Muslim Prayer in School debated

[bowieee]

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20070702-9999-1n2prayer.html

This is happening in my hometown.

Check out the response section on the bottom where people light their torches and go on a crazy conservative rampage.

[Scarfather]

I think you should move.

[Vong]

The school is giving the Muslim students time to pray...how does this affect anything else that goes on within the building?

All those comments just goes to show how intollerant conservative America is....Jebus must be spinning in his grave.

[bowieee]

Originally posted by Vong
The school is giving the Muslim students time to pray...how does this affect anything else that goes on within the building?

All those comments just goes to show how intollerant conservative America is....Jebus must be spinning in his grave.

Who is Jebus? ;)

[bowieee]

Originally posted by Scarfather
I think you should move.

We have such a crazy mix of people in my city. You would think a southern Californian city like San Diego would be more liberal minded but we have an over powering amount of conservatives. Most people here don't give a rats ass either way though which is a sad state to be in.

[someguy]

I like the guy screaming out double standard because of Christianity, even though the Islamic religion has specific times for prayer while Christianity does not.

[Dr Martin Luther Loomis]

Everytime Christians bitch and moan about their prayer not being recognized in PUBLIC schools, I point out this very thing. "Hey Mr. Christian, how would you like it if they imposed, endorsed and started giving special treatment to Muslims"? Now the tables have finally turned, and I'm guessing many Christians aren't too thrilled.

Christians don't like to hear this, due to their need to constantly play the victim, but prayer has NEVER been removed from public schools. Christians, these very Muslims and every other religion out there has every right to pray.

But once the school gets involved, once it becomes disruptive, once a teacher (AKA A government employee) starts to participate, and once a specific religion is given special treatment, it becomes a violation of the Separation and Church and State. Plain and simple. This teacher participating and giving a specific religion special treatment is a big fuckin' no-no. Cutting a class short, telling other kids to just wait it out just so you can practice your religion is absolutely unacceptable.

I hate to have that whole "love it or leave it" tone, but if religionists don't like the rules of our public schools (AKA NEUTRALITY), then it's time for some home schoolin'!

[Dr Martin Luther Loomis]

Originally posted by Dr Martin Luther Loomis
Now the tables have finally turned, and I'm guessing many Christians aren't too thrilled.

Uh, yeah... I just read the comments section. The hypocrisy is jaw dropping. The majority of these nimrods wouldn't hesitate for a second to have Christianity given the same special treatment.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

What are you all talking about?


It's not illegal to pray in school, it's just illegal for there to be a school-led prayer. I mean, a public school teacher can't say "ok kids, lets all hold hands and pray to Jesus for help on the test," but it's perfectly legal for several students to pray together before a test. I mean, it's not like these Christian guys are saying there should be a forced prayer time for all students, they're just saying that they want a chunk of time committed to prayer as well. It's not that they're full of prejudice, they just don't understand the Islamic faith (thus explaining every current and future war between the U.S. and Middle Eastern nations).

From an objective viewpoint, this seems like something an Athiest would have even more problems with. But then again, I think most self-proclaimed "Athiests" are naturally biased against Christianity (I'm talking Athiests in general, not writers like Salman Rushie or Christopher Hitchens).

[The Postmaster General]

I think it's pretty dumb to not understand that the difference is between a school setting aside a specific time so that a teacher can lead a Christian prayer, and a school allotting time to allow someone to practice a major religion according to the doctrine they believe in. We already don't have school on Sundays, which I think is pretty well because of Christianity.

[Dr Martin Luther Loomis]

Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
What are you all talking about?


It's not illegal to pray in school, it's just illegal for there to be a school-led prayer. I mean, a public school teacher can't say "ok kids, lets all hold hands and pray to Jesus for help on the test," but it's perfectly legal for several students to pray together before a test.

Well, I won't speak for the others, but you and I are saying basically the same thing. I made the same point above.

From an objective viewpoint, this seems like something an Athiest would have even more problems with. But then again, I think most self-proclaimed "Athiests" are naturally biased against Christianity (I'm talking Athiests in general, not writers like Salman Rushie or Christopher Hitchens).

Damn straight this is an issue atheists have a problem with. Last time I checked, atheists pay their taxes for public schools, as well. Why should their time of education be cut short for someone's religious rituals?

