and I'm all for it.
Maybe there should be a moment of silence before each class. Inner reflection is always a positive thing...
If people don't believe in god they should speak up. Fifteen seconds of silence may be irreverent to them. Ironic, isn't it?
Where is the ACLU when we need them? This is just the type of case that they specialize in. While they have been defending idiots rights to protest manjers and moments of silence, chimpy has been wiping his ass with the Constitution. I get a big kick out of the ACLU emailing me for donations. Why does this crap get any press at all? Someone bitching about a "moment of silence"...where is Brittany?
jeeves,every atheist on the face of this earth,has the right to not pray and just walk away..they have the right not to worship and they can turn off the t.v. evangelists,just like i do.what i object to,is they force their godless(void) will on everyone else.
Perhaps commentators above forgot about the social dynamics of school. If the intent of the law is to allow prayer in school, then it's not a leap to see how this becomes criticizing or ostracism of those who don't.
Mary McGrory wrote an article "Beware the Holy Fervor of the 70's" (I think that's the title). It was about religious affiliation being used as the litmus test of business affiliations and useage, social networks, etc.
Samuel Johnson wrote, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." Ambrose Bierce wrote
, "... and religion's the first."
What's sad is that religious beliefs and independent of theocratic philosophies have given the foundation for some of the best of humankind. And just as surely, some of the worst.
Whether religious or not, if people don't have spirituality, there're missing an important part of being human. If nature isn't an integral part of that spirituality, there's a serious disconnect.
Getting back to youth, they are becoming more disconnected to the natural world. And without that, we're lost.
There's another point here. Why would the Illinois legislature mandate this? Why not simply legislate to allow it on school by school basis?--or even a classroom by classroom basis. A moment of silence before any class to focus the mind, what's wrong with that?
No one can prove EITHER...Religion is flawed because it comes from MAN and can be manipulated to any end....Science is flawed because it can be easily manipulated and tends to not account for Mystery.....
The Religious texts we know are all written by MAN (emphasis on MAN, not Woman) over hundreds, if not thousands of years ago....all with Political agendas....they were not 'written by God' or there would be ONE translation, not the hundreds of Human translations (NEV, NEW Oxford, etc..)....
also, Atheists tend to be way too judgmental (so do Religious people) and tend to overlook the inconsistencies of Science in explaining the Universe....
NO ONE KNOWS......deal with it...or at least stop yelling at others who feel differently....one can be very happy being a Taoist and simply live....believing in 'something' bigger than themselves, but never 'knowing' it truly....just being.
Can't these people find something else to get the "vapors" over? They just installed foot baths for Muslims in my local public university- are they going to get offended by that and protest a separation of "Church and State". Get a life.
seraphicmom and everybody else, but mostly seraphicmom - None of the atheists I know, including myself, force their will on anybody else. Honestly now, is your observation based on knowing a great many atheists on a personal level, or are you just fantasizing to make a wishful point to gain ground? I'm willing to bet anybody out there that there are several people in your life whom you love and respect who are, unknowingly to you, atheists. Most of my friends are religious because there are so many more believers in whatever than nonbelievers in whatever. We have a great time together. And just like any other categorized group of people, a small percentage of atheists, are uncompromising jerks. But they are unpleasant to be around because they are uncompromising jerks not because they are atheists. Let this moment of silence all hash out with those who desire to be vocal about it, which may or may not include you or me. Our choice. But do we need to dehumanize each other in the process?
I'm a staunch atheist, but I agree this is a waste of time.
Human civilization is quickly accelerating towards destruction, and all anyone can talk about is abortion, gays, guns and religion.
Within 20 years there will be hundreds of millions of environmental refugees, massive famine, the oceans will turn acidic, and the land will only be able to provide a fraction of the food we currently consume. Wars will break out everywhere over the lack of resources. It's unlikely most of us will survive. I'd use my moment of silence to reflect upon that.
