The Decline and Fall of Religious Freedom in America

[Shmaryahu b. Chanoch]

From Mosaic Magazine


http://mosaicmagazine.com/essay/2015/08/the-decline-and-fall-of-religious-freedom-in-america/

The RFRA debates and the anti circumcising movement are going to effect Jews even more than Christians.

[Shelly]

Can never happen in the US. It is a black and white case that the
SCOTUS will take less than ten minutes to rule on and overturn any such law.

--
Shelly

[topazgalaxy]

This philosophical issue -- religious freedom vs other laws in the USA (such as gay marriage, contraception, issues of equality etc) will keep coming up over and over again IMO in our country and around the world.

There are various groups , often conservative Christian, which are legally fighting for religious freedom from their point of view. Here are 2 links from one such organization-- check out the video in the middle of the top link

http://www.adflegal.org/detailspages/case-details/state-of-washington-v.-arlene-s-flowers-inc.-and-barronelle-stutzman

I think it is ridiculous that someone who has been a florist for 30 years should be threatened with losing her business, and more, just because she refuses to serve one customer based on her religious beliefs. There has or had to be a happy compromise for both sides.

http://www.adflegal.org/issues/religious-freedom

[Beach Runner]

I disagree. We don't face a danger of anti-religious directions.

The first amendment is freedom of religion and freedom from religion.

There is a real movement and actions to make America an official
Christian nation. Polls show that most people believe America is officially
a Christian nation.

There are many places where they have Christian prayers and activities.

Even today, I play in a community based orchestra, and during the
holiday season they had a Christmas Concert. I took an unpopular, unwavering position by insisting a community organization can't have a Christmas Concert but must be a Holiday concert.

I'm sure some saw me as a pushy Jew, but they modified their fliers and
even included a collection of Hanukkah songs. They said they were for me,
but that's not right.

I will tell you this is the second community orchestra, I'm in liberal
California, but the same thing happened on the Space Coast of Florida.

The early Pilgrims extended no freedom of religion. That was common
throughout all New England. What were witch trials but killing people
they susupected of being pagans and not Christians.

In yesterday's Washington Post there was a Football coach that did Christian
prayers after his game. His argument that they were his prayers, and not official activities, but players saw him as a role model and other's joined in.

Many government and official meetings start with a prayer.

We put a motto "In God We Trust" on our money, swear on bibles in courts,
we have no freedom from religion permeating into our lives. Children are
basically forced, or socially forced to add "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance.

And there is a huge evangelical movement that wants to make the unoffical
Christian nation an official Christian nation. That's a real danger.

The Freedom of religion should be for anyone, Jewish, Hindu, Pagan or Atheist to worship or not worship as they believe. There should be complete
separation between government and religion. The government should not be
endorsing a religious believe, "In God We Trust". Who's G-d?
It happens in the military, prayers are everywhere.

We should be fighting against the use of any kinds of religion as part of our government and laws.

The step won't be more freedom to be Jews, but a push of Christianity down our throats, and religion down people that do not believe.

Nothing should stop Jewish people from being Jews in their own lives. This freedom is in danger.

[Shelly]

On 10/21/2015 9:18 AM, Beach Runner wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 2:27:29 PM UTC-7, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:
>> On 10/20/2015 4:58 PM, Shmaryahu b. Chanoch wrote:
>>> From Mosaic Magazine
>>>
>>>
>>> http://mosaicmagazine.com/essay/2015/08/the-decline-and-fall-of-religious-freedom-in-america/
>>>
>>> The RFRA debates and the anti circumcising movement are going to effect Jews even more than Christians.
>>
>> Can never happen in the US. It is a black and white case that the
>> SCOTUS will take less than ten minutes to rule on and overturn any such law.
>>
>> --
>> Shelly
>
> I disagree. We don't face a danger of anti-religious directions.

I agree. So, with what do you disagree? My statement was about the
anti-circs. That would be overruled in a heartbeat.

>
> The first amendment is freedom of religion and freedom from religion.

I fully agree.

>
> There is a real movement and actions to make America an official
> Christian nation.

Yes, there is, and ii is a real danger.

> Polls show that most people believe America is officially
> a Christian nation.

Fortunately there is the Bill of Rights and SCOTUS.

>
> There are many places where they have Christian prayers and activities.

Yes.

> Even today, I play in a community based orchestra, and during the
> holiday season they had a Christmas Concert. I took an unpopular, unwavering position by insisting a community organization can't have a Christmas Concert but must be a Holiday concert.

Is it taxpayer funded? Is it rent-free on public property? "Community"
is too broad a term. My daughter performs in "Community Theater". The
government has nothing to do with it. It is all on ticket sales and
contributions. So, my questions make a big difference.

> I'm sure some saw me as a pushy Jew, but they modified their fliers and
> even included a collection of Hanukkah songs. They said they were for me,
> but that's not right.