And there is no "bias" against Christianity from atheists. We just happen to live in America where Christianity is the dominant religion and the one we are constantly bombarded with. Put atheists in a Hindu country with an exact constitution as the USA, and you'll see just as much of a "bias".

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by Dr Martin Luther Loomis
And there is no "bias" against Christianity from atheists. We just happen to live in America where Christianity is the dominant religion and the one we are constantly bombarded with. Put atheists in a Hindu country with an exact constitution as the USA, and you'll see just as much of a "bias".


That might be, but it is a bias nonetheless and it's important for us to think outside of the boxes we create for ourselves on these issues of religion.

[Dr Martin Luther Loomis]

Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
That might be, but it is a bias nonetheless and it's important for us to think outside of the boxes we create for ourselves on these issues of religion.

It really isn't bias, because it isn't unprovoked. Bias implies an unreasoned prejudice. The strident, and ridiculously unwarranted and over used term "militant atheism" is the result of constantly being provoked.

As for thinking outside the box, well atheists are thinking outside the box the second they label themselves an atheist. 'Cause that box be overflowin' and dripping down the sides with religion.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by Dr Martin Luther Loomis
It really isn't bias, because it isn't unprovoked. Bias implies an unreasoned prejudice. The strident, and ridiculously unwarranted and over used term "militant atheism" is the result of constantly being provoked.

As for thinking outside the box, well atheists are thinking outside the box the second they label themselves an atheist. 'Cause that box be overflowin' and dripping down the sides with religion.


Bias is bias no matter what. If some Iraqi kid's parents were accidentally killed by U.S. troops and that kid holds a grudge against the U.S., then that kid is biased.

Being an athiest isn't necessarily thinking outside of the box either. Many people grow up in families that don't go to church except on Christmas and Easter. I don't see how it's that much of a stretch from going to church twice a year to not going at all. I mean, I understand what you mean that most athiests don't blindly follow what's been put in front of them, but I don't think that's the case with many of them.

I don't think "militant athiesm" is the appropriate term as much as it is "being an arrogant and unreasonable douchebag." Most people I know are athiests and don't fall under this category, but there are many people that way and they do piss me off. The kind who are always saying things like "Oh, look at those stupid Christians...how do they believe in such silly things?" are the kind I fucking despise just as much as Jerry Falwell and James Dobson.

As for myself, I don't really have any religious beliefs. I'm not an athiest or a Christian. I y'am what I y'am.

[Dr Martin Luther Loomis]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
I think it's pretty dumb to not understand that the difference is between a school setting aside a specific time so that a teacher can lead a Christian prayer, and a school allotting time to allow someone to practice a major religion according to the doctrine they believe in. We already don't have school on Sundays, which I think is pretty well because of Christianity.

But there really is no difference between teacher led Christian prayer, and allowing private time for kids to go off and pray by themselves while school is still in progress. Allowing special time for kids to practice their religion is still a public school favoring religion. They're actually going out of their way, rearranging shit just for a special prayer time. Then, or course, you have to give equal treatment to all religions. So where's the time for actual school work? Other than recess, lunch or inbetween bells, when exactly will these kids, espcially these Muslims, be allowed to pray? The only answer is to disrupt the class. Actually going to the extreme to cut class short to accomodate somebody elses private rituals. Setting time aside by cutting class short is an intrusion on other students who are simply there to be educated. The second you do that, you are automatically guilty of imposing religion on others. And since the school allows it, the school is officially endorsing religion. Which it has absolutely no business doing.

See all the fuckin' chaos that erupts when schools cease to be neutral?

[Dr Martin Luther Loomis]

Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
Bias is bias no matter what. If some Iraqi kid's parents were accidentally killed by U.S. troops and that kid holds a grudge against the U.S., then that kid is biased.

But he isn't prejudice without reason. You said atheists are "NATURALLY" biased against Christians. By saying naturally, you're implying blind prejudice. As if atheists go after Christians solely for being Christians.

Being an athiest isn't necessarily thinking outside of the box either. Many people grow up in families that don't go to church except on Christmas and Easter. I don't see how it's that much of a stretch from going to church twice a year to not going at all. I mean, I understand what you mean that most athiests don't blindly follow what's been put in front of them, but I don't think that's the case with many of them.

Well, of course I agree with you. Just my attempt at being witty.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by Dr Martin Luther Loomis
But he isn't prejudice without reason. You said atheists are "NATURALLY" biased against Christians. By saying naturally, you're implying blind prejudice. As if atheists go after Christians solely for being Christians.

