On Sunday 2003-12-21 16:38, Alberto Monteiro wrote: > I read a note in a br newspaper yesterday, and it basically said > something like this: "hey, folks, you think the USA is a christian > country, but it's not; in fact, christians have been persecuted > with violence, with the g*vernment approval" > > And then he listed what he thought was happening. Since > the USA listmembers don't seem to say these things, I guess > he is wrong. He mentioned things like:
He's not so much wrong as (probably) in a lunatic fringe of ultra-conservative evangelical christians. Government school systems in the US are intentionally decentralized. School districts (in most states) tend to be local affairs. In the Greater Phoenix area we must have over a dozen individual districts (polities with their own elections, budgets, and policies) for grade schools and half that number of districts for secondary schools. There are more school districts than municipalities. > * public schools forbid kids to wear christian symbols, > including carrying a bible to school This would probably be unconstitutional. Minors do not have complete rights to freedom of speech--especially at school--but a Bible wouldn't be obscene or objectionable. No doubt it has happened, but when it occurs it is an aberation. > * public schools punish kids that pray or proselityse. There is a difference between younger and older children. Children CAN pray. There might be restrictions, mostly their would not be allowed to interfere with the education of others, and maybe of themselves. (Muslims might be expected to perform obligatory prayers between classes, for example. Evangelical Christians might need to pray quietly so as not to disturb others.) PUBLIC prayers in istructional settings are out. Proselityzing is problematic. It tends to be permitted at secondary schools so long as it doesnt interfere with instruction. Schools CANNOT endorse prosyletizing or any prayer. This tends to piss some conservatives off. They don't like some logical extensions of the no establishment clause. > * public schools suspend and fire teachers that profess > a Christian faith They cant. That would violate the Constitution. This also means that a teacher is limited about overt actions they take based on that faith, they cannot try to convert kids, force students to pray, insist God exists (though they could say that they personally believe God or gods exists), and they might be compelled to teach evolution--though in practice a teacher can teach evolution and try to convince his or her students evolution is bunk, and some do. > * it's ok to claim anti-christian slogans in front of churches, > like "bring in the lions!" Yep. That is protected speech. You cannot incite a riot or a crime, so long as you don't advocate criminal activity you can picket churches and slander religion. > * a student that mentions anything anti-islamic is forced to > spend hours in reeducating classes, where he must study > and recite the Quram Schools tend to discourage hate speech. (Remeber minors, especially pre-teens, have limited free-speech protection, and they have *less* protection when at school.) Virulent anti-Islamic statements at school or worse, slurs directed at actual people are likely to result in some sort of sensitivity training. This is indoctrination, no matter what supporters might say. In that sort of environment the trainee WILL have to study Islam, and depending on the program might actually have to study and/or memorize verses from the Quran. NOTE that the intent would not be conversion (that would be unconstitional). The hope is that the trainee will be less suceptible to hateful ideas and have an attitude more suited to living and working peacfully and productively in a multi-racial and multi-ethnic country. > Alberto Monteiro > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
