In all seriousness, where is the line drawn on something like this?

 

If it is done by students (cheerleaders) without intervention by anyone on staff, is it OK?

Would this be completely taboo, regardless of who made the sign?

So, what exactly are our civil liberties these days anywho?

 

In these days, (CHRISTIANS) have NO civil liberties.

 

It seems its more cool to be atheist, gay, anything anti religion this day and time.

In these days, (CHRISTIANS) have NO civil liberties.

 

It seems its more cool to be atheist, gay, anything anti religion this day and time.

 

Let's put the brakes on the hyperbole here...

 

I get what you're saying. But Christians have plenty of civil liberties. Seen any policemen chaining the doors of your local church and telling you no one is allowed in?

 

To my mind, there's no doubt that there's an increasing double standard when it comes to the treatment of Christian belief and other belief, but saying that Christians have NO civil liberties in modern America is the kind of exaggeration that shuts people off to the argument and makes them unwilling to hear about it.

increasing double standard when it comes to the treatment of Christian belief and other belief

 

I'd like to hear you talk more about this.

Let's put the brakes on the hyperbole here...

 

I get what you're saying. But Christians have plenty of civil liberties. Seen any policemen chaining the doors of your local church and telling you no one is allowed in?

 

To my mind, there's no doubt that there's an increasing double standard when it comes to the treatment of Christian belief and other belief, but saying that Christians have NO civil liberties in modern America is the kind of exaggeration that shuts people off to the argument and makes them unwilling to hear about it.

 

I understand what you are saying and mean, but IMO the only rights Christians have are what they do in Church. Anything else outside of the Church is looked as (pushing religion on someone). even the Christians in the military are under attack. Everything from what they are allowed to preach on to nativity scenes. Google it and you will come up with a wide array of topics the military is doing against Christians. And it once again comes to stuff outside of the Church. One thing Christians are supposed to do is spread the word of God, which is under fire because it seems everything Christians do outside of the church is condemed.

True story, the ACLU has been on Raceland's back side all year for things just like this. They have even been sending representatives to the Raceland football games to watch. The Raceland Superintendent has an ACLU file in his office for all the correspondence.

 

If they hear of this, they will be contacting Belfry.

 

 

Cudos to Belfry for doing it, keep up as long as you can.

 

I'd tell the ACLU to kiss my donkey. Carry on Belfry. :thumb:

They didn't need God on their side to win, but it's always nice to have Him on your side.

I'd like to hear you talk more about this.

 

I read a really compelling book earlier this year called "The Three Languages of Politics" that really stuck with me. The author's theory is that liberals, conservatives and libertarians all view political action along a certain axis and that the axes are different for each of them...

 

Liberals: Oppressor ------ Oppressed

Conservatives: Civilization ---------- Barbarism

Libertarians: Coercion ----------- Free Choice

 

I tell you that bit to tell you this: imagine looking at the history of Christianity with an oppressor/oppressed set of glasses on. You see a brief period at the outset of Christianity being a minority group and then 1500 years of Christian domination.

 

I'm not saying this is right or wrong. I'm talking about perception, which is at least fifty times more potent than reality.

 

Seeing Christianity in this light means you see ALL other groups as minorities who are, therefore, in some way oppressed by the dominant group. So the natural consequence is then to say that WHATEVER has to be done to alleviate the oppressed then needs to be done.

 

If the things that need to be done come at the expense of the power, wealth and influence of the dominant group, so be it, because these things must be done.

 

That's how theory goes anyway.

 

So if you're looking from that perspective, then a white, male, American, Christian is darn near the top of the sociological mountain and so not only is that person wielding great influence, then if political power is a zero-sum game (it shouldn't be, but sometimes it's viewed that way), then he's likely maintaining that power, wealth, or influence, at the expense of the non-dominant or minority groups. Therefore, in an effort to alleviate that oppression, even if sub-consciously, the rights of the dominant are less important in any pursuit of change.

 

I'm not exactly sure if what I wrote there makes any sense and I might have even said some things I don't mean. I'll try to put together some examples of exactly what I'm talking about...

So if Belfry had lost would the students faith in God be lessened/shaken?

So if Belfry had lost would the students faith in God be lessened/shaken?

 

No because it was God's will. Their challenge would be understanding why it was God's will that they lose and what they could do to win God's favor in the future.

 

 

 

Note to anyone before replying ... the above post is not meant to mock God, God's will or anyone's belief. I just find it hard to believe God cares who wins a football game.

I just find it hard to believe God cares who wins a football game.

What about a School winning while expressing their faith in God? God may want that team to be victorious and prevail over others to show the strength of God. Exhibit above: A team that puts God first can never lose.

In all seriousness, where is the line drawn on something like this?

 

If it is done by students (cheerleaders) without intervention by anyone on staff, is it OK?

Would this be completely taboo, regardless of who made the sign?

A non-planned, spontaneous, prayer lead by a non school employee that is not performed over a PA system is permissible. I do not know how written references to God would be perceived. I would venture an argument would be made that whom every made that sign was supervised by an adult, possible school employee, that by allowing it to be made condoned it, and it not being a "spontaneous" act it is not permissible.

 

That's just my take on the viewpoint of the ACLU.

So if Belfry had lost would the students faith in God be lessened/shaken?

 

That was last year but Belfry gained.

 

http://bluegrasspreps.com/ky-football-high/god-we-will-228216.html

So what is the point of this thread Guru? To mock the religion that those students choose to follow? To question whether or not Belfry's students should have done this? I'm curious on your stance.

So what is the point of this thread Guru? To mock the religion that those students choose to follow? To question whether or not Belfry's students should have done this? I'm curious on your stance.

 

Shooting straight to hear everyone's opinion on the issue.

 

And if the ACLU is after Raceland sooner or later they will be setting up camp on Pond Creek.

 

Since you asked me for my stance, I personally think it is over the line.