|
On May 27 2011 15:28 Emperor_Earth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:10 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 27 2011 15:09 IntoTheWow wrote:On May 27 2011 15:09 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I don't believe his actions are altruistic at all
would the prayer have hurt anyone? no
he should have just let it be as a matter of respecting a community tradition illegal community tradiction* sure it's a crime, but it's a victimless crime if there was a law against scratching your head with both hands at the same time and I saw someone do it, I wouldn't report it or care at all it's illegal, therefore it is wrong, right? oh wait I would argue that it's not a victimless crime. You're just not probing deep enough. I have heard many similar arguments in different circles regarding seatbelt nonusage being a victimless crime because people don't [want to] take another minute to think it through. In our case, there's the obvious. An atheist feeling out of place in his own graduation. While obviously a very minor transgressions in terms of immediate damage, should we allow school-sponsored proethnic speeches at your graduation? How about a pro-Aryan speech? A pro-Aryan anti-every other race speech? Once you go pro-ethnic, aren't you by its very definition arguing anti-nonethnic? Where do you draw the line? Re: Seatbelt usage If car insurance is a legally-required shared cost, then I should hope we all aim to deescalate our injuries by use of safety belts in cars. Sure your $1k* extra vehicle repair bill State Farm eats because your head smashed through your windshield might not seem like a lot given how many traffic accidents occur daily, but multiply if by say 30%* who don't use seat belts and my insurance premiums go up $50/month*. No thanks. * = made up # for demonstrative purposes Oh... and as long as you're not driving... or worse riding a motorcyle while scratching your head with both hands, we're cool 
not wearing a seatbelt isn't a victimless crime but that's beside the point
you're right though, "an atheist feeling out of place" really is a "minor transgression" if you want to put it that way
I don't see how a peaceful speech praying for the best for all the students to a flying spagetti monster or whatever it may be compares to any sort of pro-ethnic, pro-aryan, anti-non-aryan speech though
nice slippery slope there, it's a steep one too
|
On May 27 2011 15:26 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
Prayer is distressing? Just dont pray and let the people who want to pray, pray?
The reaction from the rest of the town is typically retarded as well. People really just suck sometimes, everyone involved in this sound like complete idiots.
Its our national past time: Fighting over shit that really doesn't matter that for some reason splits us into factions so we can discriminate against each other.
|
Prayer is useless, or at best no better than chance.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/clsysrev/articles/CD000368/frame.html
Main results
Ten studies are included in this review (7646 patients). For the comparison of intercessory prayer plus standard care versus standard care alone, overall there was no clear effect of intercessory prayer on death (6 RCTs, n=3389, random-effects RR 0.73 CI 0.38 to 1.38). Data are heterogeneous (I2 =85%). Excluding one study from the meta-analysis (n=760) decreases this heterogeneity (I2 =44%) and shifts the finding towards the null (5 RCTs, n=2629, random RR 0.97 CI 0.63 to 1.50). For general clinical state there was also no significant difference between groups (5 RCTs, n=2705, RR intermediate or bad outcome 0.98 CI 0.86 to 1.11). Four studies found no effect for re-admission to Coronary Care Unit (4 RCTs, n=2644, RR 1.00 CI 0.77 to 1.30).Two other trials found intercessory prayer had no effect on re-hospitalisation (2 RCTs, n=1155, RR 0.93 CI 0.71 to 1.22).
Authors' conclusions
These findings are equivocal and, although some of the results of individual studies suggest a positive effect of intercessory prayer, the majority do not and the evidence does not support a recommendation either in favour or against the use of intercessory prayer. We are not convinced that further trials of this intervention should be undertaken and would prefer to see any resources available for such a trial used to investigate other questions in health care.
So why would you want to do something that is useless?
|
both sides of this argument are beyond retarded
the kid, just suck it up. im sure 100000s of atheist kids just sit through the 30 seconds or whatever and it doesnt harm them.
the community/family, disgusting.
|
You guys saying he should let them pray because it doesn't hurt anyone.
Do you not understand that public school praying = government promoting religion?
Or do you not understand why government shouldn't promote religion?
Or both?
|
On May 27 2011 15:20 atheistaphobe wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:16 EmeraldSparks wrote:On May 27 2011 15:15 atheistaphobe wrote:On May 27 2011 15:08 krbz wrote:
Christianity is backed up by "stories" compiled into a book. The history is only of the stories and completely untestable. I would also like to add that they are stories from an age that had very little understanding of the world around them. They couldn't explain things so they created something to provide that explanation.
