Thursday, February 28, 2013

Prayer in Public Schools


Over on our Facebook page, I posted a picture I found on the Being Liberal page, and have posted here, dealing with prayer in public schools.  A gentleman left a comment stating that the premise of the meme was false because often school staff do not understand or know the law.  To emphasize his point, he linked to a story titled Muslim Prayer Allowed in San Diego--Christian Prayer Denied in Bayonne

From the story –
Somehow I missed hearing about this story until yesterday, and when I did so, I listened carefully, then read thoroughly about this development. My ire is raised…for it is reported that in Carver, a San Diego elementary public school, a time during class hours has been set aside for Muslim led prayers, and that the school is now offering classes in Arabic.

Carver school no longer serves pork and other foods which conflict with fundamental Muslims diet restrictions. In addition, single gender classes for girls have been set up there.

When I read this, my mind raced to Jeremy Jerschina, the valedictorian of his graduating class, who was forbidden to include a prayer in his address to the assembled people during the ceremonies.

The author went on to link and post quotes from two stories: 1) Muslim prayers in school debated and 2) a story about a controversy over a prayer in the Valedictory Address of student Jeremy Jerschina (unfortunately the link to the original story was broken).  The opening five paragraphs and the story overview were quoted, but the story went on to add more context to the situation. 
Supporters of Carver say such an accommodation is legal, if not mandatory, under the law. They note the district and others have been sued for not accommodating religious needs on the same level as non-religious needs, such as a medical appointment.

Islam requires its adherents to pray at prescribed times, one of which falls during the school day.

While some parents say they care more about their children's education than a debate about religious freedom, the allegations – made at a school board meeting in April – have made Carver the subject of heated discussions on conservative talk radio. District officials have been besieged by letters and phone calls, some laced with invective.

The issue has drawn the attention of national groups concerned about civil rights and religious liberty. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, Anti-Defamation League, American Civil Liberties Union and the Pacific Justice Institute are some of the groups monitoring developments in California's second-largest school district.

Among the critics is Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel with the nonprofit, Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center devoted to “defending the religious freedom of Christians.”

He said he's “against double standards being used,” such as when there is a specific period for Muslim students to pray and not a similar arrangement for Christians.

Carver's supporters noted that Christianity and other religions, unlike Islam, do not require their followers to pray at specific times that fall within school hours, when children by law must be in school. Amid the controversy, the district is studying alternatives to the break to accommodate student prayer.

Capitalizing on what it considers a precedent-setting opportunity created by the Carver situation, the Sacramento-based Pacific Justice Institute has offered to help craft a district wide “Daily Prayer Time Policy.”

In a letter, the religious-rights organization urged the district to broaden its accommodations to Christians and Jews by setting aside separate classrooms for daily prayer and to permit rabbis, priests and other religious figures to lead children in worship on campuses.

A lawyer representing the district said those ideas would violate the Constitution's prohibition against government establishment of religion.

The uproar over Carver comes as schools across the country grapple with how to accommodate growing Muslim populations. In recent weeks, the University of Michigan's Dearborn campus has been divided over using student fees to install foot-washing stations on campus to make it easier for Muslim students to cleanse themselves before prayer.

“These things are surfacing more and more in many places where large communities of Muslims are coming in and trying to say this is our right,” said Antoine Mefleh, a non-Muslim who is an Arabic language instructor with the Minneapolis public schools.

His school allows Muslim students to organize an hour of prayer on Fridays – Muslims typically have Friday congregational prayers – and make up class work they miss as a result. During the rest of the week, students pray during lunch or recess.

The San Diego chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations supports the Carver program.

“Our country is transforming demographically, religiously,” said Edgar Hopida, the chapter's public relations director. “Our country has to now accommodate things that are not traditionally accounted for before.”

Carol Clipper, who is the guardian of two grandchildren enrolled in the school's Arabic program, said she believes students should be “given the freedom” to pray. Clipper is Christian, and her grandchildren are being raised in both Islam and Christianity.

“I take them to the mosque and they go to church with me,” she said.

Another parent, Tony Peregrino, whose son is not in the Arabic program, said he's OK with the Muslim students praying. What he cares about, he said, is that teachers are doing their job, and his son's education is not affected.

