OT - The "Illicit" Bible Conveyance

[John Fiorentino]

From our own sad State of NJ....................

Not only has this police State suspended the Second Amendment, we now seem
to be intent on excising the First Amendment!

Teacher says he was fired for giving inquisitive student a Bible

A substitute teacher in Phillipsburg, N.J., who was sacked for giving a
student a Bible filed a complaint this week with the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission.

In his complaint against the Phillipsburg School District, the teacher,
Walt Tutka, claims religious discrimination as well as retaliation,
reports The Warren Reporter.

Tutka says his persecution began on Oct. 12, a day when he was working as
a substitute in the Phillipsburg School District.

He alleges that he quipped to a student who happened to be standing last
in a line: "The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first."

The line is a reference to a verse seen a handful of different times in
the canonical Gospels (e.g., Matthew 19:30 and Mark 10:31).

The complaint goes on to say that the unidentified student "repeatedly"
inquired about the source of Tutka's profound remark. Tutka told him it
came from the Bible and also asked the student if he owned a Bible.

When the student said he did not, Tutka says he gave the student a
pocket-sized Bible he was carrying, reads the complaint.

On Oct. 18, the complaint continues, Superintendent George Chando informed
Tutka that he was recommending the teacher's termination over the illicit
Bible conveyance.

Tutka asserts that he was actually fired on Jan. 14.

"I believe that I have been discriminated against in violation of Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New Jersey Law Against
Discrimination and retaliated against regarding same," Tutka's complaint
reads, according to The Express-Times.

The Texas-based Liberty Institute, a conservative Christian legal defense
organization, is representing Tutka, along with an unnamed New Jersey law
firm.

"It is shocking that the school district has forced Walt to file a
complaint with the EEOC for religious discrimination," Hiram Sasser,
director of litigation for Liberty Institute," told The Warren Reporter.
"All Walt did was respond to a student's intellectual curiosity and the
school district suspended and then terminated him."

The nonprofit advocacy group claims that the Phillipsburg School District
has also failed to respond to an open-records request for emails and
documents related to Tutka's employment.

The Phillipsburg School District has been tight-lipped. Superintendent
Chando told The Warren Reporter that he is "unable to comment at this
time."

John F.

[Bud]

On Apr 12, 9:19 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

> From our own sad State of NJ....................
>
> Not only has this police State suspended the Second Amendment, we now seem
> to be intent on excising the First Amendment!
>
> Teacher says he was fired for giving inquisitive student a Bible
>
> A substitute teacher in Phillipsburg, N.J., who was sacked for giving a
> student a Bible filed a complaint this week with the Equal Employment
> Opportunity Commission.
>
> In his complaint against the Phillipsburg School District, the teacher,
> Walt Tutka, claims religious discrimination as well as retaliation,
> reports The Warren Reporter.
>
> Tutka says his persecution began on Oct. 12, a day when he was working as
> a substitute in the Phillipsburg School District.
>
> He alleges that he quipped to a student who happened to be standing last
> in a line: "The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first."

I guess this means the middle will pretty much stay in the middle.

> The line is a reference to a verse seen a handful of different times in
> the canonical Gospels (e.g., Matthew 19:30 and Mark 10:31).

And Luke 13:30. In true Bible fashion they are all different.

> The complaint goes on to say that the unidentified student "repeatedly"
> inquired about the source of Tutka's profound remark. Tutka told him it
> came from the Bible and also asked the student if he owned a Bible.
>
> When the student said he did not, Tutka says he gave the student a
> pocket-sized Bible he was carrying, reads the complaint.

Now what is he going to do if he is attacked by a vampire?

> On Oct. 18, the complaint continues, Superintendent George Chando informed
> Tutka that he was recommending the teacher's termination over the illicit
> Bible conveyance.
>
> Tutka asserts that he was actually fired on Jan. 14.
>
> "I believe that I have been discriminated against in violation of Title
> VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New Jersey Law Against
> Discrimination and retaliated against regarding same," Tutka's complaint
> reads, according to The Express-Times.
>
> The Texas-based Liberty Institute, a conservative Christian legal defense
> organization, is representing Tutka, along with an unnamed New Jersey law
> firm.
>
> "It is shocking that the school district has forced Walt to file a
> complaint with the EEOC for religious discrimination," Hiram Sasser,
> director of litigation for Liberty Institute," told The Warren Reporter.
> "All Walt did was respond to a student's intellectual curiosity and the
> school district suspended and then terminated him."

If he would have expressed curiosity about sex should he hand him a
Hustler magazine? If he is curious about Hitler hand him Mien Kampf?
Curious about anti-Semitism and given a copy of the Protocols of Zion?

[mainframetech]

On Apr 12, 9:19 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

Another one of those borderline cases that are going to occur when
people use less than normal common sense. Was the child a devout
Muslim? Was the bible the only reading material handed to the child,
and not other books from other religions as reference material?

Handing out a book from one particular religion and not doing so
for other religions gives a perception that the school supports the
Christian religion. If no other religion is treated equally, there
would be a problem.

Does the school teach about religions in general or just the
Christian religion, or any religion at all? Even though most people
around the school are probably Christian, there may also be Muslims,
Jews and all manner of other religions represented, and they would
probably not like the one religion to have a 'leg up' by the teacher
doing what he did.

Chris

[John Fiorentino]

The student asked where the reference came from. It has nothing to do with
proselytizing.

Come on folks. Put aside your "politically correct" crapola and defend
this mans Constitutional Rights.

John F.



"mainframetech" <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bdf9cecb-fc73-4fcf...@a14g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...

[John Fiorentino]

Bud:

First, the student already heard what the teacher said. That's a little
different than just being "curious" about something.

If a teacher promoted anti-Semitism or hate crimes, he should be
prosecuted for those actions.

But those things are totally different than what happened here.

Your apparent lack of faith in things Biblical is your right.

The teacher has rights also.

John F.



"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:4ac78b73-9773-42ff...@q9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

[Ed Cage]

Hi John - I think I understand your frustrations. I also see there is a
New Jersey/Texas connection on this issue. We moved from Plano Texas to
Mexico to avoid things we didn’t like; best decision of our life.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/12/2013 9:19 PM, John Fiorentino wrote:
> From our own sad State of NJ....................
>
> Not only has this police State suspended the Second Amendment, we now seem
> to be intent on excising the First Amendment!
>
> Teacher says he was fired for giving inquisitive student a Bible
>
> A substitute teacher in Phillipsburg, N.J., who was sacked for giving a
> student a Bible filed a complaint this week with the Equal Employment
> Opportunity Commission.
>
> In his complaint against the Phillipsburg School District, the teacher,
> Walt Tutka, claims religious discrimination as well as retaliation,
> reports The Warren Reporter.
>
> Tutka says his persecution began on Oct. 12, a day when he was working as
> a substitute in the Phillipsburg School District.
>
> He alleges that he quipped to a student who happened to be standing last
> in a line: "The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first."
>
> The line is a reference to a verse seen a handful of different times in
> the canonical Gospels (e.g., Matthew 19:30 and Mark 10:31).
>
> The complaint goes on to say that the unidentified student "repeatedly"
> inquired about the source of Tutka's profound remark. Tutka told him it
> came from the Bible and also asked the student if he owned a Bible.
>
> When the student said he did not, Tutka says he gave the student a
> pocket-sized Bible he was carrying, reads the complaint.
>

He was out of line for giving the student the Bible.
He should have just told him to Google it.

[John McAdams]

Intersting that you think those cases would be comparable.

Suppose the student expressed interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
gave him a copy of the Koran?

Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?

Just trying to find out if you are taking a principled position here,
or merely don't like Christians and Christianity.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/13/2013 12:40 PM, Bud wrote:
> On Apr 12, 9:19 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> wrote:
>> From our own sad State of NJ....................
>>
>> Not only has this police State suspended the Second Amendment, we now seem
>> to be intent on excising the First Amendment!
>>
>> Teacher says he was fired for giving inquisitive student a Bible
>>
>> A substitute teacher in Phillipsburg, N.J., who was sacked for giving a
>> student a Bible filed a complaint this week with the Equal Employment
>> Opportunity Commission.
>>
>> In his complaint against the Phillipsburg School District, the teacher,
>> Walt Tutka, claims religious discrimination as well as retaliation,
>> reports The Warren Reporter.
>>
>> Tutka says his persecution began on Oct. 12, a day when he was working as
>> a substitute in the Phillipsburg School District.
>>
>> He alleges that he quipped to a student who happened to be standing last
>> in a line: "The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first."
>
> I guess this means the middle will pretty much stay in the middle.
>

I guess you really don't know what it means. You think it is a LIFO thing.

>> The line is a reference to a verse seen a handful of different times in
>> the canonical Gospels (e.g., Matthew 19:30 and Mark 10:31).
>
> And Luke 13:30. In true Bible fashion they are all different.
>
>> The complaint goes on to say that the unidentified student "repeatedly"
>> inquired about the source of Tutka's profound remark. Tutka told him it
>> came from the Bible and also asked the student if he owned a Bible.
>>
>> When the student said he did not, Tutka says he gave the student a
>> pocket-sized Bible he was carrying, reads the complaint.
>
> Now what is he going to do if he is attacked by a vampire?
>

I think he was trying to prove where he got the quote from. Maybe he was
being baited by the student just to get him fired.

[John Fiorentino]

Hi ED!

Great to hear from you!

Yes the NJ Texas connection is there. The Liberty Institute is in Plano,
your old haunt and the "unidentified NJ Law Firm" is in NJ................
;-)

I hope you stay involved with the Newsgroup my friend.

John F.




"Ed Cage" <eca...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ca987031-2ea1-4f8b...@googlegroups.com...

Hi John - I think I understand your frustrations. I also see there is a
New Jersey/Texas connection on this issue. We moved from Plano Texas to

Mexico to avoid things we didn�t like; best decision of our life.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/13/2013 11:38 PM, John Fiorentino wrote:
> Bud:
>
> First, the student already heard what the teacher said. That's a little
> different than just being "curious" about something.
>
> If a teacher promoted anti-Semitism or hate crimes, he should be
> prosecuted for those actions.
>
> But those things are totally different than what happened here.
>
> Your apparent lack of faith in things Biblical is your right.
>
> The teacher has rights also.
>
> John F.
>

Maybe in other countries a teacher has the right to force a particular
religion on students, but not in THIS country, the US.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/13/2013 11:36 PM, John Fiorentino wrote:
> The student asked where the reference came from. It has nothing to do
> with proselytizing.
>
> Come on folks. Put aside your "politically correct" crapola and defend
> this mans Constitutional Rights.
>
> John F.
>

Are you saying that one amendment gives him the right to violate another
amendment? Some amendments are more important than others?

[John McAdams]

I meant to say "suppose a radical left *teacher* expresses an interest
in Ghe Guevara."

Answer that, Bud.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[mainframetech]

On Apr 13, 11:38 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

> Bud:
>
> First, the student already heard what the teacher said. That's a little
> different than just being "curious" about something.
>
> If a teacher promoted anti-Semitism or hate crimes, he should be
> prosecuted for those actions.
>
> But those things are totally different than what happened here.
>
> Your apparent lack of faith in things Biblical is your right.
>
> The teacher has rights also.
>

I'm not convinced that a student would 'repeatedly' ask for the
reference for the quote the teacher made. I think that's the teacher
trying to cover his tracks from haranguing a student in his own personal
religion. Of the rights we are granted by the constitution, freedom to
choose your religion is one, and to have a person representing the
government giving out Christian bibles says the government supports that
religion. Are those people that wanted the freedom to choose going to
have to be told by the government HERE...THIS is the right religion to get
your morals from...Not your own.

