Student Suspended For Religious Beliefs - Page 6

SoFlaJDM · 03-30-2007, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

People who say he wasn't being disruptive need to really sit back and think about what it was like when they attended high school. If this happened at your school at the age of 14-17 how do you think your peers would have responded. He was being a disruption, his parents aren't really standing up for him they admit he took it too far. He got his punishment that was rightfully deserved.

it's his religion... he shouldn't care how people react

7960 · 03-30-2007, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

oh she does? link?

do you ever post facts, or is it all speculation?

oh, you're serious....... ok then. Link that says she doesn't?

7960 · 03-30-2007, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

it's his religion...

I can't wait for this trial

Linzyhop · 03-30-2007, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

Why is this so hard for some people to understand?

i dunno. I've have fought for valid religious rights before, so this crap, when it happens, really takes credibility away from the real issue.

Linzyhop · 03-30-2007, 02:31 PM

this has turned into one big circle jerk.

7960 · 03-30-2007, 02:46 PM

Originally Posted by Linzyhop

this has turned into one big circle jerk.

like usual, now we're stuck at one group saying "everyone should have the right to do anything as long as it doesn't harm anyone else" versus the other saying "but we have to live in reality so it can't work like that."

Welcome to LL.

grembert · 03-30-2007, 02:47 PM

This thread just does keep going around and around but I am still going to give my opinion.

The teacher in the class room decides if the student is being disruptive.
School authority trumps freedom of religion in the classroom if the religious expression ( no matter how serious or silly ) interrupts the learning process.

As somebody wrote, you can wear a cross into class but you can't carry and 8 foot cross. So this rule applies to all religions.

Linzyhop · 03-30-2007, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by grembert

This thread just does keep going around and around but I am still going to give my opinion.

The teacher in the class room decides if the student is being disruptive.
School authority trumps freedom of religion in the classroom if the religious expression ( no matter how serious or silly ) interrupts the learning process.

As somebody wrote, you can wear a cross into class but you can't carry and 8 foot cross. So this rule applies to all religions.

here here! very good point.

Linzyhop · 03-30-2007, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

like usual, now we're stuck at one group saying "everyone should have the right to do anything as long as it doesn't harm anyone else" versus the other saying "but we have to live in reality so it can't work like that."

Welcome to LL.

<--- circle jerk. heh. i love these smiley faces.

thanks. good to be here still. I think.

nbiggershaft · 03-30-2007, 03:30 PM

BWWHAHHAHAHAAHAAHAAAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA
This became an actual debate overnight. Comon, freedom of religion doesn't apply when the kid obviously doesn't believe in it.
"where do we draw the line?"
"what makes his religion less valid than christianity?"
"what if I think other religious demonstration is disruptive?"
Bullshit. The entire point of pastafaria whatsit is to bask in ridiculousness of religion in general. I think it is hilarious and great, but it's not a religion, we're allowed to use atleast some degree of common sense with the application of law.

nbiggershaft · 03-30-2007, 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

it's his religion... he shouldn't care how people react

no it's not, and you know it

motivez · 03-30-2007, 04:02 PM

Lets talk about where the line actually is then:

Does it have to be recognized by more than 1 person?
Does that person have to be able to show proof of belief / lifestyle?
Do that persons friends, relatives, have to support them? Or does it not matter?
Where's the line for "disruption"?

And, finally, because it's a public school, can they legally allow certain expressions of one religion and not another?

Linzyhop · 03-30-2007, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Lets talk about where the line actually is then:

Does it have to be recognized by more than 1 person?
Does that person have to be able to show proof of belief / lifestyle?
Do that persons friends, relatives, have to support them? Or does it not matter?
Where's the line for "disruption"?

And, finally, because it's a public school, can they legally allow certain expressions of one religion and not another?

I say if the religion is already a recognized religion by the government/law/powers-that-be, that's a pretty good idea. If it's not, and whoever wants to start a court case for it, then go right ahead. this pirate crap wouldn't even make it to a state supreme court.

now, personally having knowledge on how hard it is for lesser known religions to be protected, when "religion-cry-wolves" like this one come around and try to use this religious rights argument, it upsets me because it makes it that much harder for religions that really DO have problems being recognized and not discriminated against to win legitimate battles.

motivez · 03-30-2007, 04:18 PM

Why should the government have to officially recognize a religion though?

Doesn't that mean those with the influence will be protected, while those without it wont be?

hsmith · 03-30-2007, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

no it's not, and you know it

a giant ball of spaghetti in the sky is as believable as a man in the sky the makes things happen through magic

sorry, the pastafarian religion is as valid as Christianity

Linzyhop · 03-30-2007, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Why should the government have to officially recognize a religion though?

Doesn't that mean those with the influence will be protected, while those without it wont be?

I'm saying in this country, that's what it seems like. I could go to England and there are plenty of different rules there, but if you are asking what it takes for a religion to be a recognized religion here in the states, that's the answer I gave.

Linzyhop · 03-30-2007, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

a giant ball of spaghetti in the sky is as believable as a man in the sky the makes things happen through magic

sorry, the pastafarian religion is as valid as Christianity

that's just ridiculous. and I'm not Christian at all.

spaghetti is a MAN MADE object. duh.

hsmith · 03-30-2007, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by Linzyhop

that's just ridiculous. and I'm not Christian at all.

spaghetti is a MAN MADE object. duh.

and a man in the sky that does as he pleases isn't as ridiculous?

Linzyhop · 03-30-2007, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

and a man in the sky that does as he pleases isn't as ridiculous?

i can tell I'm talking to an atheist. I give up.

JaJae · 03-30-2007, 04:46 PM

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

it's his religion... he shouldn't care how people react

If I were to say my religion was to worship your mother's twat and decided to wear a big hairy vagina on my head I think the school would tell me it's distracting and inappropriate. It isn't a matter of what some stupid kid comes in claiming is his religion, it's that the school can't allow distractions or kids to do whatever they want whenever they want just because they invented or claim membership of a pseudo religion.

If he were Christian and come in wearing boxer shorts and a thorn headdress they'd discipline him too. Schools have a dress code regardless of religious beliefs. If you want to get something approved you need permission. He didn't, he was specifically told not to and he did it anyway. His mother said he took it too far, the school obviously believed he took the prank too far. And he was punished for it. Good for the school district for not caving into the illegitimate arguments that do nothing other than take responsibility from the punk kid and the educational growth of all students at the school.

The very purpose of this psuedo religion was to poke fun at people who do believe in a religion or have some form of spirituality. It's no different than users on this forum mocking religions or pointing out what they consider to be negative points within the religion just to piss people off. That's essentially what he did and the school didn't stand up for it. Good for them.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is the deity of a parody religion[1] founded in 2005 by Oregon State University physics graduate Bobby Henderson to protest against the decision by the Kansas State Board of Education to require the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to biological evolution. In an open letter[2][3] sent to the education board, Henderson professes belief in a supernatural Creator called the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which resembles spaghetti and meatballs. He furthermore calls for the "Pastafarian" theory of creation to be taught in science classrooms, essentially invoking a reductio ad absurdum argument against the teaching of intelligent design.[4][5] Followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) call themselves Pastafarians, a portmanteau of pasta and Rastafarian.

This is not a real religion it's very purpose is for people to make these claims and for the purpose of pissing people off. Everyone who attends this school has the right to best education they can be provided with. Parents and the community pay good money to have their children educated. This is a disgrace to the educational system and should not be allowed.