I didn't mean all athiests, but in America where we have a secular democracy it's more of a nuisance.

[electriclite]

Apparently the article states that non-Muslim students would exercise a free time while their Muslim peers would be praying.


Ummmmm, wrong! That's called second-recess.


I agree with Martin Loomis. Schools need to be neutral. If these kids' families are serious Muslims than their parents need to consider home-schooling them. There are compromises in the religion that state a Muslim can pray at a more convenient time if they're say, on a bus traveling. That should apply at a US school.

[The Postmaster General]

electriclite:

But at the same time, using the same criteria, you could say kids with ADD need to be home schooled as opposed to taking time out of the curriculum to take medicine. Or what about kids that require physical therapy?

The idea of giving everyone else freetime, or double recess isn't jiving with me though. Why can't they just schedule classes, like study hall-type things around the prayer times? It shouldn't be an everybody or nobody thing, either.

It should be about freedom of religion, not neutrality. I don't remember the part in The Constitution where it says we will be a homogenized group of people who keep our religious beliefs to ourselves. Nor do I remember anything in law that says you are guaranteed a public education provided you aren't practicing a religion that doesn't jive with the Christian schedule of Monday thru Friday, and sometimes Saturdays.

They let kids out of class for sports, academic clubs, and a range of other things. I don't see why prayer - regardless of the belief (maybe not snake handlers though), should be a big problem, except for the people citing double standards, where there are none.

[someguy]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
But at the same time, using the same criteria, you could say kids with ADD need to be home schooled as opposed to taking time out of the curriculum to take medicine. Or what about kids that require physical therapy?

I don't think you can really compare a physical or mental illness to prayer though.

[Dr Martin Luther Loomis]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
But at the same time, using the same criteria, you could say kids with ADD need to be home schooled as opposed to taking time out of the curriculum to take medicine. Or what about kids that require physical therapy?

C'mon now, that's a horrible analogy. You absolutely cannot compare one's choice of worshipping supernatural beings to that of someone with a mental or physical disability. No one is rearranging the entire school day throughout the entire school year for kids with ADD, or for those in need of, what is most likely, temporary physical therapy. These kids are entitled to the same education as everyone else, and they are receiving the same education as everyone else. Learning at different levels is unavoidable and expected, and it's the whole point of public school. Their sole purpose is to become educated in an institution intended for education. Not to request special treatment for activities unrelated to the school curriculum, or to rearrange shit at the expense of other students -- as the religionists are doing.

The idea of giving everyone else freetime, or double recess isn't jiving with me though. Why can't they just schedule classes, like study hall-type things around the prayer times? It shouldn't be an everybody or nobody thing, either.

By doing this, you're actually reducing other kids to second class status by putting someone's belief in the supernatural on a fuckin' pedastol. Favoring one's religion by rearranging EVERYTHING ELSE around it is a violation of Church and State. Here's an idea, how about they get it through their thick skulls that this is a place of education, not a house of worship! Why don't THEY rearrange THEIR private rituals around PUBLIC school and start showing a little bit of consideration?

Ya know, I never see anyone with the need to all of a sudden drop to their knees in prayer when they enter a supermarket or Walmart or a movie theatre. Why, 'cause they're there to complete a task: Shop and watch a flick! Why is it the second they enter a public school, the whole world suddenly has to accomodate THEIR religious practices? Especially when no one is obstructing their practices in the first place. Religion all of a sudden becomes the number one priority the second they step off the bus.

It should be about freedom of religion, not neutrality. I don't remember the part in The Constitution where it says we will be a homogenized group of people who keep our religious beliefs to ourselves. Nor do I remember anything in law that says you are guaranteed a public education provided you aren't practicing a religion that doesn't jive with the Christian schedule of Monday thru Friday, and sometimes Saturdays.

There's no such thing as freedom of religion WITHOUT neutrality. That's why we were founded as a secular society. Give government control of religion, and freedom of religion ceases to exist. Take away neutrality, and your freedom of religion starts fuckin' with my freedom of religion. There's an old saying: Your freedom of religion ends where mine begins. The schools are the government. By remaining neutral, they are actually upholding the Constitution. And NO ONE, absolutely NO ONE is being told that they can't express or practice their religious beliefs. They can pray at literally anytime they wish, Christians can wear their favorite torturing device around their necks, and little Jewish lads hopefully/should be allowed to wear their Yamahas and Suzukis. Personal freedom, without causing a distraction, is to be tolerated. Favoring or intrusion on others by the school is not to be tolerated.