Courts have ruled on a series of school prayer cases over the past half-century, but legal scholars say a lack of clarity remains.

“This is an area where the law is notoriously erratic,” said Steven Smith, a constitutional law professor at the University of San Diego.

Voluntary prayers by students are protected private speech, the courts have said. That means students can say grace before a meal and have Bible study clubs on campus, and several San Diego schools do. Public school employees, however, cannot lead children in prayer on campus.

Students also can be excused for religious holidays, such as Yom Kippur, the Jewish day of atonement, and Good Friday during Holy Week.

The federal Equal Access Act requires that extracurricular school clubs, religious and non-religious, be treated equally.

San Diego Unified was sued in 1993 when it denied a University City High School student's request to hold lunchtime Bible fellowship. The court found the district discriminated against religion, because it allowed secular clubs to meet during lunch.

Brent North, a lawyer retained by the district to address concerns related to the Carver program, said the district learned from the University City High case to be “careful about restricting students' right to their own private religious expression, including when it's on campus.”

The district cites Department of Education guidelines on prayer:

“Where school officials have a practice of excusing students from class on the basis of parents' requests for accommodation of non-religious needs, religiously motivated requests for excusal may not be accorded less favorable treatment.”

The midday prayer for Muslims here generally falls between 1 and 2 p.m., North said, and that is before the school day ends.

“What is unique about this request is the specificity of the religious requirement that a prayer be offered at a certain time on the clock,” he said.

North went on to say, “The district's legal obligation in response to a request that a prayer must be performed at a particular time is to treat that request the same as it would treat a student's request to receive an insulin shot at a particular time.”

Mefleh, the Minneapolis Arabic instructor, said he allows his Muslim students to pray at the end of class during the month long observance of Ramadan, Islam's holiest period.

“Some accommodation has to come from both sides,” he said. “I just tell them prayer is good. Class is good, too. Your time is precious. You have to come to an agreement with them without making a big fuss. If you want to pray, I understand, but I don't want to interrupt the class too much.”

Obviously there is a lot going on here and I don’t begrudge the author of the post for not quoting the entire news article, in fact she explicitly suggests that people read both stories completely and carefully. 

After reading the story in its entirety, it appears to me that officials at San Diego public school district and at this school are doing two things: 1) trying to avoid a lawsuit from the parents of the Muslim students, and 2) trying to make the transition from the closed charter school to Carver Elementary as painless as possible for those 100 Muslim students.  While I can understand why they made the decision that they did, I think it was a big mistake. 

Religion in public schools is an all-or-nothing thing.  You cannot allow the formation of a Christian group/club (like the Fellowship for Christian Athletes) without also allowing the formation of Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, or Atheist groups (just to name a few).  The best policy, in my humble opinion, is to leave them all out but ultimately that is a decision for the local community to make. 

The difference with this situation though is that it is not about the use of school facilities for a club or after-school activity.  This is about setting aside time from class for prayer, specifically prayer for Muslims, and that is wrong.  I understand that Islam doctrine instructs followers to pray at specific times of the day; unfortunately that does not give them the right to completely disrupt class schedules in a public school.  Muslims are perfectly free to worship as they wish at home and students are well within their legal rights to pray to themselves while in school, but a school that sets aside specific times for prayer for one group of students is without a doubt breaking the law. 

If this precedent is allowed to stand, it will open a Pandora’s Box of demands from other religions that student’s of their faiths be afforded the same accommodations.  If a parent wants his/her child to attend a school that provides religious teachings and prayer, then by all means they are free to find a private school that will fit their needs.  It is not the job of the public education system to support religion—that is the religious community’s job.  Also, the argument that religious accommodations are basically the same as medical accommodations is laughable.  There is a world of difference between making sure that, for example, a student in a wheelchair is able to safely traverse the school campus and access facilities and giving someone time to pray. 

Public schools, like our government and nation, are, and should always, be secular in nature.  It is not the job of the government or a teacher to promote religion.  Period.    

