Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Is this upholding separation of church/state, or an even more blatant violation of establishment of religion?

Posted by   + Show Post

Yes, the source is biased. I couldn't find an objectional article on the issue, other than the policy in writing here. READ IT. As for a quick summary:

Indianapolis Schools Ban Atheism Websites

by Jesse Galef

The Indianapolis Public School system has a policy to ban certain websites from being viewed at school.  I certainly hated it when I was in high school (we found ways to bypass it if course) but it’s a reasonable idea.  And the list of subjects banned is pretty straightforward: Pornography, Social Networking, Atheism and “Alternative Spirituality”, Games –

Wait, what?  Sites on ‘alternative spirituality’ are banned?  From the policy (pdf hosted on FFRF website):

“Sites that promote and provide information on religions such as Wicca, Witchcraft or Satanism.  Occult Practices, atheistic views, voodoo rituals or other forms of mysticism are represented here…  This category includes sites which discuss or deal with paranormal or unexplained events.”  [emphasis mine]

Any site addressing LGBT issues or sexual identity is also banned – great idea for the kids going through confusing times, right?

Ok, first of all, I don’t know why “atheistic views” are in the same category as Satanism.  But ignoring that idiocy, this is hugely discriminatory.  “Normal” religious sites are allowed, but not the “scary minority” religious views.  I could understand if all religious sites were banned but there’s no way to justify banning only some.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation is on the case, writing a letter to the superintendent and urging people to voice their concerns.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unreasonablefaith/2009/11/indianapolis-schools-ban-atheism-websites/


"Women need not always keep their mouths shut and their wombs open." -Emma Goldman
 


http://masqueradingscientist.blogspot.com/




 




 




 




 

by on Jan. 20, 2013 at 5:25 PM
Replies (21-29):
AdrianneHill
by Platinum Member on Jan. 20, 2013 at 6:26 PM
Who thinks this is reasonable and fair?
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
randi1978
by Bronze Member on Jan. 20, 2013 at 6:27 PM

Either ban them all or none at all.  Just because those religions (or lack of) are technically in the minority does not mean they're less important.  If a child can still look up sites regarding being christian, muslim or jewish, they should be able to seek sites for other religions.

And do they have a reason for banning access to LGBT sites?  I would think such sites would be a blessing for those struggling still with their sexuality.

Sekirei
by Nari Trickster on Jan. 20, 2013 at 6:29 PM

Yup, violation... going as far as to block faiths that are recognized by the government.

circle_of_life
by Bronze Member on Jan. 20, 2013 at 6:29 PM

 

Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:


Quoting circle_of_life:

 It should be all or nothing. It's not right to ban certain religious/spiritual sites and not others.

IMO atheism isn't a religion. Banning such a site only hinders those who might choose to learn more about it during school hours.

 I agree atheism isn't a religion. That's why I said religious/spiritual. It falls in the realm of spiritual beliefs even though it is actually the lack of belief I guess. Anywho, it should be all or nothing. Meaning they should have access to all sites pertaining to all types of belief systems or none at all.

jessilin0113
by Platinum Member on Jan. 20, 2013 at 6:30 PM
1 mom liked this
No, atheists are villains. You need a long skinny mustache to twirl.


Quoting stringtheory:


Quoting romalove:


Quoting stringtheory:

While FFRF was successful in this case, I think that it highlights the fact that there is a discriminatory preference for christian students. I have pointed out before that my own affiliation with church and youth group gave me opportunities in public schools that it should not have; I was a good student but picked for leadership positions based on my church membership. While I understand that my affiliation may have shown some propensity to commitment, I don't believe that my own daughter is any less qualified for these positions because she does not have a christian affiliation. This policy was a blatant endorsement of christianity and although it has been changed, those making decisions for students likely still have the prejudice that brought about the policy in the first place. The separation and non-establishment needs to be more ingrained in public policy. This does not make me a militant, it makes me a concerned mother.

If you want to be militant I will lend you my beret.  

Sweet. I keep trying to grow a goatee (that's a thing we do, right?).


Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
Veni.Vidi.Vici.
by on Jan. 20, 2013 at 6:32 PM


Quoting circle_of_life:

 

Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:


Quoting circle_of_life:

 It should be all or nothing. It's not right to ban certain religious/spiritual sites and not others.

IMO atheism isn't a religion. Banning such a site only hinders those who might choose to learn more about it during school hours.

 I agree atheism isn't a religion. That's why I said religious/spiritual. It falls in the realm of spiritual beliefs even though it is actually the lack of belief I guess. Anywho, it should be all or nothing. Meaning they should have access to all sites pertaining to all types of belief systems or none at all.

I get your point.

Would you fight for the right for your children to be able to search the KKK or other kinds of hate groups loosely based on religious beliefs?

circle_of_life
by Bronze Member on Jan. 20, 2013 at 6:39 PM

 

Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:


Quoting circle_of_life:

 

Quoting Veni.Vidi.Vici.:


Quoting circle_of_life:

 It should be all or nothing. It's not right to ban certain religious/spiritual sites and not others.

IMO atheism isn't a religion. Banning such a site only hinders those who might choose to learn more about it during school hours.

 I agree atheism isn't a religion. That's why I said religious/spiritual. It falls in the realm of spiritual beliefs even though it is actually the lack of belief I guess. Anywho, it should be all or nothing. Meaning they should have access to all sites pertaining to all types of belief systems or none at all.

I get your point.

Would you fight for the right for your children to be able to search the KKK or other kinds of hate groups loosely based on religious beliefs?

 No, unless it pertained to a school assignment. Which is really the only good reason a kid should be looking up anything that has to do with religion/spirituality in school anyway. I just think that if they ban some religious/spiritual sites than they should ban them all.

Euphoric
by Thumper kid spanks on Jan. 20, 2013 at 7:13 PM

 bump

LoveMyBoyK
by Ruby Member on Jan. 20, 2013 at 7:18 PM
UNACCEPTABLE!! I would be suing their asses off!!! You ban ALL religious sites if you dare ban One.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured