 |
|
|
|
|
January 21st, 2011
04:04 PM ET
Georgia county's graduations to be held in a churchThe Cherokee County, Georgia school board in voted unanimously Thursday to continue holding graduations at a church, with more than 200 people showing up for the vote. For the past several years, all of North Georgia's Cherokee County high schools have held their graduations at First Baptist Church in Woodstock, but recently, a Washington, D.C.-based group threatened to sue the school district on the basis of separation of church and state. Read the full story on WSBTV.com
« Previous entryBernice King declines SCLC presidency
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
religious useful idiots.
nothing new
Thanks for your insightful blog! !
I happen to live in Cobb COutny which is next to Cherokee County School District. Our county holds graduations at the Baptist church as well. Noone here has an issue with holding graduations at the church. There are no references to religion or religious beliefs. The churches here are large and can accommodate thousands of people. This allows us to have as many family memebers as we choose. I don;t know why the Washington based organization is causing us problems. It is none of their business. I am tired of the 1% of people whom live in the USA making problems for eveyone else. You don't attend school here, so shut up! It is that 1% of people who need to hear themselves spew crap that ruin it for all of us! If you don't like it, too bad and leave the 89% of us who are happy alone!
No references to religious beliefs??? DON'T MIND THE BIG CROSS ON TOP OF THE CHURCH or the ALTER!
I agree totally with Jagger. As for the church relics being present, I would like to ask the following: Will there be anyone there holding guns to the heads of anyone present to make them listen to a sermon or not walk out of the church until they have been baptized in the beliefs of that church? No? You mean nobody is going to force me to stay longer than the graduation lasts and nobody is going to try to convert me? I will not be sent to the gallows because I choose not to say that I am a believer of that church? Subliminal messaging maybe with the cross over the door? No? It just happens to be there because that is a church and the school happens to hold graduation there? Get a life people. This is not the government wielding their influence to make me what they want me to be. And as I said before, the people doing all of the protesting don't even live in that county. Butt out!
I live in Pickens County. Nobody to blame but myself. I traveled and worked all over the world. Literally. I have never been to a location where being ignorant and closed minded, religious bigots, had been considered admirable traits. They are here. Except of course for in the Middle East.
Jaggar – It also doesnt appear to be any of your business since you dont live there either.
You must have graduated from a Georgia school. Add up your percentages and they should equal %100... unless you work for the federal government.
There is probably closer to %60 of the country's population that would have a problem with this... is my estimate. It has nothing to do with Washington DC meddling in Georgia's business... or upsetting anyone in the county. It simply has to do with the overarching laws of our country separating church and state. Its a good bet that it would not pass the smell test. Despite the fact that there may be %95 of the county citizens who are for the church venue... if the other %5 are threatened or feel uncomfortable with religious overtone it ought not to occur.
Why doesn't the county have each school celebrate their own HS graduations at the school facilities... on the athletic fields... that is the way we did it where and when I grew up.
As firm a believer in the separation of church and state as I am, I see no problem with this. Schools across the country allow churches without a building of their own to hold services within school property all the time, why would the reverse be any different? If this high school wishes its graduation to be held within a church, let them. As long as religious items that can be moved out of the area being used during the ceremony, and the students are not being forced to listen to a sermon, there's no violation happening. It's just a building.
...and the students are not being forced to listen to a sermon, there's no violation happening. It's just a building.
----------
I am certain the church leadership is smart enough to simply allow a graduation ceremony and not holds a church service. I short, I am agreeing with you!
Anyone advocating mosques clearly hasn't been to one...um, they have no chairs in their large room!
As for the article I've been to this church and it could certainly house more than just a high school graduation. More of a civic center than anything I can recall in terms of size. (No further comment on that one...)
The large format parking lot and driving lanes will allow for ease of access to and from the venue.
I am uneasy with a close relationship between a church and the state. A church here in El Paso rents meeting space from the local schools on Sunday, and that's fine with me. The Kiwanis Club, the Cancer Society, or the Democratic Party is equally free to rent that space on non-school days.
But for government events to be held in a church is another matter. It suggests government endorsement and sponsorship of that church and its beliefs. I was raised in the Baptist Church. Today, you hear a lot of anti-government propaganda in fundamentalist Protestant churches.
A church is just a building... And if all of the students are of that faith or no religious message is imposed, then it is a non-issue. I don't see the usefulness of some organization from another city threatening legal action if the students and thier parents are OK with it...
That being said... If religious ideologies are in fact imposed, I wouldn't go (granted I personally graduated a few decades ago). I'm an atheist that has no issue with non-fundamentalist type beliefs... So as long as nothing was pushed on me I could care less about the venue.