John F,
The opening comment was also wrong. It said: "Not only has this police

State suspended the Second Amendment, we now seem to be intent on excising
the First Amendment!"

Not only is the comment false, but the 2nd amendment is still firm and
no one's guns have been taken away. Would you fight for letting a person
judged to be insane have a gun? What if he turns out to hate everyone and
wants to do something about it? Still OK for him to buy a gun? Al Qaeda
has made a video for training terrorists and it points out how easy it is
to get a gun in the USA, and shows them how. Is that OK too?

There are far more than enough guns and ammo out there in the hands of
people that think they're patriots, that they could defend themselves
against any government on Earth if it tried to take over the people. The
problem was never a takeover, it was lying. Nowadays people are lied to
often by their leaders and they believe whatever comes to them in email
that cons them into being outraged about nothing. It's for votes and
donations.

Chris

[Bud]

On Apr 14, 12:00 am, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

Interesting that you think they are different.

> Suppose the student expressed interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
> gave him a copy of the Koran?

It seems to me the student wasn`t expressing interest in Christianity,
only the origin of the what the teacher said. The teacher could have told
the student where to find it.

> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?

A student wouldn`t be a representative of the school.

I can remember having a Current Events class once a week in a public
school where the teacher handed out Bibles and had us read from them (I
think Psalms mostly). Had a Health teacher who came in drunk off his ass
and tell us about how it was when he was growing up. Liked the Health
teacher better. Times were different I guess, nobody complained, they had
you for 45 minutes regardless.

> Just trying to find out if you are taking a principled position here,
> or merely don't like Christians and Christianity.

Some of my favorite people are Christians. A lot of people I know
believe silly things, I try not to hold it against them.

> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Bud]

On Apr 13, 11:38 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

> Bud:
>
> First, the student already heard what the teacher said. That's a little
> different than just being "curious" about something.

Yes, it is. The teacher brought it up, which elicited a response
from the student. I might see something that reminds me of the
punchline from a dirty joke. If I were a teacher it would be best that
I kept it to myself. If I did slip and said it aloud, I wouldn`t
compound the error by handing the student a dirty joke book.

> If a teacher promoted anti-Semitism or hate crimes, he should be
> prosecuted for those actions.

Have you seen some of the stuff in the Bible?

> But those things are totally different than what happened here.
>
> Your apparent lack of faith in things Biblical is your right.
>
> The teacher has rights also.

How are they infringed if he is prevented from handing out Bibles?

> John F.
>
> "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote in message

[Anthony Marsh]

One important distinction overlooked is that the Separation of State and
Religion is specified in the amendments to our US Constitution.
It is for that reason that I agreed the teacher was wrong.

> Suppose the student expressed interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
> gave him a copy of the Koran?
>

Why do you assume it has to be a Muslim teacher giving out the Koran?
Bias?
Have you ever heard of a college course called Comparative Religions?
Do you agree that a Catholic university should forbid the teaching of
Islam or Buddhism?
When I went to college religion was a required course and it was almost
always exclusively Christianity.

> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>

Slight difference. What if a student expressed interest in cannibalism?
The student did not ask for the Bible. The teacher forced it on the
student. The better response would have been "Google it."

> Just trying to find out if you are taking a principled position here,
> or merely don't like Christians and Christianity.
>

Or merely don't like Fascism.

> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>

[John Fiorentino]

Yes, Anthony.........................."Google it"

Maybe we should put THAT in the Constitution. I mean screw it right?

The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niem�ller (1892-1984

Yes sir folks, don't ever give anyone an "illicit" Bible!

Just tell em to "Google It"

John F.






"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:51699f9a$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

[John Fiorentino]

Anthony:

Your comment is absurd. Nobody was "forcing" anything on anybody.

Obviously you didn't read or can't comprehend the news story I posted.

"Anthony likes to call everyone a liar"

John F.



"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:516aece4$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

[John Fiorentino]

Anthony:

Your perceptions are faulty.

"Anthony likes to call everyone a liar"

John F.





"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:516aedbd$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

[Bud]

On Apr 14, 3:49 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

> Yes, Anthony.........................."Google it"
>
> Maybe we should put THAT in the Constitution. I mean screw it right?
>
> The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.
>
> First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Socialist.
>
> Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
>
> Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Jew.
>
> Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
>
> Martin Niem ller (1892-1984
>
> Yes sir folks, don't ever give anyone an "illicit" Bible!
>
> Just tell em to "Google It"

Whats wrong with telling a student where to find information and
have him look it up on his own?

> John F.
>
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message

[John McAdams]

On 14 Apr 2013 15:46:23 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:

>On Apr 14, 12:00�am, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On 13 Apr 2013 12:40:45 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>

>> > �If he would have expressed curiosity about sex should he hand him a

>> >Hustler magazine? If he is curious about Hitler hand him Mien Kampf?
>> >Curious about anti-Semitism and given a copy of the Protocols of Zion?
>>
>> Intersting that you think those cases would be comparable.
>
> Interesting that you think they are different.
>

So you think the Bible is like pornography or a Nazi work.

>> Suppose the student expressed interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
>> gave him a copy of the Koran?
>
> It seems to me the student wasn`t expressing interest in Christianity,
>only the origin of the what the teacher said. The teacher could have told
>the student where to find it.
>

Sure, but what was wrong with giving the student the source?

>> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
>> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>
> A student wouldn`t be a representative of the school.
>
> I can remember having a Current Events class once a week in a public
>school where the teacher handed out Bibles and had us read from them (I
>think Psalms mostly). Had a Health teacher who came in drunk off his ass
>and tell us about how it was when he was growing up. Liked the Health
>teacher better. Times were different I guess, nobody complained, they had
>you for 45 minutes regardless.
>
>> Just trying to find out if you are taking a principled position here,
>> or merely don't like Christians and Christianity.
>
> Some of my favorite people are Christians. A lot of people I know
>believe silly things, I try not to hold it against them.
>

I think your atheism is silly: jejune and sophomoric. But I don't
hold it against you. :-) (Really.)

Suppose *you* were a teacher and a student asked "what do atheists
believe?" Suppose you have a little booklet of atheist essays and you
gave it to the student.

Should you be fired?

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 14 Apr 2013 15:48:09 -0400, Anthony Marsh

<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On 4/14/2013 12:00 AM, John McAdams wrote:
>> On 13 Apr 2013 12:40:45 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> If he would have expressed curiosity about sex should he hand him a
>>> Hustler magazine? If he is curious about Hitler hand him Mien Kampf?
>>> Curious about anti-Semitism and given a copy of the Protocols of Zion?
>>>
>>
>> Intersting that you think those cases would be comparable.
>>
>
>One important distinction overlooked is that the Separation of State and
>Religion is specified in the amendments to our US Constitution.
>It is for that reason that I agreed the teacher was wrong.
>

The phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the
Constitution.

And *nothing* in the Constutition was intended to abridge the free
speech rights of Christians.

>> Suppose the student expressed interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
>> gave him a copy of the Koran?
>>
>
>Why do you assume it has to be a Muslim teacher giving out the Koran?
>Bias?

I knew about the bias of liberals, who don't like Christians, but are
protective toward Muslims.

So answer my question!

>Have you ever heard of a college course called Comparative Religions?
>Do you agree that a Catholic university should forbid the teaching of
>Islam or Buddhism?
>When I went to college religion was a required course and it was almost
>always exclusively Christianity.
>

Which might have been reasonable, given that Christianity is the
religion with by far the most influence on Western Civilization.

I would hope you leaned a bit about (at least) Islam.

>> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
>> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>>
>
>Slight difference. What if a student expressed interest in cannibalism?
>The student did not ask for the Bible. The teacher forced it on the
>student. The better response would have been "Google it."
>

The teacher *forced* the student to take it?

You didn't read the article.

>> Just trying to find out if you are taking a principled position here,
>> or merely don't like Christians and Christianity.
>>
>
>Or merely don't like Fascism.
>

And you equate Christianity with Fascism.

I equate firing the teacher with Fascism.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 14 Apr 2013 22:00:25 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:

>On Apr 14, 3:49�pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
>wrote:
>> Yes, Anthony.........................."Google it"
>>
>> Maybe we should put THAT in the Constitution. I mean screw it right?
>>
>> The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.
>>
>> First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
>> Because I was not a Socialist.
>>
>> Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
>> Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
>>
>> Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
>> Because I was not a Jew.
>>
>> Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
>>
>> Martin Niem ller (1892-1984
>>
>> Yes sir folks, don't ever give anyone an "illicit" Bible!
>>
>> Just tell em to "Google It"
>
> Whats wrong with telling a student where to find information and
>have him look it up on his own?
>

Nothing. But what is wrong with just giving him a bible?

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John Fiorentino]

Mainframetech:

Obviously, you also read what you want and discard the rest.

You make assertion that the teacher was "haranguing a student in his own
personal religion."

That assertion is not supported by the evidence.

Answering an inquiry truthfully and giving a pocket Bible to someone is
not an "establishment of religion."

More research into the Constitution would do you some good. It would also
give honor and meaning to the actions of lots of brave men who died to
give us our freedoms.

John F.

"mainframetech" <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:44ff8706-84df-43a4...@a34g2000vbt.googlegroups.com...

[John Fiorentino]

Bud:

So, you compare the Bible to a dirty joke book?

Yes, I've read the Bible.

You should read the Constitution, then you *might* not ask such foolish
questions.

John F.



"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message

news:9f88425a-16b6-418f...@l5g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

[Bud]

On Apr 14, 3:43 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:00:59 -0500, John McAdams
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

I think that work and Hitler`s Mien Kampf would be fair game in a
classroom setting if they were relevant to the subject being taught.

But lets change it. Lets say a student is reading the Bible and a
teacher says "Religion is the opiate of the people". The student inquires
about the quote and the teacher hands him a book by Karl Marx. Would you
be ok with this?


> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 14 Apr 2013 22:10:10 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:

>On Apr 14, 3:43�pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:00:59 -0500, John McAdams
>>
>>
>>

>> >Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
>> >left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>>
>> I meant to say "suppose a radical left *teacher* expresses an interest
>> in Ghe Guevara."
>>
>> Answer that, Bud.
>
> I think that work and Hitler`s Mien Kampf would be fair game in a
>classroom setting if they were relevant to the subject being taught.
>

But not the Bible?

Double standard.

> But lets change it. Lets say a student is reading the Bible and a
>teacher says "Religion is the opiate of the people". The student inquires
>about the quote and the teacher hands him a book by Karl Marx. Would you
>be ok with this?
>
>

The teacher has no right to say religion is the opiate of the people.

The teacher should neither *promote* nor *disparage* religion.

People like you don't want any agent of government to promote
religion, but the Constitution (according to the Supreme Court)
equally forbids anything that *impedes* religion coming from
government.

Saying "the first shall be last and the last first" is more like
saying "history repeats itself . . . first as tragedy, then as farce."

If the teacher said the latter, and the student asked the source, the
teacher would have every right to give him "The Eighteenth Brumaire of
Louis Napoleon."

