Sapper Redux said:
Yes, how dare our society not promote your religion in every possible forum.
Quote:
Section 6. Section 1006.185, Florida Statutes, is created to read:
1006.185 Opening remarks at high school athletic contests.Each athletic association designated under s. 1006.20 whose membership includes public schools shall adopt bylaws, policies, or procedures that provide each school participating in a high school championship contest or series of contests under the direction and supervision of the association the opportunity to make brief opening remarks, if requested by the school, using the public address system at the event. Such remarks may not be longer than 2 minutes per participating school. The athletic association may not control, monitor, or review the content of the opening remarks and may not control the school's choice of speaker. Member schools may not provide remarks that are derogatory, rude, or threatening. Before the opening remarks, an announcement must be made that the content of any opening remarks by a participating school is not endorsed by and does not reflect the views and or opinions of the athletic association. The decision to allow opening remarks before regular season contests is at the discretion of each school.
dermdoc said:Sapper Redux said:
Yes, how dare our society not promote your religion in every possible forum.
I believe the bill allows any religion's prayers. Not just Christian ones.
I have no idea.Sapper Redux said:dermdoc said:Sapper Redux said:
Yes, how dare our society not promote your religion in every possible forum.
I believe the bill allows any religion's prayers. Not just Christian ones.
How many non-Christian prayers do you legitimately think coaches are going to broadcast on the field?
It's not. Technically, it would allow something along the lines of the San Marcos invocation thing. The headline is but one way of applying this statute.dermdoc said:
Does not sound very theocratic.
747Ag said:It's not. Technically, it would allow something along the lines of the San Marcos invocation thing. The headline is but one way of applying this statute.dermdoc said:
Does not sound very theocratic.
Sapper Redux said:
Yes, how dare our society not promote your religion in every possible forum.
Sapper Redux said:dermdoc said:Sapper Redux said:
Yes, how dare our society not promote your religion in every possible forum.
I believe the bill allows any religion's prayers. Not just Christian ones.
How many non-Christian prayers do you legitimately think coaches are going to broadcast on the field?
dermdoc said:Exactly. Trying to foment anger for no reason.747Ag said:It's not. Technically, it would allow something along the lines of the San Marcos invocation thing. The headline is but one way of applying this statute.dermdoc said:
Does not sound very theocratic.
You realize this all started when a high school football coach lost his job for praying at a football game right?kurt vonnegut said:
Cuz, as we all know, unless a prayer is led by a school employee, out loud, in front of everyone, it doesn't count.
one MEEN Ag said:You realize this all started when a high school football coach lost his job for praying at a football game right?kurt vonnegut said:
Cuz, as we all know, unless a prayer is led by a school employee, out loud, in front of everyone, it doesn't count.
Drive by snark about religion would be acceptable if it was a level playing field. And I'd agree with you, if there wasn't anyone losing their jobs because they prayed then who cares about this bill? But its not a level playing field and this bill is to stop a left leaning administrations in their tracks if they want to replicate what that washington coach had to go through.
kurt vonnegut said:dermdoc said:Exactly. Trying to foment anger for no reason.747Ag said:It's not. Technically, it would allow something along the lines of the San Marcos invocation thing. The headline is but one way of applying this statute.dermdoc said:
Does not sound very theocratic.
Whether you agree with it or not, I think there is clearly a reason. Most of the actions from groups like Freedom From Religion and the Satanists do stunts like this point out the reality that there are many people that only like freedom of speech when they like what they are hearing. The suggestion here is that maybe it isn't necessary for a public school to facilitate a public prayer before a football game.
And if you think it is necessary, then I think we need to acknowledge that freedom of speech means you are going to hear things you don't want to hear.
one MEEN Ag said:You realize this all started when a high school football coach lost his job for praying at a football game right?kurt vonnegut said:
Cuz, as we all know, unless a prayer is led by a school employee, out loud, in front of everyone, it doesn't count.
