WOW!

EPIC satire, blackboard, glasses, logo, pauses, odd vocal patterns, Bible quotes taken out of context and all by Jon Stewart!

XD

It depends on your view of the law and politics. Do you view the law as some kind neutral "referee" making sure the rules are fair for all? I don't. The law is an instrument of power. Whichever class controls the law makes the rules. Law and politics are more akin to war than a game of backgammon. You should only support legal protections for your enemy if you can be assured your enemy will do the same. Otherwise you're voluntarily giving your enemy a knife sharpener just so he or she can more effectively stab you in the back.

The best way to make the next generation better off is to make sure the enemies of progress do not have political power.

I've watched Beck a couple of times and Stewart has him pegged.

Where do you draw the line, Santa? Should public schools be forced to offer halal meat? Or should public schools be forced to ban pork? Should public schools be forced to allow Muslim girls to attend school in full niqab?

1. No, 2. No (these two are completely unrealistic and sound like something beck would make up, jews have been attending public schools for years with no such concessions and I know of no case where this has been considered) 3. Yes, she is entitled to her religious beliefs and the government should have no right to stop her from exercising them.

The line is drawn where concessions would be out of the norm to those given by other groups of students.

How do schools handle Mennonites and other "Plain Folk" that attend public schools? They let them dress per their religious doctrine.

I'm going to have to agree with Putin. Schools are for education. Public schools are run by the government. and even if you don't have the separation of church and state, they are still supposed to be secular. Let the kids pray at home or at church/mosque/temple/etc. Or have them go to a religious private school.

This is absurd. I'm as areligious as they come, but people need to stop acting like school is like some sort of island where absolutely nothing other than learning ever goes on? Have any of you ever been to a school? Kids spend the vast majority of their waking hours at school. You can't just ask them to put every aspect of their lives beyond learning history and math from 8 in the morning till 4 in the afternoon. And for students to whom religion is very important I think it's perfectly acceptable for accommodations to be made as long as they don't disrupt the primary function of school which is education. And I think setting aside an otherwise unused room so people can pray in it, over lunch time is fairly minor, as long as students don't feel pressured and as long as they aren't instructed or led in prayer by teachers.

Errr so many mistakes in that paragraph. Sorry.
It should say "I'm as areligious as they come, but people need to stop acting like school is like some sort of island where absolutely nothing other than learning ever goes on." Obviously that isn't a question

"You can't just ask them to put every aspect of their lives beyond learning history and math from 8 in the morning till 4 in the afternoon." should actually read "You can't just ask them to put every aspect of their lives, beyond learning history and math, on hold from 8 in the..."

Mafiallegator is right, and the best way to learn tolerance of each other is exposer each others differences.

"exposer to each other"

"as long as students don't feel pressured"

The likelihood of these groups not pressuring others to join in their prayer exercises is slim to none. They can't help themselves. They must evangelize and convert all the 'lost souls' out there. Schools which have had these clubs have soon found themselves with the problem of students engaging in religious preaching. The same type of thing has happened when state legislatures mandate that schools teach *about* the Bible in a so-called "neutral" way. We quickly find out the instruction is anything but neutral. These fanatics are also purging the teaching of evolution from public schools. The percentage of science teachers who do not comply with curriculum directives about evolution is shocking. You give the religious an inch, and they will exploit it with gusto.

Nice generalization, Putin. You could have narrowed it down a bit to say the evangelical far right. I'm religious but don't feel the need to convert everyone.

OMG Peer Pressure in SCHOOLS!!! Gasp....What will they do next! Uh....there's about *40* different clubs in my kids schools. And they ALL think they are the best and try to make other kids feel like their club isn't as good. At the top of the "I'm better and you suck" is the Cheerleaders and the football team. If Putin is so damned concerned about peer pressure, etc. then I suppose he would be for the banning of all social clubs in schools?

For that matter...I suppose he supports the President who's only claim to fame prior to being President was "Community Organizer"...i.e. Professional Peer Pressure guy...Some might say he was even fanatical about his causes...

Putin, as always, does not see merit in true equal opportunity, but - like any good authoritarian Leftist - wants to outlaw anything he does not *personally* agree with. Give a leftist an inch...and they'll make you a criminal for having a belief. He is a *truly* scary guy...he's have you locked up in jail for carrying a Bible, and it makes me shudder to think there are others like him in the world (including the White House...)

Maybe Putin should be more concerned with the kids pushing drugs in school, with teachers having sex with students, with a thousand truly immoral things that are going on (teachers that don't teach but have tenure...) Instead, he wants to destroy the people that...like a *vast* majority of humanity....have a religious belief. How demented and misguided his energies are...

