thesometimesaint Posted August 27, 2015 Posted August 27, 2015 If someone started singing the Book of Mormon musical in public I'd laugh my butt off. Like I am now because someone just equivocated between the tune of a hymn with the lyrics of a musical as being equally offensive. You are free to do so. Personally I believe such public display's of piety are the very thing Jesus preached against.
Damien the Leper Posted August 27, 2015 Posted August 27, 2015 Because it warrants being repeated, even during testimony meeting...Go Utes football!!!
KevinG Posted August 27, 2015 Posted August 27, 2015 You are free to do so. Personally I believe such public display's of piety are the very thing Jesus preached against.Heaven forbid we raise a joyful noise.
thesometimesaint Posted August 27, 2015 Posted August 27, 2015 (edited) Heaven forbid we raise a joyful noise. Noise being joyful is an interesting standard for anyone who has had young children. Edited August 27, 2015 by thesometimesaint 1
Scott Lloyd Posted August 27, 2015 Author Posted August 27, 2015 (edited) You are free to do so. Personally I believe such public display's of piety are the very thing Jesus preached against.Context. What Jesus preached against was public displays of piety by those who were neglecting the weightier matters of the law. It was hypocrisy He didn't like. His apostle, Paul, wrote: 12 ... be thou an bexample of the believers, in word, in cconversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in dpurity. "Conversation" as used here means behavior or conduct. That is, if we are believers, we should act like it and not hide our light under a bushel, as it were. Paul also declared that he is not ashamed of the gospel of Christ. Edited August 27, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
thesometimesaint Posted August 27, 2015 Posted August 27, 2015 I'm not ashamed of it either. I just don't believe in casting my pearls before swine.
Analytics Posted August 27, 2015 Posted August 27, 2015 But back to the original question... Does a public school band playing a hymn tune (no lyrics) constitute state establishment of religion? Why?C'mon its not too hard to answer. It depends upon the context and motivation of the song. Is the song being played because the school is endorsing the religious message and is trying to encourage worship? Or is it being played for non-religious reasons (e.g. cultural)? If a judge not letting the state play the song is viewed as an abridgment of religious rights, that would indicate that playing the song would in fact constitute the state sponsoring religion.
Guest Posted August 27, 2015 Posted August 27, 2015 In today's politically correct environment, when a person or a group of people take a stand for religious liberty, I think it is worth highlighting and applauding. Since we as Latter-day Saints are being encouraged to safeguard religious liberty, I see it as relevant to this board. A high school marching band in Mississippi was forbidden from performing a Christian hymn at a football game. In defiance, the crowd spontaneously began to sing the hymn. Read about it here.I think the constant assault by the courts will lead to much more of this. The High School my kids all graduated from was told by court order no more prayers even at events where up until that time it was allowed. At one such service (or meeting if you will) the Pricipal got up and said that "he could no longer pray, but if he could these are the things that he would say"...and then did so. He got a 20 standing ovation from all the parents and students...which meant he did not get to say much else.
longview Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 It depends upon the context and motivation of the song. Is the song being played because the school is endorsing the religious message and is trying to encourage worship? Or is it being played for non-religious reasons (e.g. cultural)? If a judge not letting the state play the song is viewed as an abridgment of religious rights, that would indicate that playing the song would in fact constitute the state sponsoring religion.Nonsense. There is WAY too much hyper-sensitivity. All it takes is ONE person to take "pretended offense" out of a student body of thousands to bring the ACLU in to raise a stink.
longview Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 I'm not ashamed of it either. I just don't believe in casting my pearls before swine.The Public Square consists of nothing but swine?
PeterPear Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 If you were offended in your imagination by their singing of the hymn, then imagine they were singing praises of the High School ceramics class.
SmileyMcGee Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 Nonsense. There is WAY too much hyper-sensitivity. All it takes is ONE person to take "pretended offense" out of a student body of thousands to bring the ACLU in to raise a stink.I don't really think it's about offense as much as it is an aversion to govt sponsored religious expression. Obviously you can find causes where some person gets offended, but one doesn't have to be offended to be opposed to things like school prayer, teaching of creationism, etc. there are plenty of other reasons.
thesometimesaint Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 The Public Square consists of nothing but swine? Yep. The public square(The common and profane) by definition is not the place for sacred religious piety. The public square is the competition of ideas, goods, and services(Money changers in the Temple). Not really the place for my devotion to my God.