Be fun for a few good-natured non-believers to fall down screaming when they enter and thrash about pointing at the no-doubt rather obvious cross being displayed and scream "It burns!". Maybe pop a couple of stage blood capsules under their eyes and put on a real show. Probably do more to up church attendance the next week than anything the minister could dream up.
If this church regularly makes it's space available for non-religious events I'd have no problem with this venue. But I bet it doesn't and the comments about the minister trying to recruit followers as the students come in is just plain wrong and moves this into dangerous territory since it is being done without the consent of the parents and without giving the student a chance to object to being proselytized at a school function.
I can personally assure you that the minister did not hand out pamphlets. In addition, this church does rent its space out to ohter functions. It is always people who want to create a name for themselves who have to get in other people business. We are perfectly happy to hold our graduations at this church. There has never been an issue until this organization decided to create an issue. If you do not live here in Cherokee County or Georgia, please mind your own business.
If they're just using the church as a meeting hall, like a convention center, that should not be a problem. but what kind of church would want their house of worship to be used for that purpose?
Perhaps one that cares for it's community?
It's a building, nothing more. We need to stop treating church buildings like something special or taboo.
As a frequent critic of religion I must say that I couldn't care any less. As someone above me said a building is a building, As long as they aren't excluding non-Christians from the ceremony I really don't see a problem with it.
The graduationis simply held in the church because it can accommodate thousands of people. No one has ever thought a thing about it until this organization decided to get involved in something that is none of their business.
Why is it any concern of a Washington D.C.-based group anyway? It's been held their for a while and if the residents of the county don't have an issue with it, then the group that wants to cause the stir needs to find another cause.
Oops. There, not their.
If 99 people are fine with being preached to but 1 is offended, is it okay?
The group is interested in the protection of the rights of EVERYONE.
i go to high school in Cherokee county and i am a freshman and i been to a graduation ceremony in the church and i know for a fact that dr. p and the board voted 7 to zero to keep graduation at First baptist church of Woodstock!
The question here is why did they vote this way? Was it truly as suggested, that this is the only affordable venue large enough to house the graduation attendees or rather because they wished the graduation ceremony reflect a particularly Christian atmosphere/message? The Board need only to produce some doc-umentation indicating other alternatives were actually examined and all were either too small or too expensive.
Resonse to Q: First of all, it is none of your business or anyone elses business in the USA who this does not affect in any way. Second, it is the least expensive and largest venue to accommodate everyone who wishes to attend the event. The kids do not have to pick and choose who can come to graduation because the venue is so large. There is NO religious association or mention of religion during the ceremony. We are tired of people who think they can comment or stick their nose into our business here in Georgia.
It is taxpayers buisness, Jagger. Unless it is only the students and parents paying for this event?
Freshman.. I see they are doing an exceptional job at educating you. It is appears the school system has given you an excellent grasp of the English language, right down to capitalization and punctuation.
Meghan,
Disregard Chuck. He is a mean and angry man! Study hard and enjoy your life!
@meghan:
People's rights should NEVER be subject to a vote. What if the majority of citizens voted that everyone must go to a mosque? How would you feel then?
As for the prospects of holding a graduation in a church, if ALL religious symbols (including pictures of Jesus or Moses, or even the 10 commandments) were covered and there was no clergy or prayer, I don't have an issue. The problem comes when religion is being forced on people.
FYI:
I say this as a New Atheist.
425,
People's rights should NEVER be subject to a vote.
-----------
Would you mind informing the Congress then? The second amendment is under fire and with the "fairness" doctrine, so is the first amendment
@ Bob and Chuck, PROOF that I know what an amendment is!
@Steve
Sure. I'll tell them that. And no one is preventing them from forming a well armed militia to protect the security of a free state.
In all seriousness, gun control and Church-State Separation are entirely different.
425,
I am just countering your statement about rights being tied to votes In DC, it happens all the time! You are correct when you say gun control and SOCAS are two separate issues!
I'm not entirely sure you understand the connotations of my statement. I said they are two separate issues meaning that they are blown to different orders of magnitude. If the Establishment Clause is taken literally, religion will be fine, it'll just need to stay out of public events or publicly sponsored activities. And PAY IT'S DARN TAXES (not taking my chances by cursing...). If YOUR interpretation of the Second Ammendment is taken literally, expect the murder and crime rates to skyrocket.
Also, my first paragraph was intended as criticism of your interpretation of the Second Ammendment, which reads:
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
To me, this says:
If you are in a militia that is protecting the security of a free state (the USA), you may have a gun.