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John Fiorentino]

Bud:

Oh, good! So the Atheist is forgiving of the "silly" folks.

How magnanimous of you.

John F.




"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message

news:2120e47a-747b-43c5...@d8g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

[Bud]

On Apr 14, 2:46 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 4/13/2013 12:40 PM, Bud wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 12, 9:19 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> > wrote:
> >>  From our own sad State of NJ....................
>
> >> Not only has this police State suspended the Second Amendment, we now seem
> >> to be intent on excising the First Amendment!
>
> >> Teacher says he was fired for giving inquisitive student a Bible
>
> >> A substitute teacher in Phillipsburg, N.J., who was sacked for giving a
> >> student a Bible filed a complaint this week with the Equal Employment
> >> Opportunity Commission.
>
> >> In his complaint against the Phillipsburg School District, the teacher,
> >> Walt Tutka, claims religious discrimination as well as retaliation,
> >> reports The Warren Reporter.
>
> >> Tutka says his persecution began on Oct. 12, a day when he was working as
> >> a substitute in the Phillipsburg School District.
>
> >> He alleges that he quipped to a student who happened to be standing last
> >> in a line: "The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first."
>
> >    I guess this means the middle will pretty much stay in the middle.
>
> I guess you really don't know what it means. You think it is a LIFO thing.

I really don`t know what that means. But I`m not interested enough
to google it.

> >> The line is a reference to a verse seen a handful of different times in
> >> the canonical Gospels (e.g., Matthew 19:30 and Mark 10:31).
>
> >    And Luke 13:30. In true Bible fashion they are all different.
>
> >> The complaint goes on to say that the unidentified student "repeatedly"
> >> inquired about the source of Tutka's profound remark. Tutka told him it
> >> came from the Bible and also asked the student if he owned a Bible.
>
> >> When the student said he did not, Tutka says he gave the student a
> >> pocket-sized Bible he was carrying, reads the complaint.
>
> >    Now what is he going to do if he is attacked by a vampire?
>
> I think he was trying to prove where he got the quote from.

Small comfort that would be if he is caught by a vampire without his
Bible. Why else would the teacher be carrying a pint sized Bible?
Perhaps because historically and fictionally they stop bullets pretty
well. I`ve often wondered why they don`t make bullet proof vests out
of them.

>Maybe he was being baited by the student just to get him fired.

By standing last in a line?

[mainframetech]

There is a difference in a person representing themself and preaching
their faith on a street corner, compared with a person representing
governmental authority and pushing a particular religion to children. He
has 1st amendment rights on the street corner, but as a representative of
the government, he must take the position of the government, which is not
to support any one religion over another.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Apr 14, 3:49 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

> Yes, Anthony.........................."Google it"
>
> Maybe we should put THAT in the Constitution. I mean screw it right?
>
> The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.
>
> First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Socialist.
>
> Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
>
> Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Jew.
>
> Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
>

> Martin Niemöller (1892-1984

>
> Yes sir folks, don't ever give anyone an "illicit" Bible!
>
> Just tell em to "Google It"
>
> John F.
>

> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message

You can go on any street corner and give out as many bibles as you
want. But as a government representative, you cannot. Isn't it
obvious that the people that are being governed have rights too?

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/14/2013 3:49 PM, John Fiorentino wrote:
> Yes, Anthony.........................."Google it"
>
> Maybe we should put THAT in the Constitution. I mean screw it right?
>
> The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.
>

Just because you are in the Tea Party and wear one of those cute little
tricorn hats does not mean that only you really understand the
Constitution. Maybe you don't realize it because you never actually read
it, but it is not YOU who gets to interpret it, it is the Supreme Court.

> First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Socialist.
>
> Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
>
> Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Jew.
>
> Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
>

> Martin Niem?ller (1892-1984

>
> Yes sir folks, don't ever give anyone an "illicit" Bible!
>
> Just tell em to "Google It"
>

It wasn't the right way to handle it and it was unnecessary.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/14/2013 3:46 PM, Bud wrote:
> On Apr 13, 11:38 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> wrote:
>> Bud:
>>
>> First, the student already heard what the teacher said. That's a little
>> different than just being "curious" about something.
>
> Yes, it is. The teacher brought it up, which elicited a response
> from the student. I might see something that reminds me of the

The teacher used a common expression. Sometimes people do not even know
where the expressions come from and often they come from the Bible or
Shakespeare. If he had said something about "pound of flesh" and the
student asked what that meant it would be appropriate to tell him that it
came from Shakespeare, but not show to him the movie Theatre of Blood.

> punchline from a dirty joke. If I were a teacher it would be best that
> I kept it to myself. If I did slip and said it aloud, I wouldn`t
> compound the error by handing the student a dirty joke book.
>

I once had a foreign student ask me what his professor meant when he
said that human reproduction is like a shotgun approach.

>> If a teacher promoted anti-Semitism or hate crimes, he should be
>> prosecuted for those actions.
>
> Have you seen some of the stuff in the Bible?
>
>> But those things are totally different than what happened here.
>>
>> Your apparent lack of faith in things Biblical is your right.
>>
>> The teacher has rights also.
>
> How are they infringed if he is prevented from handing out Bibles?
>

You can't defend one person's right to violate the Constitution.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/14/2013 3:45 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Apr 13, 11:38 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> wrote:
>> Bud:
>>
>> First, the student already heard what the teacher said. That's a little
>> different than just being "curious" about something.
>>
>> If a teacher promoted anti-Semitism or hate crimes, he should be
>> prosecuted for those actions.
>>
>> But those things are totally different than what happened here.
>>
>> Your apparent lack of faith in things Biblical is your right.
>>
>> The teacher has rights also.
>>
> I'm not convinced that a student would 'repeatedly' ask for the
> reference for the quote the teacher made. I think that's the teacher
> trying to cover his tracks from haranguing a student in his own personal
> religion. Of the rights we are granted by the constitution, freedom to
> choose your religion is one, and to have a person representing the
> government giving out Christian bibles says the government supports that
> religion. Are those people that wanted the freedom to choose going to
> have to be told by the government HERE...THIS is the right religion to get
> your morals from...Not your own.
>

I saw no evidence of "repeatedly" and no evidence of "haranguing."

[Anthony Marsh]

I thought you meant the radical left teacher gave the student a copy of
The Motorcycle Diaries. I am sure you know that teaching aides and
curriculum sources have to be approved.

I do know that certain right wing nuts are always complaining about
radical left teachers assigning Communist literature.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/14/2013 10:19 PM, Bud wrote:
> On Apr 14, 2:46 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 4/13/2013 12:40 PM, Bud wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 12, 9:19 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>> From our own sad State of NJ....................
>>
>>>> Not only has this police State suspended the Second Amendment, we now seem
>>>> to be intent on excising the First Amendment!
>>
>>>> Teacher says he was fired for giving inquisitive student a Bible
>>
>>>> A substitute teacher in Phillipsburg, N.J., who was sacked for giving a
>>>> student a Bible filed a complaint this week with the Equal Employment
>>>> Opportunity Commission.
>>
>>>> In his complaint against the Phillipsburg School District, the teacher,
>>>> Walt Tutka, claims religious discrimination as well as retaliation,
>>>> reports The Warren Reporter.
>>
>>>> Tutka says his persecution began on Oct. 12, a day when he was working as
>>>> a substitute in the Phillipsburg School District.
>>
>>>> He alleges that he quipped to a student who happened to be standing last
>>>> in a line: "The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first."
>>
>>> I guess this means the middle will pretty much stay in the middle.
>>
>> I guess you really don't know what it means. You think it is a LIFO thing.
>
>
> I really don`t know what that means. But I`m not interested enough
> to google it.
>

That's my point. It's a computer thingy that you never need to know about.

>>>> The line is a reference to a verse seen a handful of different times in
>>>> the canonical Gospels (e.g., Matthew 19:30 and Mark 10:31).
>>
>>> And Luke 13:30. In true Bible fashion they are all different.
>>
>>>> The complaint goes on to say that the unidentified student "repeatedly"
>>>> inquired about the source of Tutka's profound remark. Tutka told him it
>>>> came from the Bible and also asked the student if he owned a Bible.
>>
>>>> When the student said he did not, Tutka says he gave the student a
>>>> pocket-sized Bible he was carrying, reads the complaint.
>>
>>> Now what is he going to do if he is attacked by a vampire?
>>
>> I think he was trying to prove where he got the quote from.
>
> Small comfort that would be if he is caught by a vampire without his
> Bible. Why else would the teacher be carrying a pint sized Bible?

A pocket Bible is no defense against a vampire.
I always used to carry my pocket Bible to class in case some question
came up.

> Perhaps because historically and fictionally they stop bullets pretty
> well. I`ve often wondered why they don`t make bullet proof vests out
> of them.
>

Remember that Schrank's bullet was slowed down by Teddy Roosevelt's 50
page speech he had folded in half in his breast pocket so he was only
wounded and not killed.

>> Maybe he was being baited by the student just to get him fired.
>
> By standing last in a line?
>

By asking that question.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/14/2013 10:18 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2013 22:10:10 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 14, 3:43 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:00:59 -0500, John McAdams
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
>>>> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>>>
>>> I meant to say "suppose a radical left *teacher* expresses an interest
>>> in Ghe Guevara."
>>>
>>> Answer that, Bud.
>>
>> I think that work and Hitler`s Mien Kampf would be fair game in a
>> classroom setting if they were relevant to the subject being taught.
>>
>
> But not the Bible?
>
> Double standard.
>

No, you didn't say it was a religion course. A lot of people use common
expressions without realizing where they come from.

>
>> But lets change it. Lets say a student is reading the Bible and a
>> teacher says "Religion is the opiate of the people". The student inquires
>> about the quote and the teacher hands him a book by Karl Marx. Would you
>> be ok with this?
>>
>>
>
> The teacher has no right to say religion is the opiate of the people.
>
> The teacher should neither *promote* nor *disparage* religion.
>

Is that the way the amendment is written? I think you are talking about
Blasphemy which is still a crime in our state, but has no Constitutional
protection.

> People like you don't want any agent of government to promote
> religion, but the Constitution (according to the Supreme Court)
> equally forbids anything that *impedes* religion coming from
> government.
>

Where does the wording say that?

> Saying "the first shall be last and the last first" is more like
> saying "history repeats itself . . . first as tragedy, then as farce."
>

Not exactly what the Bible meant.
[Re: v. 16]: "By this illustration, Jesus was teaching that the matter
of rewards is under the sovereign control of God, the 'Landowner' in the
parable. God is the One before whom all accounts will be settled. Many
who have prominent places will someday find themselves demoted. And many
who often find themselves at the end of the line will find themselves
promoted to the head of the line: The last will be first, and the first
will be last.... In the final accounting, the Lord's analysis will carry
the greatest and only important weight."

[Anthony Marsh]

Inappropriate.

> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/14/2013 10:08 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2013 15:48:09 -0400, Anthony Marsh
> <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On 4/14/2013 12:00 AM, John McAdams wrote:
>>> On 13 Apr 2013 12:40:45 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If he would have expressed curiosity about sex should he hand him a
>>>> Hustler magazine? If he is curious about Hitler hand him Mien Kampf?
>>>> Curious about anti-Semitism and given a copy of the Protocols of Zion?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Intersting that you think those cases would be comparable.
>>>
>>
>> One important distinction overlooked is that the Separation of State and
>> Religion is specified in the amendments to our US Constitution.
>> It is for that reason that I agreed the teacher was wrong.
>>
>
> The phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the
> Constitution.
>

I didn't say it was. I said that the concept is there.
Some people also call it the Establishment Clause.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.