Scientific theory cannot take divine power into consideration as it cannot be subjected to testing and verified by multiple parties. It cannot stand in a scientific setting because all a religious follower can present is the book the have "faith" in. Social Sciences prove again and again that devout Christians live a healthier life and that prayer has an effect. Atheism is nothing. It cannot be proved. christianity cannot be proved either dohohohoho [citation needed] Christianity can be proved. Thats the whole point of it.
you know basically nothing about your own religion
On May 27 2011 15:22 blah_blah wrote:
The thing is that it doesn't even matter what the kid's motivations for doing it are, the law is 100% on his side. The same people who use the glib justification that it's harmless are the same people who would be vehemently against it if it was a prayer from a different religion.
but that's wrong
On May 27 2011 15:25 johanngrunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:16 EmeraldSparks wrote:On May 27 2011 15:15 Zzoram wrote:On May 27 2011 15:11 exalted wrote:
I hate how teamliquid is so large these days that a thread like this gets spammed with replies making each reply less meaningful as it is caught up in all the clutter.
What he did was something I wouldn't. Obviously speaking out would incur severe repercussions and possibly the wrath of many. However, if everyone was like me, no change would happen either. Reminds me of Rosa Parks and how she should have just "sat in the back". That's what I thought of too. An argument could be made that sitting in the back hurts nobody, and that she should've minded her own business and not bothered the majority of bus riders. Of course, it was morally wrong and she was couragous to stand up for herself, as was Damon Fowler. racism is bad and dehumanizing Racism is discrimination based on race. This situation is discrimination based on religious beliefs. (or more specifically, discrimination because his opinions don't agree with the majority) Also, didn't want to say this initially, but female circumcision is a tradition too. However it's illegal in the US since 1996. If someone was performing female circumcision would you stand up and say something or just shut up since it's tradition?
did you just compare female circumcision with school prayer
i mean that's like some seriously disproportionate comparison right there
why don't we just ask "what if putting jews in ovens was a tradition"
On May 27 2011 15:28 Emperor_Earth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:10 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 27 2011 15:09 IntoTheWow wrote:On May 27 2011 15:09 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I don't believe his actions are altruistic at all
would the prayer have hurt anyone? no
he should have just let it be as a matter of respecting a community tradition illegal community tradiction* sure it's a crime, but it's a victimless crime if there was a law against scratching your head with both hands at the same time and I saw someone do it, I wouldn't report it or care at all it's illegal, therefore it is wrong, right? oh wait I would argue that it's not a victimless crime. You're just not probing deep enough. I have heard many similar arguments in different circles regarding seatbelt nonusage being a victimless crime because people don't [want to] take another minute to think it through. In our case, there's the obvious. An atheist feeling out of place in his own graduation. While obviously a very minor transgressions in terms of immediate damage, should we allow school-sponsored proethnic speeches at your graduation? How about a pro-Aryan speech? A pro-Aryan anti-every other race speech? Once you go pro-ethnic, aren't you by its very definition arguing anti-nonethnic? Where do you draw the line?
at racism
On May 27 2011 15:28 Co-lol-sus wrote:
A true Christian would've been proud to separate his religion from the state.
a true christian like st. teresa of avila or thomas aquinas or pope gregory the great would have been astounded to hear you say that
On May 27 2011 15:32 PH wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 13:39 aguy38 wrote:
He didn't have to pray. He could have just sat there. If you read the second line of the article it makes it sound like he said the majority should be stopped on account of him. Did they overreact to him? Hell yea they did, but at some point he should have had the common sense to just not say anything. This is the truth. The article is biased to the point of absurdity. It's pretty ridiculous.
the article is biased in favor of the constitution
nothing particularly problematic about that
|
On May 27 2011 15:32 PH wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 13:39 aguy38 wrote:
He didn't have to pray. He could have just sat there. If you read the second line of the article it makes it sound like he said the majority should be stopped on account of him. Did they overreact to him? Hell yea they did, but at some point he should have had the common sense to just not say anything. This is the truth. The article is biased to the point of absurdity. It's pretty ridiculous.
You're missing the point.
What the school was doing is against the law and should not be permitted because everybody is doing it, and that someone standing up for the law shouldn't be ostracized for doing the right thing rather then sitting in the back and not doing anything about it.
|
On May 27 2011 15:35 johanngrunt wrote:Prayer is useless, or at best no better than chance. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/clsysrev/articles/CD000368/frame.htmlShow nested quote +Main results
Ten studies are included in this review (7646 patients). For the comparison of intercessory prayer plus standard care versus standard care alone, overall there was no clear effect of intercessory prayer on death (6 RCTs, n=3389, random-effects RR 0.73 CI 0.38 to 1.38). Data are heterogeneous (I2 =85%). Excluding one study from the meta-analysis (n=760) decreases this heterogeneity (I2 =44%) and shifts the finding towards the null (5 RCTs, n=2629, random RR 0.97 CI 0.63 to 1.50). For general clinical state there was also no significant difference between groups (5 RCTs, n=2705, RR intermediate or bad outcome 0.98 CI 0.86 to 1.11). Four studies found no effect for re-admission to Coronary Care Unit (4 RCTs, n=2644, RR 1.00 CI 0.77 to 1.30).Two other trials found intercessory prayer had no effect on re-hospitalisation (2 RCTs, n=1155, RR 0.93 CI 0.71 to 1.22).
