Freethought & Rationalism Archive

BioBeing · 05-08-2003, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by pax_vobiscum3
No matter how hard the secualrist try, people will still have their faith and will always practice it where and when they see fit. The U.S. government does not have the right to inhibit this no matter how many wacko judges try to kick all religions completely out of the U.S.
I get offended by some of the clothing or lack of, that some 'professional' educators get away with wearing yet you do not here me whining about it. If we are going to start taking away freedom of expression due to 'it offending someone' then I am for removing the statues of gods and goddesses off of the Public governmental buildings in many states. I see none of the secularists mentioning that; Why, because they want tolerance for all religions except Christianity, and possibly Judaism.

Separation of Church and State is not about removing all religion from America. It is about preventing the government from promoting (with our tax dollars) one particular brand of religion over any other. While I think that some of the things may seem a little silly at times, the principle remains that no government official should be promoting ANY theistic (or atheistic, for that matter) worldview as part of their official function. Quite simply - its not their job.

Clothing - or lack thereof, as you mention - is usually regulated as part of a job description. I regularly appear, at short notice, in front of the "public" as part of my job, and have to be presentable at all times. That includes no short shorts (in fact, no shorts of any kind, but that is mainly safety), skin tight leggings etc. All employees do too. I'm sure you institution has similar policies.

I'm not quite sure what your point is about "statues of god and godesses". If a government building was displaying a statue of Zeus that was not part of a balanced display, then yes I would expect it to be removed.

Quote:

If I get responses to this be careful in your assumptions. I have made no reference to my faith, if I have any at all.

Well, your profile says "still searching", so if pushed I'd say probably agnostic. But it really doesn't matter for this discussion, does it?

PS - welcome

Toto · 05-08-2003, 10:05 AM

The statues of Greek and Roman gods and goddesses are artistic and cultural, but not designed to promote classical polytheism or the worship of Zeus or Nike or Athena. The same cannot be said about wearing a cross or displaying the 10 commandments in their Protestant formulation.

pax_vobiscum3 · 05-08-2003, 11:13 AM

Biobeing,

Firstly, thankyou for responding.

I must say that i hear the 'promoting of religion ' all too often and no one as of yet has been able to convince me that a teacher wearing a cross is promotion of a religion by the government. That is just as silly as me wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt and somoene saying the government is trying to promote that person's ideas. I am all for every religion wearing whatever religious item they choose as long as it is tasteful( no pornography or violent dipictions). They should of course not interfere with the carrying out of whatever duties the job ential, ie if one is required to wear a piece of head-gear for their job and their religion also requires a head garment and it inteerferes with the performance of that job then I believe their is a conflict. The wearing of a cross, the star of david, a pentagram, etc does not prevent a teacher from teaching. if we are going to start catering to the whims of everyone who may be 'upset' we may as well start book burning, if you catch my drift.

TOTO,
Ty for responding.

If the statues are not promoting anything by the government who placed the statutes there then how can the govt be promoting a religion ,by a teacher, under his/her own deisre, who is wearing some religious symbol?

Toto · 05-08-2003, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pax_vobiscum3
TOTO,
Ty for responding.
If the statues are not promoting anything by the government who placed the statutes there then how can the govt be promoting a religion ,by a teacher, under his/her own deisre, who is wearing some religious symbol?

The statues are not promoting polytheism because there is no organized polytheism to promote. But Christianity is an active religion, and a teacher wearing a Christian symbol is advertising to the world that he or she adheres to that religion. This sends implied messages to the student that disagreement may be unwelcome.

But I think it is a fine line, especially with a small piece of jewelry that could be ambiguous.

On the other hand, when you are an employee, you give up some of your free speech rights while on the job. If your employer tells you to wear a uniform, or business dress, or the company colors, you don't have a right to your own individual expression. You wait until you are on your own time to express yourself. The school system here, as employer, has made the decision that its teachers should not wear any religious symbolism, and that is not so unreasonable that the teacher should ask a court to overrule it.

I mean, where are all those conservatives who complain about how litigious this society has become? Who think that employers rule over their employees?

pax_vobiscum3 · 05-08-2003, 01:03 PM

Toto,

Whether or not a religion is organized or not is irrelevant to the claim that the gov't is promoting it. When did something have to become organized in order to be promoted? If you are saying that there are no groups of polytheists then I would have to correct you. I know of a group of people , from my college years, who held such beliefs.
As far as disagreement arising from wearing a piece of jewelry, as I have pointed out, if I were to wear a Che Guevara t-shirt there would be no outcry. Can one say Che Guevara and what he stood for, does not promote disagreement? I highly doubt it.
Yes, places of business may have dress codes. If the schools wish to have a dress codes that bar jewelry then ALL should be banned, including secual jewelry. The fact that a religious item was picked out is bigotry and a witch-hunt. Do we really want to send the message of intolerance out to the students? If freedom of expression is stifled in schools where is the next place?

ImGod · 05-08-2003, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pax_vobiscum3
If the schools wish to have a dress codes that bar jewelry then ALL should be banned, including secual jewelry. The fact that a religious item was picked out is bigotry and a witch-hunt. Do we really want to send the message of intolerance out to the students? If freedom of expression is stifled in schools where is the next place?

