Student Sues Wisconsin School After Getting a Zero for Religious Drawing

reply to post by The Nighthawk

---

Riiiight - so you get offended by a drawing with a bit of symbolism.

mmm 'K

That speaks volumes

I get offended by the fact that American society shoves Christianity down the throats of those who aren't Christian. 90% of American holidays are Christian holidays. I don't get time off for the Solstice, but everything shuts down for Christmas. It's fine to put crosses everywhere, but God forbid I wear a pentacle, or put one on my door. Christians have picketed businesses I've frequented because they think the business encourages "Devil Worship". Christianity encourages ignorance of science in favor of Biblical "truth". The Christian religion continually tries to chip away at the separation of Church and State as outlined in the Constitution. So yeah, I get offended. Many see the Cross as a symbol of hope and love and peace. Some see it as a rallying point for some apocalyptic battle. I see it as a wedge to isolate and alienate non-believers from society.

reply to post by The Nighthawk

---

America is a christian country, and therefore has christian holidays - in a christian country you abide by their rules, same as you abide by the rules if you're in a muslim country.

If you want pagan holidays, either live in or find and found your own country, simple really.

It's exactly that kind of attitude that causes problems:
"Yes I know it's a christian country, but I want to play by my own rules and no-one else's"

reply to post by budski

---

I usually agree with you on most things, but not this time. The US of A is NOT a Christian Country!!!!!!!

It states so in the constitution. FREEDOM OF RELIGION means something you know.

But, I'm sure I'll hear that our Diest founding fathers were Christian.

reply to post by Griff

---

Did anyone say anything about restricting anyones right to their religion?

I certainly didn't, and nor would I say that the US is a secular state.

The predominant religion is and always has been, christianity, same as the UK, whether we like it or not.

Being a christian country in no way restricts the way a person worships, if they have another religion, or their right to worship, as they see fit, providing it complies with the law of the land. By that I mean that sacrificing virgins would probably be frowned upon

Do you thiink it workable that everyone picks their own religious (or other) holidays? The country would come to a standstill in weeks, if not sooner.



[edit on 2/4/2008 by budski]

Doh...computer hickup. Double post. See below.

[edit on 4/2/2008 by Griff]

Sorry, I must have misinterpretted you when you said:





That's interesting how most of the pilgrims were escaping religious intolerance. If the UK was Christian and the people escaping UK for religious intolerance, then why did they leave?



Yes, I think it's workable. Were I work, you can substitute any day you want for the Christian holidays. That doesn't mean you get both off though. You have to pick one or the other.

[edit on 4/2/2008 by Griff]

reply to post by Griff

---

Are you then denying that america is a christian country?

I think that may be a mistake - it's certainly a multi denominational country, but it is still fundamentally christian.

Not islamic, not sikh, not hindu, not shinto, nor the church of the flying spaghetti monster - christian.

And just how does the christianity of a country restrict the right or way that people practice their own religion, if it is not christianity?
Perhaps you'd like to see ramadam as a national holiday, or diwhali and while you're at it, introduce sharia law and the protectionof sacred animals.


[edit on 2/4/2008 by budski]

reply to post by budski

---

I find it quite insulting that you automatically assume that I am Muslim. No offense people who are Muslim. Are you that programmed to think this way?

BTW, we are getting slightly off topic.

reply to post by Griff

---

Actually the pilgrims were Christians, but see in Europe, different dominations of Christianity fought with eachother. Which is another problem with Christianity, so many different denominations and factions that are constantly at odds with eachother.

However I still refuse to call this country a Christian country. If the constitution states freedom of religion then it can not be a Christian country. But I feel that this teacher should not have had the right to make students sign an agreement limiting religious expression..for ANY religious belief.

I feel this teacher has every right to do in her classroom what she will. Abiding by the laws of course.

BTW, this student had a choice. Sign the agreement or take another class. That's the bottom line. He signed it.

It's like signing a lease and then a month later wanting to move. Under the law, you're obligated to stay. Some people don't and I know some who have been taken to court for it only to loose. Although most get away with it because it's easier to just get another tenant than go through court proceedings.

A signed contract is what is the bottom line here.

Edit: BTW, the contract didn't state "Christian religious" blah, blah, blah. It said religious.

But, like I've said, if she allowed a buddah in someone's landscape and then not this kid, that's a total different story. I have yet to see that evidence though.

[edit on 4/2/2008 by Griff]

What do you mean by Christian country?
It would help if you defined the term.



You mean "majority Christian", as in the majority of the population follows some sort of Christianity. That I agree with. As for Christian values, they are something that Christians must follow privately and not force on others. Not everyone wants their soul "saved".



Perhaps I would like to see an end to the petty persecution of neo-pagans and other freethinkers - especially the "for-your-own-good" Mary Whitehouse type of BS. Imagine the mighty allies that pagans would make in the struggle against Islamo-fascism, if said pagans don't have top worry about Christofascism!