Defending the US Constitution is never a waste of time.
It's not about which minority we are trying to defend.
It is the process of enforcing the Constitution that matters and kicking out any politicians that violate it.
"A moment of silence" has indirect but clear prayer references and is a violation of the first amendment.
I agree this issue will be brought up against the left during the general election campaign, because most (not all) aetheists and constitutionalists (e.g. lawyers, ACLU) reside on the left.
We fought the intelligent design case at the Federal court and through discovery found that it was creationism re-worded... check out your PBS listings for a mock trial based on the real trial.
i would defend your right to be an atheist=as far as you would defend mine-not to be. wish i were an atheist,seems so much simpler.john lennon said."i only believe in me"that really narrows it down to a nut shell.syncronicity,i cant spell it but i see it and feel it all around and i can feel by the heat,that it emanates from 'somewhere''something' had to build this house for man....the presence and the vehicle that allows us to be squatters on this aether net=affirms that there is more....................
Dear serarphicmom, Who is that "we" that you refer to who are always defending athiests? If so, you are doing a piss poor job of it. Regarding public tax-funded functions, sorry, but I don't want to be made to "just walk away" and the framers of our Constitution would agree. Also, many thanks for that lovely, "force their godless (void) will..." Do you have the wit and education to conceive that possibly you may be a religious bigot?
Atheists always seem to strike me as being intolerant towards those who do believe in God. I have experienced alot of the uncompromising kind. Hopefully I'll meet some Atheists someday who will act otherwise.
Myself, I'm old enough to remember when the phrase "under God" was added to the pledge of allegiance. I hated it then, and refuse to say it now. Most of all, I abhor religious people sneakily inserting their "faith" into public schools.
i dont think i am a religious bigot...i try on all shoes..but every time i try to bend that way,it never sticks.i am into science and have been all my life,i just dont see any discrepancy between science and a 'creator ('not some old dude in a white beard)_......(i believe) science is an affirmation of creation or 'god',if you prefer.i apologize to your sensitivities,i forgot,you DONT prefer.p.s.religion and faith,have not much in common.religion is mostly ritual.......faith is an all encompassing optimism.
The First Amendment states:
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.
The intent was to prohibit the establishment of a theocracy in the United States, where a church ruled and governed. So, the government cannot make a law establishing a religion as the state religion. However, it is also forbidden to prohibit the free exercise of religion by the people.
There is nothing in the Constitution that forbids, for instance, a biblical quotation or the ten commandments being put on a building. It does not forbid a Christmas tree or a creche, or a menorah, or anything else being put on display on government or private property.
In short, under the Constitution everyone has the right to believe, or not believe, what they wish. They do not have the right to enforce their belief, or lack thereof, on others.
A moment of silence in school or in class does no harm. The religious may think a prayer, the not particularly religious can remember a walk in the woods where they saw a deer. The atheist can open his or her book and study or look out the window. To make an issue out of it and get it forbidden is ridiculous, and is in violation of the First Amendment.
There is so much going wrong in the world to be concerned with, why is so much time and effort being expended on thought control?
Dear hereonhteres, I remember those days equally, the "under God" business having been the work of another generation of publicly pious Republicans during the repressive McCarthy era, and then having to be fought in the progressive sixties. Damn right, the public schools are PUBLIC.
I am atheist and do feel that the moment of silence is a pretext to bringing prayer back to school. Why is the moment of silence even necessary? Recess stopped in kindergarden. Anyhow, shame on those who wrote in and stereotyped all Atheist. Some atheists feel the moment of silence is no big deal and others like myself are opposed. We are after all human and have differing opinions as does everyone else.