ERayR Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 Yep. The public square(The common and profane) by definition is not the place for sacred religious piety. The public square is the competition of ideas, goods, and services(Money changers in the Temple). Not really the place for my devotion to my God. If this is really the case it seems to me that religion(s) should not be banned from that marketplace. 2
thesometimesaint Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 If this is really the case it seems to me that religion(s) should not be banned from that marketplace. Of what possible good value would such placement be? IE; I believe in the Godhead, others believe in the Trinity. If popularity(As shown by money, number of writings, number of adherents) is as the placement of the sacred in the profane marketplace of ideas. Then the LDS lose on all counts.
longview Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 I don't really think it's about offense as much as it is an aversion to govt sponsored religious expression. Obviously you can find causes where some person gets offended, but one doesn't have to be offended to be opposed to things like school prayer, teaching of creationism, etc. there are plenty of other reasons.People need to make a distinction between government officials, school administrators and teachers against random or self-organized students, parents and invited guests. As long as the officials do not initiate or mandate religious activities, then any expressions by students or guests would be perfectly acceptable in view of the Constitution (free exercise clause). Officials simply need not choose between parties. They would intervene only when class schedules are impacted, behaviors are judged too disorderly, or anything that would detract from the normal day to day routines.
longview Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 Yep. The public square(The common and profane) by definition is not the place for sacred religious piety. The public square is the competition of ideas, goods, and services(Money changers in the Temple). Not really the place for my devotion to my God.The bazaar is not necessarily the same space as the Public Square. There is the "Forum", the philosopher's corner, the elders at the gate of the city, churches (where visitors are invited to describe their ideas), synagogues, Temple courtyards, Mar's Hill, etc. Apostle Paul was not afraid to speak to groups of people everywhere he went. Of course he had the spirit to guide him on what topics to teach in order to persuade certain kinds of crowds. Many times he was fearless in confronting powerful people such as Pharisees and government officials.
ERayR Posted August 28, 2015 Posted August 28, 2015 (edited) Of what possible good value would such placement be? IE; I believe in the Godhead, others believe in the Trinity. If popularity(As shown by money, number of writings, number of adherents) is as the placement of the sacred in the profane marketplace of ideas. Then the LDS lose on all counts. You don't make sense. Nobody said anything about popularity as shown by anything, let alone money. In the marketplace of ideas let all come to exchange. If some are so fearful of their ideas as to censor someone else it doesn't speak too highly of their ideas. Edited August 28, 2015 by ERayR 2
thesometimesaint Posted August 29, 2015 Posted August 29, 2015 You don't make sense. Nobody said anything about popularity as shown by anything, let alone money. In the marketplace of ideas let all come to exchange. If some are so fearful of their ideas as to censor someone else it doesn't speak too highly of their ideas. I'm not afraid of censor. I don't believe in casting my pearls before swine. They don't value the pearls.
Walden Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 But back to the original question... Does a public school band playing a hymn tune (no lyrics) constitute state establishment of religion? Why?C'mon its not too hard to answer.A public high school band playing a Christian hymn at a football game establishes an endorsement of religious dogma by the school; at the very least it establishes a preference for religious dogma and communicates what is acceptable and/or popular religious dogma ("popular" being a strong motivator of high school students). The band represents the school and the student body and is funded by monies from the state (as well as bake sales and car wash funds, I presume) and thus should refrain for displaying school-sponsored preference of one religion over another....not sure why this concept is so difficult for some.
Daniel2 Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 By framing the issue as one of "religious liberty", you concede that a band playing "How Great Thou Art" is inherently religious. Public schools shouldn't be in the business in the business of leading a religious exercise. Thinking that freedom of religion can best be maintained by separating state and religion doesn't mean you are against the freedom of religion--just the opposite. In any case, the public spontaneously singing a song doesn't somehow "defy" the court order. The court order was that the public school couldn't lead the song--not that people couldn't sing it or that it couldn't be heard. Yes--this. I was going to say exactly the same thing.
provoman Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 A public high school band playing a Christian hymn at a football game establishes an endorsement of religious dogma by the school; at the very least it establishes a preference for religious dogma and communicates what is acceptable and/or popular religious dogma ("popular" being a strong motivator of high school students).The band represents the school and the student body and is funded by monies from the state (as well as bake sales and car wash funds, I presume) and thus should refrain for displaying school-sponsored preference of one religion over another....not sure why this concept is so difficult for some.I do not think it is a difficult concept. It is an inconvenient concept for some to acknowledge. Acknowledging a difference between government promotion of religion verses individual promotion of religion, does not endorse the claims of "religious liberty under threat".
ERayR Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 A public high school band playing a Christian hymn at a football game establishes an endorsement of religious dogma by the school; at the very least it establishes a preference for religious dogma and communicates what is acceptable and/or popular religious dogma ("popular" being a strong motivator of high school students). The band represents the school and the student body and is funded by monies from the state (as well as bake sales and car wash funds, I presume) and thus should refrain for displaying school-sponsored preference of one religion over another....not sure why this concept is so difficult for some. Hogwash. What dogma does playing the music establish, especially for music that was adopted from non-religious sources?
provoman Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Hogwash. What dogma does playing the music establish, especially for music that was adopted from non-religious sources?You should not be so quick to accept what the Spin Doctors are prescribing. The school and/or District in question is accused of holding assemblies about finding hope in Christ. It is also claimed that attendance to these assemblies was "mandatory". Edited August 31, 2015 by provoman
ERayR Posted August 31, 2015 Posted August 31, 2015 You should not be so quick to accept what the Spin Doctors are prescribing. The school and/or District in question is accused of holding assemblies about finding hope in Christ. It is also claimed that attendance to these assemblies was "mandatory". Thanks, I had not seen that before. To me the assemblies would be out of bounds but the song that caused the fuss well maybe not so much.
Recommended Posts