Jesus Portrait Taken Down In Ohio Middle School

[jimnyc]

It's been there since 1947. Yes, I understand it's a public school. I just think it's a shame that one day our kids will go to schools that look like prisons minus the bars, just a flat color and a stool. Businesses will soon follow. Something offends everyone and the answer to being offended is to sue. What a shitty world this is turning into. I'm glad I got to go to schools when they were normal.

Outside of promotion and separation - I would love to know how someone is harmed by this. What it boils down to, is someone simply disagreeing with Christ and wanting it removed to prove a point. There's no one being harmed in the slightest bit. But I know 'legally' that it likely wouldn't matter anyway. IMO though, nothing is being promoted and no one harmed. If someone says that it simply hanging there is promotion - show me ONE person over the years that became a Catholic or made ANY choice based on that picture (other than the choice to file suit)


CINCINNATI -- A Jesus portrait that has hung in a southern Ohio school district since 1947 was taken down Wednesday, because of concerns about the potential costs of a federal lawsuit against its display.

The superintendent of Jackson City Schools said the decision was made after the district's insurance company declined to cover litigation expenses. He said the faculty adviser and two student members of the Hi-Y Club, a Christian-based service club that the school says owns the portrait, took it down at his direction.

"At the end of the day, we just couldn't roll the dice with taxpayer money," Superintendent Phil Howard told The Associated Press. "When you get into these kinds of legal battles, you're not talking about money you can raise with bake sales and car washes. It's not fair to take those resources from our kids' education."

The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio and the Madison, Wis.-based Freedom from Religion Foundation had sued on behalf of a student and two parents, calling the portrait an unconstitutional promotion of religion in a public school. The student and parents weren't identified publicly by the groups, saying they would face backlash from portrait supporters, some of whom had suggested that they should leave town and find another school.

An ACLU spokesman said the school disclosed its decision at a federal court hearing Tuesday in Columbus. The organization will wait to see whether the portrait stays down.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/03/jesus-portrait-down_n_3006643.html

http://i.imgur.com/Mj6m8pv.jpg

[PostmodernProphet]

I bet if they offered enough the school would let them put up a Coke logo.......

[logroller]

I bet if they offered enough the school would let them put up a Coke logo.......
As a Pepsi person, I'd sue.:laugh:

[jimnyc]

As a Pepsi person, I'd sue.:laugh:

And then I would sue you!

Can we sue people for suing? Or is that a protected right? People that sue too much make me angry and give me anxiety. Is that reason enough to sue? :poke:

[Syrenn]

It's been there since 1947. Yes, I understand it's a public school. I just think it's a shame that one day our kids will go to schools that look like prisons minus the bars, just a flat color and a stool. Businesses will soon follow. Something offends everyone and the answer to being offended is to sue. What a shitty world this is turning into. I'm glad I got to go to schools when they were normal.

Outside of promotion and separation - I would love to know how someone is harmed by this. What it boils down to, is someone simply disagreeing with Christ and wanting it removed to prove a point. There's no one being harmed in the slightest bit. But I know 'legally' that it likely wouldn't matter anyway. IMO though, nothing is being promoted and no one harmed. If someone says that it simply hanging there is promotion - show me ONE person over the years that became a Catholic or made ANY choice based on that picture (other than the choice to file suit)



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/03/jesus-portrait-down_n_3006643.html

http://i.imgur.com/Mj6m8pv.jpg



i would want the picture taken down...... religion has no place in public schools.

[jimnyc]

i would want the picture taken down...... religion has no place in public schools.

I agree, only based on the law which agrees. In "the real world" though, I have no issue with it, as no one is hurt, no one harmed, no one converted, not even anyone being taught. And if I thought for a moment that the suit was brought by a constitutional person, I would further agree, but we know it's not, or I believe it's not. It's simply once again someone being offended over something they simply don't like.

[Robert A Whit]

i would want the picture taken down...... religion has no place in public schools.


That is an odd thing to say given the government itself is deeply immersed with this GOD thing.

Even Obama ends his talks with GOD Bless America ... at least I believe he does. d

We know that prayers are in the two houses of congress. We know currency says trust God.