425,
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." To me, this says: If you are in a militia that is protecting the security of a free state (the USA), you may have a gun.
-------------
There are 2 term in use here: " Militia" and 'The People". It appears there is room for disagreement, based upon your definition of "the People". I just find it interesting they did not use the term Militia twice but instead used "the People". To me that does not only mean militia! But we can peacefully disagree! Agreed?
@Jaggar- Similar assertions of "not your business" were used in the attempt to prevent Federal intervention during the Jim Crow era. Whether you like or not, behaviors affecting Const-itutionally protected civil liberties are every U.S. citizen's business. But again, as previously stated, all the board needs to due is disclose their efforts in finding a non-religious venue indicating the alternatives weren't financially or fiscally feasible.
Regarding the 2nd Amendment, the SCOTUS has confirmed it to be an individual liberty just like the rest of the Bill of Rights leaving open regulations defining permissible locations for possession (e.g. not schools, not Federal buildings, etc) and limitations on type and capacity (e.g. semi vs fully automatic, etc). The 2nd Amendment is most certainly not "under fire".
Oops. "...financially or logistically feasible".
@Q
Regarding the 2nd Amendment, the SCOTUS has confirmed it to be an individual liberty just like the rest of the Bill of Rights leaving open regulations defining permissible locations for possession (e.g. not schools, not Federal buildings, etc) and limitations on type and capacity (e.g. semi vs fully automatic, etc). The 2nd Amendment is most certainly not "under fire".
-------
Care to explain the so-called Fairness Doctrine?
Q, Sorry that would be the first amendment. So I will use another example. Hurricane Katrina. Why did law enforcement in New Orleans confiscate weapons from law abiding citizens? Anytime something happens (lately in Tuscan, Arizona) the first thing shouted out is gun control!
@Steve – Law enforcement and other public officials, by accident or by design, routinely violate 1st, 2nd, 4th, etc amendment rights but, with all due respect, it's pure hyperbole to translate individual incidents into a given right being "under fire". Similarly, public opinion by itself doesn't translate into Const-itutional rights being "under fire". By comparison, the 14th amendment citizenship clause might be considered to actually be "under fire" in that there are proposals (Sen. Graham, Kyl; Rep Boehner, etc) to amend/repeal this clause and/or contest its application to the children of illegal immigrants via local legislation with subsequent litigation in the federal judicial system. If you could provide evidence of a concerted effort to directly limit the current scope of 2nd amendment rights as established by SCOTUS precedent via legislation or litigation, then I'll certainly concede the point...
I don't feel the debate about the why's and wherefore's regarding the Separation of Church and State is worth the time. As a worldly person with friends from literally all corners of the world, I think the real debate should be one of compassion for other human beings. I dare say if the venue were to be at an Egyptian mosque or Muslim facility, all you lilly white suburbanites would be up in arms about the issue. Since it is in a white anglo saxon religious facility, you are defensive. This effort on the part of the Religious Right to literally want to shove their beliefs down everyones throat will never solve anything. Take a look at the recent inaugural speech by the newly elected governor of Alabama wherein he states that non-Christian believers are not his "Brothers" because they have not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. This mindset is what allows the U.S. to go into any country they want and start wars to inflict their beliefs all over the world. It truly has done nothing but alienate the world against us. Why not let's try to accept other people and not attempt to dictate our beliefs on everyone else. You people can start by thinking farther than the end of your nose and have some compassion for others. By the way, that is what your Savior preached about. Have a nice day.
Oh me first .... Me first ....
"Take a look at the recent inaugural speech by the newly elected governor of Alabama wherein he states that non-Christian believers are not his "Brothers" because they have not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior."
Sorry Jim, but that is why unchecked hatred blinds one so.... you should try to do a bit of research yah Troll you. 🙂
Check about that "speech" you fastened your point to and get back to us. Just proving yah wrong is too easy, I want you to do the checkin' and come to the realization you are wrong.
Peace ..
@Mark:
I'll take this one. Gov. Bentley said this exactly:
"Now I will have to say that, if we don’t have the same daddy, we’re not brothers and sisters. So anybody here today who has not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior, I’m telling you, you’re not my brother and you’re not my sister, and I want to be your brother."
Well? I think he's made his point well. Non-Christians aren't his brothers.
425,
True! that is what he said What you fail to mention is the context, which is FAITH! Secondly, you are failing to mention some of the replies of your fellow atheists. They agree about not being brothers! I asked an atheist if he considered me (a Christian) to be his brother, again the answer was no! Even atheists agree with him and yet at the same time condemn him! Athesirts
Sigh.... 425, I think Jim has gone back to check on the challenge of the "recent inaugural speech " statement of his post. Maybe you should as well. There is a few issues with that statement that lets me know that Jim'o only responded with preset emotions of dislike and distrust of a person of faith. That hate put words into his little mind that he has manufactured.
