The issue is not the government telling "someone" what to do. It's the government not involving itself in religion. But definitions get in the way. Nobody really agrees on what is religious or not.
Well, I google'd "history of religion in American education," and came across this powerpoint that indicates religion was a prominent fixture in public education in early America: http://www.westga.edu/~pburgey/XIDS/Lectures/History of Religion in America2.ppt Take it for what its worth; I suspect this is pretty accurate, but I'm sure some will refute it's merit. I'm taking it as evidence of what I already believed; that early Americans didn't see the inclusion of religious material in schools to be unconstitutional. That interpretation came much later, from the courts reacting to some people's objection to religion. To take the whole argument back to what I first posted in this thread: Congress shall make no law..... Allowing a prayer in school does not equate to a government mandate that everybody has to pray. If that powerpoint is accurate, early Americans who were much closer to the people who wrote the original law than any of us agreed with me.
Let's be clear, it's a PAGAN holiday that CHRISTIANS also celebrate Jesus' birthday on. I don't know the origins of the government closures on Christmas day, but my best guess is that it was to give workers that day off so that THEY could observe the holiday, not so the GOVERNMENT could observe the holiday. I also think it's safe to assume that the overwhelming majority of the population was of christian faith at the time, thereby eliminating the need for 95% of people to take that day off anyway. Because of that tradition, people of non-christian faith also took advantage of that time off to spend with their families. So nowadays, a lot more people than christians celebrate the holiday. Hell, I'm sure even atheists give presents at Christmas! Your argument would hold a lot more water if it were some other holy day of observation that only christians recognized. Now this is just pure silliness. This is about the GOVERNMENT itself showing religious favoritism. I'm not advocating them infringing on anyone's personal rights or freedoms.
Yeah, I tried to use my Atheism as an excuse to save me the trouble of giving gifts, but then I discovered that it works both ways. o:o:o:
we do. i would venture to say that most of us were raised in christian families so we have been celebrating christmas since we were born. plus my wife is catholic so i kind of have to celebrate christmas.
"allowing a prayer" is inherently government endorsement of a religion practice if the government sets aside a time for it. Allowing someone to personally pray silently is not challenged or forbidden by anybody.
It would be the same as your company having "moment of cigarette". Even though they aren't forcing the non-smokers to smoke, they sure appear to be endorsing smoking. The smokers would love it, but everyone else would just want to get to work and wonder why they have to be constantly reminded about smoking.
which religion does a moment of silence favor? no it isn't. acknowledging that something exists is not "endorsing" it. telling a kid "you are free to pray" is nowhere near the same thing as saying "you SHOULD pray". a moment of silence ALLOWS kids to pray if they so choose. it FORCES no one to pray if they choose not to.
