Now if the school board would just listen to him.

The school board is creating both an impermissible entanglement with religion and an implicit endorsement of it by donating the use of their cafeteria to particular imams. Not all students go to see the same mosque, btw. Only some subset of even the Muslim students would benefit from this. This definitely would not fly under US case law.

Not to mention the absurd fundamentalism that would lead people to cut class instead of going to a later service. There are Muslim organizations in Canada that oppose the school board's decision.

The permissible version of this would be to just designate an area (not the whole cafeteria if it would interfere with other students) for individuals of any religion or no religion to go and pray or goof off, and not bring in religious leaders from the outside.

I don't know what "beefy boy" (around 1 minute mark) is talking about. I don't believe that a school would prevent him from "just praying".

This whole matter is a grey area, I don't think there's anything wrong with Muslims praying in the school cafeteria (or anywhere else in a school) as long as the school's not actively endorsing it but, I do think there is a problem if the school board is allowing students to leave class to pray. Can this not be left to between-period breaks, or lunch, before class, or after class?

@dystopianfuturetoday agreed on all of the above. I'm definitely not one of those people who thinks the entire fix for education is coming up with inventive pay schemes for teachers, I'm just trying to point out that even if you are one of those people, the kinds of things you see bandied about aren't designed very well. Well, unless the design was to look like it's meant to make education better across the board, while really having the effect of making sure that only wealthy people have the ability to provide a good education for their children...

My gut feeling is that a lot of our educational problems are actually general economic disparity problems, coupled with the usual conservative brain damage keeping our schools persistently underfunded, and in many cases systematically sabotaged by ideological nuts on the school boards (see Texas).

There's probably something we could learn from other countries in terms of how to do it better (since pretty much all of them do), but mostly our issue is that generally we've let that conservative brain damage really infect our social psyche to the point where every discussion of public policy is always, without any exception at all, being a nasty debate between "do something" and "do nothing", rather than people coming up with competing solutions to a problem that we all agree needs to be addressed.

>> ^bareboards2:
As the person who wrote the description, let me assure you that you have interpreted the "they" incorrectly.
I meant crazy fundamentalists who have a deep need to control the world. Regardless of what religion.
I copied the wiki article and pointed out that this sentence was a deep relief to me: Although many authors have described such influence (particularly of Reconstructionism),full adherents to Reconstructionism are few and marginalized among conservative Christians.
So there is my proof that this is what I meant.
I am also not an atheist. I believe there are things we can't possibly understand with our puny restricted human brains. I respect the personal choices of individuals -- I would never argue someone out of their personal experience of the divine.
What I don't like is when someone uses their personal experience as an excuse to control others, to define "morality" for others. This guy. Mormons working tirelessly on Prop 8. Parents trying to keep any mention of homosexuality out of schools, which perpetuates the bullying and the shaming.
And I believe that when atheists attack someone's belief as irrational, it is no different than a Christian attempting to force their worldview on the atheist. I think atheists take their justifiable anger at Christians attempting to -- and succeeding at -- controlling others through shame, laws, wars and go too far with it -- I don't believe it is necessary to talk someone out of their personal religious experience, IF IF IF that personal religious experience isn't affecting the atheist in any way. I think atheists need to learn to let folks be, and focus on facts -- overturning Prop 8, booting fundamentalist School Board members out.
Them there's my two cents. Sorry you have felt beat up here. The Sift is a great place, with some really really REALLY smart and funny people. Including some, in my opinion, angry atheists. It is part of the Sift's charm, if you can treat it like entertainment.
>> ^shinyblurry:
>> ^quantumushroom:
From that link:

LGBT Activists in Uganda point to a virulently anti-gay March 2009 conference 2009 put on by three American Evangelical activists for inciting the latest round of violence and intimidation against the local LGBT community. Among the three were Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively, Exodus International board member Don Schmierer, and International Healing Foundation’s Caleb Lee Brundidge, who is a protege of ex-gay advocate Richard Cohen. Lively, who blamed gay men for the rise of Nazism and the Rwandan genocide, proudly declared his talk as being a “nuclear bomb” against LGBT advocacy in Africa. (You can read about all of the events of 2009 and early 2010 here.)
So atheists have no problem using these fringe kooks as representatives of true Christendom, but get insulted when it's pointed out 20th century mass murderers were all leaders of communist regimes? Death toll: 100 million and counting

The whole thread was created under that presumption. "I am flabbergasted. I keep thinking they can't go any more off the deep end." They as in all Christians. As in all Christians are kooks. I don't know if this site is just pro-atheist but there is a definite undertone of intolerance and bigotry here against Christians. What happened to civil discourse? Oh yeah, this is the internet. Nevermind.



That's cool.. thanks for enlightening me here. I didn't mean to cast aspersions but I guess that shows how easy it can be to misinterpet peoples intentions/beliefs, which really underscores your point I think. I wouldn't say I feel beat up, just that there seemed to be a tone here. I'll go with your assesment for now.

Personally, I don't tell people what to believe. That is what free will is for. It's up to them to draw their own conclusions. If someone asks, I will answer. If someone is mistating, I will correct. Other than that, to each his own. I will speak the truth as I know it, and hopefully someone will listen, but that's as far as I go. If you try to force something on someone, it just pushes them farther away.