I will go no further than to request that you research the total situation.
@Steve – INAL but the SOCAS is the clear language the authors of the Establishment Clause (i.e. Madison and Jefferson) used to describe its intent. This deference to the authors intent in the SOCAS phrase is well established in SCOTUS rulings, e.g. Reynolds v U.S., 1878: "Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured."
The limitation to Congress alone was lifted via the 14th Amendment and the incorporation of the Bill of Rights requiring states to abide by these restrictions as well. There are many other rights we readily acknowledge which aren't explicitly listed in the Const-itution, e.g. a right to privacy.
The Danbury Baptists were indeed fearful of "church of England" scenario which is exactly what was occurring in many colonies where a dominant sect would use state powers to impose itself upon minority sects (e.g. taxes to support a specific church, religious tests to hold office, etc). Many attempt to argue the Establishment Clause was intended to protect the church from the state and not the other way around, however, the ability to shield minority religious views from the state is dependent on protecting the state from being surrept-itiously employed by a majority religious view. The wall must protect advances from either side to ensure minority religious views (or lack thereof) aren't infringed upon.
Numerous civil liberty situations have required the intervention of "outside" groups simply because the minorities being infringed upon are subject to overwhelming local opposition and are fearful to vocally demand their rights, e.g. Jim Crow. All of this said, numerous SCOTUS rulings have left significant "wiggle room" and if the use of the church for graduation complies with the three prongs of the Lemon Test and the intent of the school board is not shown to harbor any goal of proselytism, then there's likely no case. For better or worse, these types of threatened lawsuits are a powerful mechanism by which we as citizens keep our elected officials in check and protect our individual liberties.
Yeah, especially those liberties of the WASP family
Jim- I believe civil liberty precedents would indicate WASPs have consistently been on the losing side since Brown v Board of Ed (which IMHO is how it should be). Your reply seems mis-targeted.
Just another house of "worthless worship" akin to mosques, temples and synagogues so why not put it to some good use??
Reality Worthless maybe to you! Doubt it is worthless to the folks who VOLUNTARILY worship there or want to hold a graduation ceremony there!
Having a graduation there does not involve worshiping.
Glad even you can admit that! STILL worshipping the One True God in spirit and truth IS NOT worthless!
One True God? Zeus? Or maybe something to do with the following:
"Stories circulated to the effect that Alexander of Macedonia was not only the son of Philip II, but also of the god Zeus-Ammon (Plutarch, Parallel Lives, "Alexander" 2.1-3.2); Plato was the son of Ariston and the god Apollo (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers 3.1-2), and Augustus was the son of Octavius as well as the god Apollo (Suetonius, Lives o f the Caesars 2.4.1-7). The extraordinary character of these elites reputedly stemmed from both their divine origins and their kingroups. Their kin-groups provided one form of legitimation-political right to the throne and/or social status (thus the importance of Joseph in Matthew's genealogy). Their divine procreation provided another: their honor was divinely ascribed, and their greatness as leaders derived from divine paternity."
From: K.C. Hanson and D. E. Oakman, Palestine in the Time of Jesus, Fortress Press, 1998. p.55”
Wow Steve and Peace, that was the most calm exchange I have seen here at the belief blog for a while.
The moderators should be getting calls from Chase Visa soon for the lack of an on-going flame war.
Yall' both should be banned, for not bashing into each other, by sun up, Saturday morning 🙂
@Mark from Middle River
Thank Mark... Hopefully we will not be banned 🙂
We (you and me) also, have tended toward civil discourse and discussion as well.
I enjoy talking with people that we may agree or differ in our perspectives, but either way, I seem to come out seeing or hearing things in a new way or a new perspective.
Anyways, good to hear from you -Mark... I hope that all is well...?
Peace...
Appreciate that Mark. It is much easier to talk with folk who really want to listen and exchange thoughts and ideas! Peace2all and I may not agree but we can talk civilly.
Religion (faith) and politics are the two main subjects people get overly passionate about! Myself included!
@Stever (the real one)
*I think we may 'agree' a lot more than we disagree on things. I think we need to have a sincere desire to learn from one another, and I think you 'may' find we agree more than not.
Just some thoughts.
Peace...
Peace,
I am willing to listen! Thanks
@Steve the real one
Hey Steve... I hope that you are well.