"OMG Peer Pressure in SCHOOLS!!!"

The whole point, genius, is that these church groups are only allowed in public schools if they do not engage in this kind of pressuring, because of the silly prohibition against establishing a state religion which you hate so much. You know, that constitution you pretend to support but haven't bothered to read?

".Some might say he was even fanatical about his causes..."

Yeah, the Glenn Beck worshipers of the world. Nobody normal says this.

"does not see merit in true equal opportunity"

Neither do you, so give me a break. You're just upset that I'm on to your ilk's tactics and don't accept fake "equal opportunity" which really means a stacked deck in favor of your knuckle-dragging reactionary comrades.

"like any good authoritarian Leftist - wants to outlaw anything he does not *personally* agree with."

Ah right, because you're so accepting of views you disagree with. And your rightwing friends haven't tried to repress progressive demonstrations and groups by force, right? What does your hero Glenn Beck do all day but redbait and engage in McCarthyite tactics to terrify people into silence, yet you continue, without any sense of irony, to call people "authoritarian". Hilarious.

"Putin, as always, does not see merit in true equal opportunity, but - like any good authoritarian Leftist - wants to outlaw anything he does not *personally* agree with."

krellin, you crack me up more than even TMW. Frankly, this stinks with the kind of hypocrisy the far right regularly revels in. You, a supporter of Glenn Beck, a man who would want nothing less than an authoritarian and militaristic Christian theocracy installed, is calling someone else authoritarian.

" You could have narrowed it down a bit to say the evangelical far right. I'm religious but don't feel the need to convert everyone."

Just like not everybody has a bomb in their shoe or baby formula. But yet, we have to guard against the lowest common denominator, unfortunately. And in this case, the LCD is not really a tiny fraction of the sample size, but a good percentage.

Anyway, these charges of 'generalizing' from Draugnar would have some kind of effect if it weren't for the fact that few people on here are more talented at making broad and absurd generalizations than he is. He who claims to know why most women get abortions, and the spending habits of college kids, and the work ethic of the poor.

Should public schools be forced to offer halal meat?

If their students need it to conform to their religion. Yes. Offering a particular meal infringes upon nobody else's rights. Public schools offered fish on Fridays for years. It wasn't a problem for those that didn't have to eat fish on Friday's. There are generaly other choices anyway. So nobody is forced to eat anything.

Or should public schools be forced to ban pork?

No, nor has there been any credible movement to do so that I’m aware of. Even if there was it wouldn’t make it right to do so. This constitutes taking a choice away from the students that have no cultural or religious reason to avoid that choice. It’s giving credence to one religion over others and so it isn’t something that would pass in a secular public school. The difference being in the first something is offered to a student to allow him to practice his faith. In the second, a choice is taken away from the entire populace when practicing Jews and Muslims could easily choose other menu items. If the argument is that every menu item could have come into contact with pork because it is cooked in that kitchen, then those parents are probably used to sending lunch with their kids because they avoid lots of restaurants.


Should public schools be forced to allow Muslim girls to attend school in full niqab?

Again Yes, it’s not that they are forced to do anything. Niquab is well within the dress codes of most schools anyway. There is nothing that would prevent a parent from sending their child to school dressed that way. It’s the free expression of religion. A secular public school system cannot take favor one religion over another. Likewise it cannot enact policies that hinder one religion or groups thereof.

This is all pretty well spelled out. The school systems and religious freedom are often debated. The line is usually drawn at infringement upon others. For instance, Jehovah’s Witnesses can’t say the Pledge (it’s viewed as a form of idol worship) so they sit down while others say it and nobody bats an eye. They aren’t infringing on anyone’s right to pledge the flag, and nobody is telling them that they must set aside their beliefs.

What's the pledge? Do you have to say it everyday?

"The percentage of science teachers who do not comply with curriculum directives about evolution is shocking. "

The "shock" study I was informed of about this has some super misleading information. It gives percentages of teachers who say that they follow all the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences on evolution. Recommendations =/= cirriculum, and sometimes a radical state or local government will force them to not follow those recommendations. Among said recommendations is not allowing questions about evolution, presenting the matter totally question-free to head off "But what about creationism?" before it starts, and another is to not acknowledge that the subject is at all controversial.

"What's the pledge? Do you have to say it everyday?"

Yes we do in Georgia. I'm not sure about all other U.S. States but I think it's said everywhere.

was like that way in NJ

The pledge is, essentially, a brief commitment to America said daily by schoolchildren. In the 1950's the phrase "under God" was added to it, completely destroying the meter. The school in the small town I grew up in used the original version, and as far as I know still does today, so I was very confused when controversy erupted about that phrase.