The school specifically stated that it was also the cross that was the problem. The article also said that it was a policy of the class; that could mean either the teacher's policy or the school's policy but it's still a policy made by a teacher, which the school endorses. I doubt it would be the teacher's policy anyway.

Here are the quotes from the article:

"Millin showed the student a policy of the classthat prohibited any violence, blood, sexual connotations or religious beliefs in artwork. The lawsuit claims Millin told the boy he had signed away his constitutional rights when he signed the policy at the beginning of the semester.

The boy tore the policy up in front of Millin, who kicked him out of class. Later that day, assistant principal Cale Jackson told the boy his religious expression infringed on other students' rights...Millin stated at the meeting the cross in the drawing also infringed on other students' rights."

Irony time!

Most Christian holidays are pagan holidays under another name. Yule became Christmas. Ostara became Easter. Samhain became Halloween (and the even more Christified All-Saints' Day.)

man i consider myself an artist and i remember i used to fail art projects all the TIME back in school

i just wouldn't follow the criteria..i chose not too..i was in a classroom every day for 55 minutes with tons of different medias at my expense, that I paid for..hell no im not going to draw circles and shade them for an hour im going to draw whatever i want, get the zero and deal with it

if this kid signed the policy he shoulda known he was required to follow the course curriculum which included no relgious art work. i had a similar policy at my school. i signed it and i got like a low C in the class, was barely allowed to continue to the next art course but I came out of that class with a lot of controversial art work i was very proud of yet recieved 0's for

if this kid really like what he drew he should be proud of it regardless the grade he was given. i'm not christian but i don't think jesus would want this to be something a big deal is made over

reply to post by Griff

---

I'm confused griff - when did I say you were muslim, or any other religion for that matter?

I don't think I did, and would certainly never make such a presumptuous statement.

reply to post by IAmTetsuo

---

The US and the UK are christian country's - the statement is self-explanatory.

I say exactly the same thing about all country's and their religions - if you live there you follow their rules, whether you agree with them or not.

If that means you can't buy bread on a tuesday (example, made up) then tough - those are the rules.
Don't like it?
Go somewhere where the rules are more to your taste.

I think some of the laws in my country are stupid, but because they are the law, I follow them.

Simple really.

reply to post by budski

---

I agree with you to some extent, Budski. But I draw the line at "this is a Christian country". NO IT IS NOT!!! Our Constitution says so! And if you disagree with separation between church and religion, then you need to start a movement to get the Constitution changed.

The majority of the U.S. may be Christian, but it is not a recognized Christian country. That would mean theocracy, which is directly against our Constitution. If you don't know the meaning of theocracy, here it is from Wikipedia. You can also Google :

"Theocracy should be distinguished from other secular forms of government that have a state religion, or are merely influenced by theological or moral concepts, and monarchies held "By the Grace of God".

The above definition clearly states that a theocracy has a religioius agenda, and that a God rules the nation. To me, this means that no Christian group or any other religion group, may impose their religous beliefs on another group. And that no particular group of religion, may be represented, unless all other religions are free to be represented.

Our Constitution was directly founded on freedom from theocracy, in other words, no religious group may tell anyone else what to do.

I think you've got it all wrong here, Budski, with all due respect.

No it's not.

The US and the UK are majority-Christian countries.

The Commonwealth of England (1649-1660) was a true Christian country, with Christian laws; in the same sense that Saudi Arabia and Iran are Islamic countries.

Do you now understand the difference?



Or try to have them changed to more just ones.



Why should I? I am as much "the public" as a million hive-minded bible-or-koran thumpers. There are certain others who would certainly be more comfortable in Cromwell's Commonwealth of England, and I would love to send them there if I had the power.



So do I.

But that doesn't mean that shouldn't lobby to change unjust tribalistic ones. I live in Canada, a mostly secular democratic nation. The issue here is statutory holidays. Personally, I think it's stupid that government is in the holiday business, which is something that I believe to be a part of a personal contract between employer and employee.

Many years ago, the Canadian province of Alberta had a collectivist piece of legislation called the Lord's Day Act. It basically made it illegal for stores and other businesses (with certain exceptions such as convenience stores) to open on Sunday. In the 1980s, that law was overturned on the grounds of it being unconstitutional. And it was. It had no business being in a secular country. Even the name implied that one religion was right, and others were not. Sunday is not the Lord's Day for Seventh Day Adventists, Jews, or Muslims.

www.chrc-ccdp.ca...

Several posters have stated that the Constitution supports separation of church and state. I suggest that you read the document and the Bill of Rights again. The 1st amendment does not state a separation of church and state but the freedom to exercise religious freedom.
1st amendment text:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
The concept of the separation of church and state came in the form of a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 and is not in the language of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.