Comments on: Jesus in West Virginia

By: shika

shika — Mon, 26 Mar 2007 20:32:28 +0000

you made a good agrument stew about the painting needing to be taken down, i know it probably doesn’t matter but who actually put the picture in the school in the first place and what do they have to say about the issue? i agree that the picture may influence the Christian religion on the students, but an image of Jesus Christ can be seen anywhere, not just in schools, so do those images need to come down as well and one last thing, if the actual image of Jesus needs to be removed from the school beause it influences students, what about the Jehovah Witness that come around on a day to day basis trying to get people to convert to their religion are they doing the same thing that the image in the school could be doing?(not to offend anyone but just curious)

By: PB

PB — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 04:08:54 +0000

Late on the scene, but as an Agnostic I must say that the display of a religious figure, for any reason other than teaching world religions (something I think should be done so people see that there is more than one religion - not just the one they were lucky enough to be born into and thus must be the right one) in or on any government property - something that my hard earned money - aka my tax contributions - goes into - is just wrong. Separation of Church & State. What is there to argue about? Another thought is to either put up every religious figure in the world, or don’t put up any at all. Either educate about all religions, without bias, or don’t try to educate children about religion at all. On another skew - think of this as an oppressed person - I know what you might be thinking - oh give me a break - but when was the last time you were afraid to admit what religion you are or aren’t - yeah I thought not - so as an oppressed person of a minority group lets put this back to a basic good ‘ol boy stance - lets put a picture of the KKK up there….lets pretend that is someone’s picture of goodness. How do you think the black people in that school would feel? Not so good huh? It might make them think that perhaps they would be treated different because they aren’t supporters (with good reason obviously) of the KKK. I know the KKK isn’t generally considered a religion, I am just trying to use it as an example. It’s just food for thought. More food for thought: I think perhaps the Christians are feeling oppressed or singled out because they are the ones constantly getting into people’s faces, trying to push their religion and religious displays into people’s faces and frankly they have no place in my face, or my child’s face, etc - but my point is that people are pushing back and starting to say, hey don’t do that - and maybe this is a little new to them? I don’t know, that is just a thought I wanted to add. I don’t go out and stand on street corners and waive to the passing cars while holding a book on evolution and preeching about what evolution is. I don’t think many atheists do. That is a funny thought! I personally am tired of being blessed, invited to churches, and very very tired of hearing people tell me about how their religion is correct over all others - well gee have you tried them all - then how do you know? Oh you just know. I see. I guess I just don’t understand why people are so adament that they must talk about it incessently, display symbols & pictures, and push push push to get something religious displayed or talked about in a school or other government building. It seems to me that their faith is weak, that they don’t seem to think they can teach their child about religion at home (what are they just too busy that they have to pawn that responsibility off to the schools?) or on Sunday when they go to church (assuming they do) and when they have to tell people what they are and they have to display symbols and pictures all over the place (their car, their desk, their wall, their body, etc) it is like they have to remind themselves what they are, so they don’t lose faith, like they have to see that they aren’t the only one, so they don’t lose faith, or maybe they like to be in the club?? Wow, how did this turn into a rant? Sorry about that! Separation of Church & State - That is the clearest and simplest argument. This country was not founded on religious beliefs, no matter how badly some people want to believe it, and a lot of the religious things you see and hear - like the pledge of allegence & money - those things were ADDED later on in the McCarthy era - you know the 50’s? Check it out, read up on it, you might be surprised at the things you will find (the dirty little secrets - jk). Well hope someone reads this. I must admit my eyes started to cross after reading some of the things in this blog, so if I won’t feel left out if someone can’t read this comment - I probably didn’t read yours. To everyone out there - have a nice life, nice day, nice year, whatever you can get out of it - because you only have one shot. Good luck at it!

By: Kirk D.

Kirk D. — Sat, 16 Sep 2006 17:18:03 +0000

Came here from Ed’s thread, NICE job Stew. A consistent and logical argument that carries the weight of precedent to illustrate your points. Of course Bubba’s arguments about what Jesus looked like and the school board’s intentions are ludicrous to say the least. Is this a public school funded by my tax dollars? If so and it is subsidized by the government for the purpose of educating my children, then establishing one religious figure over all others by displaying his portrait on school grounds breaks the Establishment Clause of the Constitution and has no business being there. End of story.

Again, well done.