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Wobbles and Nubs 2/23/2013 02/23 by Wobbles And Nubs My 2 cents | Blog Talk Radio

Wobbles and Nubs 2/23/2013 02/23 by Wobbles And Nubs My 2 cents | Blog Talk Radio

For those of you who haven't heard it yet here is a link to our latest show tune in live every Saturday at 1030 am cst.

Coming soon is our first ever Spotlight Oklahoma episode featuring local news and local talent. for our Oklahoma fans!

Monday, February 25, 2013

Scripture, Faith, and Obedience


While going through the news feed on my Facebook page, I saw a status update from Free-Thinking Society that said –
 "If you are unliking this page because of the last post, that is a good idea." 

Needless to say I had to see what the hubbub was about and came found this –
People who believe in the Christian god also believe in complete obedience to him to do whatever is commanded. Thank goodness he is a fictional character and not actually going around giving out commands like the one below. Doing what god commands in the senario below is not unlike following an order from Hitler. Just doing what you're told makes you as evil as the one issuing the command for genocide.

"I am the one the Lord sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the Lord. This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’” 1 Samuel 15:1-3

While I am sure that these comments will cause some people to unlike that page, but it does bring up an interesting point.  The harshness of the tone is over the top and not really necessary but the questions are good ones. 

Based solely on the quoted passage, one could conclude that God was instructing his followers to take part in genocide.  Now the quote is taken out of context so I'm not sure what else was going on in this scripture.  This is an excellent example of a Bible passage that condones horrific violence on those who disagree with the followers of God.  A passage like this really isn't that different from the passages in the Koran that also condone violence. 

Reading a passage like this does beg a few questions about faith, obedience, and the context and environment from which the scripture was written.  Let's take these one at a time. 

Faith.  Does having faith in a certain religion mean that one must agree with and adhere to all teachings in said religion’s scriptures?  In my mind it does not.  Spiritual faith is not dependent upon religious scriptures.  Faith can be influenced by scriptures but one must remember the context around which the scriptures were written.  More on that in a bit. 

Obedience.  The quoted scripture above specifically instructs followers to partake in the mass destruction and murder of an entire community/country.  Is this kind of obedience required for someone to truly be a part of a religion?  Are passages about killing, lying, and slavery meant to be followed in modern society?  Would a loving God really condone and command these types of actions?  I tend to believe the answer to all three questions is no.  In fact I have serious issues with any religion that teaches blind faith and complete obedience because neither has anything to do with spirituality and everything to do with controlling and manipulating people. 

Environment.  Something that I think is often either forgotten or overlooked is the environment from which a religious text was written.  Understanding the circumstances around the development of religious scriptures is vital in understanding the scriptures themselves.  What does that mean exactly?  Let me use an example that will hopefully not ruffle too many feathers—Norse mythology.  The stories found in Norse mythology are violent and often take place in very cold and harsh parts of the world/universe.  This harshness and violence in these stories is a reflection of the way of life for the Northern Germanic people.  They lived in an exceptionally cold part of the world that required great strength and resilience to survive, thus those qualities were reflected in their mythology and religion.  The same can be said of modern religions.  Islam for example was born out of an incredibly violent time in history and was developed in another harsh environment (this time on the hot side).  The scriptures in the Koran were written for a specific time and environment, as was the Torah, the New Testament, the Vedas, etc.  All of these scriptures tell amazing stories and teach valuable lessons but should not be followed blindly or completely.  Meaning, you shouldn’t do everything that is in these books because some of it is cruel, harsh, illegal, and downright crazy. 

Religious scriptures, like mythology, folklore, and fair tales, teach important life lessons and can provide guidance through difficult times.  They are wonderful tales about the mystic, magical, and extraordinary things in this world and beyond and shine a bright light into the heart and soul of the human spirit, and should always be revered as such. 

Should they be taken word-for-word as literal historical facts?  No. 

Have they been used by those in power to manipulate the masses?  Yes. 

Do people do ridiculous things in their names?  Oh lord yes.

Do they deserve to be belittled and demonized?  No.  The problem isn’t the scriptures, but what people do with and in the name of the scriptures.  Following orders is one thing.  Blindly following them is another.  