What is not right about it?

>
> I will tell you this is the second community orchestra, I'm in liberal
> California, but the same thing happened on the Space Coast of Florida.

...and? My questions still apply.

>
> The early Pilgrims extended no freedom of religion. That was common
> throughout all New England. What were witch trials but killing people
> they susupected of being pagans and not Christians.

Agree.

> In yesterday's Washington Post there was a Football coach that did Christian
> prayers after his game. His argument that they were his prayers, and not official activities, but players saw him as a role model and other's joined in.

Was it a public school? There is nothing wrong, IMO, with students
getting together and praying after a game. The coach should not be the
one to organize it unless it is a religious school.

>
> Many government and official meetings start with a prayer.

I believe they are non-sectarian. That is less offensive to me.

> We put a motto "In God We Trust" on our money, swear on bibles in courts,

It has historically been there, but it shouldn't be. As for court, you
can refuse to do that and take an oath on the civil code, for example.

> we have no freedom from religion permeating into our lives. Children are
> basically forced, or socially forced to add "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance.

Blame Eisenhower. To this day I remain silent when it gets to that
simply because I believe it has no place in a pledge to the government.

> And there is a huge evangelical movement that wants to make the unoffical
> Christian nation an official Christian nation. That's a real danger.

Yes it is.

> The Freedom of religion should be for anyone, Jewish, Hindu, Pagan or Atheist to worship or not worship as they believe. There should be complete
> separation between government and religion. The government should not be
> endorsing a religious believe, "In God We Trust". Who's G-d?
> It happens in the military, prayers are everywhere.

We agree.

> We should be fighting against the use of any kinds of religion as part of our government and laws.

We need to continue.

> The step won't be more freedom to be Jews, but a push of Christianity down our throats, and religion down people that do not believe.

We agree.

> Nothing should stop Jewish people from being Jews in their own lives. This freedom is in danger.

It is, but not from the anti-circumcision group in the US. They don't
have a leg to stand on. There is far greater danger from the
anti-choicers and the Creationists.

--
Shelly

[Yisroel Markov]

The likelyhood of an anti-circ law making it all the way to the SC and
being sustained is indeed very low right now, albeit higher than the
likelyhood of the USA being declared a Christian nation. But "can
never happen" is too optimistic, IMHO. All it would take is a shift in
public perception and a new emphasis on the minors' rights.
--
Yisroel "Godwrestler Warriorson" Markov - Boston, MA Member
www.reason.com -- for a sober analysis of the world DNRC
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Judge, and be prepared to be judged" -- Ayn Rand

[mm]

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 13:18:31 +0000 (UTC), Beach Runner
<lowh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 2:27:29 PM UTC-7, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:
>> On 10/20/2015 4:58 PM, Shmaryahu b. Chanoch wrote:
>> > From Mosaic Magazine
>> >
>> >
>> > http://mosaicmagazine.com/essay/2015/08/the-decline-and-fall-of-religious-freedom-in-america/
>> >
>> > The RFRA debates and the anti circumcising movement are going to effect Jews even more than Christians.
>>
>> Can never happen in the US. It is a black and white case that the
>> SCOTUS will take less than ten minutes to rule on and overturn any such law.
>>
>> --
>> Shelly
>
>I disagree. We don't face a danger of anti-religious directions.
>
>The first amendment is freedom of religion and freedom from religion.
>
>There is a real movement and actions to make America an official
>Christian nation. Polls show that most people believe America is officially
>a Christian nation.

And others want to return it to being that way.

>
>There are many places where they have Christian prayers and activities.

In Carroll County, just to the west of Baltimore County, where my
ex-girlfriend now lives, the county council would open every meeting
with a prayer led by a local clergyman. In the last 3 or maybe 5
years, it's always been a Xian clergyman, but they said that wasn't
on purpose. Someone, not a Jew iirc, took them to court and lost,
maybe at both levels but certainly at the appeals court.

There's only one shul in the county, which iiuc barely meets and is
at the far end of the county from the county seat. Otoh, Baltimore
County is right on the other side of the reservoir and it's pluck full
of rabbis. You can't throw a stick without near hittin one. There
is also a Jewish cemetery in Carroll County, but that doesn't seem to
help.

My friend is the only Jew on her street, the only single woman, and
the only one who doesn't wear camouflage or drive a pick-up truck.
(Well, the men do the camouflage) Since it's only about 5 miles from
where she used to live, she was surprised at the last 2 differences.

The mother or father of the kids drive them to the school bus stop and
wait until the school bus comes. Then they meet the bus in the
afternoon. And this is true even though the afternoons are warm, and
even when the mornings were also. One kid is about 10 and would have
to walk an eighth of a mile to his house. The other kid is about 7
and would have to walk about 200 feet. He does play outside however.