[Syrenn]

I agree, only based on the law which agrees. In "the real world" though, I have no issue with it, as no one is hurt, no one harmed, no one converted, not even anyone being taught. And if I thought for a moment that the suit was brought by a constitutional person, I would further agree, but we know it's not, or I believe it's not. It's simply once again someone being offended over something they simply don't like.

The real world is a private world.... My favorite Thai restaurant has a shrine...and i could care less. The catholic schools have religious things up all over... and i could care less....


I don't care who is or isn't offended.... religion of any sort has no business in public schools

[Syrenn]

That is an odd thing to say given the government itself is deeply immersed with this GOD thing.

Even Obama ends his talks with GOD Bless America ... at least I believe he does. d

We know that prayers are in the two houses of congress. We know currency says trust God.


and i think the god thing is bullshit in our government as well.... the whole in god we trust on our currency is bullshit. Swearing on a bible is bullshit.... The only reasons politicians invoke "god" is for votes...

if government is isnsiting schools be striped of religion... then government should lead the way and strip it out of government.

[jimnyc]

The real world is a private world.... My favorite Thai restaurant has a shrine...and i could care less. The catholic schools have religious things up all over... and i could care less....


I don't care who is or isn't offended.... religion of any sort has no business in public schools

If it was truly an issue as some would have us believe, it wouldn't have lasted there for 60+ years. And in that time, not a single person was harmed, in any way whatsoever. Not a single person has been converted and not a single person forced to learn anything. But times are changing, and people who get offended are becoming more frequent. But I concede, as I did from the beginning, that based on law there is little standing. But that doesn't change the fact that no harm is done whatsoever, and the complaining is simply about people who aren't of the faith being butt hurt by a picture and therefore want it removed.

[jimnyc]

and i think the god thing is bullshit in our government as well.... the whole in god we trust on our currency is bullshit. Swearing on a bible is bullshit.... The only reasons politicians invoke "god" is for votes...

if government is isnsiting schools be striped of religion... then government should lead the way and strip it out of government.

Wow, now that I disagree with. So much from day one in our government was based on religion. Whether anyone likes it or not, it was a large part of our countries beginning. And certainly not all politicians use it as a tool. I know of many that are true God fearing Christians. I'm sure some "use" it, but I wouldn't paint all of them with that brush. And I don't think having current politicians think like or act like or mimicking some of our founding fathers is such a bad idea.

[aboutime]

Let's all take a step backward here. Think about this.

Does that picture of Jesus mean anything to you personally?
Is that your school?
If the picture is now down. How does it bother you IF...you didn't know it was there in the first place?
Who really cares whether the picture is up, or down?
What effect does it have on anyone outside, or inside the school today?

If it bothers anyone for taking it down.
How about every book, in every library across this nation that has at least ONE book
with pictures of Jesus, or God in them.
Does it bother you that THOSE BOOKS are closed, and the photo's are not visible????

Same principle. No Big Deal...in either case.
Unless YOU need something to be bothered by, insulted by, or offended by..just because YOU FEEL LIKE IT!

[Syrenn]

If it was truly an issue as some would have us believe, it wouldn't have lasted there for 60+ years. And in that time, not a single person was harmed, in any way whatsoever. Not a single person has been converted and not a single person forced to learn anything. But times are changing, and people who get offended are becoming more frequent. But I concede, as I did from the beginning, that based on law there is little standing. But that doesn't change the fact that no harm is done whatsoever, and the complaining is simply about people who aren't of the faith being butt hurt by a picture and therefore want it removed.

i could care less is anyone was or was not harmed..... i could care less if anyone was converted or not.

i don't think prayer or religion of any kind should be allowed in schools... including the ones with the rugs....

[Robert A Whit]

and i think the god thing is bullshit in our government as well.... the whole in god we trust on our currency is bullshit. Swearing on a bible is bullshit.... The only reasons politicians invoke "god" is for votes...

if government is isnsiting schools be striped of religion... then government should lead the way and strip it out of government.

I respect any view. When a person refuses to agree with me, unlike the claim of one woman poster, it does not at all bother me. I understand your POV and why you hold it.

