Teacher prohibits student from reading bible during 'free time&#39

[\GoBillsInDallas/]

http://www.sun-senti...0,3398662.story Edited May 6, 2014 by \GoBillsInDallas/

[B-Man]

This kind of explains why people fight to keep their religion in public place, because they'll eventually lose it if they don't object

 

 

The Park Lakes Elementary School teacher ordered Giovanni—while in front of his peers—to place the Bible on her desk and then to “get his father on the phone.” In a voicemail, the school official told Giovanni’s father:

 

“Good morning Mr. Rubeo, Mrs. Thomas. Uh. Uh. Giovanni called you because I asked him to. I noticed that he has a book – a religious book – in the classroom. He’s not permitted to read those books in my classroom. He said, if I told him to put it away you s-- … you said not to do that. So, please give me a call, I need to have some understanding on direction to him about the book he’s reading as opposed to the curriculum for public school. Mrs. S. Thomas. Thank you. Have a wonderful day. Bye-bye.”

 

 

 

 

So an 11 year old sitting quietly and reading is equivalent to government "establishing a religion".......................

 

This is why there is pushback.

 

 

 

.

 

 

.

Edited May 6, 2014 by B-Man

[Dorkington]

I bet no one would have a problem with banning his religious texts if it was the Quran.

[3rdnlng]

I bet no one would have a problem with banning his religious texts if it was the Quran.

 

So, are you saying you wouldn't have a problem banning the Quran? This is why it is easy to confuse a run of the mill leftist with Gatorman.

[Tiberius]

So, are you saying you wouldn't have a problem banning the Quran? This is why it is easy to confuse a run of the mill leftist with Gatorman.

 

Wow, stupidland has arrived

[B-Man]

So, are you saying you wouldn't have a problem banning the Quran? This is why it is easy to confuse a run of the mill leftist with Gatorman.

 

 

No, he is simply (in EVERY sense of the word) stating his percieved bias that conservatives wouldn't object if the Quran was banned.

 

He is (of course) 100% wrong.

 

 

.

[meazza]

I bet no one would have a problem with banning his religious texts if it was the Quran.

 

I would.

[Dorkington]

I don't care either way if people read their religious text of choice on their "free time". If there is "free time" at school, then fine, go for it.

 

But I have seen many neo conservatives throw fits when kids read religious texts that are not (insert preferred version of the Bible here), and to me that spits directly in the face of religious freedoms.

 

There is no doubt that Christianity holds many advantages in this country.

[B-Man]

I don't care either way if people read their religious text of choice on their "free time". If there is "free time" at school, then fine, go for it.

 

But I have seen many neo conservatives throw fits when kids read religious texts that are not (insert preferred version of the Bible here), and to me that spits directly in the face of religious freedoms.

 

There is no doubt that Christianity holds many advantages in this country.

 

I see that I was right, regarding your bias.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited May 6, 2014 by B-Man

[Dorkington]

I am admittedly biased against social conservatism.

 

Moderate and fiscal conservatives are not necessarily social conservatives. Social conservatives are many in this country though. That being said, as society changes, the old lines of thinking will die off.

[TakeYouToTasker]

I bet no one would have a problem with banning his religious texts if it was the Quran.

Which highlights your misconceptions.

[Tiberius]

I am admittedly biased against social conservatism.

 

Moderate and fiscal conservatives are not necessarily social conservatives. Social conservatives are many in this country though. That being said, as society changes, the old lines of thinking will die off.

But you are a Progressive and not biased against fiscal Conservatives? Ya, ok

[Dorkington]

I understand fiscal conservatism, and am not wholly against it. I support smaller, more efficient government in certain aspects. I support larger government in other aspects. It all starts at removing lobbying/corporate money from politics, though, and that is against free market ideals.

[meazza]

I understand fiscal conservatism, and am not wholly against it. I support smaller, more efficient government in certain aspects. I support larger government in other aspects. It all starts at removing lobbying/corporate money from politics, though, and that is against free market ideals.

 

Let it go. He's a moron.

[Dorkington]

It's a slow day at work for the minute.

[Tiberius]

I understand fiscal conservatism, and am not wholly against it. I support smaller, more efficient government in certain aspects. I support larger government in other aspects. It all starts at removing lobbying/corporate money from politics, though, and that is against free market ideals.

 

Lobbying is against the free market?? Huh? And isn't the free market the problem sometimes mr Progressive, like in health care?

 

Let it go. He's a moron.

You calling someone a moron? Tom's little puppy throwing insults, lol

 

And don't stop him, he's BSing

[Dorkington]

Lobbying is against the free market?? Huh? And isn't the free market the problem sometimes mr Progressive, like in health care?

 

You calling someone a moron? Tom's little puppy throwing insults, lol

 

And don't stop him, he's BSing

 

Removing lobbying would be against the free market ideals of most fiscal conservatives.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Removing lobbying would be against the free market ideals of most fiscal conservatives.

I'm for removing lobbying by removing the government's ability to sell influence through limiting it's powers. As long as government has the power to act in an arena, someone will purchase favor.

[Jauronimo]

I bet no one would have a problem with banning his religious texts if it was the Quran.

Muslims might take exception with that. Do you read the news much?

[Rob's House]

I'm not religious and I see a big problem with this. The movement to keep prayer and religious teachings out of the schools is based on the concept that the first amendment prohibits the government from advancing religion and as a government run entity the schools are prohibited from doing these things. (This interpretation requires a deliberate misreading of the constitution, but that's another discussion).

 

Since the constitution expressly prohibits government from restricting the free exercise of religion, this is a much clearer violation of the first amendment than a school prayer, Christmas play, or nativity scene. Not to mention this amounts to banning books. Any intellectually consistent liberal should be outraged.