>
>Even today, I play in a community based orchestra, and during the
>holiday season they had a Christmas Concert. I took an unpopular, unwavering position by insisting a community organization can't have a Christmas Concert but must be a Holiday concert.
>
>I'm sure some saw me as a pushy Jew, but they modified their fliers and
>even included a collection of Hanukkah songs. They said they were for me,
>but that's not right.

Right. They don't get it.

>
>I will tell you this is the second community orchestra, I'm in liberal
>California, but the same thing happened on the Space Coast of Florida.
>
>The early Pilgrims extended no freedom of religion. That was common
>throughout all New England. What were witch trials but killing people
>they susupected of being pagans and not Christians.

They used to (still do?) teach about Roger Williams precisely to make
the point to little children about religious freedom. They didnt'
make such a point about not estabishing a religion, and indeed, we
were in my first school district, expected to recite "the Lord's
Prayer" every morning. Plus they added "under God" to the pledge of
allegiance when I was in the 4th grade. I didn't like that because
I'm a true conservative and I don't like change. I didn't see the
First Amendment ramifications at the time.

"The Lord's Prayer" has an interesting history


This is about other religious riots and trouble in the US.
http://candst.tripod.com/boston3.htm
Despite the word boston above, it's about Philadelphia.
http://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/archive/nativist-riots-of-1844/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_nativist_riots


"The Lord's Prayer", unlike the song "Amazing Grace" has afaict
clearly un-Jewish meaning, though Xians probably take some lines
differently from what Judaism would teach. BUT, it comes straight
from the Xian Bible, so for that reason alone it shouldn't be used in
a public school.


BTW, in the last few weeks, google.com has a new policy. If you
search on 3 or 4 terms instead of listing hits with all of them first,
it will skip one term and find hits that don't have it, and at the end
of each summary like that, show the word with a horizontal line
through it.

For example, google riots prayer king of prussia and the first 3
have riots crossed out. But the 5th, 7th, 8th, and 12th at least
have all the search terms right in the summary. Other hits may have
all the terms on the page.

When I searched on pennsylvania riots prayer prussia have
prussia crossed out. I'm not sure any later hits had all 4 words, but
none showed a word crossed out.

(King of Prussia was the town in Pa. where the Lord's Prayer Riots
occurred.)

[malcolm...@btinternet.com]

On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 8:08:01 AM UTC+1, googy wrote:
>
> "The Lord's Prayer", unlike the song "Amazing Grace" has afaict
> clearly un-Jewish meaning, though Xians probably take some lines
> differently from what Judaism would teach. BUT, it comes straight
> from the Xian Bible, so for that reason alone it shouldn't be used in
> a public school.
>

I'm going to start up my own religion. I'll worship Euclid.

So now Eclid's Elements have become a religious text. Does it
follow that the book and adaptations or derivations of it can
now no longer be used in American public schools?

[cindys]

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 4:53:52 PM UTC-4, Shmaryahu b. Chanoch wrote:

-----
I'm not really sure why you keep posting "the sky is falling" posts regarding the anti-circ movement in the USA, but between 2010 and 2011, you initiated at least 5 or 6 different threads about Lloyd Scholfield and the gays and anti-circ proposals in San Francisco. At that time, Shelly responded to your post exactly the same way he responded to your post in this round of the same repetitive nonsense, i.e., that we have laws in the USA which guarantee religious freedom, and an anti-circ measure would never stand up to any kind of a legal challenge. Such a law would certainly be declared Unconstitutional almost immediately.

So, the answer is that NOBODY in the USA, Jews or Christians, are going to be impacted. Please re-read the threads you initiated in 2010 and 2011 on this subject so that we don't need to re-invent the wheel.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

[Shelly]

What an asinine comment!

--
Shelly

[Yisroel Markov]

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 13:18:31 +0000 (UTC), Beach Runner

<lowh...@gmail.com> said:

>On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 2:27:29 PM UTC-7, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:
>> On 10/20/2015 4:58 PM, Shmaryahu b. Chanoch wrote:
>> > From Mosaic Magazine
>> >
>> >
>> > http://mosaicmagazine.com/essay/2015/08/the-decline-and-fall-of-religious-freedom-in-america/
>> >
>> > The RFRA debates and the anti circumcising movement are going to effect Jews even more than Christians.
>>
>> Can never happen in the US. It is a black and white case that the
>> SCOTUS will take less than ten minutes to rule on and overturn any such law.
>>
>> --
>> Shelly
>
>I disagree. We don't face a danger of anti-religious directions.
>
>The first amendment is freedom of religion and freedom from religion.
>
>There is a real movement and actions to make America an official
>Christian nation. Polls show that most people believe America is officially
>a Christian nation.