They let kids out of class for sports, academic clubs, and a range of other things. I don't see why prayer - regardless of the belief (maybe not snake handlers though), should be a big problem, except for the people citing double standards, where there are none.

Yes, kids are let out for sports and clubs on SPECIAL occasions. People are also let out for funerals and other important occasions. But they're not being let out on a daily basis throughout the entire school year while simultaneously fuckin' with everyone else's school day in the process. No one is being sent to other classes for a nice little time out while another student attends the occasional mock trial. I'm sure anyone with a special religious event or holiday would also receive permission be excused.

And what about snake handlers? Or any other non traditional religion? Shouldn't they be allowed the same special time, as well? See this is where the chaos, the selectivness, and hypocrisy begins. This is why neutrality is so desperately needed. Give one religion special treatment, you need to give all religions special, EQUAL treatment. A place of simple education becomes a place of religious wars. Hence the article and the nutty, bloodthirsty, Right Wing Christian hawks in the comment section. It's a fuckin' madhouse!

[shoe1985]

Here is an idea, why not keep religion out of the schools? if you want to pray, wait till after school is out and do what you like. School is about learning, preparing for the future. Religion has its day of worship on Sundays, if you want more, go at night.

I have no problem with people being religious. It is a nice hobby, but come on, I went to school to learn, and now I am in college learning to get a better job.

[RicochetShaw]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
I think it's pretty dumb to not understand that the difference is between a school setting aside a specific time so that a teacher can lead a Christian prayer, and a school allotting time to allow someone to practice a major religion according to the doctrine they believe in.


I hold this same viewpoint, but unfortunately, there is precedent in Supreme Court rulings that says even alotting time for prayer is unconstitutional. Specifically, see Wallae v Jaffree (1985). In this particular case, the court ruled that schools allowing for "silent meditation or voluntary prayer" is a violation of the First Amendment. With this precedent, it's pretty clear that the news article bowieee posted isn't so offensive after all. The Muslims shouldn't be alotted the time, nor should the Christians, Zoroastrianists, Scientologists, etc., IF you use precedent.

It's true that some Christians are hypocritical in wanting the Muslims not to have this privilege, while deisiring it for themselves, but that doesn't make the school's actions more valid. In keeping with past law, the treatment is unconstitutional, whether agreed upon by hypocrites or not.

[electriclite]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
electriclite:

But at the same time, using the same criteria, you could say kids with ADD need to be home schooled as opposed to taking time out of the curriculum to take medicine. Or what about kids that require physical therapy?

It takes maybe a minute to take out your meds, swallow and chase it with some water. I'm imagining it takes a bit more time for a proper muslim prayer.

And kids who require physical therapy pardon themselves, from class and everybody still keeps on working.

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
The idea of giving everyone else freetime, or double recess isn't jiving with me though. Why can't they just schedule classes, like study hall-type things around the prayer times? It shouldn't be an everybody or nobody thing, either.

It should be about freedom of religion, not neutrality. I don't remember the part in The Constitution where it says we will be a homogenized group of people who keep our religious beliefs to ourselves. Nor do I remember anything in law that says you are guaranteed a public education provided you aren't practicing a religion that doesn't jive with the Christian schedule of Monday thru Friday, and sometimes Saturdays.

Yeah but there's a point where your freedom interferes with another groups right to learn. I mean it looks like even if they had one muslim student, class would be put on hold till he was done fulfilling his/her spiritual duty.

Plus, as we could see by the comments in that article, it creates a huge freaking stink by ignorant community members who start throwing slurs and racial epithets.

I've never had "study hall" but I would imagine one would get it if they had a surplus of credits. But what if they don't? Would it be right to deny that child a required class that would affect their academic progress because of their religion?

Is it fair if the the child excuses himself from class to pray while class continues without them and puts them behind? No.

Either way you slice it, someone is going to be inconvenienced academically.

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
They let kids out of class for sports, academic clubs, and a range of other things. I don't see why prayer - regardless of the belief (maybe not snake handlers though), should be a big problem, except for the people citing double standards, where there are none.

Those interruptions are not everyday, and they're very short and don't force the entire class to go on a break when they do occur.

[The Postmaster General]

Mental illness, special needs, cultural difference --- It all leads to taking time out of the curriculum, which is what everyone is proposing is the problem, and Im not buying it. The only difference is that apparently theirs no tolerance for cultural differences.

How is it fair to deny someone individualized curriculum, based solely on the fact that it's a cultural need. I'm not talking about some weird, obscure cultural need either -- I'm talking about something that's practiced by millions and millions of people.

The problem is that to the people who are against - it is obscure and weird cultural differences. That's it. This has nothing to do with much of anything else --- If so, why aren't they throwing a stink about kids taking religious days off? This happens all the time, considering the only days we usually get off are Christian holidays, so maybe a kid needs time of for Lint, or something.

I just can't believe that I seem to be the only one who sees this for what it was --- If we were allowed to pray 6 times a day, and a Muslim kid had to pray 7, people would still be all bent, because they are thinking, "Damn, why does he get one extra break than me." The problem is that people are taking ancient religious beliefs and reducing them to "taking a break."




By doing this, you're actually reducing other kids to second class status by putting someone's belief in the supernatural on a fuckin' pedastol. Favoring one's religion by rearranging EVERYTHING ELSE around it is a violation of Church and State. Here's an idea, how about they get it through their thick skulls that this is a place of education, not a house of worship! Why don't THEY rearrange THEIR private rituals around PUBLIC school and start showing a little bit of consideration?

Ya know, I never see anyone with the need to all of a sudden drop to their knees in prayer when they enter a supermarket or Walmart or a movie theatre. Why, 'cause they're there to complete a task: Shop and watch a flick! Why is it the second they enter a public school, the whole world suddenly has to accomodate THEIR religious practices? Especially when no one is obstructing their practices in the first place. Religion all of a sudden becomes the number one priority the second they step off the bus.


You aren't required by law to go to Wal-Mart or the grocery store during specific hours. Child services isn't going to investigate you for not going to wal-mart during prayer time.

So, having a kid go pray during a school day is like a huge inconvenience for some other kid, but you don't think twice about suggesting that someone give up their income so they can home school their kid - even when American law guarantees every kid a public education?

Seeing a kid praying is like some huge inconvenience to you, but telling someone to rearrange their beliefs and culture is no big deal. That's not how I think.



And what about snake handlers? Or any other non traditional religion? Shouldn't they be allowed the same special time, as well? See this is where the chaos, the selectivness, and hypocrisy begins. This is why neutrality is so desperately needed. Give one religion special treatment, you need to give all religions special, EQUAL treatment. A place of simple education becomes a place of religious wars. Hence the article and the nutty, bloodthirsty, Right Wing Christian hawks in the comment section. It's a fuckin' madhouse!


Yeah, what about the snake handlers? When the snake handlers are brought up as a legitimate concern, and not because I'm joking around, we can discuss that. As far as I know, there's no where near to being an issue with snake handlers. Was that mentioned in the article somewhere and I missed it? From what I understand, most of their handling comes at nights.

And what? We let the bloodthirsty Right Wing Christian hawks decide what rights we give kids and don't? Geez - Why didn't anyone tell me that? I would have stopped complaining about the War in Iraq back on day one. I never realized that having to hear people complain was reason enough to not stand up for the right to practice the same cultural beliefs that have been practiced for centuries.


There's no such thing as freedom of religion WITHOUT neutrality. That's why we were founded as a secular society.

That's not true. Damn, it's called Maurakis, or something - an island off the coast of Africa in which every major religion is represented n the government and every culture as well. I wish I could remember the name. Oh well.

And we weren't found as a secular society. The appearance of a capitalized God in most of our documents contradicts that pretty well.

We were founded as a society in which religion doesn't define laws that everyone must follow. There's a pretty huge difference, and one people still keep getting confused about. Just because we don't make laws based on religion doesn't mean we can't adapt our culture to allow others to practice their religion. Isn't that part of being a melting pot, or has it suddenly become a melting pot that doesn't allow any room for the Muslims? Is this a post-9/11 thing, or have we always been this afraid of change?



Originally posted by shoe1985
Religion has its day of worship on Sundays, if you want more, go at night..