As the person who wrote the description, let me assure you that you have interpreted the "they" incorrectly.

I meant crazy fundamentalists who have a deep need to control the world. Regardless of what religion.

I copied the wiki article and pointed out that this sentence was a deep relief to me: Although many authors have described such influence (particularly of Reconstructionism),full adherents to Reconstructionism are few and marginalized among conservative Christians.

So there is my proof that this is what I meant.

I am also not an atheist. I believe there are things we can't possibly understand with our puny restricted human brains. I respect the personal choices of individuals -- I would never argue someone out of their personal experience of the divine.

What I don't like is when someone uses their personal experience as an excuse to control others, to define "morality" for others. This guy. Mormons working tirelessly on Prop 8. Parents trying to keep any mention of homosexuality out of schools, which perpetuates the bullying and the shaming. edit - And of course when the Bible is used to trump science. That gives me the screaming mimis.

And I believe that when atheists attack someone's belief as irrational, it is no different than a Christian attempting to force their worldview on the atheist. I think atheists take their justifiable anger at Christians attempting to -- and succeeding at -- controlling others through shame, laws, wars and go too far with it -- I don't believe it is necessary to talk someone out of their personal religious experience, IF IF IF that personal religious experience isn't affecting the atheist in any way. I think atheists need to learn to let folks be, and focus on facts -- overturning Prop 8, booting fundamentalist School Board members out.

Them there's my two cents. Sorry you have felt beat up here. The Sift is a great place, with some really really REALLY smart and funny people. Including some, in my opinion, angry atheists. It is part of the Sift's charm, if you can treat it like entertainment.





>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^quantumushroom:
From that link:

LGBT Activists in Uganda point to a virulently anti-gay March 2009 conference 2009 put on by three American Evangelical activists for inciting the latest round of violence and intimidation against the local LGBT community. Among the three were Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively, Exodus International board member Don Schmierer, and International Healing Foundation’s Caleb Lee Brundidge, who is a protege of ex-gay advocate Richard Cohen. Lively, who blamed gay men for the rise of Nazism and the Rwandan genocide, proudly declared his talk as being a “nuclear bomb” against LGBT advocacy in Africa. (You can read about all of the events of 2009 and early 2010 here.)
So atheists have no problem using these fringe kooks as representatives of true Christendom, but get insulted when it's pointed out 20th century mass murderers were all leaders of communist regimes? Death toll: 100 million and counting


The whole thread was created under that presumption. "I am flabbergasted. I keep thinking they can't go any more off the deep end." They as in all Christians. As in all Christians are kooks. I don't know if this site is just pro-atheist but there is a definite undertone of intolerance and bigotry here against Christians. What happened to civil discourse? Oh yeah, this is the internet. Nevermind.

i'm amongst that stastitic. i don't vote because its fucking bullshit. not because im not smart enough to grasp the issues, but because the options do not, will not and never have represented me. i can not lend my support to someone who is owned by a moneyed interest. i'm in texas too, it's fairly obvious that all our politicians are owned by oil companies, natural gas companies, home builders, halliburton, lockheed martin and wal mart. it's insulting and it is a waste of time. all the options are false.

oh, i take that back. i do vote in local elections like school board and city council and railroad commissioner and judges, etc. but only when i have reason to believe that at least one of the candidates isnt working for a church or a company. and i do a pretty thorough evaluation.

poor does not equal stupid. i would say poor simply equal unrepresented. but none of you are being represented, unless one of you happens to own lockheed martin, then you probably are very well represented.

anyway, voting is such bullshit.

i do however, enjoy vandalizing campaign signs. like, a lot. i go around and rip them out of the ground during the day, like im the person in charge of them and im supposed to be doing it. then i take them home, deface them with clever graffitti. then drive back around and put them back in the ground. like im supposed to be doing it. sometimes i just strategically relocate them, like in front of strip clubs or "gentlemen's spas". i highly recommend you all adopt this tactic in your own towns.
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

Nearly 64% of the lowest 20% income bracket do not vote. Tell me DT, why do you hate poor people?

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

nach0s is right. This guy was simply deranged. But don't deny if this guy had put Glenn Beck as a source of inspiration for his "rampage" he'd be branded a Tea Partier Icon.


>> ^nach0s:

Um, let's see. HE (WAS) FUCKING CRAZY.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^quantumushroom:
No wonder liberals want guns banned. They're terrible shots!

Don't downvote funny posts you idiots!
Does anyone know why this guy was actually there? What the hell he was protesting and misinterpreting the Vendetta V for?


Um, let's see. HE (WAS) FUCKING CRAZY.

Your video, Florida School Board Shooting, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^quantumushroom:
No wonder liberals want guns banned. They're terrible shots!

Don't downvote funny posts you idiots!
Does anyone know why this guy was actually there? What the hell he was protesting and misinterpreting the Vendetta V for?


They fired his wife who was a Special Ed teacher.

>> ^quantumushroom:
No wonder liberals want guns banned. They're terrible shots!


Well played!

>> ^quantumushroom:

No wonder liberals want guns banned. They're terrible shots!


Don't downvote funny posts you idiots!

Does anyone know why this guy was actually there? What the hell he was protesting and misinterpreting the Vendetta V for?