IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New the aclu only gets involved in egregious behavior
long after the people with the problem have given up hope of solving it. One of the few groups I have actually donated money to and have never regretted it afterwards.
New See, this is the type of thing I'm asking.
So they sue first and seek discussion afterward? Is this the type of action they have a reputation for? Wading in with guns blazing, so to speak?

Wade.

Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers?
A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
New Ok, now I get it
Before it was obstinate ignorance. In my part it was lazyness. It was clear from that summary to me, and I didn't care enough to do your research for you.

But then Another Scott did the legwork, pulled the critical points, yes, I did read the full article and it was as obvious as it gets. They were SHOVING their religion down the throat of the student body.

Your general attitude is that we can all be nice people, talk it out, work it out, jeez, why ya gotta get the court's involved type of person.

BECAUSE I've been on the recieving end of that state sponsored Christian education. And I know how damaging it is to the families of the non dominate religion.

You didn't want to address any of the issue. You just want to know if they were attacked by the ACLU. Oh no! Don't be mean to the poor sad wonderful educators, it must all be a simple misunderstanding.

You know what? They should have been attacked a lot harder. Jail the bastards. Let them be martyrs.

You want to have a say from across the pond? At least try to stick on the issue.
New It's all a matter of perspective.
Since you've acknowledged in this thread that I am coming from a viewpoint outside the US, all you really had to say a few replies earlier was that, yes, the ACLU's modus operandi is to take legal action. I didn't know that and it was an assumption the original articles and those Another Scott also excerpted all made. Not wholly surprising, given their target audience is residents of the US who could reasonably be expected to already know that.

I know intellectually that evangelising any religion in the US within a government institution is illegal (and yes, I did need reminding). Your, ah, emotional response to the topic is quite strange to me because such activity is not illegal in Australia. I was not attacking your response or defending their wrong doing. Or at least, that was not what I thought I was doing. It wasn't even what I was talking about.

My "complaint", if you want to call it that, was that the *original* issue was addressed by pulling the ACLU on to the stage and they promptly sue! To which I quite innocently said "why was that their first response?" as it seems rather incendienary. Now I know that that is what they do. Any in all likelihood, the original students who contacted them knew this. Not to belabour the point, but I did not.

Like I said, it was a simple matter of perspective.

Wade.

Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers?
A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
New Question for you
Is there a dominant religious belief in Australia? I seriously don't know.

So for a sense of perspective based on what I do know about Australia ... In large parts of the U.S. being a member of any minority religious faith, including no faith, bears comparison to being an aborigine in the early 1900s. No, Jewish and atheist children are not taken from their families. But the school boards and local law enforcement make sure to indoctrinate them into Christian beliefs all the same.

If an organization dedicated to protecting the rights of aborigines had approached the local authorities and requested a meeting to discuss what they were doing, how would they have been received? With an honest effort to discuss the issue? Or maybe with threats and intimidation?

That is the reception you will receive today in the rural South if you ask them to stop proselytizing to your kids in school. That's not an exaggeration. See the Jena Six ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jena_Six ) for an example from three years ago.
--

Drew
New confused, where does religion come into Jena 6?
I live in the deep south and the only religion taught in our elementary school is secular humanism, I have to remind the teachers that teaching children that mother nature is real is verboten.
Of course the district has a shitload of private christian schools where I am sure they are all dosed regularly
New It's a proxy for "people like us"
The Klan uses Christian symbolism, even as they bomb black (Christian) churches. And they use the same symbol when they light it on the Jewish family's lawn.

Point is, what they are really pushing is conformity. The fact that their current mindset is mostly Christian evangelical is an implementation detail.
--

Drew
New Ah, agree with your second paragraph
conformity is treasured hereabouts
New Answers.
Is there a dominant religious belief in Australia? I seriously don't know.


Yes, there is. And it could probably be called 'Christian' but to dice things more accurately, far more Australians are 'religious' about sport, usually some sort of football. Socially, we're British by descent, but we do import from other cultures. And significantly, we never had a revolution against Mother England (they learnt from the US's; when it looked like one might be starting here, they decided to talk to us about independance).

Because of this, there is a certain evangelical rabidity that Australians do not, as a rule, have. You may have heard the phrase "She'll be right, mate" as an Australianism: this embodies a *lot* of the Australian psyche. If it wasn't compulsary, voter turnout at elections would probably be around 15%.