I couldn't find such a poll. The closest was a Newseum Institute
annual survey which found 51% believing that "the U.S. Constitution
establishes a Christian nation" - which equates neither to "America is
a Christian nation now" nor to "it should be a Christian nation."

http://www.newseuminstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/FAC_SOFA15_report.pdf

>There are many places where they have Christian prayers and activities.
>
>Even today, I play in a community based orchestra, and during the
>holiday season they had a Christmas Concert. I took an unpopular, unwavering position by insisting a community organization can't have a Christmas Concert but must be a Holiday concert.
>
>I'm sure some saw me as a pushy Jew,

[nod] You said it.

>but they modified their fliers and
>even included a collection of Hanukkah songs. They said they were for me,
>but that's not right.

So they tried to accomodate you and still you were unhappy?

[snip]

>Many government and official meetings start with a prayer.
>
>We put a motto "In God We Trust" on our money, swear on bibles in courts,
>we have no freedom from religion permeating into our lives. Children are
>basically forced, or socially forced to add "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance.

I don't see any of that as impacting freedom from religion in any
meaningful way.

>And there is a huge evangelical movement that wants to make the unoffical
>Christian nation an official Christian nation. That's a real danger.

How far have they gotten in the past fifty years? AISI, Christianity
is very much on the defensive nationwide. And polls show young
evangelicals to be a lot more tolerant than their parents.
http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/02/2014-lgbt-survey/#.Vio2_X6rSCh

>The Freedom of religion should be for anyone, Jewish, Hindu, Pagan or Atheist to worship or not worship as they believe. There should be complete
>separation between government and religion. The government should not be
>endorsing a religious believe, "In God We Trust". Who's G-d?

For those purposes, whoever you think He is, of course.

>It happens in the military, prayers are everywhere.
>
>We should be fighting against the use of any kinds of religion as part of our government and laws.
>
>The step won't be more freedom to be Jews, but a push of Christianity down our throats, and religion down people that do not believe.

We seem to be living in different countries. Then again, there are
sociologists that subdivide the USA, culturally, into anywhere from
five to eight different "countries."

>Nothing should stop Jewish people from being Jews in their own lives.

Yes.

>This freedom is in danger.

No.

[Shelly]

On 10/23/2015 12:15 PM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
>> Many government and official meetings start with a prayer.
>> >
>> >We put a motto "In God We Trust" on our money, swear on bibles in courts,
>> >we have no freedom from religion permeating into our lives. Children are
>> >basically forced, or socially forced to add "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance.
>
> I don't see any of that as impacting freedom from religion in any
> meaningful way.

An atheist does not believe there is a god. For him to have to say
"under God" means he does not have freedom from religion.

On all the other points you made, I agree with you -- but not this one.

--
Shelly

[Yisroel Markov]

True, but according to you, no one *has* to say it. You have reported
omitting "under God" from your pledge. When someone is persecuted for
doing so, we can talk about threats to freedom from religion.

Freedom of speech, now, faces greater threats in the USA and
worldwide.

[Shelly]

On 10/23/2015 4:08 PM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 18:27:51 +0000 (UTC), Shelly
> <shel...@thevillages.net> said:
>
>> On 10/23/2015 12:15 PM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
>>>> Many government and official meetings start with a prayer.
>>>>>
>>>>> We put a motto "In God We Trust" on our money, swear on bibles in courts,
>>>>> we have no freedom from religion permeating into our lives. Children are
>>>>> basically forced, or socially forced to add "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance.
>>>
>>> I don't see any of that as impacting freedom from religion in any
>>> meaningful way.
>>
>> An atheist does not believe there is a god. For him to have to say
>> "under God" means he does not have freedom from religion.
>>
>> On all the other points you made, I agree with you -- but not this one.
>
> True, but according to you, no one *has* to say it. You have reported
> omitting "under God" from your pledge. When someone is persecuted for
> doing so, we can talk about threats to freedom from religion.

....and if someone is listening and notices the sudden break, that could
lead to problems. When I was teaching in a charter school for one year
I made sure that I said it all in a very low voice at the back of the
room. I didn't need any trouble. I should not have had to do that. It
should not have been in there in the first place.

> Freedom of speech, now, faces greater threats in the USA and
> worldwide.

True.

--
Shelly

[mm]

On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 16:15:00 +0000 (UTC), Yisroel Markov
<ey.m...@MUNGiname.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 13:18:31 +0000 (UTC), Beach Runner
><lowh...@gmail.com> said:
>
>>On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 2:27:29 PM UTC-7, shel...@thevillages.net wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2015 4:58 PM, Shmaryahu b. Chanoch wrote:
>>> > From Mosaic Magazine
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > http://mosaicmagazine.com/essay/2015/08/the-decline-and-fall-of-religious-freedom-in-america/
>>> >
>>> > The RFRA debates and the anti circumcising movement are going to effect Jews even more than Christians.
>>>
>>> Can never happen in the US. It is a black and white case that the
>>> SCOTUS will take less than ten minutes to rule on and overturn any such law.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Shelly
>>

This is an old post, more than a month, and I went back and forth
trying to decide whether to write an answer. cc: Beachrunner

>>I disagree. We don't face a danger of anti-religious directions.
>>
>>The first amendment is freedom of religion and freedom from religion.

FTR, and pointing out that it's freedom from government-applied
religion, I agree. I'd also write it with different syntax, but
that's a small matter.

>>
>>There is a real movement and actions to make America an official
>>Christian nation.

Real but small and ineffectual and amounts to whining. However it
may well be strongly correlated with support for Trump, Carson, and
the plans of some other R. candidates, including Bush, to for example
check out if potential refugees are Xian or Muslim and give priority
to the first.

Aside: Don't forget that those considered for refugee status have been
in refugee camps for 2 years or more, and they are not part of the
"horde" which has been walking to Europe for the last 3 or so months.
It's this latter group in which it's reasonable to think Al Queida and
ISIS terrorists have been merged, if as I think is the case, trying to
go from an Arab country to Europe as a tourist will get one a lot more
attention from European police than coming in with 10's of thousands
of refugees. Per person, that is. Of course 10 thousand people get
plenty of attention but per person I think there far fewer people
assigned to them, and most are worried about feeding and sheltering
them, whereas for tourists they have established procedures and no
time is spent by host countries on their food or shelter.

But the former group, from which the immigrants would come.... I don't
think terrorists were hanging out in refugee camps in Lebanon or
Jordan for 2 years just so they can have a 1% chance of getting into
the US, when they could put on western clothes and get a tourist visa
to go to Disneyworld and then not leave when they're supposed to.
That's what people from countries all over the world do. There are
loads of Irish who did that when the Irish economy was bad, for
example.

I don't like the idea of more Arabs or more Moslems, not because they
will be terrorists, though maybe 1% of the children or grandchildren
will be when they are 18 and older, and that will be a big problem,
but because eventually they will be legally involved in politics and
may well oppose the US's current relationship with Israel.

>> Polls show that most people believe America is officially
>>a Christian nation.
>
>I couldn't find such a poll. The closest was a Newseum Institute
>annual survey which found 51% believing that "the U.S. Constitution
>establishes a Christian nation" - which equates neither to "America is
>a Christian nation now" nor to "it should be a Christian nation."

I don't understand the point of your answer.

No it doesn't *equate* to '"America is a Christian nation now" nor to
"it should be a Christian nation"' but neither of those is the same as
what Beachrunner said or what 51% in the poll believe, so why bring
them up?

Because you thought one was the same (which seems hard to believe,
because you seem far too smart to think so) , or because you wanted to
make your point while brushing aside his?

Both "America is officially a Christian nation" and "the U.S.
Constitution establishes a Christian nation", both of them definitely
don't mean...neither of them means that America is a Xian nation
*now*. That's their complaint, that the Constitution says it should
be and thus officially it is, meaning it should be in actuality but in
actuality it's not. After all, abortion is legal and in some places
interfered with only a little bit and only in the 3rd trimester (or
whatever the new rule is. Prayer in school is out. Etc. Etc. In
actuality the US is almost the secular nation it was meant by the
Constitution to be. (Unless you want an abortion in Texas, etc.)

>http://www.newseuminstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/FAC_SOFA15_report.pdf

I skimmed this pdf but based really on what you say above, it totally
supports what Beachrunner said. "The U.S. Constitution establishes
a Christian nation" is equivalent to "America is officially a
Christian nation", for those who hold fast to the US Constitution. The
fact that they're wrong about what the Constitution says, that they're
about 180^ wrong, doesn't have any effect on that.

(Some people seem to see in the US Constitution whatever they want to
see. When I read a Noachide mailing list there was one guy who said
that the US Constitution was based on the Torah. I asked for
examples, and though he continued to argue with me, he never gave me a
single example. AFAICT, and I've read it several times, not counting
the Bill of Rights which he wasn't counting either, the US
Constitution is not based on the Torah, but neither is it opposed to
anything in the Torah. Counting the Bill of Rights, I still don't
see it as either based on Torah or contradictory to Torah. It's no
more based on or opposed to the Torah than is a flashlight, a blender,
or a banana.

(This same guy kept mentioning that he had written a book that was
published, in which he, I figured, better supported what he said about
the Constitution and other things, and when I went to Barnes and
Noble, they didn't have it in stock, but they were glad to order it
for me. Somehow I was smart enough to ask details of the book, and
the publishing company had the same name as his email address, or
something like that. He had self-published the book (incredibly cheap
these days, even when you pay for it). I thought a publisher had an
editor read it and thought it was good, but only he had to think it
was good. B&N said they would order it for me and I still didn't have
to buy it, but I didn't think that was fair to them. )

(If anything the First Amendment is contradictory by permitting
polytheism, but iiuc, that's not contradictory because it's about the
US and not the land of Israel??