I think we all know a certain atheist here who interprets that as
meaning that Congress should not pass a law honoring a Church building
as a historical landmark.

> And *nothing* in the Constutition was intended to abridge the free
> speech rights of Christians.
>

Of anyone regardless of religion.

>>> Suppose the student expressed interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
>>> gave him a copy of the Koran?
>>>
>>
>> Why do you assume it has to be a Muslim teacher giving out the Koran?
>> Bias?
>
> I knew about the bias of liberals, who don't like Christians, but are
> protective toward Muslims.
>

Why do you assume that Liberal don't like Christians? Is that because
you are biased?
Some Muslims are protective of Christians and Jews.
Remember the movie Exodus?

> So answer my question!

Which question? You mean MY question?

>
>
>> Have you ever heard of a college course called Comparative Religions?
>> Do you agree that a Catholic university should forbid the teaching of
>> Islam or Buddhism?
>> When I went to college religion was a required course and it was almost
>> always exclusively Christianity.
>>
>
> Which might have been reasonable, given that Christianity is the
> religion with by far the most influence on Western Civilization.
>

So you claim because of your bias.

> I would hope you leaned a bit about (at least) Islam.
>

Some, not enough.

>
>>> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
>>> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>>>
>>
>> Slight difference. What if a student expressed interest in cannibalism?
>> The student did not ask for the Bible. The teacher forced it on the
>> student. The better response would have been "Google it."
>>
>
> The teacher *forced* the student to take it?
>
> You didn't read the article.
>
>>> Just trying to find out if you are taking a principled position here,
>>> or merely don't like Christians and Christianity.
>>>
>>
>> Or merely don't like Fascism.
>>
>
> And you equate Christianity with Fascism.
>

Hitler justified the Nazi party as God's mission.

> I equate firing the teacher with Fascism.
>

Are you still confused about the difference between Communism and Fascism?

> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/14/2013 10:04 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2013 15:46:23 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 14, 12:00 am, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>> On 13 Apr 2013 12:40:45 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> If he would have expressed curiosity about sex should he hand him a
>>>> Hustler magazine? If he is curious about Hitler hand him Mien Kampf?
>>>> Curious about anti-Semitism and given a copy of the Protocols of Zion?
>>>
>>> Intersting that you think those cases would be comparable.
>>
>> Interesting that you think they are different.
>>
>
> So you think the Bible is like pornography or a Nazi work.
>
>
>>> Suppose the student expressed interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
>>> gave him a copy of the Koran?
>>
>> It seems to me the student wasn`t expressing interest in Christianity,
>> only the origin of the what the teacher said. The teacher could have told
>> the student where to find it.
>>
>
> Sure, but what was wrong with giving the student the source?
>

I said TELL the student what the source is.
No need to hand out Bibles. Everything is online now.

>
>>> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
>>> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>>
>> A student wouldn`t be a representative of the school.
>>
>> I can remember having a Current Events class once a week in a public
>> school where the teacher handed out Bibles and had us read from them (I
>> think Psalms mostly). Had a Health teacher who came in drunk off his ass
>> and tell us about how it was when he was growing up. Liked the Health
>> teacher better. Times were different I guess, nobody complained, they had
>> you for 45 minutes regardless.
>>
>>> Just trying to find out if you are taking a principled position here,
>>> or merely don't like Christians and Christianity.
>>
>> Some of my favorite people are Christians. A lot of people I know
>> believe silly things, I try not to hold it against them.
>>
>
> I think your atheism is silly: jejune and sophomoric. But I don't
> hold it against you. :-) (Really.)
>
> Suppose *you* were a teacher and a student asked "what do atheists
> believe?" Suppose you have a little booklet of atheist essays and you
> gave it to the student.
>
> Should you be fired?
>

Got any common expressions which originated with atheists?

> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/14/2013 10:00 PM, Bud wrote:
> On Apr 14, 3:49 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> wrote:
>> Yes, Anthony.........................."Google it"
>>
>> Maybe we should put THAT in the Constitution. I mean screw it right?
>>
>> The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.
>>
>> First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
>> Because I was not a Socialist.
>>
>> Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
>> Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
>>
>> Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
>> Because I was not a Jew.
>>
>> Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
>>
>> Martin Niem ller (1892-1984
>>
>> Yes sir folks, don't ever give anyone an "illicit" Bible!
>>
>> Just tell em to "Google It"
>
> Whats wrong with telling a student where to find information and
> have him look it up on his own?
>

You know they do have these things which are called libraries.

[John Fiorentino]

Bud:

My, how polite you've become.

John F.




"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message

news:8aaa8f63-14a3-4127...@v20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

[John Fiorentino]

Bud says................

"Why else would the teacher be carrying a pint sized Bible? Perhaps
because historically and fictionally they stop bullets pretty well. I`ve
often wondered why they don`t make bullet proof vests out of them."

I say................

I'm sure you'll get the answer to your question someday.

John F.







"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message

news:f1bcffce-7552-4bf6...@d8g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

[John Fiorentino]

I think we've established where you stand, and we've also established you
are certainly no Constitutional scholar.

Try reading and comprehending the article without your preconceived
biases.

John F.



"mainframetech" <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:864872c6-cb37-4401...@r4g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...

[John Fiorentino]

Perhaps a copy of "The Merchant of Venice?" or have they burned that
already?

John F.



"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:516b46b3$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

[John Fiorentino]

Mainframetech:

Receives an "F" in Constitutional Law 101.

John F.



"mainframetech" <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:26f3e683-13dc-4c43...@a14g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...

On Apr 14, 3:49 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:
> Yes, Anthony.........................."Google it"
>
> Maybe we should put THAT in the Constitution. I mean screw it right?
>
> The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.
>
> First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Socialist.
>
> Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
>
> Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
> Because I was not a Jew.
>
> Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
>

> Martin Niem�ller (1892-1984

[Bud]

We agree.

> >>>> The line is a reference to a verse seen a handful of different times in
> >>>> the canonical Gospels (e.g., Matthew 19:30 and Mark 10:31).
>
> >>>     And Luke 13:30. In true Bible fashion they are all different.
>
> >>>> The complaint goes on to say that the unidentified student "repeatedly"
> >>>> inquired about the source of Tutka's profound remark. Tutka told him it
> >>>> came from the Bible and also asked the student if he owned a Bible.
>
> >>>> When the student said he did not, Tutka says he gave the student a
> >>>> pocket-sized Bible he was carrying, reads the complaint.
>
> >>>     Now what is he going to do if he is attacked by a vampire?
>
> >> I think he was trying to prove where he got the quote from.
>
> >    Small comfort that would be if he is caught by a vampire without his
> > Bible. Why else would the teacher be carrying a pint sized Bible?
>
> A pocket Bible is no defense against a vampire.
> I always used to carry my pocket Bible to class in case some question
> came up.

Tiny ass print.

> > Perhaps because historically and fictionally they stop bullets pretty
> > well. I`ve often wondered why they don`t make bullet proof vests out
> > of them.
>
> Remember that Schrank's bullet was slowed down by Teddy Roosevelt's 50
> page speech he had folded in half in his breast pocket so he was only
> wounded and not killed.

I guess it paid to be longwinded.

> >> Maybe he was being baited by the student just to get him fired.
>
> >    By standing last in a line?
>
> By asking that question.

Your idea is that he baited the teacher by asking the teacher what
the teacher meant by what the teacher said. Crafty!

[Bud]

On Apr 14, 11:28 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 4/14/2013 3:46 PM, Bud wrote:
>
> > On Apr 13, 11:38 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> > wrote:
> >> Bud:
>
> >> First, the student already heard what the teacher said. That's a little
> >> different than just being "curious" about something.
>
> >    Yes, it is. The teacher brought it up, which elicited a response
> > from the student. I might see something that reminds me of the
>
> The teacher used a common expression. Sometimes people do not even know
> where the expressions come from and often they come from the Bible or
> Shakespeare. If he had said something about "pound of flesh" and the
> student asked what that meant it would be appropriate to tell him that it
> came from Shakespeare, but not show to him the movie Theatre of Blood.
>
> > punchline from a dirty joke. If I were a teacher it would be best that
> > I kept it to myself. If I did slip and said it aloud, I wouldn`t
> > compound the error by handing the student a dirty joke book.
>
> I once had a foreign student ask me what his professor meant when he
> said that human reproduction is like a shotgun approach.

Did you demonstrate?

> >> If a teacher promoted anti-Semitism or hate crimes, he should be
> >> prosecuted for those actions.
>
> >    Have you seen some of the stuff in the Bible?
>
> >> But those things are totally different than what happened here.
>
> >> Your apparent lack of faith in things Biblical is your right.
>
> >> The teacher has rights also.
>
> >    How are they infringed if he is prevented from handing out Bibles?
>
> You can't defend one person's right to violate the Constitution.

You can show more reason to be protected from religion than reasons
that religion needs protecting.

[Bud]

On Apr 14, 10:18 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

> Bud:
>
> Oh, good!   So the Atheist is forgiving of the "silly" folks.

As long as they don`t try to burn me.

> How magnanimous of you.
>
> John F.
>

> "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote in message

[Bud]

On Apr 14, 10:18 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

> On 14 Apr 2013 22:10:10 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 14, 3:43 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:00:59 -0500, John McAdams
>
> >> >Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
> >> >left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>
> >> I meant to say "suppose a radical left *teacher* expresses an interest
> >> in Ghe Guevara."
>
> >> Answer that, Bud.
>
> >  I think that work and Hitler`s Mien Kampf would be fair game in a
> >classroom setting if they were relevant to the subject being taught.
>
> But not the Bible?

Maybe in the context of a philosophy class. Not in line in the
cafeteria.

> Double standard.
>
> >  But lets change it. Lets say a student is reading the Bible and a
> >teacher says "Religion is the opiate of the people". The student inquires
> >about the quote and the teacher hands him a book by Karl Marx. Would you
> >be ok with this?
>
> The teacher has no right to say religion is the opiate of the people.
>
> The teacher should neither *promote* nor *disparage* religion.
>
> People like you don't want any agent of government to promote
> religion, but the Constitution (according to the Supreme Court)
> equally forbids anything that *impedes* religion coming from
> government.
>
> Saying "the first shall be last and the last first" is more like
> saying "history repeats itself . . . first as tragedy, then as farce."

It took it to be more like the story of the poor woman who only gave
a small amount to the church when the rich man gave a lot.