Authors' conclusions
These findings are equivocal and, although some of the results of individual studies suggest a positive effect of intercessory prayer, the majority do not and the evidence does not support a recommendation either in favour or against the use of intercessory prayer. We are not convinced that further trials of this intervention should be undertaken and would prefer to see any resources available for such a trial used to investigate other questions in health care. So why would you want to do something that is useless?
why would you be offended if someone wanted to do something useless if it didn't hurt anyone?
|
On May 27 2011 15:34 maliceee wrote:
It's funny listening to both sides rationalize their sides' position when both are stupid.
This sort of statement doesn't do anything. It precludes the possibility that one side actually is correct, which is nonsensical when you have a dichotomy.
|
I must say I've read 1/2 the post I didn't see one remark about how against the teaching of Jesus Christ this all was. Love thy enemy and turn the other cheek no not these hicks just more ignorance from the Jesus freaks from the South. Such hate at this kid one of their own but I personally hate all religious people due to the fact that 99% of them are Hippocrates don't claim to be religious if you don't even fallow the teachings of your own religion.
|
On May 27 2011 15:30 atheistaphobe wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:19 Popss wrote:
What about atheism have to be proved.
I actually really don't get that :S Let me help you out. God exists. Its my word against the atheists. God can show the atheist that he exists, but the atheist can never show me that God does not exist.
I'm bored so I'll take the troll bait. You make a claim, you have to provide evidence for that claim. If you do not provide enough (or any, in this case), its not a faith-based belief when someone denies your claim is true. It's almost impossible to prove a negative, the burden of proof is always on the person making the claim.
|
482 Posts
On May 27 2011 15:28 krbz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:19 Popss wrote:On May 27 2011 15:15 atheistaphobe wrote:On May 27 2011 15:08 krbz wrote:
Christianity is backed up by "stories" compiled into a book. The history is only of the stories and completely untestable. I would also like to add that they are stories from an age that had very little understanding of the world around them. They couldn't explain things so they created something to provide that explanation.
Scientific theory cannot take divine power into consideration as it cannot be subjected to testing and verified by multiple parties. It cannot stand in a scientific setting because all a religious follower can present is the book the have "faith" in. Social Sciences prove again and again that devout Christians live a healthier life and that prayer has an effect. Atheism is nothing. It cannot be proved. . What about atheism have to be proved. I actually really don't get that :S Atheism is the "belief" that their is no god. Theism is the "belief" that their is a god. They are equal in that they both take faith, and they both cannot be proven. The "faith" is the issue between the two as they cannot be proven. It is fully illogical to believe either of these since you have to follow both blindly. Agnosticism is the view that certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—is unknown or unknowable. ^aka - The logical choice.
i feel bad for the u.s because their education system has a chance of producing people like this
first of all atheism is about as much a belief , as NOT collecting stamps is a hobby
it takes exactly as much faith as laughing at idiots who claim to have seen the tooth fairy/xenu/santa
it's not vaguely similar , it's not pretty similar ... it's the EXACT same thing
also being agnostic doesn't mean you stop assigning probabilities
do you know for a fact there's no god? no (because proving a negative doesn't work)
are you 99,9% certain there isn't one ? congratz you're agnostic
|
On May 27 2011 15:20 KSMB wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:15 atheistaphobe wrote:Social Sciences prove again and again that devout Christians live a healthier life and that prayer has an effect. Absolute horseshit.
As an atheist, I'm going to have to side with atheistaphobe here.
Humans tend to live longer and be more productive when they are given a focus/direction.
Religion has, in many cases, been a very organized way to align one's views/goals/life around.
In fact, I would argue that this was the original idea of religion at the tribe level. Get a group of men who need each other for their best chance of survival something separate to believe in together. A bonding experience at a tertiary level that allows for greater trust and harmony when you start running around with weapons... hopefully aimed at animals or rival tribes.
|
I think those people are either mentally retarded(most probably) or just ignorant. They threaten to beat him up when they say they are christians? Doesn't that go against every single thing they're religion teaches them? And apparently it's illegal for the school to hold the prayer. Since they did legal action should be taken against them.
|
On May 27 2011 15:36 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:34 maliceee wrote:
It's funny listening to both sides rationalize their sides' position when both are stupid. This sort of statement doesn't do anything. It precludes the possibility that one side actually is correct, which is nonsensical when you have a dichotomy.
