Forum Post: Call for solidarity - Police arrest more protesters in NYC today.
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 12, 2012, 8:10 p.m. EST by JoeTheFarmer
(2654)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
The rain didn't stop a group of religious leaders and elected officials from rallying outside Morris High School in the Bronx today before the mayor's State of the City speech.
The city has told about 60 churches they must stop holding worship services in public schools after Feb. 12. It argues separation of church and state and cites a court decision.
New York City allows anything pertaining to the welfare of the community--that ranges from labor union meetings to Alcoholics Anonymous groups, to filming episodes of 'Law & Order'--to meet in schools. Excluding religious groups is a violation of the Equal Access Act. It also jeopardizes a longstanding cooperation between cities and faith-based groups. If you trace the roots of some of America's largest churches, like California's Saddleback, most of them started in rented schoolrooms. Now, it seems a struggling system like New York City's would rather turn away income than allow for the free exercise of religion.
Seven pastors and demonstrators including Councilman Fernando Cabrera, were charged with trespass Thursday.
“We were praying and we sang a song, The event took like 2 minutes and we were arrested"
Those schools are, the peoples schools, and the people decide what the schools are to be used for- The corruption in city government- is not to be tolerated- Legal action is not possible in a corrupt system- demonstration is the only recourse.
Perhaps it would be more effective to get the federal government out of education. No federal government involvement, no 1st amendment problem... and the quality of the education would most likely improve.
I believe in the people making the decisions to a point- but ultimately a body or individual needs to make a law, ordained by the people who elected them. What about the protesting on public property? It's ok to voice free speech as long as laws, like blocking traffic, are observed. But I think it's good there are laws not allowing blocking of traffic, even though I support the OWS protesters.
The church doesn't belong in schools. The next thing you know, they'll be making us pray before we can enter a supermarket.
We are talking about churches that rent space after hours to hold meeting, functions, and events. There are hundreds of non profit groups that rent space from the schools. The schools need the money.
I am an atheist myself and I am not afraid of my kids being exposed to religion.
The first amendment is about freedom of religion not freedom from religion.
"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 clip just said holding of worship services in public schools. As long as it's after hours, and not a disruption for the other kids, then it's ok, I guess.
yet you opined w/o fact.
Well, if the facts had been written in the statements, then I would have been more informed. Right?
You can make your own decision if your response was in light of having adequate information and whose responsibility that is.
london2z is replying to the information presented by the original poster, JoeTheFarmer. If that information was inadequate, you should blame the OP, not london2z.
london made broad-reaching assumptions from a limited amount of information. this is what happens to frequent with those that act out of emotion rather than logic. Based upon that info, london thought prayer before entering a supermarket might be a possibility.
No he didn't. He read the limited information that JoeTheFarmer published without knowing that it was limited. Actually, I made the same mistake because JoeTheFarmer's original posting was misleading.
Based on what JoeTheFarmer had previously written, london2z's conclusion was entirely logical; almost machine like.
JoeTheFarmer did good and rectified his posting to make it clearer. This helps a lot.
Your attack on london2z is lame and pointless. It only serves to disrupt the discussion by render it nothing more than a childish affront against a particular forum user. You should stick to discussing the issues like an adult, i.e. in a serious manner.
School education, should not include religion- ( separation of state and church) - but using the school building for religious purposes- gains money for the education system. Money that will be used for our children's education- that doesn't include religion. -------------------------------
Agree - no different than the local quilting group looking for a hangout.
You have this backwards.
The money is coming from the churches and going to the school. This is space rented in the school for use outside of the school curriculum and not during school hours. The school buildings are owned and paid for by the community and we should not discriminate based on religion.
This has nothing to do with school education.
That is just silly,
The same could be said in the other direction. Next thing you know they will not allow churches to have steeples since they might offend people.
The thing is that actually happened in Switzerland. Switzerland has direct democracy and the people used that to banned minarets on privately owned buildings. The majority, Christians, trampled on the rights of the Muslim minority.
These services are held on Sundays and utilize the empty school as a church during vacant weekend hours. I do not believe in organized religion. But I do believe if someone does believe in this that I would see no problem in the way they use it. It's not like they are holding church service in the classrooms during school hours. They use the empty gymnasium on a weekend. It's bullshit that the State is even fighting this. I'm sure it's only because the State isn't being paid for it. Wah wah wah!
Keep 'em separated. Plain and simple.
We should not discriminate based on religion.
I agree
If you take it that way, I can't stop you. But I still say keep 'em separated. There are plenty of churches where these activities can take place.