(Anyhow, my point is that he sees Torah in the Constitutions and some
Xians see Xianity in it!!)

>>There are many places where they have Christian prayers and activities.
>>
>>Even today, I play in a community based orchestra, and during the
>>holiday season they had a Christmas Concert. I took an unpopular, unwavering position by insisting a community organization can't have a Christmas Concert but must be a Holiday concert.
>>
>>I'm sure some saw me as a pushy Jew,
>
>[nod] You said it.

[nod] You said it. Beachrunner, was this a goverment-sponsored
organization or just a community organization? If the latter, I
don't see any strong reason that it can't have an Xmas concert. A
very weak reason is that Jews won't want** to sing Xmas songs and
certainly not religious Xmas songs, and being inclusive and welcoming
are American values. But they're not the only American values and
another value is for groups of like minds to get together and do
whatever is legal that pleases them.

Don't Jews have Jewish concerts? Aren't the Jewish Community Center
or the G'milas Chesed Society or Shomrim community organizations?
Can't they have [Name the Jewish holiday] concerts?

**We had annual Xmas assemblies, about an hour long, where I went to
grades 1 to 5. They sang both non-religious and religious xmas songs,
and I'm proud to say I never let words that refer to another god or
praise anything xian, etc. come out of my mouth, even at age 5. It
might have been easier the first year, when I had never heard the
songs (although some parts get repeated), but by the second year, I
could tell what was coming and when I was 6, I definitely used my,
proper standards. Of course I shouldn't have been put in that
situation. I'd still be kicking myself if I hadn't measured up, even
as a little boy.

>
>>but they modified their fliers and
>>even included a collection of Hanukkah songs. They said they were for me,
>>but that's not right.
>
>So they tried to accomodate you and still you were unhappy?

Of course not. I understand him perfectly. They should have, in his
opinion (and if it was a government-sponsored community organization,
I agree with him) changed it for the sake of doing the right thing,
not just to make him happy. They still don't understand how America
is supposed to work.

>
>[snip]
>
>>Many government and official meetings start with a prayer.
>>
>>We put a motto "In God We Trust" on our money, swear on bibles in courts,
>>we have no freedom from religion permeating into our lives. Children are
>>basically forced, or socially forced to add "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance.
>
>I don't see any of that as impacting freedom from religion in any
>meaningful way.

Maybe not in any strong way, but they are all certainly meaningful.

>
>>And there is a huge evangelical movement that wants to make the unoffical
>>Christian nation an official Christian nation. That's a real danger.

Real but small and ineffectual and amounts to whining. However it
may well be strongly correlated with support for Trump, Carson, and
the plans of some other R. candidates, including Bush, to for example
check out if potential refugees are Xian or Muslim and give priority
to the first.

>How far have they gotten in the past fifty years? AISI, Christianity
>is very much on the defensive nationwide.

On average, but they are still making advances in some places while
losing ground in others.

> And polls show young
>evangelicals to be a lot more tolerant than their parents.
>http://publicreligion.org/research/2014/02/2014-lgbt-survey/#.Vio2_X6rSCh

"Same-Sex Marriage and LGBT Issues" are only two things. And in
earlier years they totally lost ground on divorce and birth control.
(Xian supporters of Trump don't seem bothered that he's on his 3rd
wife, and in an earlier election season, afaict no one but me was
bothered that Newt Gingrich cheated on his first two wives to have sex
with the upcoming one. Divorce is very hard on children, even adult
children (I have a friend who tells me about that) but other than
that, I have no problem with it, but cheating on your spouse makes
both you and the person one cheats with into tramps. (More so the
person one cheats with, because if the married person wants someone
else, it's always going to be cheating. If the other person is single
and s/he wants someone else, s/he should find another single person.
Is that so hard?

So "Same-Sex Marriage and LGBT Issues" are only two things, but they
don't mean that they won't compensate by being even stronger on other
issues, or that those who don't accept those two things won't make
bigger issues of them and other things too. In fact that is exactly
what is happening. Forcing same-sex marriage and tolerance or even
acceptance or even affection for LGBT** is making non-agreeing Xians
angry, etc.

**Just try to find a sit-com without a lgbt cast character, or a
talk-show without one being warmly accepted, and those who oppose the
ideas being treated as low-lifes.

>
>>The Freedom of religion should be for anyone, Jewish, Hindu, Pagan or Atheist to worship or not worship as they believe. There should be complete
>>separation between government and religion. The government should not be
>>endorsing a religious believe, "In God We Trust". Who's G-d?
>
>For those purposes, whoever you think He is, of course.
>
>>It happens in the military, prayers are everywhere.
>>
>>We should be fighting against the use of any kinds of religion as part of our government and laws.
>>
>>The step won't be more freedom to be Jews, but a push of Christianity down our throats, and religion down people that do not believe.
>
>We seem to be living in different countries. Then again, there are
>sociologists that subdivide the USA, culturally, into anywhere from
>five to eight different "countries."
>
>>Nothing should stop Jewish people from being Jews in their own lives.
>
>Yes.