[mainframetech]

On Apr 14, 10:04 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2013 15:46:23 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:

>
> >On Apr 14, 12:00 am, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> On 13 Apr 2013 12:40:45 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >> >  If he would have expressed curiosity about sex should he hand him a
> >> >Hustler magazine? If he is curious about Hitler hand him Mien Kampf?
> >> >Curious about anti-Semitism and given a copy of the Protocols of Zion?
>
> >> Intersting that you think those cases would be comparable.
>
> >  Interesting that you think they are different.
>

> So you think the Bible is like pornography or a Nazi work.
>

> >> Suppose the student expressed interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
> >> gave him a copy of the Koran?
>
> >  It seems to me the student wasn`t expressing interest in Christianity,
> >only the origin of the what the teacher said. The teacher could have told
> >the student where to find it.
>

> Sure, but what was wrong with giving the student the source?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> >> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
> >> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>

> >  A student wouldn`t be a representative of the school.
>
> >  I can remember having a Current Events class once a week in a public
> >school where the teacher handed out Bibles and had us read from them (I
> >think Psalms mostly). Had a Health teacher who came in drunk off his ass
> >and tell us about how it was when he was growing up. Liked the Health
> >teacher better. Times were different I guess, nobody complained, they had
> >you for 45 minutes regardless.
>
> >> Just trying to find out if you are taking a principled position here,
> >> or merely don't like Christians and Christianity.
>
> > Some of my favorite people are Christians. A lot of people I know
> >believe silly things, I try not to hold it against them.
>

> I think your atheism is silly:  jejune and sophomoric.  But I don't
> hold it against you. :-)  (Really.)
>
> Suppose *you* were a teacher and a student asked "what do atheists
> believe?"  Suppose you have a little booklet of atheist essays and you
> gave it to the student.
>
> Should you be fired?
>

> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Atheism is a belief that falls in the realm of religion. If the
government gives out such information, they are then supporting a
belief that NO religion is valid. Nope, won't do. Neutrality is
best.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Apr 14, 10:08 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2013 15:48:09 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>
> <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:

> >On 4/14/2013 12:00 AM, John McAdams wrote:
> >> On 13 Apr 2013 12:40:45 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>   If he would have expressed curiosity about sex should he hand him a
> >>> Hustler magazine? If he is curious about Hitler hand him Mien Kampf?
> >>> Curious about anti-Semitism and given a copy of the Protocols of Zion?
>
> >> Intersting that you think those cases would be comparable.
>

> >One important distinction overlooked is that the Separation of State and
> >Religion is specified in the amendments to our US Constitution.
> >It is for that reason that I agreed the teacher was wrong.
>
> The phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the
> Constitution.
>

> And *nothing* in the Constutition was intended to abridge the free
> speech rights of Christians.
>

"Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the
clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect
a wall of separation between church and state."
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

If the laws of the union 'respected' a particular 'establishment'
of religion, it might then appear to be supporting that religion,
which would put all others at odds and violate the intent of the 1st
amendment. The separation must be maintained so that the first
amendment can allow for the free exercise of any religion.

> >> Suppose the student expressed interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
> >> gave him a copy of the Koran?
>

> >Why do you assume it has to be a Muslim teacher giving out the Koran?
> >Bias?
>
> I knew about the bias of liberals, who don't like Christians, but are
> protective toward Muslims.
>

I'm a liberal, but I have nothing against Christians...or any of the
other general accepted religions. It takes all kinds to make a USA.

> So answer my question!

>
> >Have you ever heard of a college course called Comparative Religions?
> >Do you agree that a Catholic university should forbid the teaching of
> >Islam or Buddhism?
> >When I went to college religion was a required course and it was almost
> >always exclusively Christianity.
>
> Which might have been reasonable, given that Christianity is the
> religion with by far the most influence on Western Civilization.
>

As an offshoot of Judaism, Christianity might be thought of as a
Jewish subset with a messiah...the basic set of laws are handed down
from Judaism, the 10 commandments. Islam has many facets that reflect
Christianity.

> I would hope you leaned a bit about (at least) Islam.
>

> >> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
> >> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>

> >Slight difference. What if a student expressed interest in cannibalism?
> >The student did not ask for the Bible. The teacher forced it on the
> >student. The better response would have been "Google it."
>
> The teacher *forced* the student to take it?
>

Many students wouldn't argue with a teacher, but would take the book
proffered. Later a parent might make an issues of it, which was may
have been the case here.

> You didn't read the article.
>

> >> Just trying to find out if you are taking a principled position here,
> >> or merely don't like Christians and Christianity.
>

> >Or merely don't like Fascism.
>
> And you equate Christianity with Fascism.
>

> I equate firing the teacher with Fascism.
>

Similar to making laws for the government to decide about the
disposition of every abortion in the country? Which will of course,
kill a number of women trying to get one illegally from some scammer.
Those kind of laws are on the 'social' fabric of society, but if they
tried to carry them out, it would quickly become jack-booted fascism.
Soldiers crashing into homes and forcing invasive ultrasound tests
(like in Virginia) to determine the length of pregnancy and whether
the intended abortion is legal or not, and hauling away to prison
those that haven't complied with the laws, after showing the expectant
mother the child they would have 'killed'.

Yes, it seems ridiculous, but trying to control women's
reproductive rights can quickly become just that. Other than rape,
women have always controlled their reproduction, but men would like to
have that control so they can be sure of reproducing without getting
the cooperation of a woman, and so, as the majority in many congresses
in many states, they have acted to get that control and assure
themselves that reproduction will occur anytime they have sex. That's
the goal, and watch them try to put into place laws that will
eventually get to that point. The newer efforts for 'Personhood' for
fertilized eggs would eliminate any use of 'Plan B' drugs and many of
the various contraceptives that are used nowadays. It has been
defeated so far, but they keep trying. It would mean more
fertilization and more births if that law were followed.

No, I'm not a woman, but the issues seem obvious to me.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Apr 14, 10:09 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 14 Apr 2013 22:00:25 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 14, 3:49 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> >wrote:

> >> Yes, Anthony.........................."Google it"
>
> >> Maybe we should put THAT in the Constitution. I mean screw it right?
>
> >> The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.
>
> >> First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
> >> Because I was not a Socialist.
>
> >> Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
> >> Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
>
> >> Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
> >> Because I was not a Jew.
>
> >> Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
>
> >> Martin Niem ller (1892-1984
>
> >> Yes sir folks, don't ever give anyone an "illicit" Bible!
>
> >> Just tell em to "Google It"
>

> >  Whats wrong with telling a student where to find information and
> >have him look it up on his own?
>

> Nothing.  But what is wrong with just giving him a bible?

Everything. It's not a class in comparative religion, where all
religions are talked about, but a representative of the government
giving out a Christian Bible. The implication is the problem. The
perception that the government supports that particular religion and
its beliefs.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Apr 14, 10:09 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:
> Mainframetech:
>
> Obviously, you also read what you want and discard the rest.
>
> You make assertion that the teacher was "haranguing a student in his own
> personal religion."
>
> That assertion is not supported by the evidence.
>
Sorry. You're correct. I was trying to use those words to make the
error more obvious.

> Answering an inquiry truthfully and giving a pocket Bible to someone is
> not an "establishment of religion."
>
However, it IS 'respecting' a particular religion, showing
favoritism of the government to a particular religion, and by
implication, the dislike of those of other religions. The real
intention of the teacher we might argue about, but the perception is
the key.

> More research into the Constitution would do you some good. It would also
> give honor and meaning to the actions of lots of brave men who died to
> give us our freedoms.
>
Some research into the actions of those that go to war might help
get a perspective on human goals, and help you understand some things
you don't seem to have realized. While I appreciate those that have
gone into war for our leaders, I don't see that their honorable
efforts were to defend the constitution, but to get the job done and
get out of there as quickly as possible. Based on conversations I've
had with those that were there (WW2, Vietnam, Korea), once there and
being shot at, most if not all people want just to get done and get
out.

> John F.
>
> "mainframetech" <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:44ff8706-84df-43a4...@a34g2000vbt.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 13, 11:38 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> wrote:> Bud:

>
> > First, the student already heard what the teacher said. That's a little
> > different than just being "curious" about something.
>

> > If a teacher promoted anti-Semitism or hate crimes, he should be
> > prosecuted for those actions.
>

> > But those things are totally different than what happened here.
>
> > Your apparent lack of faith in things Biblical is your right.
>
> > The teacher has rights also.
>

>   I'm not convinced that a student would 'repeatedly' ask for the
> reference for the quote the teacher made.  I think that's the teacher
> trying to cover his tracks from haranguing a student in his own personal
> religion.  Of the rights we are granted by the constitution, freedom to
> choose your religion is one, and to have a person representing the
> government giving out Christian bibles says the government supports that
> religion.  Are those people that wanted the freedom to choose going to
> have to be told by the government HERE...THIS is the right religion to get
> your morals from...Not your own.
>
>
>

> > If he would have expressed curiosity about sex should he hand him a
> > Hustler magazine? If he is curious about Hitler hand him Mien Kampf?
> > Curious about anti-Semitism and given a copy of the Protocols of Zion?
>

> > > The nonprofit advocacy group claims that the Phillipsburg School
> > > District
> > > has also failed to respond to an open-records request for emails and
> > > documents related to Tutka's employment.
>
> > > The Phillipsburg School District has been tight-lipped. Superintendent
> > > Chando told The Warren Reporter that he is "unable to comment at this
> > > time."
>
> > > John F.
>

> John F,
>    The opening comment was also wrong.  It said: "Not only has this police

> State suspended the Second Amendment, we now seem to be intent on excising
> the First Amendment!"
>

[mainframetech]

I believe the original telling of the story included 'repeatedly'
and I've apologized for exaggerating with 'haranguing'. Stay up to
date.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Apr 14, 11:30 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 4/14/2013 3:43 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:00:59 -0500, John McAdams

> > <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

Isn't that what the Fascists do? Put certain books off limits,
then hold a book burning, if they have the power.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Apr 14, 11:45 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

> Mainframetech:
>
> Receives an "F" in Constitutional Law 101.
>
> John F.
>

Tch, Tch, John. That's not nice. Because we disagree on the
meaning of some of the things in the constitution doesn't show lack of
knowledge, as is also the case with you. I'm sure you read it all the
way through and made sure you knew all the ramifications and meanings
of all the passages.' You simply disagree with what I learned from
it.

> "mainframetech" <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>
> news:26f3e683-13dc-4c43...@a14g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 14, 3:49 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> > Yes, Anthony.........................."Google it"
>
> > Maybe we should put THAT in the Constitution. I mean screw it right?
>
> > The Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves.
>
> > First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
> > Because I was not a Socialist.
>
> > Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
> > Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
>
> > Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
> > Because I was not a Jew.
>
> > Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
>

> > Martin Niemöller (1892-1984

[John Fiorentino]

Mainframetech:

Your apology is certainly accepted. Thank you!

As to the rest of it we're miles apart.

John F.




"mainframetech" <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:110f0e36-944e-4c38...@s4g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...

[John Fiorentino]

I wouldn't waste the timber.

John F.

"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message

news:fb6488e8-f077-423e...@r13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...

[Anthony Marsh]

Isn't that what Americans do? Ban books and burn the Koran?

[Anthony Marsh]

The modern Bible contains both the Old Testament and the New Testament.
But a lot of people don't even know that Jesus was Jewish. There is even
a sect called Jews for Jesus.

Most Muslims revere Jesus as a great rabbi and prophet. It's just that
they see Mohammed as the Last Prophet.

I suggest that people watch the movie The Handmaid's Tale. That is where
we are headed.

Set in a Fascistic future America, The Handmaid's Tale tells the story of
Kate, a handmaid. In this America, the religious right has taken over and
gone hog-wild. Kate is a criminal, guilty of the crime of trying to escape
from the US, and is sentenced to become a Handmaid. The job of a Handmaid
is to bear the children of the man to whom she is assigned. After ruthless
group training by Aunt Lydia in the proper way to behave, Kate is assigned
as Handmaid to the Commander. Kate is attracted to Nick, the Commander's
chauffeur. At the same time, a resistance movement begins to challenge the
regime.

