.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to Yeti.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="Yeti:1274275"]it all boils down to one fact. religion, references to religion, prayer, nostalgic vaguely religious sayings, all have no place within a public school. i took an English course in high school and part of it was "the Bible Through Literature", and in my uneducated 18 year old ways, i fought against it based on this. the teacher made a good point to me about it, they weren't promoting it, they weren't displaying it for all to see, it was a class studying the impact of the Bible through historical and literary analysis. i had to elect the course, and the course outline was available at enrollment. it was a public school, but it wasn't on display, and ultimately the course further proved to me why i am against religion, but it was fascinating to study it from an objective perspective. that is vastly different than a posting in a traffic artery essentially blessing the school and all within it. again, it doesn't specify a religion, but it specifies a deity. and let's not dance around the fact that "heavenly father" is a direct reference to Abrahamic religion, and i don't mean Islam. but even then, subjective perception isn't a basis for concrete litigation. this is larger than that, "that" being the blessing of a school under religion, no matter how vague it is. again, as lame as anonymous trolling is, Samefag brought a good counter argument, and lent a lot to this discussion. it could have been a bit more intelligent by avoiding the name-calling, but still, a good argument is a good argument. [/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.003 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][