Drive by snark about religion would be acceptable if it was a level playing field. And I'd agree with you, if there wasn't anyone losing their jobs because they prayed then who cares about this bill? But its not a level playing field and this bill is to stop a left leaning administrations in their tracks if they want to replicate what that washington coach had to go through.
That took how many years and had to go all the way to the supreme court to be settled?kurt vonnegut said:one MEEN Ag said:You realize this all started when a high school football coach lost his job for praying at a football game right?kurt vonnegut said:
Cuz, as we all know, unless a prayer is led by a school employee, out loud, in front of everyone, it doesn't count.
Drive by snark about religion would be acceptable if it was a level playing field. And I'd agree with you, if there wasn't anyone losing their jobs because they prayed then who cares about this bill? But its not a level playing field and this bill is to stop a left leaning administrations in their tracks if they want to replicate what that washington coach had to go through.
Is that the coach resuming his job next season with a $1,700,000 settlement?
A school board overstepped, fired a coach, the case went into the court system, and the coaches right to pray after a game was reinforced, the coach got paid and got his job back. What is the correct reaction? Of all the messed up stuff that goes on in this country and this world. . . . and all the people who are truly abused and harmed in our own backyard. . . hundred of thousands of children sexually abused by the church, but this is the thing that chilled you to your core?one MEEN Ag said:That took how many years and had to go all the way to the supreme court to be settled?kurt vonnegut said:one MEEN Ag said:You realize this all started when a high school football coach lost his job for praying at a football game right?kurt vonnegut said:
Cuz, as we all know, unless a prayer is led by a school employee, out loud, in front of everyone, it doesn't count.
Drive by snark about religion would be acceptable if it was a level playing field. And I'd agree with you, if there wasn't anyone losing their jobs because they prayed then who cares about this bill? But its not a level playing field and this bill is to stop a left leaning administrations in their tracks if they want to replicate what that washington coach had to go through.
Is that the coach resuming his job next season with a $1,700,000 settlement?
Thats where you're spiking the football here? That the guy eventually got a settlement? Which is an admission that there was unjust actions against him? Lost his job in the meantime?
Just handwave the bureaucracy that sidelined him and created a chilling effect on religious expression (on purpose), and its underlying cultural rot.
kurt vonnegut said:A school board overstepped, fired a coach, the case went into the court system, and the coaches right to pray after a game was reinforced, the coach got paid and got his job back. What is the correct reaction? Of all the messed up stuff that goes on in this country and this world. . . . and all the people who are truly abused and harmed in our own backyard. . . hundred of thousands of children sexually abused by the church, but this is the thing that chilled you to your core?one MEEN Ag said:That took how many years and had to go all the way to the supreme court to be settled?kurt vonnegut said:one MEEN Ag said:You realize this all started when a high school football coach lost his job for praying at a football game right?kurt vonnegut said:
Cuz, as we all know, unless a prayer is led by a school employee, out loud, in front of everyone, it doesn't count.
Drive by snark about religion would be acceptable if it was a level playing field. And I'd agree with you, if there wasn't anyone losing their jobs because they prayed then who cares about this bill? But its not a level playing field and this bill is to stop a left leaning administrations in their tracks if they want to replicate what that washington coach had to go through.
Is that the coach resuming his job next season with a $1,700,000 settlement?
Thats where you're spiking the football here? That the guy eventually got a settlement? Which is an admission that there was unjust actions against him? Lost his job in the meantime?
Just handwave the bureaucracy that sidelined him and created a chilling effect on religious expression (on purpose), and its underlying cultural rot.
What sort of mutual understanding are you looking to come to with the people whose values you see as 'cultural rot'?
He lost his job because he wouldn't follow the same rules as they apply to everyone else and had created an atmosphere where athletes felt compelled to participate. The SOCTUS ignored the actual facts of the case to create the ruling they wanted.one MEEN Ag said:You realize this all started when a high school football coach lost his job for praying at a football game right?kurt vonnegut said:
Cuz, as we all know, unless a prayer is led by a school employee, out loud, in front of everyone, it doesn't count.