[John Fiorentino]

Yeah. I'm afraid I've had much more experience with it than that.

John F.

"mainframetech" <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:d3d3a1f4-7dad-4924...@m1g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...

> > Martin Niem�ller (1892-1984

[Bud]

On Apr 15, 4:12 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
wrote:

> I wouldn't waste the timber.
>
> John F.

Thats a relief, historically that hasn`t served as much of a
deterrent to Christians.

[John McAdams]

On 15 Apr 2013 11:34:33 -0400, mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Suppose a student expressed an interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
gave the student a Koran?

Should that teacher be fired?

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 15 Apr 2013 20:26:48 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:

>On Apr 15, 4:12�pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
>wrote:
>> I wouldn't waste the timber.
>>
>> John F.
>
> Thats a relief, historically that hasn`t served as much of a
>deterrent to Christians.
>

When atheists got power in the 20th century, the carnage was way
beyond anything Christians ever achieved.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 15 Apr 2013 11:33:12 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:

>On Apr 14, 10:18锟絧m, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On 14 Apr 2013 22:10:10 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Apr 14, 3:43锟絧m, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:00:59 -0500, John McAdams
>>
>> >> >Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
>> >> >left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>>
>> >> I meant to say "suppose a radical left *teacher* expresses an interest
>> >> in Ghe Guevara."
>>
>> >> Answer that, Bud.
>>

>> > 锟絀 think that work and Hitler`s Mien Kampf would be fair game in a

>> >classroom setting if they were relevant to the subject being taught.
>>
>> But not the Bible?
>
> Maybe in the context of a philosophy class. Not in line in the
>cafeteria.
>

Why not? The student asked a question. The teacher gave him a book
that answered the question.

Have you every answered my question?

Suppose a student asked a Muslim teacher about Islam, and the teacher
gave him a Koran?

Should the teacher be fired?


>> Double standard.
>>
>> > 锟紹ut lets change it. Lets say a student is reading the Bible and a

>> >teacher says "Religion is the opiate of the people". The student inquires
>> >about the quote and the teacher hands him a book by Karl Marx. Would you
>> >be ok with this?
>>
>> The teacher has no right to say religion is the opiate of the people.
>>
>> The teacher should neither *promote* nor *disparage* religion.
>>
>> People like you don't want any agent of government to promote
>> religion, but the Constitution (according to the Supreme Court)
>> equally forbids anything that *impedes* religion coming from
>> government.
>>
>> Saying "the first shall be last and the last first" is more like
>> saying "history repeats itself . . . first as tragedy, then as farce."
>
> It took it to be more like the story of the poor woman who only gave
>a small amount to the church when the rich man gave a lot.
>

The point was that the think the teacher said had no obvious religious
content, taken out of context.

If the student wanted to know the context, it was fair to give him the
text that showed the context.

Do you think a teacher should be fired for giving a student "The
Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon?"

Or is it only religious texts you want to censor?

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

No, this case proves that Christians need protecting, since hostility
to Christianity is very much institutionalized.

It wasn't an atheist who was fired.

But note that you are *admitting* to now wanting to protect
Christians.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 15 Apr 2013 16:05:44 -0400, mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 14, 11:45�pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
>wrote:
>> Mainframetech:
>>
>> Receives an "F" in Constitutional Law 101.
>>
>> John F.
>>
> Tch, Tch, John. That's not nice. Because we disagree on the
>meaning of some of the things in the constitution doesn't show lack of
>knowledge, as is also the case with you. I'm sure you read it all the
>way through and made sure you knew all the ramifications and meanings
>of all the passages.' You simply disagree with what I learned from
>it.
>

But in fact, nothing in the Constitution prevents a teacher from
referring a student to a religious text, if answering the student's
requestion requires it.

The Founders intentions were clear. The expected Christian religious
instruction in public schools. Read the Northwest Ordinance.

Current Constitution doctrine is a mess, but the Court generally will
not discriminate against religious people or ideas.

What if the teacher said something about "history repeats itself, it
comes the first time as a tragedy and the second time as a farce?"

And suppose a student asks where that come from.

Can the teacher give the student a copy of "The Eighteenth Brumaire of
Louis Napoleon?"

If you say "yes," you are wanting the state to discriminate against a
religious text.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Bud]

On Apr 15, 6:24 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 4/15/2013 11:34 AM, mainframetech wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 14, 10:08 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> On 14 Apr 2013 15:48:09 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>
> >> <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>> On 4/14/2013 12:00 AM, John McAdams wrote:
> >>>> On 13 Apr 2013 12:40:45 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>    If he would have expressed curiosity about sex should he hand him a
> >>>>> Hustler magazine? If he is curious about Hitler hand him Mien Kampf?
> >>>>> Curious about anti-Semitism and given a copy of the Protocols of Zion?
>
> >>>> Intersting that you think those cases would be comparable.
>
> >>> One important distinction overlooked is that the Separation of State and
> >>> Religion is specified in the amendments to our US Constitution.
> >>> It is for that reason that I agreed the teacher was wrong.
>
> >> The phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the
> >> Constitution.
>
> >> And *nothing* in the Constutition was intended to abridge the free
> >> speech rights of Christians.
>
> >    "Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the
> > clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect
> > a wall of separation between church and state."

> > From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_Un...

<snicker> The crap you watch, Tony. Don`t you get "Vikings"?

[John Fiorentino]

"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:516c4d0c$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

Anthony:

No, these are not American activities.

John F.

[Bud]

On Apr 15, 8:31 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

<snicker> We atheists wouldn`t hurt a fly. Its the Christians who
have racked up the body count.

[John McAdams]

Oh, my!

You never heard of Mao, Stalin, Ho, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim Jung [Il, Un]
and so on.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Anthony Marsh]

So you think Christians are being persecuted and need protecting more
than any other religion.

> It wasn't an atheist who was fired.
>

Were there any atheists ever fired?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/15/2013 8:35 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2013 11:33:12 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>

>> On Apr 14, 10:18 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>> On 14 Apr 2013 22:10:10 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 14, 3:43 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:00:59 -0500, John McAdams
>>>
>>>>>> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
>>>>>> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>>>
>>>>> I meant to say "suppose a radical left *teacher* expresses an interest
>>>>> in Ghe Guevara."
>>>
>>>>> Answer that, Bud.
>>>

>>>> I think that work and Hitler`s Mien Kampf would be fair game in a

>>>> classroom setting if they were relevant to the subject being taught.
>>>
>>> But not the Bible?
>>
>> Maybe in the context of a philosophy class. Not in line in the
>> cafeteria.
>>
>
> Why not? The student asked a question. The teacher gave him a book
> that answered the question.
>

No need to give him a whole book just to answer one simple question.

> Have you every answered my question?
>
> Suppose a student asked a Muslim teacher about Islam, and the teacher
> gave him a Koran?
>

Is it a religion course?

> Should the teacher be fired?
>
>
>>> Double standard.
>>>

>>>> But lets change it. Lets say a student is reading the Bible and a

[John McAdams]

On 15 Apr 2013 21:23:13 -0400, Anthony Marsh

<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On 4/15/2013 8:35 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>> On 15 Apr 2013 11:33:12 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 14, 10:18 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>>> On 14 Apr 2013 22:10:10 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 14, 3:43 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:00:59 -0500, John McAdams
>>>>
>>>>>>> Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
>>>>>>> left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>>>>
>>>>>> I meant to say "suppose a radical left *teacher* expresses an interest
>>>>>> in Ghe Guevara."
>>>>
>>>>>> Answer that, Bud.
>>>>
>>>>> I think that work and Hitler`s Mien Kampf would be fair game in a
>>>>> classroom setting if they were relevant to the subject being taught.
>>>>
>>>> But not the Bible?
>>>
>>> Maybe in the context of a philosophy class. Not in line in the
>>> cafeteria.
>>>
>>
>> Why not? The student asked a question. The teacher gave him a book
>> that answered the question.
>>
>
>No need to give him a whole book just to answer one simple question.
>
>> Have you every answered my question?
>>
>> Suppose a student asked a Muslim teacher about Islam, and the teacher
>> gave him a Koran?
>>
>
>Is it a religion course?
>

No. It's a teacher of whatever, who is directly asked by the student
about Islam.

>> Should the teacher be fired?
>>
>>

Now answer my question, Tony!

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/15/2013 8:31 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2013 20:26:48 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 15, 4:12 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
>> wrote:
>>> I wouldn't waste the timber.
>>>
>>> John F.
>>
>> Thats a relief, historically that hasn`t served as much of a
>> deterrent to Christians.
>>
>
> When atheists got power in the 20th century, the carnage was way
> beyond anything Christians ever achieved.
>

What atheists where?
Are you claiming that the Nazis were atheists?

> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>

[Bud]

On Apr 15, 8:35 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2013 11:33:12 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 14, 10:18 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> On 14 Apr 2013 22:10:10 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>

> >> >On Apr 14, 3:43 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:00:59 -0500, John McAdams
>
> >> >> >Suppose a students expresses an interest in Che Guevara and a radical
> >> >> >left student gave him a copy of THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES?
>
> >> >> I meant to say "suppose a radical left *teacher* expresses an interest
> >> >> in Ghe Guevara."
>
> >> >> Answer that, Bud.
>

> >> > I think that work and Hitler`s Mien Kampf would be fair game in a

> >> >classroom setting if they were relevant to the subject being taught.
>
> >> But not the Bible?
>
> >  Maybe in the context of a philosophy class. Not in line in the
> >cafeteria.
>
> Why not?  The student asked a question.  The teacher gave him a book
> that answered the question.

And he shouldn`t have. He should have told him where to find it.

> Have you every answered my question?
>
> Suppose a student asked a Muslim teacher about Islam, and the teacher
> gave him a Koran?
>
> Should the teacher be fired?

Sure. And deported if possible.

>
> >> Double standard.
>
> >> > But lets change it. Lets say a student is reading the Bible and a

> >> >teacher says "Religion is the opiate of the people". The student inquires
> >> >about the quote and the teacher hands him a book by Karl Marx. Would you
> >> >be ok with this?
>
> >> The teacher has no right to say religion is the opiate of the people.
>
> >> The teacher should neither *promote* nor *disparage* religion.
>
> >> People like you don't want any agent of government to promote
> >> religion, but the Constitution (according to the Supreme Court)
> >> equally forbids anything that *impedes* religion coming from
> >> government.
>
> >> Saying "the first shall be last and the last first" is more like
> >> saying "history repeats itself . . . first as tragedy, then as farce."
>
> >  It took it to be more like the story of the poor woman who only gave
> >a small amount to the church when the rich man gave a lot.
>
> The point was that the think the teacher said had no obvious religious
> content, taken out of context.

Are you mocking my sloppy writing with even sloppier writing?

> If the student wanted to know the context, it was fair to give him the
> text that showed the context.

No, it`s not ok. One of the raunchiest jokes I ever heard had the
punchline "Thats right, your brother has the car" (ask one of the priests,
they`ve probably heard it). Sometimes in certain situations me or my
co-worker (who told me the joke) would say this line. If someone not in on
the joke heard it, it would be innocuous. It would be inappropriate to
explain it in some situations or to some people. You just have to know the
line.