"But...the Pledge doesn't say 'under God'..."

Students don't have to say the Pledge of Allegiance. It's recited in most schools at the beginning of the day, but students are not required to say it themselves.

It's hard to see how you can justify a school rule forbidding students to exercise their First Amendment rights. If a student feels like praying when nothing else is going on, s/he can.

And while the school isn't obligated to make schedule allowances for students who need more than a couple of minutes to pray, few school administrators are going to make a big deal out of it if they can manage. When I was in 10th-grade biology, I didn't want to dissect a frog, so my teacher allowed me to take on an alternate assignment. And dissection wasn't against my religion; I just had a personal issue with it. It's just easier for everyone, and you won't find many people who will attack religious practice on principle.

It occurs to me that this provides a generalizable use for the Flying Spaghetti Monster. If an accommodation for religion would be given to a Pastafarian, then it's truly neutral. I mention this because I suspect that if a parent came to the school and said that their child was required to eat noodles precisely at noon, most school administrators would move the kid's lunch without a second thought. It's just not worth the hassle for a principal to make a fuss over something so trivial.

"Among said recommendations is not allowing questions about evolution, presenting the matter totally question-free to head off "But what about creationism?" before it starts, and another is to not acknowledge that the subject is at all controversial."

The recommendations are the following:

"http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/evolution.aspx

"Declarations
Within this context, NSTA recommends that
Science curricula, state science standards, and teachers should emphasize evolution in a manner commensurate with its importance as a unifying concept in science and its overall explanatory power.
Science teachers should not advocate any religious interpretations of nature and should be nonjudgmental about the personal beliefs of students.
Policy makers and administrators should not mandate policies requiring the teaching of “creation science” or related concepts, such as so-called “intelligent design,” “abrupt appearance,” and “arguments against evolution.” Administrators also should support teachers against pressure to promote nonscientific views or to diminish or eliminate the study of evolution.
Administrators and school boards should provide support to teachers as they review, adopt, and implement curricula that emphasize evolution. This should include professional development to assist teachers in teaching evolution in a comprehensive and professional manner.
Parental and community involvement in establishing the goals of science education and the curriculum development process should be encouraged and nurtured in our democratic society. However, the professional responsibility of science teachers and curriculum specialists to provide students with quality science education should not be compromised by censorship, pseudoscience, inconsistencies, faulty scholarship, or unconstitutional mandates.
Science textbooks shall emphasize evolution as a unifying concept. Publishers should not be required or volunteer to include disclaimers in textbooks that distort or misrepresent the methodology of science and the current body of knowledge concerning the nature and study of evolution."

It is matter of fact. It's anti-scientific horsepuckey to claim that because something is a "theory" that means it's a "guess" or not backed by reams of evidence. Religious fanatics forcing science teachers to claim it isn't a matter of fact and unifying concept within the the sciences while giving equal or more time to religious and pseudoscientific "theories" is an attack on our education system and an attack on science as a whole. No other field has so many instructors rejecting the foundations of their own field. Not only that, but the study found that15-20% of science teachers are explicitly teaching 'creationism' and other similar malarkey. The recommendations are clear. I would think that people generally believe that our schools should follow national curriculum guidelines set by science educators. But apparently not.

Putin accusing people of broad generalizations! Haaa ha ha ha! That's too funny! There is no arguing with someone as inconsistent and unprincipled as Putin. I call for equality...if people want to organize a group within school of any legal sort (and I believe worship is still legal in this country, much to chagrin of people like Putin) then they should be allowed to within limits that ALL must adhere to. Putin, on the other hand, only wants groups allowed that HE PERSONALLY agrees with. Such hypocrisy has no place in my thinking. You do and will suggest otherwise...but I don't think you can back up your claim *at all* without taking statements out of context....the last refuge of the fool with no argument.

Equally, funny, of course, is largeham with his flat-out *made up* accusations, such as the assinine claim that I would like a Christian theocracy installed. QUITE to the contrary, I believe in freedom of worship, but I would *never* call for a theocracy, Christian or otherwise. Find **ONE SINGLE CLAIM** EVER THAT I HAVE MADE TO THIS AFFECT! Oh....you can't...instead you simply slander and spread lies. How pathetic. At least have the integrity to base your personal attacks on something people said, instead of making stuff up.

While I believe in evolution, Putin, it is not a matter of *fact*. It is still a theory. I lnow you Fre a pseudo science professor (PoliSci is an arts course, not a science) so the difference between fact and theory eludes you. One is proven (fact), the other is not (theory) and no mattter how widely accepted and how much evidence is provided, science requires full indisputable proof to be fact.