So, basically, we can keep religion out of schools by adopting a school schedule that conforms to the Christian doctrine of prayer. (Read: Not every religion considers Sunday a sacred day. Sunday being a day of rest is pretty much on the first page of The Holy Bible.)






electriclite:

It takes maybe a minute to take out your meds, swallow and chase it with some water. I'm imagining it takes a bit more time for a proper muslim prayer.


Yeah, but time is totally arbitrary. Maybe someone takes a series of meds, maybe someone prays really fast. My point is that why should some people be given special treatment, while others not, based solely on the criteria that it's a religious reason.


And kids who require physical therapy pardon themselves, from class and everybody still keeps on working.

Yeah but there's a point where your freedom interferes with another groups right to learn. I mean it looks like even if they had one muslim student, class would be put on hold till he was done fulfilling his/her spiritual duty.

Plus, as we could see by the comments in that article, it creates a huge freaking stink by ignorant community members who start throwing slurs and racial epithets.

I've never had "study hall" but I would imagine one would get it if they had a surplus of credits. But what if they don't? Would it be right to deny that child a required class that would affect their academic progress because of their religion?

Is it fair if the the child excuses himself from class to pray while class continues without them and puts them behind? No.

Either way you slice it, someone is going to be inconvenienced academically.[/b]


How? No one has explained how letting Muslims pray is like this big fire drill. Jeez - I don't think anyone is proposing that we set off alarms and make every kid don dope head gear and get on their knees.

Is this an ADD thing?

[electriclite]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove

electriclite:




Yeah, but time is totally arbitrary. Maybe someone takes a series of meds, maybe someone prays really fast. My point is that why should some people be given special treatment, while others not, based solely on the criteria that it's a religious reason.





How? No one has explained how letting Muslims pray is like this big fire drill. Jeez - I don't think anyone is proposing that we set off alarms and make every kid don dope head gear and get on their knees.

Is this an ADD thing? [/B]

Yeah but this is the salat. A good, mature Muslim is obligated to perform their prayer 5 times a day and not in the super speedy way George Carlin can do the Hail Mary. And there are very, very few excuses for not performing or postponing the prayer, except in travel. You're not even allowed to postpone it with the plan to make it up later.


Salah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salah)

[The Postmaster General]

My point is that time factors should be considered arbitrary, because once you get into that, you are imposing belief upon someone else. Maybe a doctor is the best person to say someone needs to flex their knees for 5 minutes a day - not the school board. Maybe a religious figure is the right person to determine how long it should take to properly pray according to that religion which is also shared by millions of people who want to live in America.

I'm throwing time out the window with this one. No one else is, and I get that. However, I really don't think time is even the issue. Time, to me, sounds like a reason people are coming up with in the afterthought of just not wanting Muslims to pray in their schools, because somewhere in America we've made up our mind that "no prayer in schools" means just that, and not what it was based on which was to ridding of class-led prayer in schools in which everyone had to participate in.

You know, it isn't like we have a sign in America that says, "Muslims stay out." I know there are people that would want that, but no one here is that sort of idiot. So, I just don't understand - we require that their children attend school, by law. Otherwise, we go in and take their kids out. And don't give me the home school thing either, because that's just rude. No parent should be forced to pull their kid from public school for practicing a religious belief that entire nations participate in.

This country is not based on homogenization. We as a country have never made anyone remove themselves from their religious beliefs - that was one of the main reasons we wanted freedom in America - because our old bosses like to remove people from their religion. So, I don't get the big deal - let them continue practicing their religion. We aren't stupid people. It isn't like we can't figure out how to coordinate with their schedule so that we won't *GASP* disrupt class.

I just don't see the real harm in trying. We should probably teach kids some tolerance - they don't need to stare at kids while they are praying or act like it's some weird thing. God man, I really don't get this issue here. You tell me when people are being forced to pray, or whatever, and I'm all over that, but to me, forcing someone to pray is as bad as not allowing someone else to pray. In both instances, you are making them be what they and the culture they grew up with is not - and it's not like it's a bad culture either.

[electriclite]

I think the the important question that no one has asked yet is, how have other devout Muslim children managed to perform their compulsory prayers in schools throughout the country?

I mean there are millions of practicing muslims in this country, San Diego can't be the only school addressing this issue. How do other schools in parts of the country manage?