Yes.

>>This freedom is in danger.
>
>No.

There are ups and downs but the long term trend is for more religious
toleration, acceptance, and less religious government mandates. In
Maryland, Jews couldn't vote, hold office, be admitted to the bar, and
some other things until 1826, when the Jew Bill finally passed, after
being introduced in the legislature 4 or 5 times by Thomas Kennedy, a
Catholic from western Md. who had never met a Jew, but still knew what
the right thing was. After two 2-year terms he was defeated for
re-election because of his offering this bill every session, but
re-elected two years later. In a couple other of the original 13
states Jews could not vote either but I think Maryland lasted that way
the longest. While a colony, when Maryland was controlled by
Protestants, Catholics were persecuted to some extent (no killings or
stealing. I forget what was done to them), but according to the book
I have, when Catholics ruled (in the only Catholic colony) they
treated the Protestants well. Georgetown University started as a
Catholic school in, I think St. Mary's County, Md., but when
Protestants came to power in Md, around 1646, it had to move to a
rural (still rural, 370 years later, though they have paved roads
now!) part of Delaware, and later moved to DC.

Not the most detailed source but the one I found:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_University#Founding

So it's only by showing that things have been worse that I can be
pretty sure they are getting better, but I think they are and will
continue, with a few small ups and downs.

[mm]

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 18:45:12 +0000 (UTC), mm <mm2...@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

>
>**We had annual Xmas assemblies, about an hour long, where I went to
>grades 1 to 5. They sang both non-religious and religious xmas songs,
>and I'm proud to say I never let words that refer to another god or
>praise anything xian, etc. come out of my mouth, even at age 5. It

These words of mine sound a little snarky. There are plenty of good
things about Xianity and I'm happy to praise them. I probably didn't
know any when I was 5 or even 10, but that's not what I'm referring to
anyhow. During an Xmas assembly, the kind of "good things" that get
emphasized are not what I would praise, coming to "visit the baby
Jesus", etc. It's fine if they want to do it but I'd reserve my
praise for something that's better that that, other Xian stuff that
doesn't come up in Xmas assemblies.

[mm]

Trying to catch up on old posts.

On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 20:08:43 +0000 (UTC), Yisroel Markov
<ey.m...@MUNGiname.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 18:27:51 +0000 (UTC), Shelly
><shel...@thevillages.net> said:
>
>>On 10/23/2015 12:15 PM, Yisroel Markov wrote:
>>>> Many government and official meetings start with a prayer.
>>>> >
>>>> >We put a motto "In God We Trust" on our money, swear on bibles in courts,
>>>> >we have no freedom from religion permeating into our lives. Children are
>>>> >basically forced, or socially forced to add "Under God" in the pledge of allegiance.
>> >
>>> I don't see any of that as impacting freedom from religion in any
>>> meaningful way.
>>
>>An atheist does not believe there is a god. For him to have to say
>>"under God" means he does not have freedom from religion.
>>
>>On all the other points you made, I agree with you -- but not this one.
>
>True, but according to you, no one *has* to say it.

Really? I don't know what Shelly said that makes you say this but
check with a six-year old. Or an 8-year old. Or a 10-year old? Or
a 12-year old.^^^

Even though I didn't like it -- and not because I didn't believe in
G-d but mostly because I kept forgetting to include it, secondly
because I didn't like their changing things, and thirdly maybe I did
sort of realize the First Amendment problems, if not when I was 9,
starting when I was 11 and moved to a school district that didn't have
prayer in class each morning (they didn't have the Pledge either) --
even though I didn't like it, I said it. Because kids are used to
being pushed around by adults.

Yisroel, have your children ever given you a lot of trouble? Do they
do what you expect of them? If the answers are no and yes, then your
kids too are used to being pushed around by adults. And if they went
to public school and for whatever reason didn't want to say it, they
almost surely would anyhow, unless a parent thought to tell them not
to. About half the kids in the world, or more, would not tell
their parents about the problem. The parents would have to ask them
or know from other sources.

My background is in the footnote***.

And even there, where I faced no reprisals from other students, I said
both the prayer and the pledge and the extra two words, under God,
because they, the teacher each year, told us to.

Imagine what it would be like to be in a school where if you refused
to do any of those things, your classmates** would pick on you, maybe
endlessly. Where you might get beat up after school.

**mate is too strong a term.

More background^^^^

But most people do not grow up in western Pennsylvania.

> You have reported
>omitting "under God" from your pledge.

I think now you're talking about a Shelly, a 60+ -year old.

Do you see the difference? Oh, maybe you mean him as a child. If so,
he's not the typical child.