Issues with recent immigrants and refugees don't focus so much on their religious practices, as much as their assimilation. There have been concerns about specific Islamic developments, but very rarely is the focus on anything but how "unAustralian" things might be.

Many state schools offer a form of religious education called 'scripture', which is takes about an hour a week and is run with cooperation of the local churches. Students are free to opt-out and the school will provide an alternate program for those who do. This program does struggle, though, with lack of people to teach. I don't know how this fares in areas with a high level of Muslim children. Or Jews. But then, I've heard that in both cases, they are more likely to be placed in private schools, anyway.

If an organization dedicated to protecting the rights of aborigines had approached the local authorities and requested a meeting to discuss what they were doing, how would they have been received? With an honest effort to discuss the issue? Or maybe with threats and intimidation?


Usually with an honest effort to discuss the issue. Or at least that's what each side would believe they were doing. If talks break down, the next recourse tends to be civil disobedience, or trial by media, especially if one side just refuses to even talk. People do try very hard to make themselves heard. (Frivolous lawsuits do get thrown out in Australian courts; magistrates and judges do not like people wasting the courts time and will tell them so directly. There is provision in several laws for the court process to be halted and the parties sent to negotiation or mediation.)

One good example is the so-called Aboriginal Tent Embassy. This was classic civil disobedience dating from 1972 where some Aborigines simply camped on the lawn of Parliament House because the McMahon government refused to consider Aboriginal land rights. There was police action a few times, but neither side rolled out the lawyers.

To give you a good idea of how alien us Aussies can find rural southurn US, even by proxy, have you ever seen the Top Gear US Special? The British presenters drove through Alabama with a task that saw them seriously teasing the residents about their beliefs, religious and social. This turned out to be far more dangerous than the show's producers ever thought possible. And the presenters could not quite believe the responses, either. You would get the same response from most Aussies. (The same anti-gay, anti-religious messages would invite reasonably harmless ridicule in both Britan and Australia. In Alabama, people were shocked and horrified. And then the presenters were shot at.)

Wade.

Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers?
A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
New anecdote about alabama
circa 1977 was working as a gas leak inspector in arough part of town. My partners truck was keyed and the arial ripped off whie we were working on the next block. The next morning my partner complained bitterly to the foreman and didnt want to complete the job unless he was given a city truck. Foreman (white) went into the crew canteen (black) and asked "who are the two toughest niggers in there."
two fella volunteered and the forman told them to watch the truck while we worked. Of course they were delighted to have a day just standing around watching us two white guys worked. Afterwards we grabbed a beer, I asked them (me being young and stupid) how they could take the boss calling them niggers. They replied that they had gone to highschool together and had known him their whole lives so it was no big deal. However if I was to call them a nigger they would probably kill me.

Alabama is a far different world than the rest of the US. Mind yer manners and yer business you will be fine, rock the boat and there would be hell to pay.
New There's your answer
In Alabama, people were shocked and horrified. And then the presenters were shot at.
That's why the ACLU tends to lead with lawyers. If it doesn't work, at least they make good cannon fodder.
--

Drew
     Oh this is SO cool - (crazy) - (22)
         If you want to pray the bacteria out of your own food feel - (boxley) - (21)
             Nope - (crazy)
             Oh, and the STFU is the standard thing I'd hear - (crazy) - (19)
                 not for that reason :-) - (boxley)
                 It sounds like that 90/10 thing which is the problem. - (static) - (17)
                     Yo dude, you seem to have lost the key piece - (crazy) - (15)
                         Yes, I saw all of that. - (static) - (14)
                             Nope - (drook) - (1)
                                 I'm talking about the step before that. -NT - (static)
                             A couple of better summaries. - (Another Scott)
                             the aclu only gets involved in egregious behavior - (boxley) - (10)
                                 See, this is the type of thing I'm asking. - (static) - (9)
                                     Ok, now I get it - (crazy) - (8)
                                         It's all a matter of perspective. - (static) - (7)
                                             Question for you - (drook) - (6)
                                                 confused, where does religion come into Jena 6? - (boxley) - (2)
                                                     It's a proxy for "people like us" - (drook) - (1)
                                                         Ah, agree with your second paragraph - (boxley)
                                                 Answers. - (static) - (2)
                                                     anecdote about alabama - (boxley)
                                                     There's your answer - (drook)
                     Same thing with Dillinger - (mhuber)

Dein Glück... ist nicht mein Glück... ist mein Unglück.
58 ms