Friday, February 22, 2013

Topics for the Feb. 23rd Radio Show


On this week’s edition of the Wobbles and Nubs My 2 Cents Radio Show we have each selected a few specific stories to discuss beyond the general news of the day and political philosophies.  Below are links to said stories and please check out the show!  By the way, our first two episodes are available to your listening (dis)pleasure here

Wobbles’ Selections –
Opening Paragraph:  President Obama played golf Sunday with Tiger Woods during the president’s long holiday weekend in Florida, amid concerns from the media about a lack of access before, during and after the newsworthy outing.

Opening Paragraph:  WASHINGTON (AP) - Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday that Americans don't need semi-automatic weapons to protect their homes because a couple of blasts from a shotgun will scare off intruders.

Opening Paragraph:  While trying to explain why women in college don’t need firearms for self-defense on campus, Colorado state Rep. Joe Salazar said even if women feel like they might be raped, their suspected attacker might not actually have intent to rape. So please, put the guns away ladies.


Nubs’ Selections –
Opening Paragraph:  Many employees lost their jobs in recent years after posting negative comments about work on social media sites. A recent decision by the National Labor Relations Board may give workers more freedom to talk and complain about work on social media.

Opening Paragraph:  Oklahoma has made some of the deepest cuts to funding for local schools of any state in the country. Over the last five years, the state has cut per-pupil education aid for primary and secondary schools by 20 percent, or $706 per student, after adjusting for inflation. Only Arizona and Alabama have cut funding more deeply over that time frame. These funding cuts have serious consequences for educational quality and for economic growth.

Opening Paragraphs:  DAYTON, Ohio (AP) — A southwest Ohio woman who says she was fired because she voted for President Barack Obama filed a lawsuit against her former employer. 

Patricia Kunkle's lawsuit accuses Dayton-based defense contractor Q-Mark Inc. and its president of telling employees that if Obama was re-elected, then his supporters would be the first to be fired, The Dayton Daily News (http://bit.ly/YxE10A) reported.  

Sunday, February 17, 2013

Religion and Children

The following is a reprint of a post from my blog Oklahoma Lefty.
_____________________________________________________

Religion and Children

Children can be very impressionable. They can also absorb information like a sponge. And they’re often a lot smarter then we adults realize. So taking all of that into consideration, when is it a good time to introduce children to religion?

This is something that I have wondered about for a while and wrote about once, but admittedly I’m still not sure what to do with my own kids. My wife grew up in the Lutheran Church and I grew up in the Episcopal Church but neither of us are religious in the traditional way (she’s an agnostic and I’m a deist with Buddhist/Hindu leanings). Our children were baptized in the Lutheran Church that my wife grew up in but we did that more out of tradition and for the family then for our kids or their salvation or anything like that. Occasionally our kids have gone back to that church when they’ve spent the night at their grandparents’ and my daughter has gone to church, a non-denominational one, with her best friend after having spent the night at her house. Beyond that we don’t go to church. From time to time our kids ask questions about God or Jesus and typically I answer in generalities saying things like “some people believe…” or “that’s what some folks think” but I always leave the answer open to interpretation (for lack of a better term).

I want my kids to have their own beliefs about God and faith and not just mirror what my wife and/or I believe. I want them to make informed and educated decisions when they are ready to do so. I do not want to indoctrinate them in mine or anyone else’s faith.

But what is the best way to accomplish this goal?

And to some degree, aren’t all organized religions guilty of indoctrination?

One of these days I would love to take my children to a variety of different religious services, but my choices in that regard in the Oklahoma City area are a bit limited (at least based on what I’ve been able to find through the yellow pages). On top on that, I work nights and on Sunday’s, so the thought of getting up early on a day that I don’t have to (especially during the school year) does not appeal at all to me. I want my kids to see and experience the beauty and wisdom of the world’s religions and then to make their decision based on those experiences and exposures.

I do not believe for a minute that my children will be damned to hell if they don’t pick the “right religion.” Their deeds in life will determine their fate and it is my job to help them to prepare to make the best decisions possible, to be good and moral people, to live ethically, and to treat others with kindness and respect. These are the values that we are instilling in our kids and honestly we don’t need a church or a religion to tell us to do it. We do it because it is the right thing to do.