If you don't mind, I would like to explore this with you in a different manner, than your back and forths with some of the other bloggers.
For the moment, lets just take out of the discussion the whole issue of whether there (is or is not) a 'separation' clause in the consti-tution.
So, with that said, if we just explore the concept as whether it is a (good idea to have or not), and base our opinions on taking a look at other countries, who 'do not' literally have a 'separation' clause in their political governing, ...what do we find...?
Typically, without question we find what are called Theocracies. Where there is no separation, and in fact, the rule of law 'is' based on whatever religion is in power and often their radicalized views on reality based on their holy books. i.e..the Qur'an, the Bible, etc... Taken to its extreme, countries like Iran, etc... will often imprison, torture, and even kill people who do not follow, nor believe in the religious government that is in power.
So, again, at this point, does this help at all to have a discussion around whether or not the concept 'is' a 'good one' or not, just based on the realities of what we see in other countries...?
I would assert that, in fact... it 'is' a good concept to have, given what we see and are aware of in the World today.
I wouldn't want a Theocracy here in the U.S., would you...? Would you want the Muslim's to be imposing their religious laws on everyone here...? I would think that you wouldn't, and the same goes for a Christian Theocracy.
By having this principle or concept of a 'separation' of (any) religion and government, it helps to maintain some semblance and equality for secular and civil rights, not to mention, your ability to practice your religion of choice(Christianity) openly and freely, while allowing the Muslim's, the Jew's, the Hindu's, etc... to do the same.
Steve, I hope that I was able to make a civil and reasonable point with you that we could 'both' agree on...?
I am certainly curious to hear your views...!
P.S–Maybe if we are in basic or full agreement on this, we can move on to take a look at discussing your assertion of the 'church/state' issue in the const-itution....fair enough...?
Peace...
@Steve the real one & everyone else...
Sorry for double post...!
Peace...
Hello Peace2all,
I hear what you are saying and I agree the US is a representative republic and NOT a theocracy and no one is attempting to make it as such. Listen, this article simply stated a school district in Georgia wants to hold a graduation on church. No one said there would be any type of service. In fact, of of the students in the main story said the same. A simple graduation! No more, no less. What happens next! Threats of lawsuits and heated discussion. Over a simple graduation in a church! As much as I love Christ I too do not want any type of theocracy in the U.S. WHY? Simple! Jesus NEVER forced himself on anyone. We as His people do not have that right! So peace, I am in agreement with you there! I am sure you know that Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to PASTORS were afraid of a "church of England" situation here . He (TJ) wrote that letter to ease their fears! All I am saying is any prohibition is on CONGRESS ONLY and not these students. Anytime church is mentioned somebody will shout "separation of church and state" without knowing what it really is. Again no theocracy for this country because humans do have the tendency to go extreme. Thanks for your reasonable and well thought out post! And I am well and I hope you are as well! No theocracy for me!
@Steve (the real one)
Yes, I'm doing quite well, -Steve, thank you for asking. Glad you're well too.
Also, glad to hear that we are in agreement on this.
The reason that I had posted to you on this, was that I noticed in your reply to -Luke "here we go again" that you were heading down that path of going nowhere in your arguments. As I have witnessed your back and forths with others concerning the 'separation' issue many times before, and it often seemed to me at least that 'both' sides weren't going anywhere, as you were 'both' stuck in trying to prove or disprove what our founding fathers wanted-intended, and what was meant by the const-tution, and 'Jefferson's' letter, and Madison, etc..etc..
So, I thought that if we could just look at it as... is this a 'good' concept to have or not...? Then, we could further our mutual understandings...And.. apparently we did.
As for this particular article concerning the "School Graduation to be held in a Church" issue, I certainly understand your point and can see where you are coming from.
Thanks again for chatting -Steve...
Peace...
Thanks for the reply Peace! Again, I am fully against any attempt to create a theocracy! Forcing any religion on someone does not work. All it does is begrudging change behavior, but not the heart and Christianity is a matter of the heart! You are correct though circular arguments go nowhere fast and get frustrating and I am guilty of that. Thanks for for your time! Peace, the concept to prevent a theocracy is fine! i have no issue with that. The problem I really have is that is not how the concept is applied. In my eyes there is great overreach! That is my issue!! Although we disagree on key points, I appreciate being able to civilly talk with you! Thanks!