> Do you think a teacher should be fired for giving a student "The
> Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon?"

Do teachers give out books? I thought they taught out of them.

> Or is it only religious texts you want to censor?

No. Conspiracy books, too.

> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 15 Apr 2013 21:26:48 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:

>On Apr 15, 8:35锟絧m, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On 15 Apr 2013 11:33:12 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>

>> Why not? 锟絋he student asked a question. 锟絋he teacher gave him a book

>> that answered the question.
>
> And he shouldn`t have. He should have told him where to find it.
>
>> Have you every answered my question?
>>
>> Suppose a student asked a Muslim teacher about Islam, and the teacher
>> gave him a Koran?
>>
>> Should the teacher be fired?
>
> Sure. And deported if possible.
>

I don't think you believe that. The "deported" comment shows you are
being sarcastic.

And you are using that to avoid giving a sincere answer about the
Muslim teacher, whom you clearly would not want fired.

>>
>> >> Double standard.
>>
>> >> > But lets change it. Lets say a student is reading the Bible and a
>> >> >teacher says "Religion is the opiate of the people". The student inquires
>> >> >about the quote and the teacher hands him a book by Karl Marx. Would you
>> >> >be ok with this?
>>
>> >> The teacher has no right to say religion is the opiate of the people.
>>
>> >> The teacher should neither *promote* nor *disparage* religion.
>>
>> >> People like you don't want any agent of government to promote
>> >> religion, but the Constitution (according to the Supreme Court)
>> >> equally forbids anything that *impedes* religion coming from
>> >> government.
>>
>> >> Saying "the first shall be last and the last first" is more like
>> >> saying "history repeats itself . . . first as tragedy, then as farce."
>>

>> > 锟絀t took it to be more like the story of the poor woman who only gave

>> >a small amount to the church when the rich man gave a lot.
>>
>> The point was that the think the teacher said had no obvious religious
>> content, taken out of context.
>
> Are you mocking my sloppy writing with even sloppier writing?
>
>> If the student wanted to know the context, it was fair to give him the
>> text that showed the context.
>
> No, it`s not ok. One of the raunchiest jokes I ever heard had the
>punchline "Thats right, your brother has the car" (ask one of the priests,
>they`ve probably heard it). Sometimes in certain situations me or my
>co-worker (who told me the joke) would say this line. If someone not in on
>the joke heard it, it would be innocuous. It would be inappropriate to
>explain it in some situations or to some people. You just have to know the
>line.

In the first place, in certain company, you doubtless *would* tell the
whole story.

But the Bible gift would be more like "The Eighteenth Brumaire of
Louis Napoleon." Some people would not like it, but it's of
considerable historical importance.

>
>> Do you think a teacher should be fired for giving a student "The
>> Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon?"
>
> Do teachers give out books? I thought they taught out of them.
>

Sashay(tm)!!

Give me an honest answer.

We all know what the answer is. You have no grudge against Muslims,
nor against Marx. It's just Christians you don't like.

>> Or is it only religious texts you want to censor?
>
> No. Conspiracy books, too.
>

See? You are evading giving me an honest answer.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Bud]

On Apr 15, 8:37 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

The idea is to prevent Christianity from being institutionalized.

> It wasn't an atheist who was fired.

How long would a janitor evangelizing atheism to the students at
Marquette last?

> But note that you are *admitting* to now wanting to protect
> Christians.

You should read it again...

"You can show more reason to be protected from religion than reasons
that religion needs protecting."

The need for people to be protected from religion is greater than
the need for religion to be protected. Which will probably be shown
once more when the Boston Marathon bombers are identified.

> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 15 Apr 2013 21:34:52 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:

>On Apr 15, 8:37�pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On 15 Apr 2013 11:32:58 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> >> The teacher has rights also.
>>
>> >> > How are they infringed if he is prevented from handing out Bibles?
>>
>> >> You can't defend one person's right to violate the Constitution.
>>
>> > �You can show more reason to be protected from religion than reasons
>> >that religion needs protecting.
>>
>> No, this case proves that Christians need protecting, since hostility
>> to Christianity is very much institutionalized.
>
> The idea is to prevent Christianity from being institutionalized.
>

Is Marxism being institutionalized if a leftist teacher gives a
student a copy of "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon?"

Is Islam being institutionalized if a curious student asks about
Islam, and a Muslim teacher gives him a Koran?

>> It wasn't an atheist who was fired.
>
> How long would a janitor evangelizing atheism to the students at
>Marquette last?
>

Probably indefinitely.

But I can't imagine a janitor doing that. It's half-baked
intellectuals who would do that.

>> But note that you are *admitting* to now wanting to protect
>> Christians.
>
> You should read it again...
>
> "You can show more reason to be protected from religion than reasons
>that religion needs protecting."
>

No, you can't. In this case, the Christian was persecuted.

That's extremely common in academia, as even an atheist (who also
believe in free speech)admits.

http://www.amazon.com/Unlearning-Liberty-Campus-Censorship-American/dp/1594036357

> The need for people to be protected from religion is greater than
>the need for religion to be protected. Which will probably be shown
>once more when the Boston Marathon bombers are identified.
>

OIC. You are assuming that they bombers are Muslim.

Even if that's true, it doesn't justify discriminating against
Christians, nor against Muslims who are not involved in terrorist
acts.

You are just showing a diffuse antipathy toward religion, and trying
to use it to persecute a Christian high school teacher.

Remember: Kim Jung Un is an atheist. A *lot* of people need to be
protected against him.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Anthony Marsh]

But these are things that happen in the US.

> John F.
>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/15/2013 8:43 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2013 16:05:44 -0400, mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 14, 11:45 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
>> wrote:
>>> Mainframetech:
>>>
>>> Receives an "F" in Constitutional Law 101.
>>>
>>> John F.
>>>
>> Tch, Tch, John. That's not nice. Because we disagree on the
>> meaning of some of the things in the constitution doesn't show lack of
>> knowledge, as is also the case with you. I'm sure you read it all the
>> way through and made sure you knew all the ramifications and meanings
>> of all the passages.' You simply disagree with what I learned from
>> it.
>>
>
> But in fact, nothing in the Constitution prevents a teacher from
> referring a student to a religious text, if answering the student's
> requestion requires it.
>
> The Founders intentions were clear. The expected Christian religious
> instruction in public schools. Read the Northwest Ordinance.
>

Allow and mandate are two different things.

[Anthony Marsh]

He's not brave enough to tell you, but he's comparing Stalin's
atrocities to Hitler's. He'll never address the Inquisition.

[Bud]

On Apr 15, 9:22 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

> On 15 Apr 2013 21:19:51 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 15, 8:31 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> On 15 Apr 2013 20:26:48 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >> >On Apr 15, 4:12 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net>
> >> >wrote:
> >> >> I wouldn't waste the timber.
>
> >> >> John F.
>
> >> > Thats a relief, historically that hasn`t served as much of a
> >> >deterrent to Christians.
>
> >> When atheists got power in the 20th century, the carnage was way
> >> beyond anything Christians ever achieved.
>
> >> .John
> >> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>
> >  <snicker> We atheists wouldn`t hurt a fly. Its the Christians who
> >have racked up the body count.
>
> Oh, my!
>
> You never heard of Mao, Stalin, Ho, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim Jung [Il, Un]
> and so on.

The killing of those guys were not largely fueled by anti-religious
fervor. Mostly political. A religious man can kill for political reasons
as well as a non-religious man.

[John McAdams]

On 15 Apr 2013 21:48:00 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:

>On Apr 15, 9:22�pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On 15 Apr 2013 21:19:51 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >> > Thats a relief, historically that hasn`t served as much of a
>> >> >deterrent to Christians.
>>
>> >> When atheists got power in the 20th century, the carnage was way
>> >> beyond anything Christians ever achieved.
>>
>>

>> > �<snicker> We atheists wouldn`t hurt a fly. Its the Christians who

>> >have racked up the body count.
>>
>> Oh, my!
>>
>> You never heard of Mao, Stalin, Ho, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim Jung [Il, Un]
>> and so on.
>
> The killing of those guys were not largely fueled by anti-religious
>fervor. Mostly political. A religious man can kill for political reasons
>as well as a non-religious man.

Anti-religious fervor is an integral part of Marxism. Marx himself
was quite insistent on that.

And if "A religious man can kill for political reasons as well as a
non-religious man" you might ought to admit that a lot of the killing
you blame on religion was in fact political -- with religion being
merely window-dressing.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/15/2013 9:51 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2013 21:48:00 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 15, 9:22 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>> On 15 Apr 2013 21:19:51 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Thats a relief, historically that hasn`t served as much of a
>>>>>> deterrent to Christians.
>>>
>>>>> When atheists got power in the 20th century, the carnage was way
>>>>> beyond anything Christians ever achieved.
>>>
>>>
>>>> <snicker> We atheists wouldn`t hurt a fly. Its the Christians who
>>>> have racked up the body count.
>>>
>>> Oh, my!
>>>
>>> You never heard of Mao, Stalin, Ho, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim Jung [Il, Un]
>>> and so on.
>>
>> The killing of those guys were not largely fueled by anti-religious
>> fervor. Mostly political. A religious man can kill for political reasons
>> as well as a non-religious man.
>
> Anti-religious fervor is an integral part of Marxism. Marx himself
> was quite insistent on that.

Oh yeah. Wasn't Marx Jewish? And didn't he once study to be a rabbi?

>
> And if "A religious man can kill for political reasons as well as a
> non-religious man" you might ought to admit that a lot of the killing
> you blame on religion was in fact political -- with religion being
> merely window-dressing.
>

When one religious sect gains the upper hand politically it uses that
power to oppress the other side, like the Catholics and the Protestants
or the Sunni and Shia.

> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>

[Anthony Marsh]

All of whom were originally supported by the US when we wanted to use them.

> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>

[John Fiorentino]

"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:516ca652$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

Exactly! Like banning the Bible!

John F.

[Bud]

On Apr 15, 9:51 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

> On 15 Apr 2013 21:48:00 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 15, 9:22 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> On 15 Apr 2013 21:19:51 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> > Thats a relief, historically that hasn`t served as much of a
> >> >> >deterrent to Christians.
>
> >> >> When atheists got power in the 20th century, the carnage was way
> >> >> beyond anything Christians ever achieved.
>
> >> >  <snicker> We atheists wouldn`t hurt a fly. Its the Christians who
> >> >have racked up the body count.
>
> >> Oh, my!
>
> >> You never heard of Mao, Stalin, Ho, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim Jung [Il, Un]
> >> and so on.
>
> >  The killing of those guys were not largely fueled by anti-religious
> >fervor. Mostly political. A religious man can kill for political reasons
> >as well as a non-religious man.
>
> Anti-religious fervor is an integral part of Marxism.

But not the driving force. Atheists do not rise up and start killing
people because of what they believe. Hardly a minute goes by that
somewhere in the world a religious fanatic isn`t killing someone with
religion being the reason.

>  Marx himself
> was quite insistent on that.
>
> And if "A religious man can kill for political reasons as well as a
> non-religious man" you might ought to admit that a lot of the killing
> you blame on religion was in fact political -- with religion being
> merely window-dressing.

Thats why you should never trust anyone who says they are doing
something for religious reasons.

> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[mainframetech]

On Apr 15, 8:28 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2013 11:34:33 -0400, mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 14, 10:09 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> On 14 Apr 2013 22:00:25 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> Yes sir folks, don't ever give anyone an "illicit" Bible!
>
> >> >> Just tell em to "Google It"
>
> >> >  Whats wrong with telling a student where to find information and
> >> >have him look it up on his own?
>
> >> Nothing.  But what is wrong with just giving him a bible?
>
> >   Everything.  It's not a class in comparative religion, where all
> >religions are talked about, but a representative of the government
> >giving out a Christian Bible.  The implication is the problem.  The
> >perception that the government supports that particular religion and
> >its beliefs.
>
> Suppose a student expressed an interest in Islam, and a Muslim teacher
> gave the student a Koran?
>
> Should that teacher be fired?
>
What's the difference to the case with the Christian bible?
Doesn't look like any difference to me. I'm not Islamophobic like
many people have been manipulated into being.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Apr 15, 8:43 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2013 16:05:44 -0400, mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com>

The John I spoke to earlier was John F.

In today's world (not 1776 when Christianity was so heavily
represented)) saying something like the passage used in the example
doesn't carry as much weight as having a bible available and readily
giving it out to a student to keep. That the teacher keeps a bible
handy for giving out allows for interpreting it as being ready to fill
little minds with Christianity and their view of the world, sin, etc.
Doesn't matter if the teacher had no such intent, the perception is
such that it could give the impression of government supporting
Christianity. Much better to take the suggestion from earlier to go
and Google it, since that could be an answer in any religion or case.

Chris

[mainframetech]

Atheists are fired and discriminated against often. The Christians
are a pretty tight group and will get on anyone that doesn't see eye
to eye with them, especially in bible belt states. Look at the
effort to kill abortion doctors and close abortion clinics. Not that
those people are atheist, but it shows the consolidation of feeling
and action that is possible.

Look into the military training these days for officers, and you'll
find heavy Christian beliefs used in training:
http://tinyurl.com/c2cxnvv

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Apr 15, 9:45 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

> On 15 Apr 2013 21:34:52 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 15, 8:37 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >> On 15 Apr 2013 11:32:58 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> The teacher has rights also.
>
> >> >> > How are they infringed if he is prevented from handing out Bibles?
>
> >> >> You can't defend one person's right to violate the Constitution.
>
> >> > You can show more reason to be protected from religion than reasons
> >> >that religion needs protecting.
>
> >> No, this case proves that Christians need protecting, since hostility
> >> to Christianity is very much institutionalized.
>
> >  The idea is to prevent Christianity from being institutionalized.
>
> Is Marxism being institutionalized if a leftist teacher gives a
> student a copy of "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon?"
>
> Is Islam being institutionalized if a curious student asks about
> Islam, and a Muslim teacher gives him a Koran?
>
> >> It wasn't an atheist who was fired.
>
> >  How long would a janitor evangelizing atheism to the students at
> >Marquette last?
>
> Probably indefinitely.
>

Would Marquette hire a non-Catholic janitor?

> But I can't imagine a janitor doing that.  It's half-baked
> intellectuals who would do that.
>
> >> But note that you are *admitting* to now wanting to protect
> >> Christians.
>
> >  You should read it again...
>
> >  "You can show more reason to be protected from religion than reasons
> >that religion needs protecting."
>
> No, you can't.  In this case, the Christian was persecuted.
>

No, the Christian was' dealt with'.

> That's extremely common in academia, as even an atheist (who also
> believe in free speech)admits.
>

> http://www.amazon.com/Unlearning-Liberty-Campus-Censorship-American/d...

>
> >  The need for people to be protected from religion is greater than
> >the need for religion to be protected. Which will probably be shown
> >once more when the Boston Marathon bombers are identified.
>
> OIC.  You are assuming that they bombers are Muslim.
>
> Even if that's true, it doesn't justify discriminating against
> Christians, nor against Muslims who are not involved in terrorist
> acts.
>
> You are just showing a diffuse antipathy toward religion, and trying
> to use it to persecute a Christian high school teacher.
>
> Remember:  Kim Jung Un is an atheist.  A *lot* of people need to be
> protected against him.
>

The Vatican is catholic, but the children of the world need
protection from them.

American laws, need protection from becoming Christian-only law,
since we are a country where ALL religions are accepted and sheltered.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Apr 15, 9:51 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:

While the reasons were political, the motivation often was religious.
Where it can be used to manipulate a crowd, religion is always
considered by politicians. Some of today's issues are argued in the
religious vein, but are political and personal for the politicians.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/15/2013 9:45 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 15 Apr 2013 21:34:52 -0400, Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 15, 8:37 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>> On 15 Apr 2013 11:32:58 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> The teacher has rights also.
>>>
>>>>>> How are they infringed if he is prevented from handing out Bibles?
>>>
>>>>> You can't defend one person's right to violate the Constitution.
>>>
>>>> You can show more reason to be protected from religion than reasons
>>>> that religion needs protecting.
>>>
>>> No, this case proves that Christians need protecting, since hostility
>>> to Christianity is very much institutionalized.
>>
>> The idea is to prevent Christianity from being institutionalized.
>>
>
> Is Marxism being institutionalized if a leftist teacher gives a
> student a copy of "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon?"
>
> Is Islam being institutionalized if a curious student asks about
> Islam, and a Muslim teacher gives him a Koran?
>

"Institutionalized" is a red herring. More like endorsing.
n>

[Anthony Marsh]

Can you show me any cases? Was Oswald fired because he was an atheist?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 4/16/2013 12:13 PM, Bud wrote:
> On Apr 15, 9:51 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On 15 Apr 2013 21:48:00 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 15, 9:22 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>>>> On 15 Apr 2013 21:19:51 -0400, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Thats a relief, historically that hasn`t served as much of a
>>>>>>> deterrent to Christians.
>>
>>>>>> When atheists got power in the 20th century, the carnage was way
>>>>>> beyond anything Christians ever achieved.
>>
>>>>> <snicker> We atheists wouldn`t hurt a fly. Its the Christians who
>>>>> have racked up the body count.
>>
>>>> Oh, my!
>>
>>>> You never heard of Mao, Stalin, Ho, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim Jung [Il, Un]
>>>> and so on.
>>
>>> The killing of those guys were not largely fueled by anti-religious
>>> fervor. Mostly political. A religious man can kill for political reasons
>>> as well as a non-religious man.
>>
>> Anti-religious fervor is an integral part of Marxism.
>
> But not the driving force. Atheists do not rise up and start killing
> people because of what they believe. Hardly a minute goes by that
> somewhere in the world a religious fanatic isn`t killing someone with
> religion being the reason.
>

What is the most famous case of an atheist killing someone for religious
reasons?

>> Marx himself
>> was quite insistent on that.
>>
>> And if "A religious man can kill for political reasons as well as a
>> non-religious man" you might ought to admit that a lot of the killing
>> you blame on religion was in fact political -- with religion being
>> merely window-dressing.
>
> Thats why you should never trust anyone who says they are doing
> something for religious reasons.
>

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a
fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a
few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men
to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a
sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man
I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in
His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of
vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the
Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I
recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this
that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no
duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter
for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could
demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily
grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed.
The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp.
19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)

Hitler's anti-Semitism grew out of his Christian education. Christian
Austria and Germany in his time took for granted the belief that Jews
held an inferior status to Aryan Christians. Jewish hatred did not
spring from Hitler, it came from the preaching of Catholic priests and
Protestant ministers throughout Germany for hundreds of years. The
Protestant leader, Martin Luther, himself, held a livid hatred for Jews
and their Jewish religion. In his book, "On the Jews and their Lies,"
Luther set the standard for Jewish hatred in Protestant Germany up until
World War II. Hitler expressed a great admiration for Martin Luther.

Hitler did not have to parade his belief in God, as so many American
Christians do now. Nor did he have to justify his Godly belief against
an Atheist movement. He took his beliefs for granted just as most
Germans did at that time. His thrust aimed at politics, not religion.
But through his political and religious reasoning he established in
1933, a German Reich Christian Church, uniting the Protestant churches
to instill faith in a national German Christianity.

He justified his fight for the German people and against Jews by using
Godly and Biblical reasoning. Indeed, one of his most revealing
statements makes this quite clear:

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will
of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am
fighting for the work of the Lord."

>> .John
>> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>
>

[John Fiorentino]

Something to think about................

"If religious exercises are held to be an impermissible activity in
schools, religion is placed in an artificial and state-created
disadvantage.... And a refusal to permit religious exercises thus is seen,
not as the realization of state neutrality, but rather as the
establishment of a religion of secularism, or at least, as governmental
support of the beliefs of those who think that religious exercises should
be conducted only in private."

Potter Stewart - Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. In
office October 14, 1958 - July 3, 1981

John F.





"John Fiorentino" <jefior...@optimum.net> wrote in message
news:516867be$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

> From our own sad State of NJ....................
>
> Not only has this police State suspended the Second Amendment, we now seem
> to be intent on excising the First Amendment!
>
> Teacher says he was fired for giving inquisitive student a Bible
>
> A substitute teacher in Phillipsburg, N.J., who was sacked for giving a
> student a Bible filed a complaint this week with the Equal Employment
> Opportunity Commission.
>
> In his complaint against the Phillipsburg School District, the teacher,
> Walt Tutka, claims religious discrimination as well as retaliation,
> reports The Warren Reporter.
>
> Tutka says his persecution began on Oct. 12, a day when he was working as
> a substitute in the Phillipsburg School District.
>
> He alleges that he quipped to a student who happened to be standing last
> in a line: "The first shall be the last, and the last shall be the first."
>

> The line is a reference to a verse seen a handful of different times in
> the canonical Gospels (e.g., Matthew 19:30 and Mark 10:31).
>

> The complaint goes on to say that the unidentified student "repeatedly"
> inquired about the source of Tutka's profound remark. Tutka told him it
> came from the Bible and also asked the student if he owned a Bible.
>
> When the student said he did not, Tutka says he gave the student a
> pocket-sized Bible he was carrying, reads the complaint.
>

> On Oct. 18, the complaint continues, Superintendent George Chando informed
> Tutka that he was recommending the teacher's termination over the illicit
> Bible conveyance.
>
> Tutka asserts that he was actually fired on Jan. 14.
>
> "I believe that I have been discriminated against in violation of Title
> VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New Jersey Law Against
> Discrimination and retaliated against regarding same," Tutka's complaint
> reads, according to The Express-Times.
>
> The Texas-based Liberty Institute, a conservative Christian legal defense
> organization, is representing Tutka, along with an unnamed New Jersey law
> firm.
>
> "It is shocking that the school district has forced Walt to file a
> complaint with the EEOC for religious discrimination," Hiram Sasser,
> director of litigation for Liberty Institute," told The Warren Reporter.
> "All Walt did was respond to a student's intellectual curiosity and the
> school district suspended and then terminated him."
>

> The nonprofit advocacy group claims that the Phillipsburg School District
> has also failed to respond to an open-records request for emails and
> documents related to Tutka's employment.
>
> The Phillipsburg School District has been tight-lipped. Superintendent
> Chando told The Warren Reporter that he is "unable to comment at this
> time."
>
> John F.

[Anthony Marsh]

It was Massachusetts which banned Christmas.