So what to do? Well, I think that I’m going to find some Buddhist and Hindu artwork to put up in the office (we had a Buddha statue and a Hindu wheel of life painting in my house as a kid) and as my studies in Religious Studies continue, I’ll introduce my children to different concepts that I’m studying.

But I’d like to hear from other parents. How have you broached the subject of religion with your children? When do you think is the right time to introduce children to religion?

The Modern Age of Iron

I was digging through some old political posts from my blog and came across a post about a questionable outburst by Representative Joe Wilson.  The specifics of that situation are completely irrelevant at this point, but the closing paragraph isn't.
This does however highlight the fragile state of civility in our nation. People are angry, angrier than I can ever remember in my lifetime, and the have no problems taking that anger out on others. Things are getting bad out there and I think that it is safe to say that we are living in the Iron Age / Kali Yuga. The big question though is, what can we do to get our civility and society back on track?
So what exactly are the Iron Age and Kali Yuga?  You may be surprised how familiar they are considering both come from ancient times (long before Christ).  

The Iron Age is part of the Ages of Man as listed in Hesiod's Works and Days.
Iron Age – Hesiod finds himself in the Iron Age. During this age humans live an existence of toil and misery. Children dishonor their parents, brother fights with brother and the social contract between guest and host (xenia) is forgotten. During this age might makes right, and bad men use lies to be thought good. At the height of this age, humans no longer feel shame or indignation at wrongdoing; babies will be born with gray hair and the gods will have completely forsaken humanity: "there will be no help against evil."

The Kali Yuga comes from ancient Hindu scriptures. 
In relation to rulers
·        Rulers will become unreasonable: they will levy taxes unfairly.
·        Rulers will no longer see it as their duty to promote spirituality, or to protect their subjects: they will become a danger to the world.
·        People will start migrating, seeking countries where wheat and barley form the staple food source.
·        "At the end of Kali-yuga, when there exist no topics on the subject of God, even at the residences of so-called saints and respectable gentlemen of the three higher varnas [guna or temperament] and when nothing is known of the techniques of sacrifice, even by word, at that time the Lord will appear as the supreme chastiser." (Srimad-Bhagavatam (2.7

In human relationships
·        Avarice and wrath will be common. Humans will openly display animosity towards each other. Ignorance of dharma will occur.
·        People will have thoughts of murder with no justification and will see nothing wrong in that.
·        Lust will be viewed as socially acceptable and sexual intercourse will be seen as the central requirement of life.
·        Sin will increase exponentially, whilst virtue will fade and cease to flourish.
·        People will take vows and break them soon after.
·        People will become addicted to intoxicating drinks and drugs.
·        Gurus will no longer be respected and their students will attempt to injure them. Their teachings will be insulted, and followers of Kama will wrest control of the mind from all human beings.  The maximum lifespan of a human in this age is 90-100 years.
·        Brahmans will not be learned or honored, Kshatriyas will not be brave, Vaishyas will not be just in their dealings
I don't know about you, but that sure sounds like the times in which we live.  Society sure seems to be crumbling around us and I'm not really sure if there is anything we can do to stop it because the solutions would come from a place of kindness and compassion and that is something the world is sorely lacking.    

Friday, February 15, 2013

The Lost Purpose of Pop Music

In his latest column Bill O’Reilly looks at the loss of purpose behind modern pop music as compared to the music of previous eras. 

From the story –
While watching the Grammy awards last Sunday, it occurred to me that American culture has been defined by music ever since the end of World War II. After the Germans and Japanese surrendered in 1945, millions of GI's returned home to marry and begin families. The big band era of good time music accompanied that, and romantic singers like Frank Sinatra ruled the day.

In the fifties, many young people, tired of conformity, began to rebel. The rise of Elvis Presley illuminated that rebellion. Then the angst kind of died out as Chubby Checker ushered in the Twist in 1960 and Americans began dancing all over the place.

Exhausted from doing the Pony, young consumers eventually began to respond to the snappy melodies of an English group called The Beatles and, once again, music mania gripped the nation. The British invasion featured the four mop-tops, The Rolling Stones and The Animals, among others.