Drive by snark about religion would be acceptable if it was a level playing field. And I'd agree with you, if there wasn't anyone losing their jobs because they prayed then who cares about this bill? But its not a level playing field and this bill is to stop a left leaning administrations in their tracks if they want to replicate what that washington coach had to go through.
They aren't. But neither should the school use its resources to promote the beliefs of someone so that they speak to everyone.M1Buckeye said:Sapper Redux said:
Yes, how dare our society not promote your religion in every possible forum.
It's about FREEDOM of expression. Why should government officials have the power to tell students that they are forbidden from praying to Allah, Buddha, Jesus, etc., prior to a sporting event?
I'm pretty sure schools in Texas that broadcast prayers aren't going to allow the Shahadah to be said over the speakers on their fields.M1Buckeye said:Sapper Redux said:dermdoc said:Sapper Redux said:
Yes, how dare our society not promote your religion in every possible forum.
I believe the bill allows any religion's prayers. Not just Christian ones.
How many non-Christian prayers do you legitimately think coaches are going to broadcast on the field?
Are you worried an Islamic prayer might be said?
ramblin_ag02 said:
Oddly, most of the world seems to have figured this out pretty easily. The predominant religion in a community is the most visible in public functions. If there isn't a dominant group, then usually several religions have visible expressions in the public square. It's not like Christian missionaries are going to Iran and demanding the right to have a Christian prayer before soccer games in an almost entirely Muslim community. As far as I can tell, only atheists in the US consider public expression of any faith at all to be offensive.
No worries, I can take it. It came across as frustrated, but from following your other posts I know you're not mean-spirited.Quote:
. . . . sorry ramblin. . . most of that isn't directed at you specifically. More of a rant that just happened. I'll probably read this again in the morning and feel bad about one part of it or another, but maybe its worth not deleting it.
Maybe I'm still angry that Koepka won yesterday. Derm - I was really pulling for Scottie or Vik to pull something off.
I don't blame you for being frustrated. I always enjoy reading your comments. That said - I think we (try to) love you because we believe that (among other things):kurt vonnegut said:
I mean. . . you love us because God tells you to, but we're still 'cultural rot'. Yeah?
-----
. . . . sorry ramblin. . . most of that isn't directed at you specifically. More of a rant that just happened. I'll probably read this again in the morning and feel bad about one part of it or another, but maybe its worth not deleting it.
Maybe I'm still angry that Koepka won yesterday. Derm - I was really pulling for Scottie or Vik to pull something off.
Didn't Uganda just make being gay a capital offense? Is that what you mean by a "shining beacon"?Quote:
The African Christian churches are shining beacons to the rest of the world right now if you're a conservative Christian.
As a conservative Christian, that is not Christ like in my opinion.Sapper Redux said:Didn't Uganda just make being gay a capital offense? Is that what you mean by a "shining beacon"?Quote:
The African Christian churches are shining beacons to the rest of the world right now if you're a conservative Christian.
ramblin_ag02 said:
Throughout the Islamic world, prayers are broadcast over loudspeaker 5 times per day. Minneapolis approved the same in their city, allowing very loud prayers to reach every part of the city. So instead of having to hear one Christian prayer over an audio system at a football game, you're going to get 5 prayers a day pumped into your house or apartment at max volume.
In Thailand, religious freedom is practiced and protected, but all the government building display Buddha and public ceremonies are Buddhist in character.
I don't know much about Africa, but I know it's been a religious melting pot since forever. You have Ethiopian Christians dating back to the early ADs, Muslims since the 700-800s, and tribal religions going back farther than that. And give me the Christians "oppressing local culture" any day over the actions of the Muslim groups that are active in Africa. The African Christian churches are shining beacons to the rest of the world right now if you're a conservative Christian. They are very much leading the countermovement against carefree abandonment of Christian values that are occuring elsewhere. They aren't being manipulated by anyone. They are native, have been for over a thousand years, and they are remarkable.
