<p>Since the schools, facilities, staff, and equipment are paid for by tax dollars. That makes it a “state function” – a function of some level of government. The “level” varies by state depending on how the taxes for schools are levied and distributed, but I don’t even see where this question comes from.</p>
<p>If you want a graduation that is not a “state function”, attend a private religious school.</p>
<p>I consider myself an extremely devout Christian. The practice of my Christian faith includes a very strong evangelistic belief and practice. Perhaps because I’ve been at multiple kitchen tables and living rooms, discussing the tenets of my faith, with a huge variety of people with legitimate questions, I’ve also been keenly aware of how obnoxious thoughtless zealotry in the name of Christianity has damaged many people.</p>
<p>I find the politicization or radical demonstrations of a supposed “beleaguered” Christians to be counterproductive in the context of general population. Rightly so, why should anyone listen to this Christian message if all they sense of the speaker is a facepalm?</p>
<p>I strongly disagree with this person’s method of declaring his religion. I can tell you I wouldn’t have been clapping or cheering in the audience.</p>
<p>I don’t think it should be an issue of free speech or separation of church vs. state – both of which I support. Rather, what’s the ultimate goal? To better represent Christianity (which I think he fails at) or to make a bold statement to cheers and applause (short sighted gains)?</p>
<p>Madaboutx-
You have a right to worship, just not every time and place you choose. Just like you have a general right to free speech but it doesn’t give you the moral or legal right to yell “fire!” in a crowded theater.</p>
<h1>179 I hope my kids have the ability to let non consequential things be. It was a short event and a short speech (I’m sure …because face it …there was partying to be done!). They have their happy place and ability to drown out that which is, in their mind, gibberish. (as it may be defined by each individual for their own individual health and mental well being and not to be defined by anyone else …of course)</h1>
<p>But…fight on oh warriors for victims (especially if the fools don’t even KNOW they are victims).</p>
<p>T26E4, I just wanted to let you know that I very much appreciated your post. I have plenty of Christian friends who would not approve of this… even those who have devoted their life to ministry.</p>
<p>Doesn’t seem that way to me. All she’s done is repeat the sad, tired old tropes about the south and/or Bible Belt that so many people who have never left the northern states embrace. It seems very provincial and unsophisticated to me, but ignorance truly is bliss in these situations. Really though, how does a high school val reciting the LP threaten so many adults to the point where they are figuratively frothing at the mouth?</p>
<p>It’s been made abundantly clear that the secularists think that anyone who embraces a faith, particularly Christianity is less intelligent than they are and feel that they can (just barely) tolerate the existence of religion as long as they never have to hear or see anything about it. On the rare occasions when religious belief does rear it’s head, they become positively unhinged. I don’t get it. In a country where people object to “Merry Christmas” and public school children can’t sing carols in a Christmas, sorry, Winter pageant, and Easter is only about bunnies and eggs, it just doesn’t seem to be that much of a threat.</p>
<p>Oh my God (no pun intended). All this PC tomfoolery. When will people realize that political correctness is the principal principle of anti-intellectualism? Not saying this guy wasn’t being an idiot and being purposefully showy and intentionally stirring the pot, but come on people. If someone gets offended, move on. People need to allocate their mental energy to something more worthwhile than whining about the fragility of the emotions of simpletons.</p>
<p>Quote:
The term “separation of church amd state” is not in the Constitution. It is based on a misunderstanding of Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists where he talks about a “wall of separation”</p>
<p>Misinterpreted my a$$. Here are some additional Jefferson quotes:</p>
<p>“Question with boldness even the existence of a god.”</p>
<p>“The Christian god is a three headed monster: cruel, vengeful, and capricious… one only needs to look at the caliber of the people who say they serve him. they are always of two classes: fools and hypocrites.”</p>
<p>The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus… in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."</p>
<p>“Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shown on man… perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind… a mere contrivance (for the clergy ) to filch wealth and power to themselves.”</p>
<p>Source: Huberman, The Quotable Atheist, p. 166 (Nations Books, 2007)</p>
<p>@dgdzdad And what makes you think the quotes of Thomas Jefferson have any relevance in this situation? This situation, as you have been too ignorant to realize, is not an issue of separation of church and state. Furthermore, the fact that you think Jefferson quotes provide credence to your arguments and expose the flaws in the arguments of others shows that you are willing to stereotype all Christians as some Glenn Beck, flag waving, founding father worshipping idiot who would be mystified by the irrelevant quotes that you cited. Bam.</p>
<p>I can’t believe the mods let these threads go on so long. Every time, they devolve into religion-bashing. How is that any better than the politics threads which are now quickly shut off?</p>