Comments for New Policies at http://mnatheists.org , comment 1 to 3 out of 3 comments http://mnatheists.org Wed, 08 Sep 2010 02:57:57 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://mnatheists.org/content/view/395/88/#comment-506 My first comment advocates freedom. The freedom of parents to teach their children as they see fit which includes freedom from state laws and mandates. Don't misconstrue my comment to encourage religious intimidation. Independent school districts are not governed by the state constitution therefore the over-used and too-limited principle of separation of church and state does not apply. Parents set the teaching policy of their school and parents not agreeing with the particular teachings of their school can contradict those teachings at home. They also can remove their children from the school and ought to be able to remove their funds from the school. In a school district or a local community, majority-rule has more legitimacy than at the state or national level where the rule of law applies exclusively. As far as secularity: to quote Ayn Rand "All work is an act of philosophy" which means all activities put forth a point of view and secularity IS a belief system. To focus on religious zealots misses the zealots of other types, even secularity zealots. The principle of independent school districts protects schools from zealots outside one's school district. Zealots inside a school district are another problem, and can be defeated with knowledge and logic not with state mandates. Parents do have near-absolute dominion over their children. A person's home is their castle and a parent can homeschool their children inside it. "Society as a whole" (which seems to be another way to say "the majority") cannot do anything about it. Paradoxically the first part of the comment by "me" seeks to limit the majority but then uses it for purposes which he/she agrees with. Religion is not the only belief system that makes people argue and kill each other nor is it the only one wishing to subject every single event to scrutiny. Government revenue zealots have succeeded in getting almost all financial activity subject to the scrutiny of the IRS. Healthcare zealots want to dictate business operations of insurance companies and have done so with restuarants and bars. Zealots of almost every stripe have sought to have their beliefs taught in schools or mandated by the state. Focusing on religion may be Minnesota Atheists goal but at least acknowledge the harm caused by other zealots. - Robert Janckila Fri, 01 Jan 2010 14:28:46 +0100 http://mnatheists.org/content/view/395/88/#comment-494 I think what I am reading by your comment is that you are advocating that a public school system should be free to teach religious based propaganda counter to state law if there are a lot of self righteous parents in the community who don't mind intimidating others into submission if they don't share their brand of religion or lack of thereof. Secular activities are those activities that are inherently nonreligious - like eating, bathing, driving a car, voting or testifying in court. There is no need for constitutional protections from these things. Secularity is NOT a belief system. Unfortunately, religious zealots wish every single event in everyone's life to be subject to their own religious scrutiny - you know, like in Iran. Such rigid control over a community is what the forefathers sought to avoid so that those with divergent points of view, who usually represent a minority, are not burned at the stake or lynched. If there isn't a higher authority to provide protections such as these, in these near monoculture communities that you speak of that is exactly what would happen. Aside from that, parents do not have dominion over their children. Society as a whole has deemed it proper than they are human beings and benefit from exposure to the diversity that exists around them in the interest of fostering peace and mutual understanding. Religion just makes people argue and kill each other. - me Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:40:58 +0100 http://mnatheists.org/content/view/395/88/#comment-479 Given that the purpose of our constitutions on the federal and state levels are to establish governments that serve the all people in general, not any person or group of persons in specific the focus on religious freedom in our constitutions is too specific. I believe the focus should have been on all activity in general. The constitutions should include the idea of separation of state and all belief systems whether religious or secular. The focus on separation of church and state leads some people to believe the state does not have to be separate from secular activities, only religious activities. This leads to the state's interference in a whole host of activities or freedoms, including educational freedoms. Some school districts call themselves independent school districts. We should take this to mean the school districts are independent from the state and any other political entity. They are dependent only on and to the parents of their students. Any state law that attempts to force a school to teach or not to teach a point of view is wrong. If Minnesota Atheists is attempting to mandate educational policies it is wrong. If it is attempting to educate parents then it is in the right. What gives Minn. Atheists the right to say what should be taught in a school district in which no member of Minn. Atheists live? For instance, the statement "Abstinence may be advocated only in conjunction with instruction in safe prophylactic practices" sounds like a mandate. Don't many schools prohibit tobacco and alcohol use by students? Couldn't those same schools prohibit sexual activity by students? The statement "The teaching of any subject should protect the right of an educator to present their material without infringement" also sounds like a mandate. The educators of students are limited by wishes of the parents and school board. Educators are hired and paid by the parents and so remain subject to the parents wishes. The state funding of schools leads some to think that the state has the right to meddle in the operation of independent schools. This is not true and is the problem with state funding of any educational body. What state funded school is going to teach that the state funding of schools is wrong (or that anything the state does is wrong)? Is it right to force the citizens of the Dassel-Cokato Independent School District #466 to fund the St. Louis County Schools Independent School District #2142? This is not what is meant by publicly funded schools. Minnesota Atheists' policies should be educational and acknowledge the rights of parents to teach their children even if it disagrees with those teachings. - Robert Janckila Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:33:15 +0100