Dear seraphicmom, Please excuse my angry tone, but you clearly don't realize that some of your assertions are insulting. How can you assume that I have no faith? Humanism is a faith, a view of humankind that must be assumed, cannot be proved, in fact is difficult to hold in view of recent history but which I hope I will not be forced some day to abandon.
i absolutely believe in separation of church and state !!!!it is the cornerstone of democracy and freedom,along with free speech....freedom cannot exist and democracy cannot breathe unless church and state are separate...............man= designated to be caretakers of living (things)...(doin a helluva job,brownie)i am in a generous mood...i am going to take a hiatus,from the aetherous blogesphere and give the raven and the misanthrope a break.i am not "the enemy"and i do not want to participate in the 'infight club'....there must be larger more pressing enemies,than i
there are areas in the u.s., that if you would refuse to participate in a moment of silence, (prayer), in a classroom , you could be ostracized, or shunned by your peers. that's a lot of pressure to put upon the psychic of fragile children. this could be a slippery slope, and i'm sure those who are pushing for this, have that intention in mind. keep the prayers in the home or church, where they belong. religion should be a personal experience. why do you people of faith, insist on pushing your beliefs on everyone? i'm secure in my spirituality, and i have no need for confirmation. are you?
So I guess we should boot the Muslim footwashing facilities out of our public campus?
Actually!!!I believe we could all stand momentS of silence to our own and others benefit. For example, I don't know who's an atheist...and I like it that way. Can you imagine a less inspiring/interesting conversation over tea or down at the corner bar than on why somebody's against something?
And I won't tell you where I am in my Christian spiritual pilgrimage...unless you're receptive. We all believe we're totally awesome, full of feeling and sensitivity, well-read, discerning...in fact, brilliant and just the way a person should be.
Now, pray tell what's wrong with silence? May the teacher MANDATE tests to those who don't believe in them? Can children REFUSE to read because they believe reading rots the brain and stymies social growth? May order BE IMPOSED in a classroom despite children's natural proclivity to be disorderly? Perhaps speeding and running stop signs should be permitted since we all want to be free.
How free?
Dear bligh, No
Dear lobster, Camel's nose in the tent.
dcbeltway, are you willing to compromise your beliefs? if not, then why should others? your generalized remarks are bigoted.
Tony,
So? There are lots of camels all the way in said tent. That's why it's good to study the liberal arts and humanities. Then you have many thoughts to strike fire as they move around your brain.
I knew this story would generate a lot of heated debate, and I was right. For what it's worth, here is my take...
I largely agree with those who conclude that fighting over "moment of silence" legislation is a waste of time and resources. In a perfect world, where the leftists and civil libertarians had billions of dollars and endless amounts of time to expend, I would say go for it. But given the limited budgets of most left-leaning organizations and individuals, it seems so wasteful.
That said, none of us should be too quick to judge. We are not in the situation personally. Being a teenager in our conformity obsessed culture is hard enough; I'd hate to see religion tacitly shoved in my face in school on top of everything else. And that is what all "moment of silence" laws amount to: sneaking school prayer in the back door, however minimally. Is it a huge deal? I don't think so, but I might feel differently were I an atheistic high school student.
As to the argument about the personalities of atheists, I think it is VERY important to distinguish between openly and actively atheistic individuals and passive atheists (along with agnostics, deists, secular humanists, etc.) In college, I was very much in the former group; today, I am very much in the latter. Back then, I was active in the Duluth chapter of Minnesota Atheists, went to conferences put on by FFRF (Freedom from Religion Foundation), the Atheist Alliance and the Council for Secular Humanism, started my own atheist/agnostic student group at my college and wrote weekly columns for my university newspaper on religion. I was quite active. And I was also militantly materialistic, scientistic and against even the mildest religious belief or spirituality.
Thus, from my own experience and in knowing MANY, MANY active atheists in Minnesota, I can say that yes, most (though not all) were narrow minded and puerile in their hatred of ALL religion and spirituality (not just fundamentalism). They also tended to elevate science to the status of a religion (and men like Dawkins to the status of demigods). In addition, they fetishized the Establishment Clause to the level of idolatry. And, as PJD stated, many were Ayn Rand loving social Darwinist types who reveled in the myth of "Enlightened Self-Interest". Indeed, one of the main reasons I lost interest in the atheist/freethought community was, as a lifelong socialist, I got sick of listening to endless diatribes about the glories of the free market and how lassiez-faire liberalism is the only truly rational political belief.
