[leucetios]

Short version: a parent went to school as part of this week where parents read from their kid's favourite book. This parent had the bible, but was told she couldn't read because of the seperation of Church and State.

Now, I'm an atheist, so I could care less about the bible one way or the other. But this is just plain silly. Seperation of Church and State is for the people administering and teaching, not for a parent reading from her kids favorite book. If her kid likes the bible she should be able to read from it.

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - A Pennsylvania school district violated the free-speech rights of a parent who was prevented from reading the Bible to her son's kindergarten class, an attorney for the woman said Monday.

The parent, Donna Busch, has filed a lawsuit against the Marple Newtown School District near Philadelphia, claiming her constitutional rights were breached when a school principal stopped her reading from the Bible in a class last October.

Busch, of Newtown Square, Pennsylvania, attended her son Wesley's class as part of "Me Week," which gave parents an opportunity to read aloud from their child's favorite book.

Busch planned to read Psalm No. 118 but was told by the principal the reading would violate the separation of church and state, according to the suit filed earlier this month.

Some U.S. religious groups are fighting for inclusion of "intelligent design," a theory they say competes with evolution, into biology classes, and another Pennsylvania school district is being sued by the American Civil Liberties Union for including intelligent design in its curriculum.

Busch is represented by the Rutherford Institute, a conservative legal nonprofit organization.

Doug McKusick, an attorney for the group, said there is no constitutional ban on private expression of religious opinions and Busch was within her rights to read the Bible in class.

"School districts tend to over-react to this sort of thing," McKusick said in an interview. "They are saying that this is state-endorsed religious expression, whereas it is a private statement."

The school district has defended the principal, saying his actions upheld the law, and its policies forbid the teaching or advocacy of any religion.

Ed Partridge, president of the school's board of directors, said Busch would have broken the law if she read the Bible because it would have amounted to a promotion of religion. He accused the Rutherford Institute of seeking publicity. "Their goal is to generate national media headlines. They don't have any care about our community," he said.

[leucetios]

Having said that... I think I would feel more conflicted were the parent reading from something more damaging, like Mein Kampf or Sweet Valley High.

[Beaucephus]

Hardly surprising in this day and age. :roll:

[leucetios]

Hardly surprising in this day and age. :roll:

Agreed... one wonders just what in Psalm 118 the kids need to be protected from :S We're going to Politically Correct this country right into fascism

[TomFoolery]

I agree, this is silly. But I want to raise a couple of points:

1. If Donna Busch had been allowed to read the passage, do you think other parent(s) would sue the school and/or school district for not adhering to strict Separation of Church and State laws? Is it possible the principal took the best course of action at the time because he/she thought of the potential backlash from other parents and/or administrators if the reading had been allowed by him/her?

2. How many kindergarten kids do you know that consider the bible their favorite book? Sure, it's understandable if it is, but rather strange. This is just an assumption, but I would think that any 5 year old that claims the Bible is their favorite book is raised by a devoutly Christian family--chances are Donna Busch would be promoting her faith and religion in front of the class. I'm not saying if it's right or wrong, just saying that may have been her intent.

I know listening comprehension isn't the point of "My Week", but if the reading was in front of other kids, how many do you think would have understood the reading?


Psalm 118
1 O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good:
because his mercy endureth for ever. 1 Chr. 16.34 · 2 Chr. 5.13 ; 7.3 · Ezra 3.11 · Ps. 100.5 ; 106.1 ; 107.1 ; 136.1 · Jer. 33.11


2 Let Israel now say,
that his mercy endureth for ever.


3 Let the house of Aaron now say,
that his mercy endureth for ever.


4 Let them now that fear the LORD say,
that his mercy endureth for ever.


5 I called upon the LORD in distress:
the LORD answered me,
and set me in a large place.


6 The LORD is on my side;
I will not fear:
what can man do unto me? Heb. 13.6


7 The LORD taketh my part with them that help me:
therefore shall I see my desire upon them that hate me.


8 It is better to trust in the LORD
than to put confidence in man.


9 It is better to trust in the LORD
than to put confidence in princes.


10 All nations compassed me about:
but in the name of the LORD will I destroy them.


11 They compassed me about;
yea, they compassed me about:
but in the name of the LORD I will destroy them.


12 They compassed me about like bees;
they are quenched as the fire of thorns:
for in the name of the LORD I will destroy them.


13 Thou hast thrust sore at me that I might fall:
but the LORD helped me.


14 The LORD is my strength and song,
and is become my salvation. Ex. 15.2 · Is. 12.2


15 The voice of rejoicing and salvation is in the tabernacles of the righteous:
the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly.


16 The right hand of the LORD is exalted:
the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly.


17 I shall not die, but live,
and declare the works of the LORD.


18 The LORD hath chastened me sore:
but he hath not given me over unto death.


19 Open to me the gates of righteousness:
I will go into them,
and I will praise the LORD:


20 this gate of the LORD,
into which the righteous shall enter.