I think, but can't prove that courts ended swearing on bibles and now simply ask a person to raise a hand and the oath is to say the truth. Maybe somewhere some court still uses the bible.

Your point is that if Government bans it, they out go ban it for all.

My view is that Government, per the constitution, has no right to ban anything religious.
It says so right in the founding documents.

[jimnyc]

i could care less is anyone was or was not harmed..... i could care less if anyone was converted or not.

i don't think prayer or religion of any kind should be allowed in schools... including the ones with the rugs....

I believe you mean "I couldn't".... :)

I'm a logical person, and I do care about such things. People getting their way via lawsuits and being "offended" is sickening to me. People don't have a "right" to not be offended.

[Robert A Whit]

Let's all take a step backward here. Think about this.

Does that picture of Jesus mean anything to you personally?
Is that your school?
If the picture is now down. How does it bother you IF...you didn't know it was there in the first place?
Who really cares whether the picture is up, or down?
What effect does it have on anyone outside, or inside the school today?

If it bothers anyone for taking it down.
How about every book, in every library across this nation that has at least ONE book
with pictures of Jesus, or God in them.
Does it bother you that THOSE BOOKS are closed, and the photo's are not visible????

Same principle. No Big Deal...in either case.
Unless YOU need something to be bothered by, insulted by, or offended by..just because YOU FEEL LIKE IT!

You are always right because you say so. Who are we to say you might not be right since we know you believe you are always right.

[Syrenn]

Wow, now that I disagree with. So much from day one in our government was based on religion. Whether anyone likes it or not, it was a large part of our countries beginning. And certainly not all politicians use it as a tool. I know of many that are true God fearing Christians. I'm sure some "use" it, but I wouldn't paint all of them with that brush. And I don't think having current politicians think like or act like or mimicking some of our founding fathers is such a bad idea.


oh i know... it is an extreme opinion. But it is only my opinion. I know full well it is not mainstream or that any of what i would have be done, undertaken.

[jimnyc]

oh i know... it is an extreme opinion. But it is only my opinion. I know full well it is not mainstream or that any of what i would have be undertaken.

Not extreme, you pretty much have the law and the majority on your side! Why it's never been taken away from the government fully and they do to other public institutions is beyond me. But I'm glad it's still on money and we still swear on Bibles, at least there is a tiny bit of a reminder out there!

[Syrenn]

I respect any view. When a person refuses to agree with me, unlike the claim of one woman poster, it does not at all bother me. I understand your POV and why you hold it.

I think, but can't prove that courts ended swearing on bibles and now simply ask a person to raise a hand and the oath is to say the truth. Maybe somewhere some court still uses the bible.

Your point is that if Government bans it, they out go ban it for all.

My view is that Government, per the constitution, has no right to ban anything religious.
It says so right in the founding documents.


:poke:



lol... and what is that thing the president swears on when he takes office.....


bingo... if they are going to ban it... then ban it!


:beer:

[jimnyc]

:poke:



lol... and what is that thing the president swears on when he takes office.....


bingo... if they are going to ban it... then ban it!


:beer:

Good, then ban it retroactively and therefore Obama never really became our shitty president!

[Syrenn]

I believe you mean "I couldn't".... :)

I'm a logical person, and I do care about such things. People getting their way via lawsuits and being "offended" is sickening to me. People don't have a "right" to not be offended.

:slap:

nazi!


oh i am pretty darn sick of the "i am offended" crap myself. I am offended that THEY are so thin skinned and offended!

[Robert A Whit]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Syrenn http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=629128#post629128)

i could care less is anyone was or was not harmed..... i could care less if anyone was converted or not.

i don't think prayer or religion of any kind should be allowed in schools... including the ones with the rugs....



I believe you mean "I couldn't".... :)

I'm a logical person, and I do care about such things. People getting their way via lawsuits and being "offended" is sickening to me. People don't have a "right" to not be offended.

And the constitution says the Goverment may not ban anything that is religious.

Amendment I says Congress shall make no law respecting religion ...

What does Congress do

Pray to open sessions
Pay for prayers ... at least IMO they pay the person praying. Seems to me I read that they pay him to pray.

[Abbey Marie]

i would want the picture taken down...... religion has no place in public schools.