I become torn on this topic often. While I undertand the argument that other venues are too small or too expensive, these reasons do not give reason to purposely undermine the church state seperation clause. Some in my position, a non believer, do not have much of a problem entering churches for given reasons. While I go to weddings and enjoy churches for their architecture across Europe, I would have to contest to public funds or public events being held in a church. The government in any capacity cannot do these things or force me to be inside a church against my will. If my child were to go to this public school, I would protest rightfully so. When I go to churches on my own time, it is by my choice. In this instasnce, the school is forcing me to go or miss the graduation. This is an interesting debate. I'd like to see what the ACLU has to say.
Here we go again! What separation of church and state clause? Where is it? It's not in the US Const-it-ion!
Steve the real one, if the school wanted to have it at a Mosque or Synagogue, or where ever Wiccans worship it would still be cool?
@Steve the real one
Hey Steve... I hope that you are well.
If you don't mind, I would like to explore this with you in a different manner, than your back and forths with some of the other bloggers.
For the moment, lets just take out of the discussion the whole issue of whether there (is or is not) a 'separation' clause in the consti-tution.
So, with that said, if we just explore the concept as whether it is a (good idea to have or not), and base our opinions on taking a look at other countries, who 'do not' literally have a 'separation' clause in their political governing, ...what do we find...?
Typically, without question we find what are called Theocracies. Where there is no separation, and in fact, the rule of law 'is' based on whatever religion is in power and often their radicalized views on reality based on their holy books. i.e..the Qur'an, the Bible, etc... Taken to its extreme, countries like Iran, etc... will often imprison, torture, and even kill people who do not follow, nor believe in the religious government that is in power.
So, again, at this point, does this help at all to have a discussion around whether or not the concept 'is' a 'good one' or not, just based on the realities of what we see in other countries...?
I would assert that, in fact... it 'is' a good concept to have, given what we see and are aware of in the World today.
I wouldn't want a Theocracy here in the U.S., would you...? Would you want the Muslim's to be imposing their religious laws on everyone here...? I would think that you wouldn't, and the same goes for a Christian Theocracy.
By having this principle or concept of a 'separation' of (any) religion and government, it helps to maintain some semblance and equality for secular and civil rights, not to mention, your ability to practice your religion of choice(Christianity) openly and freely, while allowing the Muslim's, the Jew's, the Hindu's, etc... to do the same.
Steve, I hope that I was able to make a civil and reasonable point with you that we could 'both' agree on...?
I am certainly curious to hear your views...!
P.S–Maybe if we are in basic or full agreement on this, we can move on to take a look at discussing your assertion of the 'church/state' issue in the const-itution....fair enough...?
Peace...
JohnQuest
How are you? As far as your question my friend, nobody asked to graduate in a temple, mosque or wiccan church! Why can't we just let the students and their parents decide without having folks who have NOTHING to do with it threaten a lawsuit? how about that? Courts wrongly decided SOCAS (too long to always type)! Again any prohibition is on the Congress and ONLY the Congress! Not these kids and the school board! I submit there maybe a few graduates who disagree. Remember, there is NO service,just a graduation.
@Steve--did you stop to think that maybe the people who are involved who do disagree NEED outside support? In a community like that, if you happen to be against having the service in a church you will be ostracized, if not something worse. You may not want to admit it, but the bible thumpers in these small communities tend to be close-minded and can often even be violent. Sometimes people need help to stick up for their views.
Emmanual Goldstein
@Steve–did you stop to think that maybe the people who are involved who do disagree NEED outside support? In a community like that, if you happen to be against having the service in a church you will be ostracized, if not something worse. You may not want to admit it, but the bible thumpers in these small communities tend to be close-minded and can often even be violent. Sometimes people need help to stick up for their views
-------–
Who might these "victims" be? By your use of "Bible thumpers" I will assume you are hostile towards people of faith. Hopefully I am wrong! "...tend to be close minded and can be often be violent". The blanket statement? You know these people? You have been threatened by "bible Thumpers"? ANYBODY can be violent! Even Non Believers!
Steve The Real One.. It's called the First Amendment.. you do know what an amendment is do you not?
Chuck in Jasper, Ga
Steve The Real One.. It's called the First Amendment.. you do know what an amendment is do you not?
-------–
Ouch Chuck, such a harsh tone! What gives you the impression I don't know what an amendment is?
As long as the students, parents and Cherokee County School Board do not have a problem with this, why does anyone else care? No one else has to attend.
> Ouch Chuck, such a harsh tone! What gives you the impression I don't know what an amendment is?
Based on your previous statement? You've got to be a troll, no one is this dumb.
Bob,
You have called someone stupid and me dumb (not that I mind) because I am not but, why the anger, man? Let's just talk! We will not agree but let's just share thoughts and ideas. Not a troll either, we have blogged before!
The article says:
"It's not held as a church, there's not a prayer, there's not holy songs being sung," said student Savannah Hodge.