21 I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me,
and art become my salvation.


22 The stone which the builders refused
is become the head stone of the corner. Lk. 20.17 · 0.1--0.1 ; 1.1 · 1 Pet. 2.7


23 This is the LORD's doing;
it is marvelous in our eyes. Mt. 21.42 · Mk. 12.10, 11


24 This is the day which the LORD hath made;
we will rejoice and be glad in it.


25 Save now, Mt. 21.9 · Mk. 11.9 · Joh. 12.13 I beseech thee, O LORD:
O LORD, I beseech thee, send now prosperity.


26 Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the LORD: Mt. 21.9 ; 23.39 · Mk. 11.9 · Lk. 13.35 ; 19.38 · Joh. 12.13
we have blessed you out of the house of the LORD.


27 God is the LORD, which hath showed us light:
bind the sacrifice with cords,
even unto the horns of the altar.


28 Thou art my God, and I will praise thee:
thou art my God, I will exalt thee.


29 O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good:
for his mercy endureth for ever.

[Bill]

oddly enough I agree with Tom.

[TomFoolery]

oddly enough I agree with Tom.

I wasn't looking for support, just trying to raise a couple of points.

Now that I re-read my statements, it was stupid to consider a 5 year old's favorite book choice as the Bible "strange", along with assuming that their parent(s) may try and promote their religion in front of others.

[Bill]

I wasn't looking for support, just trying to raise a couple of points.

Now that I re-read my statements, it was stupid to consider a 5 year old's favorite book choice as the Bible "strange", along with assuming that their parent(s) may try and promote their religion in front of others.

extremely devote christians would take any oprotunity to promote their "belief" to others, expecially the younge uncultured mind. I'm sure the child asked mommy to read Thomas the Train, but felt the bible to be more suited to their obligation to spread Gods word as instructed.

Being the father of a couple of younger children I know good and well they didn't say the bible was their favorite book. Now maybe the child intended to mean bible stories (ie: golden book series of bible stories). Which would be understandable.

[leucetios]

I agree, this is silly. But I want to raise a couple of points:

1. If Donna Busch had been allowed to read the passage, do you think other parent(s) would sue the school and/or school district for not adhering to strict Separation of Church and State laws? Is it possible the principal took the best course of action at the time because he/she thought of the potential backlash from other parents and/or administrators if the reading had been allowed by him/her?

It is entirely possible that the principal took the action (s)he thought best to keep the school out of trouble. However, that's exactly my point. That we live in a time where a simple reading of a song from a religious text can cause enough concern that beaurecrats need to put an end to it before some litigious fool sues for them for allowing their child to be exposed to a religion/alternate point of view. It backfired, though, cause now some litigious fool is suing for not being allowed to read it.

2. How many kindergarten kids do you know that consider the bible their favorite book? Sure, it's understandable if it is, but rather strange. This is just an assumption, but I would think that any 5 year old that claims the Bible is their favorite book is raised by a devoutly Christian family--chances are Donna Busch would be promoting her faith and religion in front of the class. I'm not saying if it's right or wrong, just saying that may have been her intent.

I know listening comprehension isn't the point of "My Week", but if the reading was in front of other kids, how many do you think would have understood the reading?

I don't know any kindergarten kids. But I would imagine most wouldn't list the bible as their favourite book. But for all we know a) its the only book this kid has at home, b) he actually really likes Psalm 118. It doesn't matter.

You're right too, listening comprehension isn't the point of "My Week", and int he same vein how many of those other kindergarteners would have paid attention past the second line? Probably none.

I just think it is silly for the following reasons:
1. It isn't violating the seperation of C and S because the school isn't promoting the religion, a parent is.

2. We can't hide children from other points of view. They should be exposed to them, and if you don't believe in it, then its your perogative/responsibility to explain to your child why. Sheltering them won't help. (This is in response to the people who would have sued had the reading been allowed).

3. We've reached a point in our society where the fear of litigation is actually what is dictating decisions. The principal didn't disallow it because he thought it beyond the grasp of kindergartener's, or because it was a psalm and they wanted stories. He disallowed it simply because of a fear of litigation. And that we've reached that point is silly.

People as a whole need to lighten up.

[SanDog]

I don't think they should allow any John 3:16 signs at school sporting events.

[leucetios]

I don't think they should allow any John 3:16 signs at school sporting events.

enlighten me.. I'm too lazy to google

[TomFoolery]

We've reached a point in our society where the fear of litigation is actually what is dictating decisions. The principal didn't disallow it because he thought it beyond the grasp of kindergartener's, or because it was a psalm and they wanted stories. He disallowed it simply because of a fear of litigation. And that we've reached that point is silly.

People as a whole need to lighten up.

Nice.



