Kicking God out of Schools

Sorry for the huge font.   

I've always thought it was a little weird to ban religion in the schools. Heh, 'cause we're all about it in jails and prisons.

I like the large font.  Say it big! 

 

While I don't agree with the kicking God out of school, and think that it is a wrong thing to have done. I don't agree that this is the reason why all those bad things have happened in school.  Are you saying that God, not being allowed their, so to speak, is the reason why what has happened did?  Because it sounds to me like you're saying God not being there made it all happen.

 

That's not a good impression for someone who doesn't believe to read about God at all.  Obviously he's vengeful then, he is, but not in that way.

In the Islamic world G-d is in schools. How much better are they doing?

In the US G-d is a lore more present in some states than in others. But we have see that those states are also more immoral than the more secular states.

So what made you ignore all these facts and repeat your oft-disproven claim as if it was fact?

 

Are you really asking that question? Or are you really asking how you can rationalise it to yourself that secularism is the cause of that?

It seems fairly simple. Crime rates are higher in big cities, I think. Cities have grown as has the population as such. Hence crime rates would go up over time too.

But I don't know the numbers.

 

 

God does say it's his to give vengenance and not our place. He's God after all but that's not what's happening here. It's more God letting us have our way. If you get a chance read Deut 28. It shows us a picture of what happens when we trust and listen to God vs what happens when we choose to turn our back on him. It's like reading the news today.



I, as well as Lula, do not believe the Islamic God (Allah) is the same God of the bible. I do not believe the Jews God and the Arab's God are one and the same.



So do you have facts to back this up? What states are secular? What states are Godly? I don't think God is partial to certain states over others. God blesses his people wherever they are.....in an immoral state or not.

Yes, I have the facts to back this up.

We had this discussion in another thread, subject was whether "Christianity" would have a positive impact on morality or not.

A claim was made that in the past, before schools were secular, teen pregnancy levels were lower; however, in the past people did not report teen pregnancies, hence we could only look at current numbers.

We compared Bible Belt states to states in New England and all other states. Turns out that teen pregnancy rates, which we accepted as signs of immorality for the purpose of the discussion are highest in Bible Belt states (and California) and lowest in states with lowe church attendance (and Utah).



I would have thought that G-d is not partial to certain states. You are right, He blesses His people whereever they are. However, the states where people are most "Christian" also happen to be the most immoral states (as measured in teen pregnancies).

We don't know whether one causes the other or vice versa or whether the two things have nothing to do with each other. But the correlation is interesting.


I see three possible reactions for Christians:

1. Accept that there is a problem with the type of "Christianity" practiced in the Bible Belt, that something must be done to make those states more moral.

2. Deny everything.

3. Claim that secularism leads to immorality and that for some reason the immorality simpy shows in the Bible Belt but not New England or Utah.


To me it looks like you guys have the same problem Islam has, except on a lower level because there is fewer of you and your preachers are not in power.

Hate to disappoint you. It's the same god.

Abraham taught both his children about the one true god, and both children and their descendants believed. Muhammed was a descendant of Ishmael and believed in the same god as Isaac and Ishmael did. So far none of this has anything to do with "Islam" in the Muhammedan sense. Ishmaelis believed in the same god as the Israelites.

There were many gods Semitic tribes believed in, among them the Creator, the only real god, the god ultimately known by His name and by "El" (Alpha Lamed, also simply means "god") and "Elohim" (Alpha Lamed Heh Yud Mem, this is a plural of Aleph Lamed Heh) in Hebrew and "Allah" (short for Aleph Lamed Aleph Lamed Heh, with the first Aleph Lamed being the definite article and Aleph Lamed Heh being the word) in Arabic. Hebrew-speaking Jews refer to Him as "Elohim", Arabic-speaking Jews, Muslims, and Christians refer to Him as "Allah".

At some point Muhammed, the Ishmaeli, believed he was a new prophet. His prophecy, later written down in the Qur'an (from the root Quf Resh Aleph, meaning "read" or "happen" with "Qur'an" meaning "recitation"), confirmed many of the stories in the Bible, not because G-d told Muhammed, but simply because Muhammed already believed in Adam and Eve, in Noah, and in Moses and the exodus.

However, the god Muhammed believed in and the god Muhammed thought he was a prophet of is that same god Jews and Ishmaelis (and many other Semitic tribes and peoples) and Christians worshipped.