Ok, then what about giving out condoms? Does that belong in the public schools?

[Syrenn]

Not extreme, you pretty much have the law and the majority on your side! Why it's never been taken away from the government fully and they do to other public institutions is beyond me. But I'm glad it's still on money and we still swear on Bibles, at least there is a tiny bit of a reminder out there!

ppsstt....ever eaten at in and out burger?

[jimnyc]

ppsstt....ever eaten at in and out burger?

No, aren't they only out West? Why though, they religious?

[jimnyc]

Ok, then what about giving out condoms? Does that belong in the public schools?

Well, that's different of course! Promoting sex is not religious by nature! And yes, promoting safe sex is still promoting sex.

"Don't offend my child with a picture of a religious person" "But please go ahead and teach them about the birds and the bees and send them away with some condoms"

[Syrenn]

Ok, then what about giving out condoms? Does that belong in the public schools?

teaching sex education...is not teaching about religion.

Granted i get that goes against some parents religious teachings..... and if they dont like it then they are free to home school or remove their children to a religious institution were it is not taught.


and as an aside... consideing the lack of parents teaching their children and or providing condoms... yes giving out condoms is a very good thing. In my opinion they should also be giving out female condoms.

[Syrenn]

No, aren't they only out West? Why though, they religious?

chapter and verse on every cup and paper warping..... hidden, but it is there.

http://www.snopes.com/business/alliance/inandout.asp

[Robert A Whit]

chapter and verse on every cup and paper warping..... hidden, but it is there.

http://www.snopes.com/business/alliance/inandout.asp


I have eaten at an In-and-Out once. For the price, OK

Nations a small chain is much better.

My problem is this was years ago near Los Angeles and though we have one here, i don't go there for burgers.

Can anybody say what makes the best burger?

I like to have quality meat and perhaps 1/3 lb and they can put the "fixins" in a container like Fuddruckers does and let me pick what I want. I used to drive way up to San Leandro at one time to eat hamburgers from a very good place. Been years since I took that trip. I like the large buns with the sesame seeds too.

A decent hamburger place locally owned is in walking distance but even so, I seldom go there.

Has anybody had Fuddruckers burgers? I believe they also serve bison meat burgers.

From their menu

Buffalo*, Elk*, and Wild Boar*
Our all-natural, free-range, grass and grain fed game burgers are 100% antibiotic and hormone free. Often lean and always tasty, Fudds Exotics℠ are full of nutritional benefits and are served on a wheat bun, which contains<nobr>3 g.</nobr> of fiber.

So <nobr>Build Your Own®</nobr> and make it yours at our market fresh produce bar or add your favorite toppings from the grill for a World's Greatest Burger™ experience that can't be beat.
See all our Exotic Burgers. (http://www.fuddruckers.com/exotics)

[logroller]

I respect any view. When a person refuses to agree with me, unlike the claim of one woman poster, it does not at all bother me. I understand your POV and why you hold it.

I think, but can't prove that courts ended swearing on bibles and now simply ask a person to raise a hand and the oath is to say the truth. Maybe somewhere some court still uses the bible.

Your point is that if Government bans it, they out go ban it for all.

My view is that Government, per the constitution, has no right to ban anything religious.
It says so right in the founding documents.
The exact phrase is "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
My view is that posting a religious image leans more towards establishment than free-exercise.

[Abbey Marie]

teaching sex education...is not teaching about religion.

Granted i get that goes against some parents religious teachings..... and if they dont like it then they are free to home school or remove their children to a religious institution were it is not taught.


and as an aside... consideing the lack of parents teaching their children and or providing condoms... yes giving out condoms is a very good thing. In my opinion they should also be giving out female condoms.

I did not say teaching about sex, I said giving out condoms. Two different things.

And whether or not you think it is a "good thing" to give out condoms, does not make it any more appropriate for the public schools than a piece of religious artwork on the wall. It just makes it, in your opinion, a good thing. I may thing it is a "good thing" to have religious art on the wall.

[Syrenn]

I did not say teaching about sex, I said giving out condoms. Two different things.