Then Vietnam emerged.

That led to protest music, drug-fueled lyrics, as well as introspective tunes by The Doors, The Jefferson Airplane, and Bob Dylan. Acid rock soon followed and everything was very far out, man.

After about seven years, that intensity died out. The dark themes receded and dancing once again came back. The age of disco took hold as The Bee Gees and other polyester-clad groups dominated the charts. The good times of the late 1970's unleashed Madonna, Michael Jackson, and Earth, Wind and Fire. But it all ended when the AIDS scare arrived in 1984. Suddenly, the uninhibited party became dangerous.

Then music kind of meandered around for a while until rap emerged. At first, the anger-fueled recordings were confined to urban radio stations and a niche audience. But when Elton John sang a duet with the white rapper Eminem on a Grammy telecast, rap went mainstream. Massive parental headaches followed.

Overall his take on the history of popular music is pretty accurate.  I’d call into question his take on when rap music went mainstream and his complete exclusion of the grunge and punk explosions of the 1990’s but that is squabbling over minute details.  Also taking into account that he is looking at popular music through the eyes of a Baby Boomer, his analysis makes complete sense. 

When he tackled the topic of recent popular music, he really hit the nail on the head. 
The rise of the Internet signaled the slow collapse of record stores and the music industry quickly fragmented after the turn of the century. Consumers could now download songs into portable machines and bop at will. Americans no longer had to depend on the radio to hear their favorite tunes.

Since then, there have been a series of pop superstars but no real purpose or point-of-view in the music which, again, may reflect the current time. I mean what do Lady Gaga and Jennifer Lopez really stand for? Narcissism? Just asking.

Since the death of Kurt Cobain, what has popular music really stood for?  What’s been the cultural purpose and drive behind the music?  Looking at artists like Lady Gaga, Justin Beiber, or even “older” (though they really aren’t old) artists like the Backstreet Boys and N’SYNC and one has to wonder what in society are they reflecting.  Now of those artists Lady Gaga does promote issues of equality (see “Born This Way”) but for the most part it is all about the glitz and the glamour. 

Modern society has become obsessed with fame, celebrity, and the superficial—even more so than in the 1980’s.  Since music not only drives, but is a reflection of society, it is no wonder that the majority of Top 40 music is vapid, soulless fluff.  As O’Reilly pointed out in his column, it’s not for a lack of talent.  Many pop stars are extremely good at what they do (Adele for example) and a lot of them do put their hearts and souls into their music, but more often than not the result is just pretty sounds. 

In the past, music was something that brought people together.  Rock ‘n’ roll, R&B, and soul music helped to begin to bridge the racial divide in the 1950’s and ‘60’s.  The frustration of a generation at war was expressed through the protest music of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.  Even in the 1980’s kids were brought together by artists like Michael Jackson and Prince, but even then things had started to fragment.  Entire portions of disaffected youth found their voice is music that wasn’t yet ready for the mainstream radio.  That music fueled the voice of a generation to break through the hairspray decorated pop to show the world that not everyone was matching to the same beat and that was okay.  Then after a decade of the corporate diluting of that raw angst for the masses followed by the advent of the internet, things completely changed…probably forever. 
We are definitely living in confusing, rapidly changing times as machines are now dominating leisure options for many consumers. Fifty years ago, we all were humming the same tunes heard over and over on AM radio. The good vibrations of The Beach Boys thrilled Maine as well as Malibu. The music actually brought Americans together.

Today, the tuneless lure of cyber-space has pulled us apart. Perhaps forever.

While the internet has aided in the development of niche markets, it’s also helped us as a society to segment and segregate into our own little communities and worlds.  It seems like the time of music uniting the country has passed.  For example, last year’s ridiculously huge international hit “Gangnam Style” was nothing more than a catchy beat and a crazy dance.  Is that all that pop music has to offer?  What happened to the songs that could change the world?  Will we ever have another “What’s Going On?” or “Smells Like Teen Spirit?”  Hole once sang
If the world is so wrong
Then you can break the mold
With one song
If the world is so wrong
Then you can take it on
With one song
But it seems like those days may now be behind us forever.