I don't know where the legend that it's not the same god comes from, but it's simply not possible because a) Abraham taught both his children about the one true G-d, b) the words in Hebrew and Arabic simply don't allow for another interpretation, and c) there is no other (real) god, which means that even if Muhammed was not a prophet, the god he THOUGHT he received his prophecy from MUST have been the same god as the Jewish and Christian god.

However, there is another Semitic people (or sect) called the Mandaeans who also believe in Adam and Eve and Noah but not Moses and the exodus (don't know their stance on Abraham) and they believe that the god of Adam and Noah is NOT the god of Moses, Jesus, and Muhammed (but I think they do believe in John the Baptist as a prophet but I might be wrong on that). The Mandaeans speak Aramaic, I think. I believe "Manda" means "knowledge" in Aramaic. (In Hebrew "Mada" (Mem Dalet Ayin) means "knowledge", the missing "n" could be a regular consonant shift, I don't know.)

So if you ask me if I believe in the one true god, the Semitic creator god "El" or "Elohim", the god of Abraham and the god of Moses, I will say that, yes, I do.

But if you believe in that same god or not, I cannot tell. Abraham did, Isaac did, Ishmael did, Moses did, Muhammed did, and I do.

I really don't care if you worship the same god or not (who cares what gods other people worship anyway, as long as such worship doesn't involve ugly sacrifices?), but I won't let you modify my G-d just because you want to exclude one half of Abraham's children and show such disrespect to Abraham.

If you worship a god who is not spelt Aleph Lamed Heh and who is not the god of Ishmael, you are not worshipping the same god as Isaac and Moses.

You can clearly read in the Bible that Abraham's covenant with G-d covered both Isaac and Ishmael (who was 13 at the time). In fact, I seem to recall that Isaac was even born when the covenant was made.

I assume you both know what the sign of that covenant was and is and that it is practiced by Jews as well as Ishmaelis and all who follow the religion founded (or re-affirmed, depending on what you believe) by the most well-known Ishmaeli after Ishmael.

These things are not coincidence.

You must stop using the word "Allah" as if it were a name. "Allah" is simply the Arab word for "god" (with a definite article attached, as is proper per Arab grammar). Arabs and Jews happen to refer to god by the same word because Arabic and Hebrew are so closely related. If "Allah" is different from "god", then so is the Hebrew "Elohim" because it's the same as the Arabic.

I don't know of JU can use Hebrew and Arabic characters.

(Note that Hebrew and Arabic use the same alphabet and letters, just different scripts.)

Word for "god" in Hebrew:

אל

Transliteration: 'L
Pronunciation: /el/

The version with the Heh at the end:

אלוה

Transliteration: 'LVH
Pronunciation: /eloa/ (Note that the "V" is not part of the root but stands for a vowel.)

The plural version used in the Bible:

אלהים

Transliteration: 'LHYM (Note that YM is the normal Hebrew ending for masculine plural.)
Pronunciation: /elohim/ (Note that the the /o/ vowel is not written in the plural.)

Arabic for /eloa/ with definite article /al/ integrated as per Arabic grammar:

الله

(Windows seems to have recognised the word I copied from my Mac text editor and replaced it with the unicode character for "Allah". I didn't add the vowel dot, don't know how to type vowel dots in Arabic. I have Arabic script installed only Mac-side, not for Windows programs.)

Transliteration: 'LLH (short for 'L'LH, with the first 'L being the article /al/).
Pronunciation: /al-la/ (I think. I cannot pronounce Arabic.)

Judaeo-Arabic is written in the Hebrew script, but would probably use the Hebrew word for "Allah" (Yiddish does). But the Arabic "Allah" written in Hebrew script would look like this:

אללה

And with the article split from the word:

אל אלה

And without the article:

אלה

The difference is the second vowel, which is an /o/ in Hebrew (written as "V") and an /a/ in Arabic (not written).

Now, it could be claimed that the Arabs simply took the Hebrew word and made it their own. However, this would not work because it's unnecessary. The word is VERY OLD and existed long before the Semitic languages split up. It remained the same in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic because it's a very simple root and because Semitic languages don't change as quickly as Indo-European languages.

Plus the Muslims under Muhammed had absolutely no reason to invent a new god. The god Arab monotheists believed in before Muhammed and since Ishmael was perfectly fine. You just had to invent a new prophet for Him.

Incidentally, all this stuff about the holy language and everything, THAT is something I would like to see taught in schools.

Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be what "Christians" have in mind when they call for bringing G-d into schools.

Who cares about teaching actual knowledge from the Bible when there is so much knowledge in other subjects that we can take away by bringing G-d into schools!

Thank you all for your comments...