New York City allows anything pertaining to the welfare of the community--that ranges from labor union meetings to Alcoholics Anonymous groups, to filming episodes of 'Law & Order'--to meet in schools.
Excluding religious groups is a violation of the Equal Access Act. It also jeopardizes a longstanding cooperation between cities and faith-based groups. If you trace the roots of some of America's largest churches, like California's Saddleback, most of them started in rented schoolrooms. Now, it seems a struggling system like New York City's would rather turn away income than allow for the free exercise of religion.
You still haven't changed my mind. Keep 'em separated. I'm pretty firm on that position.
Keep what separated. There is nothing in the constitution about freedom from religion. There is only one phrase in the constitution and it demands that
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof""
Excluding these groups access to the same rooms that you allow alcoholics, craft shows, unions, and sports teams to use based on religion is a violation of the intent of that amendment.
I thought it was pretty clear we were talking about separating church and state. I get where you're coming from on allowing religion the same due, but what if it was the satanic religion protesting that they weren't getting equal access. Would you feel the same way?
I would have no problem if a satanic cult wanted to meet or hold services as long as they abide by the rules.
Separating church and state means the state cannot establish a state religion. It does not mean you cannot say a prayer or hold a service in a building owned by the public.
But we are not talking about any building, we are specifically talking about a public school building. I'm still against mixing religion and public education on any level. They can find some other accommodations.
I am an atheist myself. I just do not understand this paranoia that some atheists have that their kids will convert because some folks are praying in they building somewhere.
I have not problem with a Christmas tree or a Buddha in the building somewhere either. Exposure to religion will not hurt my children.
I don't have kids, btw, but I used to be one. I grew up baptist. Trust me. I got my reasons. I don't care if people have a religion and I don't care about holy symbols (they don't talk), but I firmly believe all kids should be exposed in public schools to scientifically accepted teachings and not religions. And to be frank, I wouldn't be at all disappointed, if over the next few centuries, religion went by the way of the dinosaur. Not spirituality, which is fine, mind you, just dogmatic, preachy religion.
I see it a different way. I think kids in public schools should be exposed to all the various religions of the world. As long as they do not tell my my kids they have to recite the "lords prayer" every morning.
I am also fine with people believing whatever they want to as long as they do not harm another being in the name of religion. They should not prevent a child and 10 friends from saying the "lords prayer" together every morning.
"It does me no harm for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg" -- Thomas Jefferson
Then we will have to agree to disagree. You are more fond of religion than I ever will be.
"Pick you poison"
I choose Freedom!
I am not fond of religion, I am fond of freedom.
I am not afraid of religion. I am afraid of loss of freedom.
We have the first amendment to protect things that are controversial. There is no need to protect things that are not controversial.
I believe it is very dangerous to start chipping away at freedoms.
I believe religion is very dangerous. Pick your poison.
[Removed]
[Removed]
By law, religion has no room in public schools. Parents who want their children to get a religious education should send them to religious school on their own time.
New York City allows anything pertaining to the welfare of the community--that ranges from labor union meetings to Alcoholics Anonymous groups, to filming episodes of 'Law & Order'--to meet in schools.
Excluding religious groups is a violation of the Equal Access Act. It also jeopardizes a longstanding cooperation between cities and faith-based groups. If you trace the roots of some of America's largest churches, like California's Saddleback, most of them started in rented schoolrooms. Now, it seems a struggling system like New York City's would rather turn away income than allow for the free exercise of religion.
Your original posting is misleading. From what you wrote, I understood that religious worships were being held in normal classes. If we are talking about religious groups renting school space for after hours worships, then it's a whole different issue.
I suggest you change your original posting to make it clearer as to what you are talking about. I would also link to a news article so that readers can get more information. When reporting news on this forum, I think one should always provide a link to a trustworthy news report.
The following sentence in your OP is very misleading as it says nothing about worships being held after regular class hours.
It was not my intent to be misleading. That was what I read. I can adjust it.
If that's what you read, are you sure we are talking about after hours worships?
Read my changed post. I looked further and yes it is about after hours meetings and Sunday Services
New York City allows anything pertaining to the welfare of the community--that ranges from labor union meetings to Alcoholics Anonymous groups, to filming episodes of 'Law & Order'--to meet in schools.r
OK. Thanks for clearing that up. That's very appreciated.
If the school rents out its spaces to groups for after school activities, I think it shouldn't be allowed to discriminate. In this context, I don't see a problem with a religious group wanting to rent a space for their worships.
Many forms of discrimination are against the law. I assume this matter will be brought to court?