I used to like Winning Ben Stein's Money...thanks Ryan.  Ben Stein is a moron.  

It's not like the Islamic and the Christian clubs have a crusade in the middle of the frigging campus.

That would be awesome.


If I were a teacher and I found a child talking to himself & disrupting class, I'd tell him to stop.  "But I was praying!" would not be a valid excuse.  Of course, I have no respect for religion.

My History teacher was on this show, and nearly won. He got as far as the part where he had to answer 5 questions consecutively, right, in order to win (or maybe you were supposed to win more than Stein) and he lost by one or so points.

Anyways, what's with all of this anti-Ben Stein sentimentality? I'm agnostic, so I'm not sure whether or not whatever he said was supposed to be offensive.

It's just incredibly ignorant and false.  It offends common sense.

Basically what ryan said

Except with that we need to HOLD THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE imo public schools count as state and we don't need the fucking church in it I'm alright with exposing kids to religion as a sort of historic criteria or something like that but I don't want my kids feeling alienated when all these other little fuckers are surrounded around a flagpole everyday praying to jeesus chriits

pretty much this.
It should be allowed, but definitely not enforced.

how did you guys ever like Ben Stein.

he was fucking RICHARD NIXON'S SPEECH WRITER.

Let's talk about the moment of silence because it's a hotly debated "topic" in modern day America.

Apparently sitting quietly and contemplating to yourself is unconstitutional.  Every time I try to research the subject I get absolutely no evidence or references in the Constitution that affirms this argument.  The moment of silence has been bitched about for the past 40 years and it's absolutely amazing to me how people start pissing contests about shutting up for a goddamn minute.

it's unconstitutional because a school can't mandate students have 60 seconds of silence at the beginning of the day because it's religious in nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallace_v._Jaffree

"(a)The proposition that the several States have no greater power to restrain the individual freedoms protected by the First Amendment than does Congress is firmly embedded in constitutional jurisprudence. The First Amendment was adopted to curtail Congress' power to interfere with the individual's freedom to believe, to worship, and to express himself in accordance with the dictates of his own conscience......"
"(b)One of the well-established criteria for determining the constitutionality of a statute under the Establishment Clause is that the statute must have a secular legislative purpose. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 612-613 (1971). The First Amendment requires that a statute must be invalidated if it is entirely motivated by a purpose to advance religion."
"(c)The record here not only establishes that 16-1-20.1's purpose was to endorse religion, it also reveals that the enactment of the statute was not motivated by any clearly secular purpose." "...The State's endorsement, by enactment of 16-1-20.1, of prayer activities at the beginning of each schoolday is not consistent with the established principle that the government must pursue a course of complete neutrality toward religion."

In October 2000, the U.S. District Judge Claude M. Hilton ruled that the "moment of silence" law was constitutional.[1][2] Judge Hilton stated, "The court finds that the Commonwealth's daily observance of one minute of silence act is constitutional. The act was enacted for a secular purpose, does not advance or inhibit religion, nor is there excessive entanglement with religion... Students may think as they wish -- and this thinking can be purely religious in nature or purely secular in nature. All that is required is that they sit silently."[cite this quote] His ruling was upheld in the 4th circuit.[3][4]

i'm not FOR THIS or anything but apparently it is constitutional!

i'm not FOR THIS or anything but apparently it is constitutional!

yes, but that's the district court, not the SC, so I quoted them because of what Marcus was referring to.

also we are having this very debate in my government class this week so i would love some info to destroy my government teacher with. (she is disgustingly conservative and constantly refers to court cases and always loves to point out that SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE IS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION!!!)

it's unconstitutional because a school can't mandate students have 60 seconds of silence at the beginning of the day because it's religious in nature.

That case was brought up because a teacher would ask a student to lead prayer which goes against the whole secularism bit.  I'm talking about a straight up moment of silence; 60 seconds of quiet.  No one leads in any sort of prayer/chant/mantra just complete and total silence.  If you want to carve runes into your skin for 60 seconds then you should have the right to do that in silence just like someone else has the right to fall asleep drooling on the desk.  I thought that the was the hole point of the MOS.

I guess someone can argue that FORCING people to comply to something is unconstitutional or whatever but I still don't see how giving you the choice to pray/not to pray/sing to yourself/doodle/sleep/whatever for 60 seconds can be considered unconstitutional in modern society.

also we are having this very debate in my government class this week so i would love some info to destroy my government teacher with. (she is disgustingly conservative and constantly refers to court cases and always loves to point out that SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE IS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION!!!)

Tell her that Jesus wanted the church separate from politics/state.  I can't be arsed to find the direct quote but a quick google search should bring it up.

That case was brought up because a teacher would ask a student to lead prayer which goes against the whole secularism bit.  I'm talking about a straight up moment of silence; 60 seconds of quiet.  No one leads in any sort of prayer/chant/mantra just complete and total silence.  If you want to carve runes into your skin for 60 seconds then you should have the right to do that in silence just like someone else has the right to fall asleep drooling on the desk.  I thought that the was the hole point of the MOS.

I guess someone can argue that FORCING people to comply to something is unconstitutional or whatever but I still don't see how giving you the choice to pray/not to pray/sing to yourself/doodle/sleep/whatever for 60 seconds can be considered unconstitutional in modern society.

well the moment of silence is a covert religious practice.

WOKIPEIDA!

However, critics often view the moment of silence as publicly endorsing prayer "in disguise." This issue has been especially raised by atheists, who argue that no non-religious purpose is served by designating an official moment of silence[citation needed]. They point out, for example, that many schools have entire class periods dedicated to silent study, which can equally be used for silent prayer or meditation.

also tell her black people are established as 3/5ths of a person in the constitution so the idea of something being unconstitutional really carries a lot less weight than it used to, considering the evolving standards of societal decency.

wow.  clearly this self implied religion is a bigger conspiracy than the illuminati and the american moon landing.

my god...

NO! not my god...

also tell her black people are established as 3/5ths of a person in the constitution so the idea of something being unconstitutional really carries a lot less weight than it used to, considering the evolving standards of societal decency.

Ugh... I read somewhere that Bush was trying to pass a law that could be used to revert back to the 3/5ths clause.  I forgot the link because it sounded ridiculous but I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were true.

I thought the moment of silence thing was just to mourn the dead?

Regardless of your religion or what you think happens after death, you'd think that mourning the dead would be ok?

I thought the moment of silence thing was just to mourn the dead?

Regardless of your religion or what you think happens after death, you'd think that mourning the dead would be ok?

no, it's a sly way of promoting religion without actually saying "take a minute to pray"

'let the dead bury the dead'
i think a moment of silence if anything is from something zany like paganism

seperation of church and state was as much to keep the government out of church affairs. probably.

Yes, allowed. Not forced, allowed. Freedom of choice!

I dont think a "moment of silence" is really tyhat terrible. I mean, obviously it is a covert religious thing. But I mean, you can use it to meditate if you are atheist/buddhist, pray if you are christian or muslim, etc. Just thinking about stuff for a moment of silence is not terrible!

I don't know. I mean you could argue that then, people could force you to go to church, and its okay because they don't force you to listen to the preacher.
I mean sure its not nearly as bad as that, but still its the same way of thinking.