"We should be able to come together and let all our family be there who supported us," said student Tori Tomlinson
A school district spokesman said other venues in the area were either too small or to expensive. Officials said they need the 7,500 seats provided by the church."
Hmmm...I assume any crosses or other Christian puffery will be covered or removed during the ceremony.
If so, I have no problem with it. A building is just a building.
Cheers!
You don't need to worry, that thing about vampires getting burned by seeing crosses isn't true... Take some extra vitamin A, wear a lead-lined jacket, and you should be OK
It's a church! what part of that don't you understand!
David,
According to others on this board, the crosses will not be covered, and a minister will start the ceremony by asking all in attendance to join his faith.
The so called "puffery" should most definitely NOT be covered. They are part of the decor of the building. If the people renting the building don't like the decor, they are free to rent another building. You see, David, that is the nice thing about our country. Everybody has rights, including atheists, Jews, Muslims, and yes, evenr Christians.
@Edwin
You said: "According to others on this board, the crosses will not be covered, and a minister will start the ceremony by asking all in attendance to join his faith."
If what you say is true, then the issue is not just about a building large enough to seat all the people.
I would not doubt that the good people of Georgia County, would not scheme to make their graduation a Christian affair.
The graduation should not be an advertisement for a non-existent god. The graduation is a celebration their children's achievements.
Cheers!
@johhny3
You said: "The so called "puffery" should most definitely NOT be covered. They are part of the decor of the building. If the people renting the building don't like the decor, they are free to rent another building."
If the claim, "that the church has been chosen only because of its size is true", then a condition for its renting should be that the "Jesus" be covered.
The U.S. has many religions. People are free to choose one, and worship as they please (within reason).
If this graduation was from a Christian school, I wouldn't care where they held it, or how many crosses they displayed.
If the graduation is from a public school, then there should not be any religious bias. Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, atheists, etc. all have a right to be educated and to graduate without being subject to anyone's wishful thinking.
Graduation from High School is the celebration of a first step toward learning! Science and math should be worshiped. Not a deluded carpenter who died 2000+ years ago.
Think, johhny3. Don't spend the only life you will ever have on your knees. LOL
Love and Prayers!
And rightly so.
There are bound to be some lovely mosques nearby. Would it present a problem for the students to graduate in one of those venues?
In this church last year, it was reported that they did not cover the large cross above the stage, and some report that the minister of the church greeted the students with an invitation to join the church, etc. What if similar things were to happen at a mosque?
Or if an atheist came on stage and told them that God does not exist?
The outrage from either instance would be sharp and immediate. Why does it seem there is a double standard for Christianity?
K Mason – Yep, gotta love those double standards. Chances are still upset when government funded museums have no problems displaying Cross in vats of urine or just covered in dung but have a issue at Christmas time of a Nativity scene.
By the way ... I noticed that Rickey Gavais had no jokes about Allah at the Golden Globes. I guess flying planes into a few buildings and beheading a few journalist sorta excludes your religion for jokes.
Yep, gotta love those double standards
What a gross injustice to state taxpayers. If I were a student, I'd walk out.
@K.Mason – You beat me to it! Imagine the (false) outrage if it were held in a mosque or – worse yet – a non-believer spoke. Bill O'Reilly's head would explode – finally!
If you look into this you will discover that conservative christian families are behind the venue. Went through it at Centennial HS in Roswell. My son chose not to attend graduation
@Mark-Are you serious? Yeah, there are NEVER any jokes about Islam or middle eastern people. And turn on any political tv show and you NEVER hear any disparaging talk against "those" people. (sarcasm). You are worse than the idiot Christian representative the other day, who in response to a UK court finding against a christian couple who refused to house a gay couple at their bed and breakfast. He actually said that Christians are being marginalized in the UK and by UK law. Next, you guys are going to claim that rich middle age white christians are targeted for discrimination and bias. This whole country is tilted to favor your cult over the other cults both through law and culture. God-forbid (pun intended), anyone wants to level the playing field and lay a foundation of equality among all religions, and between believers and non-believers.
You people are freaking idiots! It's a building that holds the number of people necessary for a graduation. We do this in my area all the time! The founding Fathers weren't against church or Christianity! If Jesus is a myth, why do you guys have such fear and hatred for it! It's laughable really. And why are you so afraid of a little book called the Bible?! Are you against the Torah or Koran?! I say you should get over yourself and find something substantive to argue about! Your fear of Christianity is nothing more than you not wanting to recognize a God because then you would have to submit to a higher authority and your pride, selfishness and arrogance wont let you do it!!