But active, overt atheists are not all atheists; not by a long shot. I still consider myself non-theistic (though I don't brandish the atheist label anymore), but I've come to appreciate many forms of liberal Christianity and the social gospel. My political/social beliefs are fair more important than my lack of religions belief (i.e., I'd take Dietrich Bonheffer over Ayn Rand any day). Furthermore, while I respect the scientific method in the abstract, I treat the actual practice of science as skeptically as I do religious practices. And I don't think every instance of religiosity in the public square requires an unyielding attack. Furthermore, most of my friends are atheistic/ agnostic/ freethinkers and hold similar beliefs as I do on all these matters.
The problem here is, the most radical and extreme atheists are the ones most likely to associate themselves with the label. And in doing so, they give a very skewered picture and confirm a lot of negative stereotypes about all of us who are unbelievers. It's unfortunate, but little can be done about it.
May order BE IMPOSED in a classroom despite children's natural proclivity to be disorderly? Perhaps speeding and running stop signs should be permitted since we all want to be free.
How free?
if there is a natural proclivity for disorder, I don't see it. Where I've been there is a strong embracing of the status quo, arbitrary procedure and order. In short, we are dead to the system until we are the product it wants us to be. Until those same people break from the system, and its molding influence, I don't see them as alive at all. Maybe it is naive, but I support anybody who runs against the ingrained, even if the monotony is inevitable, at least they try to live. Orders, repetition, organization, and normalcy, all are sought in the spirit of consistency and comfort, but they like anything else, offer no guarantee of enjoyment, no tendency for personal or societal success, unless you call what we have now a success.
Tim Kidd said
The problem here is, the most radical and extreme atheists are the ones most likely to associate themselves with the label. And in doing so, they give a very skewered picture and confirm a lot of negative stereotypes about all of us who are unbelievers. It's unfortunate, but little can be done about it.
I agree with this statement, the same way the fundamentalists might skew a person's view of their religion, the angry unreasonable atheists can skew the view of groups who don't hold a deity, because the title encourages the consideration of a group of people and not an individual basis, and because people define themselves by personal standards, these types of generalizations are highly detrimental. It goes back to an ability to be tolerant, and to avoid generalizations.
I also want to suggest that Miss Dawn, high school freshman, might have a tough row to hoe. Who cares what she came to school to learn. Perhaps home schooling would be just the thing for her since she has written her own syllabus with the cooperation of her parents.
This won't be the first time in life she will find that she's come to a party only to find it's not what she wanted.
I think one goes to school to learn how to learn...and how to get along with others and still make a place for oneself.
I remember a student many years ago who refused to do his assigned work in a mechanical drawing class since he'd already won his National Merit Scholarship based on grades earned up till that point. He made an F in drawing, because as he told me, his advisor, I don't need that grade. I tried to persuade him to do his best the rest of the semester to no avail.
He reported me to the principal and said that I threatened his scholarship. I sat quietly while the principal read me the Riot Act. At the end of this I said quietly, "I don't think he'll last very long at that college?"
Before Thanksgiving, a dean sat beside me in the teachers' cafeteria and told me that my advisee was back home...that he couldn't make it.
I suggest a compromise based on the teacher's being the captain, if you will, of the classroom. If the teacher wants to start the class with a moment of silence, or not, let the teacher explain the reason why and accept the praise, or blame, for the result. The kids will figure out for themselves how they feel about it.
Just like any other large group of people, atheists come in all shapes and sounds.
