Jesus Portrait Will Remain in Ohio Public School (Catholic, believers, exist)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As a government employee I have to disagree with you. Everything I do is viewed as the action of the government. All spending, whether as a primary or secondary function of my job. The presentation and appearance of my workspace/department. The content of my email messages, and how I deal with vendors.
You can disagree and it would not even be unusual. Far too many typical government employees simply do not employ common sense. They do not discriminate among their roles as employee, government agent/official and citizen. That is the primary evil of bureaucracies. It accounts for the many absurd actions taken against school children today . . . like suspensions for giving aspirin or Midol to their friends or putting notices on bulletin boards for religious meetings on school property.
I haven't walked through the halls of this particular school but I remember my elementary, junior high, and high school pretty well. One of the things I was always enamored by were in fact the pictures on the wall of past presidents, famous documents (like the Constitution), and the like. One thing was always missing from those pictures now that I look back on it: Great mathematical and scientific thinkers.
I never saw a picture hanging on the walls of my school(s) of Euler, Tesla, Edison, Einstein, Darwin, or the like. In my opinion, school is, or perhaps should be, a place to inspire young minds to begin a connection with the awe and wonderment of nature, of the beauty of mathematics, of understanding the world and the way it works. I suppose one could propose the lame argument that Jesus was a great thinker, or perhaps moral philospher, but considering that many of the things attributed to him were conjured long after his death (if he ever indeed lived in the first place), it's sketchy at best.
More than likely, though, the picture hangs on the wall at the behest of some proselytizing teacher, principal or faculty member and is not meant to inspire but rather to convert. If the picture was one of many of history's greatest thinkers then I could see it. I might even be willing to accept it. But, what do you think the odds are that the picture is solitarily isolated and, in a lot of ways, proving a very specific agenda?
If the picture were hung up next to, say, Kant and Paine and Bacon in the "philosophy section" of a large gallery of people then, yeah, I don't really have a problem with that. We all know that's probably not the case, though, right?
A picture of Jesus is not an icon. Jesus was an historical figure, with whom it is hard fault, and as such, his picture in a school is as appropriate as a picture of Socrates or Galileo or Shakespeare, and somewhat more appropriate than Columbus or Jackson. Setting aside for the moment that nobody knows what Jesus looked like.
If, as opposed to being a part of a gallery, there is only a picture of Jesus, and it has been there since before the birth of any of the principals in the dispute, it is simply a part of the historical legacy of the building, which validates its presence for that reason alone. They have no right to gainsay those deceased who put it there for reasons of their own.
If, as opposed to being a part of a gallery, there is only a picture of Jesus, and it has been there since before the birth of any of the principals in the dispute, it is simply a part of the historical legacy of the building, which validates its presence for that reason alone. They have no right to gainsay those deceased who put it there for reasons of their own.
Tradition does not make it right. Slavery was traditional. Men only voting was traditional. Pressing people into the navy by kidnapping them when they were drunk was traditional. Tradition alone is a terrible reason for doing something.
We also rethink the decisions of past generations all the time. That is called progress.
As always . . . the voice of reason, Mordant. You focused on the central issue (if not the motive) for these extremist atheist baitings and trolling of government institutions on these issues. (Note: to Mods this is NOT referring to the posts or posters here). These extremists do not WANT to perform triage and be reasonable in their demands. They are provocateurs . . . BOTH sides of these issues . . . THAT is the point of these ludicrous legal conforntations.
See Mordant, you have the support of the theists, which demonstrates that you must be providing them cover. Tell me, what better place to pick a battle than in the halls of our primary education system?
Another bogus argument. There is a huge difference between offical actions as agent for the government (official actions) . . . and the personal acts and actions of the individual officeholders/agents. The pretense that ALL actions while operating as a member/official of government/state/school are agency actions is ludicrous and disingenuous, period. Establishing curricula ARE agency actions . . . decorations, portraits, and other expressions especially those donated or provided by private individuals are NOT.
Have any case law to back up your assertions here, or are you just making this stuff up as you go along?
What's with all the "argumentum ad verecundiam" around here?!!
What does what some "legislators", "judges", or "justices"...or "laws" and "documents" drawn up by those people, have to do with what is objectively right or wrong...in this or any other situation?
I see "appeals" to the Constitution, the SCOTUS and rulings by other courts, and what some laws/regulations say, as an "answer" to this issue.
I don't put much faith in "documents" that have endorsed slavery and rated some humans as on par with animals, and designated one gender as less than the other...written by slavemaster barbarians that sanctioned a genocide of an entire race of people so they could steal their land and possessions. Interpreted by people that are part of a group (the SCOTUS) that have been known to go along with all of that.
Funny...the same people that show the utmost disdain for "logical fallacies" in the past...break one out here to support their point!!
If you want to determine the issue with a "logical fallacy"...then use my all-time favorite! Since, as I've said over and over in the past...in my opinion, it is the "most fair" way to determine how things should be:
Put it to a referendum and let "We the People" decide the issue. Let ad populum determine how it goes down!!
See that? Follow my method...and you settle the matter *SNAP* just like that!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