Screw these D.C. "based" groups. Send them out of town on a rail
To all of these people fussing about it being in a church have you seen how much it costs to have it there in comparison to venues around the area? Of course cnn won't report that part of it. They are saving taxpayers a crap load of money!!! I can promise you, as a christian i would have NO problem with it being in a mosque if it saved money like that! Its just a venue, get over it! If that group has such a big problem with it, they should put their money where their mouth is and foot the bill for it instead of expecting tax payers to!!!!!
berefreshed, if it is true that, as others have mentioned, religious symbols will be displayed prominently during the graduation ceremony, and the minister will encourage all those in attendance to join his church, then there is an egregious Const!tutional (Really CNN? It's still an issue to be able to type that word correctly without being censored?) issue with this public school graduation. If attempts are made to use the facility in a way as religiously neutral as possible, then there isn't so much of an issue. Someone did also mention that the school only relatively recently started using a church, though given the explosions of births by many conservative families, perhaps it was only recently that such an amount of space was needed.
In regards to your other vacuous claim, that people hate religion because they don't want to be accountable to anything, you'd find yourself to be in error. We have no hatred for something which holds no reality to us; we do however disdain the use of fantasies to justify hatred, intolerance, discrimination and general ignorance amongst a large portion of our populace. Look at almost every major civil rights issue and you will find at least someone in the wrong who is using their religion to back up their empty rhetoric.
Enough already with Christians dominating everything. I'm sick of it. Keep your religion in your churches where it belongs!
The church holds 7500 people and costs $2800
The cobb energy center only holds 2750 people and costs 8125
The verizon ampitheater holds 7000 people but costs $14,000
Which one sounds more economical for our already stretched education budget..........
Emmanual Goldstein –
Oh most definatly serious. The leveling of jokes about Christians is worst than aganst Muslims. All I have to do to destroy your challenge is look at South Park. Tell me, they joke about Christians, Jews , Scientology and even Hinduism but backed down over the mohammud episode.
Lastly, can you tell us the Muslim joke that was told at the Golden Globes ?
My high school graduation was in a college gymnasium, did that make it a sporting event? There was an eveangelical church that hosted services in my high school auditorium, did that make those services a high school theater production? No.
More to the point, go look up Lemon V Kurtzman and apply the Lemon test to this scenario. If you still think there is a church-state conflict, argue your point from the precedent set by the Supreme Court.
I'm certain that everyone who believes it is acceptable to hold a public school graduation in a church would have no problem if the graduation were held in a mosque, right?
> Tell me, they joke about Christians, Jews , Scientology and even Hinduism but backed down over the mohammud episode.
Then you're far too stupid to have grasped the real point of the show. Watch it again, think and then see what you come up with.
Who care? More than likely, all of the students are members of one of the protestant denominations anyway.
Aside from that, if there is an issue, let a local person bring up the problem. It is none of the litigant's business to poke their noses into this community's affairs. Reminds me of the time somebody from another part of California decided to sue the City of Ventura over the replica of Father Serra's cross on the hill. The hill is a historical site and unfortunately, the state forgot to include the cross, that by the way, has continuously been replaced by an identical copy taken from the exact stand of trees that Father Serra got the first cross from. The friars called the hill "'La Loma de la Cruz" and it is the No 113 site of historical sites in California. Rather than incur the cost of a lawsuit, which the city could ill afford, it gave up a main part of it's history. Yes the City of San Buenaventura was founded by the Spaniard who just happen to have been Roman Catholics and it was Father Serra who founded this community as a pueblo. What is going to happen when these same idiot who like to sue, go after Native American sacred sites? After all, they are religious, too. Or is it only christian sites that are under attack.
It shouldn't be a problem- I'm sure that since the the church is not taxed on "anything" that they would not be charging anything for the use of their 'publicly funded' venue. that would be 'double dipping', and I'm sure that good christians wouldn't be caught dead doing anything illegal or frowned upon.
I went to my brother's graduation at this church in 2006. They held it here because it's a mega-church and had enough space for their entire class and any number of family and friends (versus my school, with a graduating class of 700 and only 7 invitations per student.) The pastor most definitely was not even a part of the graduation, much less was he given the chance to invite students to join the church.
sue their a double s off.
The seperation of church and state is bogus to begin with. Unless people are being preached to , which also goes into freedom of speech being violated , then there is no problem with the schools holding a graduation in a church. If the people of this country are so deadset on christianity not being in school then they would have to kick the christian kids out of school. Bottom line , theres is no way to ever completely get rid of christianity and seperate it from the state. It is here to stay and the best thing that this country could do is get some in there lives.