Wouldn't you know I go ahead and post this and then get soooo busy with getting our house ready for the real estate market!

ROYLEVOSH POSTS:

Well, ya, but have you noticed it's only the Christian religion that the Supreme Court has banned?

Add to the list above another US Supreme Court decision which rendered student led prayer at football games violates the First Amendment's Establishment clause.

FOREVERSERENITY POSTS:

Yes, it seems to me a logical connection can be made. Think about it..those heinous things were not occurring back then when prayer was allowed in public schools across the land. No where that I know of were there child/child or child/teacher crimes like these before 1962. Another factor to consider is that (to my knowledge) none of these crimes listed above occurred in Catholic parochial, Christian or home schools.

LEAUKI POSTS:

Leauki,

The only thing in my article I claim are facts are the Supreme Court decisions and the dates they occurred. As far as the list of towns, states and dates that violent crime occurred in public schools, I think that list is accurate.

The rest are logical conclusions that could be drawn from taking prayer and God out of public schools.

My goodness even the US Congress opens everyday with a prayer...why would the Supreme Court of the land take that away from children in schools if it wasn't for some crazy, Marxist ideological bent...like secular or atheistic humanism?

Have you ever really considered the power of prayer? It works. With prayer, we cannot fail. Many of the original Founders of the US did and even though public schools didn't exist back then, I can't imagine for a minute they would object. Even General George Patton understood the importance of prayer. He often had prayers printed on cards and sent to every man in his Army.

He is quoted as saying, "There are three ways that men get what they want: by planning, by working, and by praying.... But between the plan and the operation there is always an unknown. That unkown spells defeat or victory success or failure. It is the reaction of the actors to the ordeal when it actually comes. Some people call that getting the breaks. I call it God. God has His part, or margin in everything. That's where prayer comes in."

As far as I'm concerned the same thing with our children during the school day. It's good for them to be able to start the day with a prayer...for God to come into every part of their daily life and as Gen. Patton said, "do His part". Well, now Almighty God has been told by the powers that be in the US government that He's no longer wanted, no longer needed, no longer necessary....that man can do it all himself.

Other countries appear to manage the not having god in schools with out having school shootings.  The French have gone so far as to ban any and all reglion symbols (including Islamic ones) from any and all state school but they haven't had this wave of shooting, although the ban was only in 2004 they haven't been teaching godly morals for many a year.

Basmas,

Of course. And teen pregnancy rates are also lower in Europe. And they are in lower in US states that are not part of the Bible Belt.

As I said, I don't know the correlation between murder and "Christianity", but there is a clear correlation between teen pregnancy and "Christianity".

Since the US are a secular state, I suppose that IF they start teaching G-d, they could use any religion or god, with no particular reason to choose (a certain brand of) "Christianity".

I suggest Hinduism.

It's a fascinating religion and culture and it would certainly help to learn more about it.

But if it has to be a Semitic god, I would be for Baal. The Phoenician city-god has been so sadly ignored ever since his last believers died in north-west-Africa. And we only remember him in his role as unimportant mock-god.

Yes, I pray in Hebrew.




In my experience prayer gives about the same results as sitting in my sofa.

Maybe you are praying to a servant, not a master?

No, I haven't. How did they do that?

I have heard stories about Muslims being allowed to pray in American state schools, but I hadn't heard anything about the Suprene Court permitting them to do so.

Personally, I have nothing against teaching religion in school in principle. I just see three problems with this current discussion:

1. US law specifically prohibits the teaching of religion in state schools and I do NOT advocate the breaking of a law or the changing of a law to benefit a certain group that are supposed to enjoy the same rights and limits as all other groups or the open rebellion against the spirit of the supreme law if such is advocated.

2. I can see that this particular brand of "Christianity" would not teach morality as much as ban science from the class room.

3. I can see that this particular brand of "Christianity" if not causes than at least creates an environment in which immorality thrives.

From what I can see beinging G-d back into schools under the proposed terms would transform America into a lawless, immoral, and backwards country.

And all the "Christians" have to offer in terms of explanation is that the law is wrong, that the immorality simply won't happen (even though in the Bible Belt it does), and that evolution is wrong because idiots can't understand it (as evidenced by the fact that they use the term "random chance" to explain a process that isn't and the terms "micro-evolution" and "macro-evolution" as if evolution saw such a distinction).

In Columbus Ohio right now, the public school system is required to cook separate meals for the Muslim kids.  For example, if they make peperoni pizza, they have to make a certain number of cheese only pizza for the Muslim kids.