For example, my neighbors are Christians. They hang their Christmas lights, go to church every Sunday, yet they are still able to come over to our house for dinner and bridge without discussing religion. I think they are more representative of average Christians than the people who scream on TV asking for money, or the well-dressed teens who ring my doorbell on Saturday morning to explain why my beliefs are wrong.
Similarly, most atheists do not find the need to proselytize. They get along with religious and non-religious people alike by respecting everyone's right to think and decide for themselves. However, the few who do speak loudly and publicly are sometimes the only atheists that some people even know exist.
There are plenty of atheists who are not trying to outlaw religion. They just do not want religion forced upon them. Do unto others, right?
I do not see anything wrong with requiring a moment of silence, as long as there is absolutely no pressure to direct the thoughts of the students or faculty during that moment. Since when can't a teacher tell the class to be quiet?
Could this be a "first step" towards re-instituting prayer in public schools? Of course it could. But it -isn't- prayer in school. Just as we can require gun registration without gun confiscation, we do not have enforce a 0% policy in order to prevent a 100% disaster.
It is hardly a question of time it's a question of teaching facts,known facts through observation and discovery. Religion has been around for a long time under different guises and different rituals that it does seem childish to even contemplate it seriously that is why this student protests. She thinks in logical terms that's why math's is of such interest to her and like me she finds people who believe in this rubbish quite devoid of reasoning, it's all belief.
I often wonder what I would say in a court of law when some moron shoves that book in front of me and says repeat after me, I would probably tell them the book means nothing to me which, in the USA would be like pleading guilty.
I'm not an atheist, but I believe 100% in the complete and total separation of church and state. Organized religion, which appears to me to have been used by the state as a powerful tool to control the masses (that's you and me, my friend) throughout history, is what I'm really wary of. I think churches should be treated as businesses for tax purposes, and I also think references to God should be removed from our currency and the Pledge of Allegiance. Having read more than a little about the horrors of the state-sponsored Christian-on-Christian co-persecution in England during Shakespeare's time, for example, I'm very afraid of church-state coalitions. Want a couple of examples of how modern-day state religions operate? Have a look at Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Why in hell must it be MANDATORY? Simple question!
'In 2002, Illinois lawmakers passed the Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act'
Did anyone notice the name of the law? It seems pretty clear to me what they are trying to promote.
Having been in high school more recently than probably all of the other posters here, I can tell you that I kept my beliefs to myself for very good reasons. Attending a public school in Ohio, not exposing myself as an atheist was important. My classmates were judgmental, if I was the only person in the class not participating in a moment of silence, it would be noticable.
Although, I might not have minded a moment of silence in school compared to the science teacher I had who quoted the bible in class.
I'm glad there are people standing up for issues like this.
The USA has to get over the god myth if it ever wants to rejoin the civilised world.
Faith is the mental illness dragging the USA back into the dark ages.
Any action that helps Americans to avoid becoming infected is a good thing.
Personally, I felt that a moment of silence was a refreshing way to start a class, however, I agree that it should not have a religious meaning.
Imagine my horror this Christmas Day, standing in a prayer circle with my devoutly Christian family (two of them are missionaries/pastors in training)... as an atheist. They insist that we go around the circle and individually thank God for what we have been given. I felt like running out the door and never coming back! And I love these people, and respect their beliefs. I just said, "Yeah, what he said..." seconding my 13-year-old cousin at my side.
Thinking back now I should have said, "I am thankful this will be over soon," or, "I am thankful that my brain evolved in such a way that it is capable of logical thought."
Now imagine a classroom of children (of all faiths) expected to pray...when adults can't even share what they believe with their own families--out of fear that they will be ostracized by the people who love them! Why do Christians have to make a show out of prayer? I can tell you that the Muslim child probably doesn't want to roll out a mat and pray toward Mecca in front of everyone. That might kill their social life in this day and age (regretfully). I know it is 15 seconds of silence... but it only takes one second to discriminate against those who are different from you. I respect people who want to make personal prayer...truly personal--by doing it on their own time.