And I can't even with the LGBT rights situation. That movement is basically a cult nowadays and runs counter to almost every traditional culture across the globe. The US is by far the most radical nation in the world in regards to that issue, and we are aggressively exporting our extreme views to the world using all the significant leverage at our disposal.
Unfortunately a lot of what you posted is true.kurt vonnegut said:ramblin_ag02 said:
Throughout the Islamic world, prayers are broadcast over loudspeaker 5 times per day. Minneapolis approved the same in their city, allowing very loud prayers to reach every part of the city. So instead of having to hear one Christian prayer over an audio system at a football game, you're going to get 5 prayers a day pumped into your house or apartment at max volume.
In Thailand, religious freedom is practiced and protected, but all the government building display Buddha and public ceremonies are Buddhist in character.
I don't know much about Africa, but I know it's been a religious melting pot since forever. You have Ethiopian Christians dating back to the early ADs, Muslims since the 700-800s, and tribal religions going back farther than that. And give me the Christians "oppressing local culture" any day over the actions of the Muslim groups that are active in Africa. The African Christian churches are shining beacons to the rest of the world right now if you're a conservative Christian. They are very much leading the countermovement against carefree abandonment of Christian values that are occuring elsewhere. They aren't being manipulated by anyone. They are native, have been for over a thousand years, and they are remarkable.
And I can't even with the LGBT rights situation. That movement is basically a cult nowadays and runs counter to almost every traditional culture across the globe. The US is by far the most radical nation in the world in regards to that issue, and we are aggressively exporting our extreme views to the world using all the significant leverage at our disposal.
If your point is that things could be worse, point taken. Otherwise, the bit about Islamic prayers being broadcast in Minneapolis - you recognize that you are on the side advocating for that, correct? And I'm on the side saying it would be better for Minneapolis to not broadcast prayers 5 times a day. If you want public resources being used to broadcast prayer, then Minneapolis is all you. . . not me.
Here is perhaps another way for me to describe why I was frustrated in my previous post. . . . . there is a perception among many non Christians that they are hated by Christians. And some of it is over sensitivity and some of its propaganda, but some of it isn't. You don't call someone cultural rot if you respect them. Criticizing them as degenerative or hedonistic or flippant is a weird way to show you love someone. And you don't legislate for their books to be banned, their speech to be reduced or their marriage rights to be revoked if you value them as equals.
I have friends and family who are religious and for whom their religious beliefs serve as a positive influence. I may disagree with those beliefs, but I love that the people I love have something that gives them hope and happiness. Christianity in the US in 2023 seems to have no equivalent mechanism for being happy for people who find happiness differently. Secular values, scientism, alternative lifestyles are simply immoral and abominations. It doesn't matter if people embrace those values and they bring people happiness. . . Christians just somehow know they are degenerate.
And so you can't be happy for someone that doesn't believe in God. You pity them and know they are wrong. And you can't be happy for someone in a same sex marriage. You know their marriage is corrupt and that they would be better off living celibate. I don't think non-Christians in this country want your pity. And they don't want your judgement. I don't think it comes from a place of love. I think it comes from a place of superiority and pride.
For all of the things I love about Christianity and Christians, you are really **** all at loving the non Christians. . . . and you kinda always have been. And whether you agree or not, I'm telling you that this is how a huge and growing part of this country feels. I'd really love for you to convince me that I'm wrong. All of the Christians on this board. . . . And maybe you can start by not telling me that I am cultural rot, that my values are degenerative and empty and that my values are harmful to God's order and that I am corrupted by Satan. And maybe go out and ****ing meet some different people and realize we don't eat babies and diddle children. And then you can tell me how I can treat you better and I can try to learn and get better as well.
You don't have to approve of different views in order to be happy for someone who has found happiness and peace and joy in something different from where you've found it. But, American Christians have made an enemy of those that have different views, and then you have the balls to wonder why people don't like Christians any more. It truly blows my mind that you all can't see it. 30 years from now (maybe less), Christianity will be a minority in the US. Maybe treat us the way you want to be treated. Or don't, and see how well its gonna work for you.