And whether or not you think it is a "good thing" to give out condoms, does not make it any more appropriate for the public schools than a piece of religious artwork on the wall. It just makes it, in your opinion, a good thing. I may thing it is a "good thing" to have religious art on the wall.

agreed. It is about opinion.

[jimnyc]

and as an aside... consideing the lack of parents teaching their children and or providing condoms... yes giving out condoms is a very good thing. In my opinion they should also be giving out female condoms.

I disagree. Giving out condoms is promoting sexual activity, even if safe. Then add in that they are going over various sexual things in health classes and you get kids wondering.

[cadet]

I disagree. Giving out condoms is promoting sexual activity, even if safe. Then add in that they are going over various sexual things in health classes and you get kids wondering.

Now you can add in the giant factor of sexual innuendos in every children s movie or tv show. And add in that every tv show has to have cusswords nowadays.

Then add in that students no longer have to watch their tongue.

and a personal opinion, spanking needs brought back. Those little shits need a little fear every once in a while.

[Robert A Whit]

Now you can add in the giant factor of sexual innuendos in every children s movie or tv show. And add in that every tv show has to have cusswords nowadays.

Then add in that students no longer have to watch their tongue.

and a personal opinion, spanking needs brought back. Those little shits need a little fear every once in a while.

Have the kids watch FEAR FACTOR and promise if they are bad, they get to eat some of the stuff eaten by those on the TV program.

[Robert A Whit]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Robert A Whit http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=629130#post629130)

I respect any view. When a person refuses to agree with me, unlike the claim of one woman poster, it does not at all bother me. I understand your POV and why you hold it.

I think, but can't prove that courts ended swearing on bibles and now simply ask a person to raise a hand and the oath is to say the truth. Maybe somewhere some court still uses the bible.

Your point is that if Government bans it, they out go ban it for all.

My view is that Government, per the constitution, has no right to ban anything religious.
It says so right in the founding documents.




The exact phrase is "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"
My view is that posting a religious image leans more towards establishment than free-exercise.

Congress did not hang the photo of Jesus and did not create the school, ergo establishment not proven.

The school had nothing to fear other than democrats.

Sad to see that Democrats are so feared.

BTW, Thanks but I was well aware of the wording.

[Abbey Marie]

Let the Christianphobics have the public schools. They are in sad-to-pathetic shape anyway.

We just have to teach our kids what we believe, model it, and take them with us to whatever church/synagogue, etc., we favor. And if possible, send them to a private school that fits our beliefs.

We can not depend on our officials to understand what the 1st Amendment really says about religion, and this example is far from the worst misunderstanding we've seen.

[jimnyc]

Let the Christianphobics have the public schools. They are in sad-to-pathetic shape anyway.

We just have to teach our kids what we believe, model it, and take them with us to whatever church/synagogue, etc., we favor. And if possible, send them to a private school that fits our beliefs.

We can not depend on our officials to understand what the 1st Amendment really says about religion, and this example is far from the worst misunderstanding we've seen.

Yep, it's another thing on the parenting side. My son is taught in a certain manner and having a picture in his school wouldn't matter anyway. He doesn't go there to pray or learn religion anyway. For me it was more about the incessant complaints from pre-school to college and into the workplace and then businesses and it wouldn't surprise me if soon your homes - where people feel that being offended is always against the law and they have some sort of right to go through life without ever being offended. We brag about freedoms here in the USA and scoff at other countries that fine/punish people for speaking out or doing certain things that the government disagrees with. Well, I got news for people, keep going at this rate and in about 40-50 years we will be there too.

[Abbey Marie]

Yep, it's another thing on the parenting side. My son is taught in a certain manner and having a picture in his school wouldn't matter anyway. He doesn't go there to pray or learn religion anyway. For me it was more about the incessant complaints from pre-school to college and into the workplace and then businesses and it wouldn't surprise me if soon your homes - where people feel that being offended is always against the law and they have some sort of right to go through life without ever being offended. We brag about freedoms here in the USA and scoff at other countries that fine/punish people for speaking out or doing certain things that the government disagrees with. Well, I got news for people, keep going at this rate and in about 40-50 years we will be there too.


I agree, and it's sad, frightening, and pretty much foretold. I am mostly sad for my child and future grandchildren. We have taken for granted freedoms they may not have.