However, I think it is an excellent current events topic to discuss in the classroom, so that children may understand why the separation of church and state is so important.
'the world is my country and my religion is to do good' (thomas paine)...i like this statement and it pretty much fits me...i don't need to believe in a supernatural being or belong to an organized group with a book of tenents that i must live by...
i spent a week's vacation painting the steeple of a small upstate ny church because i adore my aunt and uncle who have added for over 50 years...i worked many summer saturdays as a lead carpenter for habitat for humanity (a christian organization) and i assisted my incarcerated brother in converting to catholicism...i don't think many christians would be willing to volunteer to work for atheist or humanist organizations...
as a non-believer, i am offended that the legal tender i must use in this country falsely claims 'in god we trust'...how arrogant is that? i would say that that clearly violates the constitution...i just cross out the phrase and hope it encourages others to contemplate why someone would do that...i find it offensive for someone to say 'god bless' when i sneeze...it is offensive to me that every state and federal sector shuts down for 'the christmas holiday' but not other religious holidays...it is offensive to me when the folks on npr say 'the week before christmas' rather than the third week in december...it's arrogant to dismiss other religions or those who do not 'believe' at all...
even the term atheist is offensive to me...it is akin to calling a white person 'non-black' or a dog 'non-human' or a christian a 'non-atheist'...
sure there are larger, more pressing issues than the mandatory momentsof silence but i find that i can be concerned about more than one thing at a time...i very rarely talk about the fact that i am a realist because i have learned that most people are very intolerant of those who do not believe the way that they do...
"In 2002, Illinois lawmakers passed the Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act".
""What's the problem? Every single time we meet on the Senate floor, we open up the session with prayer - whether it's given by a rabbi, or a priest, or a Buddhist or a minister," Lightford said."
It amazes me that people don't see what the problem is—so much so that I believe they're just saying things off the cuff that they'll regret on further reflection (maybe 15 seconds of silence, maybe longer), or they're feigning ignorance, a risky game as people tend to be taken over by the roles they play. Personally I spent years doing Buddhist meditation, now I'm a psychotherapist who finds a lot of change happens in silence. I like the idea of silent times in school; not just 15 seconds but say, 15 minutes. Or maybe an hour. But we live in times in which laws like this happen in a context, and that context is pointed to perfectly by the name of the 2002 Illinois bill—Silent Reflection and Student P-R-A-Y-E-R Act! Yes, there are other crucial concerns—environmental destruction and global warming, looming wars over oil and water, and the ongoing takeover of the US by fascism. But intentionally or not, consciously or not this innocent silence-in-school idea is one small part of a comprehensive, aggressive and relentless program (make that 'ongoing takeover by theocratic fascism'), and if you deny it you either haven't been paying attention or you're lying because you're part of it. Camel's nose? More like the tip of the police baton and tank gun barrel.
Don't think it's a judeo-christian movement? How bout that other "what's the problem?" comment: "rabbi, priest…minister" or… I suspect he either wasn't paying attention, which suggests it's a dumb idea, or they haven't had too many Buddhists on the floor of the Senate or Lightford would have known what kind of Buddhists they had—priests, monks, nuns, or some student who thought it was cool to wear the little two-fish-with-dots thing around his neck.
I don't know what an "active, overt atheist" is and (I'm guessing) have never met one either. Sounds to me that these "active" types (as described somewhere above in Duluth) are mere anti-theists, not atheists. The vast majority of religiosos and atheists I know are too busy being themselves, getting through their days with one another in the most usual of ways. Hmm, come to think of it, I remember a friend a few years back - a self avowed atheist who attended some group meetings at some local chapter of whatever - who tried to get me to admit or verbally declare that I was an atheist. I explained that I don't do handstands on demand and that I was too busy not caring about a self label to perform for him. Damn, I'm so hip, so wordly, and far better than anyone else, irregardless of my personal beliefs.
Hey, whose for burgers and beer?