In principle one side is correct, but the way he went about it is laughably arrogant and asking for problems.
|
On May 27 2011 15:35 Jojo131 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:32 PH wrote:On May 27 2011 13:39 aguy38 wrote:
He didn't have to pray. He could have just sat there. If you read the second line of the article it makes it sound like he said the majority should be stopped on account of him. Did they overreact to him? Hell yea they did, but at some point he should have had the common sense to just not say anything. This is the truth. The article is biased to the point of absurdity. It's pretty ridiculous. You're missing the point. What the school was doing is against the law.
I can't fault you there. I guess the big question is do people wide with the law or their personal traditions. Personally, I didn't know it was the Lord's prayer that was recited. I thought it was just some local best of luck to you prayer. After I learned that it was the lord's prayer it changed my veiw on it.
|
On May 27 2011 15:36 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 15:34 maliceee wrote:
It's funny listening to both sides rationalize their sides' position when both are stupid. This sort of statement doesn't do anything. It precludes the possibility that one side actually is correct, which is nonsensical when you have a dichotomy.
Thats the point imo, everything has to be one or the other. Black and White: A clear in the wrong and a clear in the right when it rarely is 100% that way (not saying that doesn't apply to this situation though just that this is used WAY to much).
|
On May 27 2011 15:06 poorbeggarman wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2011 13:40 Kelberot wrote:"What would Jesus do?" It's kind of mind blowing how people will be so hostile to others because of their belief. He wasn't being a smartass, read... But Fowler -- knowing that government-sponsored prayer in the public schools is unconstitutional and legally forbidden - ... it also goes against what he believes, why should he just accept it? Why can't people accept the fact that others don't wanna pray, specially when its legally forbidden? Come on.. Back on topic, he must be some sorta law-nerd to know that kind of thing in high school lol. Way too uptight for his own good.
Not really. I live in Canada and I read that from somewhere on this forum.
It's a good way to see who your friends really are, I suppose. And he learned something new about his parents.
I'm not accustomed to American graduation procedure. How does the government help pay for graduations? How does the government pay for graduation prayer? I don't believe it was a Christian themed graduation, so I don't know how the government money would be going towards that.
It just seemed like there was a prayer in the ceremony he refused, which is perfectly acceptable. No one should be forced to pray or pretend to pray because the majority of people would beat him up instead. I like how that teacher said that others pretended to pray so that the majority ruled, and how they've never had this problem before (maybe they were scared of this?).
It was handled really badly by grown adults, and the parents don't deserve that name or duty. It's very difficult to place blame on the kid for standing up against something that's clearly illegal and getting completely wrecked for it. And he even did it anonymously, so it's not like he publicly denounced it.
I don't understand how the prayer would've worked in his graduation still though.
The article was also really biased, and felt like it was trying to force the religion and atheism argument in favour of atheism.
Right now a religious group needs to stand up and denounce the actions of this school and its community for its plain stupidity and misrepresentation of the religion. Then the school needs to compensate the student for ousting him. But I wouldn't return there anyways after that whole mess. Same thing with the parents.
And wow, serious death threats from dumb high school kids. That's very pathetic. I wonder who actually sided with him during this affair.
I also wonder how he took all of this.
I'd hugely respect him if he knew exactly what would happen if he did this, but did it anyways. Then held his head up high and didn't complain or cry when all the trouble started.
But if it was an uninformed act of smartassery, it's really his fault for not preparing for it.
|
Pretty interesting read. Probably try to follow this a bit closer. Thanks for bringing it up.
I live in Arkansas, Bible belt as well. I can literally spit on 7 churches from where i type this. I knew several atheist in high school but most didn't care about what happened at our graduation. I actually attended my high schools graduation for the class this year and they had a prayer the same as when i graduated a few years ago.
I can see why the guy was upset and didn't want them to have a prayer. Its against the law after all. You can't pick laws you want to break and laws that you can't break without consequence. From my experience a majority of schools around here still have prayers at school events and that probably wont ever change unless something pretty drastic happens.
It probably wasn't the smartest thing this guy could have done especially in a town like he is in. But none the less the school should have kept this private and not leaked which student was responsible. Coming from a small school in the south i know how often things don't stay in the private that should. Its sad that this happened and he couldn't even enjoy his high school graduation. But really he should have just not prayed during it i think. Maybe go to law school and figure out how to stop praying in schools if your that passionate about it.
Support to him though at least he is standing up for what he believes in.
|
On May 27 2011 15:36 Hister wrote:
I must say I've read 1/2 the post I didn't see one remark about how against the teaching of Jesus Christ this all was. Love thy enemy and turn the other cheek no not these hicks just more ignorance from the Jesus freaks from the South. Such hate at this kid one of their own but I personally hate all religious people due to the fact that 99% of them are Hippocrates don't claim to be religious if you don't even fallow the teachings of your own religion.
I quoted matt 6:5-6 which proves that Jesus was against public prayer in the first place but you have Paul saying conflicting stuff and Christians pick and choose what verses they follow anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