[jeo4]

I suggest a break every day at 'prayer time' so that everyone (regardless of religious affiliation) will have time to pray. As long as the observation is consistent for all religions, I don't see a problem. And those participating need to be respectful of other religions, not interfering or preaching the gospel, whatever that may entail.

[someguy]

Just treat it like when kids have to go to the bathroom, excuse yourself from class for however long it takes to pray and go somewhere private in the school to do it.

[The Postmaster General]

Has there ever been a debate about teachers sending kids to "time out"?

[QUENTIN]

My high school had a Muslim headmaster which attracted a lot of Muslim parents in the area to send there kids there, so considering our small size, we had a decent Muslim "population" at our school.

There wasn't prayer time every day, but during the month of Ramadan, any student (or teacher) who wished to be excused during salah would go to the gym and pray. I went once or twice to see what it was like and that was encouraged. After prayers, there was a brief discussion period led by a senior student that was also open to anybody in the school.

Granted it was only for a month out of the year, but it never really seemed to cause any problems. Of course, some of my friends started to abuse it a little bit, like not studying for a test if they knew it was gonna take place during prayers and they'd have to make it up, but I think that has more to do with my friends being kinda lazy people than anything else.

Of course my school was private (and secular), so issues of church and state didn't enter into it, but even as someone who could describe themselves as basically anti-religion, I think accomodations can be made for people to practice their religious rituals without too much hassle or problems arising. I think there are valid points on both sides, but it seems like there is middle ground on this issue that wouldn't violate the consitution or student's rights.

[Jim H]

Originally posted by someguy
Just treat it like when kids have to go to the bathroom, excuse yourself from class for however long it takes to pray and go somewhere private in the school to do it.

That's what I thought too. Might lead to ridicule, but I think it is the best solution.

[Danger^Cart]

Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
It's not that they're full of prejudice, they just don't understand the Islamic faith (thus explaining every current and future war between the U.S. and Middle Eastern nations).


The Islamic faith has absolutely nothing to do with said conflicts. It's little more than an excuse for an ultraist agenda. Although that's another topic entirely.

Too look at this objectively, I can see what a problem it is for Muslim students, but ultimately, tough luck. If they wish to go to school in this country, they should respect our rules regarding seperation of Church and State. It's a good rule, and to break it would be opening a very large can of worms. The last thing we need is religious fanaticism spilling into the educational system. It's fucked up enough as is.

Besides, the Muslim faith is pretty flexible regarding prayer (it's pretty flexible in general, actually). It's not like if they miss a prayer their life is ruined and they're cursed to burn in hell forever. I won't get any more specific than that (I'd be here all day, and I'm not that knowledgable) but I'm sure you can find all the information you need pretty easily.

From what I can discern, it seems like a lot of you cursing those intolerant christian devils as being ignorant are pretty ignorant yourselves.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

Originally posted by Danger^Cart
The Islamic faith has absolutely nothing to do with said conflicts. It's little more than an excuse for an ultraist agenda. Although that's another topic entirely.


What the fuck, I never said the Islamic faith was responsible for said conflicts. Western ideas of how to deal with Middle Eastern conflicts display our lack of understanding of Muslim faith. How you were able to turn what I said into that is simply beyond me. If you just look at everything that's happened over the last sixty years it's pretty obvious. It's the reason we established Israel as a nation thinking everything would be fine and dandy, the reason it took so long for us to get our hostages out of Iran, and the reason why we felt the need to get involved in the Iran-Iraq conflict. There are countless foreign policy experts who say the exact same thing.

[bigred760]

I think most people are complaining because they are unaware (I want to say ignorant but that might be pushing it) of other religions' (in this case Islam) doctrines and "rules," such as specific prayer times. That mixed in with whatever misunderstandings there are about the law and school prayer and you get all of this controversy.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Danger^Cart
...they should respect our rules regarding seperation of Church and State.


That's not what that means. It means that the government can't favor any one religion, declare a national religion, nor provide funding for the advancement of any religion. It doesn't mean that a government run business cannot allow anyone to practice religion. In fact, to do actually would be against our "rules" regarding separation of church and state.

It's all about this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .


Really.... We get Christmas off. They had to change the name from Christmas break to Winter break to make it secular, but regardless of semantics, why should Christians be the only ones to be provided provisions to practice their beliefs? Sounds like Nazi Germany to me.