The christians can't have theirs without opening the gates back up for everyone. I think that was the intent of the law. Better to err on the side of caution than to be burdened with reviewing individual cases.

Pat Robertson could care less about the Muslim teacher's rights from 13 years ago. The law was ok until it "persecuted" this poor christian woman and her marriage to the lord and savior jesus christ. Then they back this woman financially with a lawyer to sue the school district instead of challenging the state law.

If crosses are allowed, should she be allowed to wear a shirt showing the crucifixion? How would you draw the line of acceptable speech differently than the existing state law?

Toto · 05-08-2003, 01:59 PM

pax_vobiscum3:

If anyone thought that statues of ancient gods were worshipped by modern day people, or if sacrifices were being done in front of them, it might be worth removing them from public land. But their status in our society is clearly as "Art", not objects of worship. That's not true of a cross.

dangin · 05-08-2003, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto
pax_vobiscum3:

If anyone thought that statues of ancient gods were worshipped by modern day people, or if sacrifices were being done in front of them, it might be worth removing them from public land. But their status in our society is clearly as "Art", not objects of worship. That's not true of a cross.

Crosses planted in the land are more reminiscent of torture devices (I would say intentionally) than art.

It always amused me to think of Jesus returning and seeing all the people wearing crosses.

Jesus "Hey I died on that, thanks for bringing up such a painful memory."

Toto · 05-08-2003, 02:26 PM

Which reminds me, there is a lot of religiously themed art in public museums, but I don't know of any atheists or secularists who object to it, because it is clearly Art and not proselyzing. It's only when some "blasphemous" art shows up that the religious conservatives get upset.

Calzaer · 05-08-2003, 03:16 PM

If she wins, I have a precedent to wear my pentacle when I start teaching!

If she loses, I won't have to put up with any "WWJD" garbage permeating my colleagues� classrooms.

It's win-win for me!

05-08-2003, 11:13 AM	#13
pax_vobiscum3 Junior Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: NY Posts: 11	Thankyou Biobeing, Firstly, thankyou for responding. I must say that i hear the 'promoting of religion ' all too often and no one as of yet has been able to convince me that a teacher wearing a cross is promotion of a religion by the government. That is just as silly as me wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt and somoene saying the government is trying to promote that person's ideas. I am all for every religion wearing whatever religious item they choose as long as it is tasteful( no pornography or violent dipictions). They should of course not interfere with the carrying out of whatever duties the job ential, ie if one is required to wear a piece of head-gear for their job and their religion also requires a head garment and it inteerferes with the performance of that job then I believe their is a conflict. The wearing of a cross, the star of david, a pentagram, etc does not prevent a teacher from teaching. if we are going to start catering to the whims of everyone who may be 'upset' we may as well start book burning, if you catch my drift. TOTO, Ty for responding. If the statues are not promoting anything by the government who placed the statutes there then how can the govt be promoting a religion ,by a teacher, under his/her own deisre, who is wearing some religious symbol?

05-08-2003, 01:03 PM	#15
pax_vobiscum3 Junior Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: NY Posts: 11	thankyou Toto, Whether or not a religion is organized or not is irrelevant to the claim that the gov't is promoting it. When did something have to become organized in order to be promoted? If you are saying that there are no groups of polytheists then I would have to correct you. I know of a group of people , from my college years, who held such beliefs. As far as disagreement arising from wearing a piece of jewelry, as I have pointed out, if I were to wear a Che Guevara t-shirt there would be no outcry. Can one say Che Guevara and what he stood for, does not promote disagreement? I highly doubt it. Yes, places of business may have dress codes. If the schools wish to have a dress codes that bar jewelry then ALL should be banned, including secual jewelry. The fact that a religious item was picked out is bigotry and a witch-hunt. Do we really want to send the message of intolerance out to the students? If freedom of expression is stifled in schools where is the next place?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-08-2003, 10:05 AM	#12
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The statues of Greek and Roman gods and goddesses are artistic and cultural, but not designed to promote classical polytheism or the worship of Zeus or Nike or Athena. The same cannot be said about wearing a cross or displaying the 10 commandments in their Protestant formulation.

05-08-2003, 01:59 PM	#17
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	pax_vobiscum3: If anyone thought that statues of ancient gods were worshipped by modern day people, or if sacrifices were being done in front of them, it might be worth removing them from public land. But their status in our society is clearly as "Art", not objects of worship. That's not true of a cross.

05-08-2003, 02:26 PM	#19
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Which reminds me, there is a lot of religiously themed art in public museums, but I don't know of any atheists or secularists who object to it, because it is clearly Art and not proselyzing. It's only when some "blasphemous" art shows up that the religious conservatives get upset.

05-08-2003, 03:16 PM	#20
Calzaer Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ohio Posts: 2,762	If she wins, I have a precedent to wear my pentacle when I start teaching! If she loses, I won't have to put up with any "WWJD" garbage permeating my colleagues� classrooms. It's win-win for me!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.