Public School Ministries?

FF, if that is indeed true, she is violating the law. I am not sure what the Canadian law is re: this, but consider the following. Would you approve of a Mormon coming into your child's school and teaching about the prophet Smith? Or perhaps a Christian Scientist preaching the words of Mary Baker Eddy? Or even a Muslim converting children to Islam?

 

Students are allowed to lead Bible clubs and teach Bible studies in the US. It is open to anyone who wants to star a religious group. Generally the local school policy is that it is either open to all or closed to all.

 

MP,

She is not violating the law. There IS NO law in our country that says that Christians may not teach the Bible in the public school as a voluntary class. It might open up the school to a lawsuit, BUT it is not against the law. The individual local school districts have the power to allow or disallow such a thing.

The activist judges of today have hijacked the law and caused many of us to believe that it is against the law when it is not. The judges are the ones calling it unconstitutional and a violation of the separation of church and state. Because the JUDGES are ruling this way, the administrators of schools are afraid to let it happen, because naturally they don't want a lawsuit. Even if they are found innocent it still costs the school money to go through a suit.

fundamentalist, of course I cannot answer to the legality of it in Canada. If I were you, Id go ask your school district if they would allow such a class for the students to attend on a voluntary basis. You might be surprised with the results.

 

bapmom, I trust the SCOTUS interpretation of law more than yours. In any case, theirs carries weight. Your's does not.

Again, would you like people of other religions doing this to your child?

 

Ok Magnetic, why be hostile about it???


Im telling you, there's no law against it. Our judges ACT and JUDGE as if there IS a law. If someone of another religion was teaching a class on their religion I would instruct my child that they could not attend that class. BTW, the public schools already teach our kids things we don't want them to know. How many of us go and protest to our PTA's?

It is also a practice of school districts to uphold and respect the parent's wishes (or at least they claim that), so if they don't want their child to be there the child is not there.

If this lady is going from school to school teaching a Bible class, than Id assume it is presented as a voluntary time.

May I add, the public schools already have religious training. Ive heard of Islam being taught in some, and even Wicca. The only flak comes in is when Christianity is tried to be taught.

Another reason why Id homeschool before Id ever have my kids in a public school anyway.

 

Bapmom,

I agreed with everything you said, except I do have my kids going to public school. I can tell you so many rewarding stories about my kids successfully witnessing to their peers. There have been some challenges but nothing we couldn’t easily overcome. When I think of all the best little witnesses that are being kept home away from the little ones that need people like them, of course with their parents close behind guiding them, to balance the scales I often count the cost to the general public schools. I will also say that I’ve been concerned but become more confident every year that the flak is easily stepped over and is not even going to be a viable threat to what has become almost like a free reign mission at times that my kids and I enjoy working on together. Just my 2 cents.

[ September 28, 2005, 01:44 AM: Message edited by: Benjamin ]

 

Well, by all means let's withold the truth for fear of offending the heathen.

 

bapmon mom is right, there is no law that can keep the kids from leading a a bible study on there own, teachers and parents may attend and answer questions if asked, also students may invite an outside speaker, understand this is all voluntary.

 

Benjamin,

I can understand your position. But Ive seen too many kids whose faith is shaken or shattered by the conflicts between what they are taught at a public school versus what is being taught at church and home for me to be comfortable risking it.
If Ive heard right, though, the public schools in Arizona are a good example of parental involvement having improved the system? I certainly don't condemn you for having your kids in a public school.

 

Our church has successfully started three Good News Clubs, which are voluntary after-school programs where we're seeing many children come to know Christ. I'm also involved with a local high school football team. Our church provides Gatorades after practice, and I get to eat the pre-game meal with them. There is also a voluntary prayer that I lead as well. Since this has started, three football players are now attending our church, and more are interested in coming.

 

Well, by all means let's withold the truth for fear of offending the heathen. </font>[/QUOTE]Once again Aaron, you miss the point entirely. I said nothing about offending anyone.

 

Servent, you are incorrect. Teachers are state employees and must not intermingle that role with proselytization. This is established case law.

 

MP,

you have made a common mistake. CASE LAW.....there is no such thing! Judges have MADE THIS UP. There has been a silent "revolution" going on for the past 40 odd years, in which the judicial branch has been gradually taking over the role of the legislative branch. The judiciary has no right whatsoever to make any laws. There is no constitutional thing as "precedence" imposed upon the judiciary.

Why do you think a few people have started talking about "activist judges?" Its been a long time coming, but people are finally starting to wake up to what's going on. Judges have made rulings on things such as: school prayer, separation of church and state within the schools, abortion, and now they are starting in on "under God" in the pledge. The judges had no right to make rulings on these things and expect them to be applied across the board. Every one of these cases were lawsuits, not the judiciary ruling on a LAW brought before them after having been passed through the Congress and the Senate.......the latter is the proper way for the judicial branch to be in the process of interpreting law. SUITS should not cause something to be imposed on the rest of us.

The judicial branch is not supposed to make law.....of any kind. So to say it is "case law" is referring to something which is patently unconstitutional.

Constitutionally, a LOCAL school district should be able to establish any sort of school they want......even one that actively teaches Christianity. The FEDERAL gov't is prohibited from establishing any religion as THE REQUIRED religion, otherwise the states are free to do as they please. The reality of the situation has changed because of these activist judges who have decided that one person's lawsuit should impose the HUMANIST religion on all of us, through administrative fear of more lawsuits.

 

Bapmom, sorry to tell you, that is not "made up". Case law is extremely important in our system of justice. Case law is not, as you seem to think, legislation from the bench, but instead is precedential interpretation of laws on the books that have been passed by the Congress and signed by the President. It is called "Checks & Balances". Ever heard of it?

Rulings on lawsuits SHOULD apply to all of us, otherwise the law is being applied differently to different citizens.

An activist judge is only one who rules against your opinion. If one were to say, rule against abortion, would you consider this judicial activism?

 

MP,

judges have no authority to rule on the constitutionality of "practice." Only on the constitutionality of a LAW that has been presented to them through congress.

 

Answer my question please, bapmom. Did you even read my last post?

 

yes, and when Im talking about "activist" Im referring to those who are overstepping their bounds and creating a ruling judiciary......something the constitution never intended and certainly tried to avoid.

Today, if a judge overturned Roe v Wade Id consider it an overturning of a corrupt ruling in the first place, and it would be placing power back in the hands of the people where it belongs.

The people of the US ought to have had the chance to VOTE on such a thing as abortion. This is why I agree with those who are currently saying that the reason there is so much anger over the abortion issue is because we never got a chance to have our own say.......

 

Mp,

I am in youth ministry and I am in a public school everday. I am the chaplian of a high school football team. I spend 2+ hours in schools daily.

I feel we should leave religiuos education out of the public school. If we do not, then we are opening a pandora's box. If one is set of beliefs are taught then we will have to let all be heard.

The church needs to step up to the plate and teach and reach a lost generation. I have a child in the public school system and feel that is where he belongs. We are raising him to salt. We want him to make a difference in the Kingdom!!!!!!!!!

 

see now?
patrick ought to have that right to voice his opinion at the local PTA meeting, and have his vote heard and respected. Just like mine ought to be able to be heard and respected.....rather than have my voice disenfranchised by a ruling federal judiciary.