Dig a little deeper on this story, you should find an article that shows how Jewish children at the school were allowed to discuss Hanukkah during "My Week" without any stink. Weird.

[SanDog]

Oh, as long is ain't Christian, no one seems to have a problem with religion in schools. It is a huge double standard that the ACLU seems to propogate.

[Beaucephus]

The whole thing about all of this to me is "the seperation of church & state". IMO the founding father put that in place for the prevention of a church corrupted government like the one that prevailed in Europe. It has been blown completely out of porportion now in that any government entity with the simple ten commandments posted is violating the constitution. BULLSHIT. If anything all of these court rulings and politically correct decisions are violating freedom of speech and freedom to practice religion. This principal clearly blocked freedom of speech here regardless of whether the bible was the kids favorite book or not. Now then, I know there are those who would say "well why not have postings of the Quaran or Buddhist quotes (for example) posted at these govt venues then!! It's just not fair!!!" BULLSHIT AGAIN. Our country wasn't founded around those religions. It was founded on Judeo Christian principles. Our constitution does allow however for the freedom to practice any religion one chooses though. But that just ain't good enough anymore. The liberal left wants all of the american citizens to be exactly the same by law. Think about that statement. EXACTLY THE SAME. The term NAZISM , FACISM & SOCIALISM comes immediately to mind when I think of a public in which all constituents are exactly same. Fucking scary thought. While there are certainly those who do not believe in the christian principles (which is THEIR RIGHT here) the christians themselves and their beliefs are being persecuted more and more as time goes on. Something is really fucked up about that to me.

[SanDog]

The whole thing about all of this to me is "the seperation of church & state". IMO the founding father put that in place for the prevention of a church corrupted government like the one that prevailed in Europe. It has been blown completely out of porportion now in that any government entity with the simple ten commandments posted is violating the constitution. BULLSHIT. If anything all of these court rulings and politically correct decisions are violating freedom of speech and freedom to practice religion. This principal clearly blocked freedom of speech here regardless of whether the bible was the kids favorite book or not. Now then, I know there are those who would say "well why not have postings of the Quaran or Buddhist quotes (for example) posted at these govt venues then!! It's just not fair!!!" BULLSHIT AGAIN. Our country wasn't founded around those religions. It was founded on Judeo Christian principles. Our constitution does allow however for the freedom to practice any religion one chooses though. But that just ain't good enough anymore. The liberal left wants all of the american citizens to be exactly the same by law. Think about that statement. EXACTLY THE SAME. The term NAZISM , FACISM & SOCIALISM comes immediately to mind when I think of a public in which all constituents are exactly same. Fucking scary thought. While there are certainly those who do not believe in the christian principles (which is THEIR RIGHT here) the christians themselves and their beliefs are being persecuted more and more as time goes on. Something is really fucked up about that to me.

I agree.

[leucetios]

The whole thing about all of this to me is "the seperation of church & state". IMO the founding father put that in place for the prevention of a church corrupted government like the one that prevailed in Europe. It has been blown completely out of porportion now in that any government entity with the simple ten commandments posted is violating the constitution. BULLSHIT. If anything all of these court rulings and politically correct decisions are violating freedom of speech and freedom to practice religion. This principal clearly blocked freedom of speech here regardless of whether the bible was the kids favorite book or not. Now then, I know there are those who would say "well why not have postings of the Quaran or Buddhist quotes (for example) posted at these govt venues then!! It's just not fair!!!" BULLSHIT AGAIN. Our country wasn't founded around those religions. It was founded on Judeo Christian principles. Our constitution does allow however for the freedom to practice any religion one chooses though. But that just ain't good enough anymore. The liberal left wants all of the american citizens to be exactly the same by law. Think about that statement. EXACTLY THE SAME. The term NAZISM , FACISM & SOCIALISM comes immediately to mind when I think of a public in which all constituents are exactly same. Fucking scary thought. While there are certainly those who do not believe in the christian principles (which is THEIR RIGHT here) the christians themselves and their beliefs are being persecuted more and more as time goes on. Something is really fucked up about that to me.

My take on the whole ten commandments thing is that if it was there from before, leave it. Taking shit out is just silly. If people want to be more non-demoninational then don't build those things in in the future. But removing old Commandments is silly. Side note: anyone see the Reno 911 where they tried to remove the Commandments? Funny shit.

I'd agree that the Christians are coming under fire more than any other group. Not to justify it, cause I don't think it is justifiable, but I think it is, in part, a reaction to the religious right. Some of the people on the left are paranoid about us becomming one of those Gov't run by religion (corrupt or not) and so they take their fear and run to an extreme where they don't want any religion in anything to do with the State. Christianity gets this more than other religions cause, well, we haven't had too many Muslim, Hindu or Jewish Presidents, and by extension it then doesn't feel like those are the religions encroaching on our rights.

Again. Just silliness.