By: Plead the First » Blog Archive » Insight Into School-Sanctioned Prayer

Plead the First » Blog Archive » Insight Into School-Sanctioned Prayer — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 04:35:31 +0000

[…] In the recent conversations I’ve had about the West Virginia lawsuit involving the portrait of Jesus, as well as other discussions revolving around schools and religion, the opinion is often expressed that school prayer should be ok, and that school-sanctioned religious displays don’t harm anyone. […]

By: Bubba

Bubba — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:46:13 +0000

Whatever.

It’s your blog. You get the last word.

By: PotatoStew

PotatoStew — Wed, 30 Aug 2006 02:03:27 +0000

“Leaving aside everything else,your argument that an image, in and of itself, violates a first amendment right, is patently absurd.”

There are many ways to communicate ideas - words are just one way. Images by themselves can also be a powerful way to communicate - sometimes more powerful, since they often transcend any language barriers, and are more noticeable and eyecatching than mere text. You can say that it’s absurd all you want, and try to deny that an image could have that kind of impact, but you’ll be ignoring quite a bit of history.

As for the remainder of your comment - you don’t actually think that the ACLU gets to pick which judge hears the case, do you? The assigning of judges is outside of the ACLU’s control, so there’s no “judge shopping”. However, I love that you feel you have to provide yourself with an out in case any decision goes against your beliefs. It couldn’t be that there may have been some merit to the case - oh no. It’s because the ACLU hand-picked a liberal, terrorist-loving judge to hear the case. Too funny.

By: Bubba

Bubba — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 23:17:13 +0000

(Sigh)

Why do I even bother?

Leaving aside everything else,your argument that an image, in and of itself, violates a first amendment right, is patently absurd.

However, I am sure that if you judge-shop enough, you will get someone on the Bench to agree with you on that point, just as the ACLU found Judge What’shername to give them the NSA verdict they were looking for.

By: PotatoStew

PotatoStew — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 13:13:03 +0000

“No, I’m just pointing out the gaping holes your argument leaves all over the place.”

No, really you’re just wasting my time at this point, but I’ll keep playing along for now.

“How do you know what Jesus actually looked like?”

As I tried to point out in your thread that I linked to earlier, this is one of the most ridiculous arguments I’ve ever heard. Whether it’s what Jesus actually looked like (and I agree he almost certainly did not look like that), it is most certainly a picture that nearly everyone will recognize as being Jesus, seeing as it’s one of the most popular modern representations of Jesus, and has been reproduced over 500 million times in Bibles, on posters, in church bulletins and many other places. Whether it actually looks like him does not matter, because that picture is understood by the vast majority of people to represent him. That’s like saying that a metal cross cannot represent Christianity because Jesus probably wasn’t crucified on a metal cross.

“What law of Congress compelled the School Board to put the picture up on the wall?”

As the courts decided a long time ago, it doesn’t need to be an actual law of congress to violate the First Amendment. If that were the case, then state and local governments could endorse and enforce religious practices all they want, and that’s obviously not the case. And in this case, as I pointed out, the school board - a local government body - is effectively requiring that the picture be hung in the hallway.

By: Bubba

Bubba — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:52:54 +0000

No, I’m just pointing out the gaping holes your argument leaves all over the place. and, as far as sarcasm goes, I’ve learned that it’s an effective tool to counter things that people like you do to blow things way out of porportion to the reality of certain situations.

But let’s move on……

How do you know what Jesus actually looked like?

The picture in question represented European Renaisance artists’ idea of what “Jesus” looked like. Almost to an artist, the rendition was that of a Euro-centric white male with fair skin, and long, straight light brown hair.

That’s NOT very likely.

Of course if you like, we can always debate what the Constitution itself says about the issue.

By now, it’s pretty obvious that the Constitution does NOT say what you and some activist judges say.

What law of Congress compelled the School Board to put the picture up on the wall?

By: PotatoStew

PotatoStew — Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:52:48 +0000

Which one of us is deflecting Bubba? It’s totally about the school board, as they are the ones requiring the presence of that picture in the hallway, and they are the ones who required the superintendent to re-hang it after he had removed it earlier. As much as you may like to, it makes no sense to try to consider the issue without the context of the school board’s actions and motivations. The courts will certainly consider them.

“And how do we know the original offending picture was of the “religious�? Jesus?”

Are we going back to our original conversation about this, where you tried to imply that there was no reason to think it was a portrait of Jesus, and then when it was pointed out how little sense that made you tried to pass it off as nothing more than sarcasm? Are you making it your actual argument now, or are you just kidding around again?