> When someone is persecuted for
>doing so, we can talk about threats to freedom from religion.

So if someone knuckles under to government authority that's telling
him to do something he shouldn't have to do, that doesn't represent a
loss of freedom? Only if he resists and he is persecuted has there
been a threat to freedom? Hasn't there by the time he knuckles under
been a loss of freedom, not a mere threat? Of course there has.

So that means if you believe in promoting freedom, you are apparently
calling for rebellion.

>Freedom of speech, now, faces greater threats in the USA and
>worldwide.

So what? How would selling out freedom of religion promote freedom
of speech?

~~~

And if you're going to say that freedom of speech is more important
than freedom of or freedom from religion, I think you have to analyze
every situation separately, and not as you seem to be doing, have some
general rule that free speech is more important.


^^^ If you don't think students are forced to include "under God" when
they say the pledge of allegiance, check with, these days, a high
school student in Texas or maybe anywhere but Ohio where the
Republicans are in the majority.

~~~There's a famous quotation especially popular for the last few
years, from Benjamin Franklin, roughly, "He would sacrifice liberty
for a little security deserves neither". Now I understand why he said
that when he did and it was probably good advice then, but it's false.
In fact everyone but criminals deserve both liberty and security.


***Now I grew up in a school where no one teased anyone. And I know
this is true because I have a distinct memory from when I was 10 or
11, and I had several times read or heard the expression, "Children
can be so cruel". and I even remember where I was walking when I
thought to myself, "I wonder why they say that", because I knew they
meant teasing and taunting (and now I know they might have included
hitting) and I had never seen any kid do that to any other, in my 4 or
5 years in school at that time.

And there were certainly likely targets if anyone had been inclined to
tease. Of the 30 kids in the class (the same 30 every year), one was
fat and two never knew the answer to the question. And every year,
the teacher (who changed every year) would call on every one of us.

Some of the time the teacher would call on whoever raised his hand,
but then she would even things out by calling on those who hadn't. All
of the others knew the answer some or all of the time, but these two
never knew the answer. And the rest of the class just sat there
quietly, no wisecracks, no insults, nothing, until the teacher either
helped her the answer or gave the answer, or went on to someone else.

There was also a girl who stuttered. No one ever mocked or teased her
either, starting in the first grade, all the way to when my family
moved out of town in the 6th grade. She was called on by every
teacher too, and we all waited patiently while she tried to get the
words out.

I saw one of these three girls at what would have been my 25th high
school reunion, had I not moved. And she didn't seem stupid anymore.
She'd lived in France or Switzerland for a few years, knew French,
seemed as smart as anyone. It was hard to pry tactfully but I did
it.... She said she looked terrible in grade school because her mother
never washed her hair. (Her hair as a child was like that of a
stereotype witch.)

^^^^For the record, the one thing that has some similarity to teasing
was choosing up sides for baseball or softball etc. But I never saw
anyone cry or look crushed from that. Also with some batters,
members of the opposing team might call out "easy out" if they thought
he was an easy out. But neither of these are examples of forcing a
kid to do what he didn't want to do. He was already playing ball
with them, and he too wanted to get a hit. So choosing him last was
not done to make him not play. We never had more than 18 for a game
-- we never had more than 10 -- We wanted everyone to play. And
calling out "easy out" was a bit about teasing, but I think it was
more about psyching the batter out, by convincing him he wouldn't get
a hit. This was only tried and probably only works with kids who
haven't been successful batters in the past. But the batter wants to
get a hit whether others are teasing him or not. So this is not like
not saying "under God" where someone faces a choice between behaving
as he wants and then getting picked on versus neither. In baseball,
all the incentives are in the same direction.

And there was one boy in my class who may have been teased or
something somewhere, but I guarantee it never happened in class or
right before or after school, because I was watching***. I remember
his name. He was also the shortest boy in the class, no taller than
the shortest girl. The one indication that he had been teased or
something at one time is that he was a jokester. One day before
school he tricked me into chasing him through the untended field next
to the school and there was a hole that I guess rain had filled with
water, and he had covered it with straw, so that on one lap around
the field I stepped in the hole and got my shoe and foot wet, and it
stayed wet until lunch, when afaik everyone went home for lunch.

Also, the last day of school in the 3rd grade, even though no kid ever
wore a tie to school, he wore a black dress shirt, with long sleeves,
and an all-white tie. He looked like a gangster. I didn't even own
such clothes. At our 25th reunion, he said his mother let him pick
out his clothes, even when he was 8.

***Unless they waited for the high holidays to tease him, 3 days I
wasn't there, but I'm sure that didn't happen.

BTW, I've talked to several people and apparently my school, or my
town, was unusual (nationally). I did talk to one girl from
Pittsburgh, 50 miles away, who said her school was the same way. So
maybe western Pennsylvania is special. My friend tells me I grew up
in Pleasantville.