Only Muslim kids get to eat the cheese pizza.  So if my kid doesn't like pepperoni he can't say...cheese only please, because they only make enough for the Muslim kids.

How is that keeping religion out of schools?

We've never made kosher meals for the Jewish kids.

I don't think the school should be cooking separate meals for ANYONE...they can bring their lunches if they don't like what's on the menu.

Thats because Jewish people didn't go around cutting off peoples heads and blowing up embassays if you offended them or didn't accomdate their religion.

It isn't. I consider that a plain violation of the constitutional requirement to keep religion and state separate.



Despite the fact that such kosher meals would also be permitted for Muslims according to Sharia.




I agree, to an extent. I think schools should offer meat and vegetarian meals.

I don't keep kosher but I eat vegetarian if the only meat option is pork. I don't see that Muslims are above making that choice!

Muslims don't do that either.

I see this more as a case of "Vorauseilender Gehorsam". (There is only a German definition for the term for ironic reasons.)

"Vorauseilender Gehorsam" means the voluntary submission to the perceived wishes or commands of an individual or a group. In this case Islamic fundamentalists were understood as representing Islam and (presumably liberal) politicians are trying to do what they want as quickly as possible. The same mechanism showed in Germany in the 1930s. Sometimes the Nazi party themselves had to undo some quick changes!

There is a reason why so many American politicians (usually liberals) keep talking to crazy groups like Cair and pretend that submitting to insane fundamentalists has something to do with respecting other cultures.

Something similar also happened in Sweden (I think) and Britain (if memory serves) with piggy banks and Teddy pigs. Social activists (liberal such) tried to outlaw anything pig-related because it might offend Muslims. It took Muslim groups weeks to repair the damage and explain to stupid Britons that pigs do NOT offend Muslims and that any action taken against Teddy pigs is complete nonsense.

However, Muslim fundamentalists used the opportunity to support the pig ban and paint the non-fundamentalist organisations as un-Islamic.

Orthodox (and some non-orthodox) Jews are known not to buy products that are not certified kosher. Most Muslims do the same with halal foods. I eat in kosher restaurants when there is one available and usually buy products with a halal certificate since kosher certs don't really exist in Ireland.

Just the other day the Pakistani working in the shop next to my office reminded me that the turkey they sold was not certified halal and whether I really wanted it anyway. He also makes sure that the cheese or turkey I get for my sandwiches doesn't get mixed up with ham on the meat bar. (I wouldn't want pieces of ham in my turkey.)

The Arab butcher next to my house signals me when I walk past his shop when the halal (turkey) salami comes in every two weeks.

The only kosher supermarket in Dublin is far from my house.

Yes the Piggy Bank fiasco i remember.

I agree entirely that the majority of mulsims living in the west are quite tolerant of ignorance towards their beliefs and traditions, most just want to get on with it, so to speak.

Yet i think many whom live in countries were islamic fundamentalisim is rife, do not, i'll indicate the country wide marches and protests in Sudan calling for the head (quite litterally) of a primary school teacher who named a teddy bear Mohammed.

My opinion on the issue is that Religion has some great morales to teach, but those same morales can be taught without the rubbish and tradition that surrounds our first attempt at explaining world.

I'm all for someone telling a child in school that you should treat others as you'd want yourself to be treated, but i'd not like for that child to be told he'll burn in hell for eternity if he doesn't.

Leauki,

Please enlighten me. Where exactly in the US Constition is the requirement to keep religion and state separate?

 

Now see I don't agree that the critera for a state to be immoral is to look at pregnancy rates. That's absurd. To me all that means is they're not advocating birth control and handing it out like candy like the do in the NE states.

I knew two girls in HS....one got pregnant soon after dating her first boyfriend. The other girl was having sex with whoever and whenever but was protected. So who was the immoral one?

According to your criteria it would be the girl who had one boyfriend and got pregnant. What about all the girls having sex and NOT getting pregnant? They're NOT immoral?

That's absurd.

And I hate to disappoint you but they are NOT the same God. For instance do the Muslims believe Jesus is God? Do they believe Jesus was involved in the creation of the world? Jesus is a manifestation of the OT God Jehovah.

The Muslim God is the Moon God that goes way back to the days of Nimrod. That's why they have a cresent as their symbol. Many think or assume they are the same God but they are not. Remember Ishamael's mother was an Egyptian and Sarai was a Hebrew. Their sons went two diff ways.

Well that really depends on what you think is more immoral, having fun that harms no one but oneself (and even the likelihood of that can be reduced substantially), or bringing a child that you cannot care for properly into this world.