[bowieee]

Wow. I haven't checked up on this thread for awhile. There is alot of interesting discussion going on here but I have to agree on the side that schools shouldn't schedule around religous practices but at the same time they should allow each child to be able to leave class and pray when needed. If they missed something just take a few minutes to catch up on what they missed with them when they return. I work at an emergency shelter with an onsite public school and I'm pulling kids from class constantly for various needs. They come and go and the teachers just adapt to their needs but they don't stop class, they just help them catch up when they return. That's how it should work for religous practice needs as well. On the employee front we have plenty of Muslim staff working onsite and it doesn't take them long to do their daily prayers. They are gone for a few minutes and are back before I know it. This is becoming much more of a big deal then it should be. The only reason this is causing such an uproar is so many Christians are so quick to light their riot torches once they hear the word muslim. People need to realize that the crusades were old news.


Bubba I totally see your rationale about how everything is scheduled around Christainity. It sucks because it does contradict what we stand for but at the same time it doesn't mean we should cross that line again and again for other religions. We shouldn't have crossed it to begin with but now we are having a hard enough time pointing out that goddamn obvious line to Christainity as it is. If we begin crossing it more and more it will get blurrier and blurrier.

[bowieee]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
Has there ever been a debate about teachers sending kids to "time out"?

Hell yes there has. It still is constantly debated in the education world. They have set up a whole structered way to go about it.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by bowieee
Hell yes there has. It still is constantly debated in the education world. They have set up a whole structered way to go about it.


Good. If we can rearrange policy to deal with kids who want to be disruptive shits, we should be able to take care of kids who want to pray.

[bowieee]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
Good. If we can rearrange policy to deal with kids who want to be disruptive shits, we should be able to take care of kids who want to pray.


Addressing behaviour is part of a schools function, arranging around peoples religous beliefs is not. I think every single kid who wants to pray should be able to do it, just class shouldn't stop for it. They do their thing come back and join in wherever the class is at. There shouldn't be any action taken by the school to deny them the right to take breaks and pray, I just think the school schedule should be centered around the curriculum.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by bowieee
Addressing behaviour is part of a schools function, arranging around peoples religous beliefs is not. I think every single kid who wants to pray should be able to do it, just class shouldn't stop for it. They do their thing come back and join in wherever the class is at. There shouldn't be any action taken by the school to deny them the right to take breaks and pray, I just think the school schedule should be centered around the curriculum.



Right. It's part of a schools function, but by practice, not by design. I don't know for fact, but schools were not created as institutions for addressing behavioral problems no more than they were created as places where some people might end up praying.

I agree with you that most shouldn't have to take time out of the curriculum so that few can pray - even if it was most the kids, I think it would be unfair to the few. Kid A shouldn't have to feel alienated or short-changed because Kid B needs or even just wants to pray.

My point is that I don't think anyone is being given a difficult task here. You know, if a teacher has to go out in the hall to talk to a kid because he's being a shit - that takes every single kid away from the curriculum. When I would get in that situation, everyone was usually told to read, or a teacher from next door would come through a connecting door and just keep an eye on everyone. Things don't dissolve into chaos, people survive and we move on. I don't see any reason why a group of Muslims getting up to pray is any more difficult to accommodate. The fact that some people don't even want to try is mostly what irks me.

As for what I'm saying about scheduling revolving around Xtianity, I wasn't saying it was awful or anything, I mean, except for nonXtians. What I was saying is that no one ever made a big deal about it - it didn't turn into a big issue. Pillars of education didn't come tumbling down. In the big scheme of things, the school system REALLY has things that are much more devastating than incorporating other cultures into their practices.

IMO, that should be the least of anyones concerns when it comes to education in America. It's like, fuck, kids are getting knocked up, becoming junior mafia, beating the shit out of weirdos, we're loosing funding for science, history, and a plethora of other things - I really don't get why Muslims wanting time to pray at school should even be joked about as being a huge disruption much less an issue.

[bowieee]

Bubba,

I pretty much agree with you on all counts from that last statement. The sad fact of reality is that teachers just don't get the support they need in the public circuit. At my spot of work my role is dealing with kids behaviours. When a kid gets pissed and starts throwing chairs I step in and deal with it, not the teacher. The teacher gets to focus on teaching while we run our system that was set up for helping kids manage their behaviours. Problem is at most public schools it's one teacher on their own with 30+ kids and in that situation they don't have time to help anyone nearly as much as they need.

So yeah I agree with you bubba.