Requiring students to sit through a class is hardly indoctrination.

So you would have no difficulty with, say, a mission from Bob Jones University holding a single impromptu "Introduction to Christian Prayer" session at a local school? No advance information to parents given, no other religions invited, no third party (a "teacher," for example) to provide external context?

If you think it's so against liberty, then you should probably oppose mandatory education altogether (then again, perhaps you do?)

I'm all for mandatory education of children. I just happen to be for following the law while doing it. And the law -- as we're reminded each Christmas, it seems -- requires public schools to afford equal opportunity for religious practice to all faiths, or to none. This class met neither of those criteria.

these parents would rather that their children remain completely ignorant than to take the time and have a discussion with their kids over what they learned in that class and talk about how it may or may not have been biased, etc, etc.

Maybe these parents would have liked to have that discussion prior to their children being taught by Muslims during school. Wouldn't that have been a marvelous learning opportunity? Moreso than castigating them for what they had no chance to do after the fact?

So you would have no difficulty with, say, a mission from Bob Jones University holding a single impromptu "Introduction to Christian Prayer" session at a local school? No advance information to parents given, no other religions invited, no third party (a "teacher," for example) to provide external context?

I'm not sure this is analogous, but if the purpose was to educate, then what's the problem?

When I was in school we learned about Mayan, Aztec, and African religions without our parents being told about it first, and I don't go make animal sacrifices to Quetzacoatl.  If this had involved anything other than Islam, those bigoted parents wouldn't have flipped their shit like this.  But because Islam is equated with the t'rrists, it's anathema.

Ignorance breeds contempt.

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

So you would have no difficulty with, say, a mission from Bob Jones University holding a single impromptu "Introduction to Christian Prayer" session at a local school? No advance information to parents given, no other religions invited, no third party (a "teacher," for example) to provide external context?

If the context was similar (i.e. a student had been a victim of violence which was apparently based on religious intolerance), then I would not have a problem with it.  When I was in elementary school (in rural, backwoods Pennsylvania) we had a Jewish student in our class (everyone else was as WASP as can be - I don't even think we had any Catholics).  Little kids being little kids, we picked on him a bit because he was different, was out of school for Jewish holidays, etc.  After a bit of this I guess his parents and the teacher had some discussion and then one day his Rabbi came in to class and gave a very basic presentation on Jewish history / religion / etc.  As far as I'm aware nobody told our parents in advance and nobody got upset in the least.  

requires public schools to afford equal opportunity for religious practice to all faiths, or to none. This class met neither of those criteria.

The law does not prevent learning about different faiths in terms of history / culture (my world history classes in middle school and high school certainly touched on Christian history and Jewish history - although not at all on Muslim history or the middle east, which seems to have been a bit of a failing, considering recent events...).  To my eyes, this class fell into that realm.  If there seemed to be any evidence that the class was an attempt to convert students to Islam or somehow forcibly indoctrinate them, I might see your point - but as far as I can tell no such thing happened, and you've yet to even attempt to provide any evidence that it did.

Maybe these parents would have liked to have that discussion prior to their children being taught by Muslims during school. Wouldn't that have been a marvelous learning opportunity? Moreso than castigating them for what they had no chance to do after the fact?

Here is one point I will not begrudge you.  I think that the parents should have been notified first and given the chance to withdraw their children, etc.  I think it's foolish that any parent would actually withdraw their child from something like this, but in the same breath I believe it's their right to do so.  My biggest ire goes to those parents who seem to be opposing this purely because it's a class on Islam and who seem to believe that their children have no reason or need to ever learn anything about Islam, Muslims, the Middle East, etc.  It's like they think if they close their eyes and cover their ears and go "LALALALALA" long enough it'll all just go away...

Look, Muslimofascists are mud people, and teaching our kids that they are equal to real Americans and should be respected goes against every Texan value.  Next thing you will be saying that the Mexicans should be allowed to vote.  Lowe should thank her secular humanist god she got transferred instead of properly lynched.

If the context was similar (i.e. a student had been a victim of violence which was apparently based on religious intolerance), then I would not have a problem with it.

Interesting. So what you're saying is that, because of a known history of a single minor but noteworthy attack, it is allowable to suppress civil liberties in order to prevent further violence.

Remind me again: what is it you dislike about the Bush administration?

Bone-deep ignorance and hatred is a God-given civil liberty.

suppress civil liberties in order to prevent further violence.

I fail to see how this is a suppression of civil liberties, other than to the extent that the children's parents were not notified ahead of time and allowed to withdraw their children from the class (which, you will note, I agreed with you about).  If the children's parents had been notified ahead of time, would you have been okay with this assembly?  If so, then we're basically in agreement on this.  If not, explain to me what fundamental right was violated.

If the children's parents had been notified ahead of time, would you have been okay with this assembly?

I would still be unhappy with having a missionary group brought in to teach the class, but would accept it unless other religions requested equal access and had those requests denied.

As for the assembly itself, notification alone would not be sufficient. The school would also have to provide the students with alternate accommodations -- a study room, say -- if either they or the parents objected to the session.

Look,pal, punching the shit out of scapegoats is a sacred American right, and anyone who wants to tell me different is going to have to get through the Constitution to do it.

Sensitivity training is not necessarily learning. As a long-avowed opponent of the PC, but also a more vigorous opponent of plain old ignorance, I have conflicting feelings about this.

If these kids are going to learn about the rest of the world, and not just about Texas, these kids are going to need more than one session during their PE time about Islam.  Islam is a complicated religion, as are all religions, and an integrated approach towards better education is what is needed in the battle against ignorance.

And yes, all American children should learn about Islam.  If anything, I don't understand why conservatives are unhappy about American children learning about Islam.  One of the reasons why we can't dig ourselves out of the shithole known as our Iraq Occupation is because our beloved leaders were too ignorant about the Middle East and sectarian lines to know what a fucking mess they were getting us into.  If we are to have a chance of ever getting out of there and maintaining a working relationship with the Middle East, future generations will have to know about different sects, customs, beliefs, and boundaries in the Middle East.

As for the parents, I don't think they are worried about their ignorance being revealed.  They are probably too ignorant to even know they are ignorant.  As they say: ignorance is bliss.  At least they are not thinking about American politics and thinking the whole nation is about to blow up sky-high due to our own stupidity.  

Sorry, but clearly I am not in a good frame of mind about U.S. politics these days.  I am even beginning to think that McCain is the only one telling the truth when he says we are there for 100 years, as much as I hate to admit it.  

If anything, I don't understand why conservatives are unhappy about American children learning about Islam.

Conservatives are frequently unhappy with children learning about Islam because of who is teaching it. It's one thing to have a non-biased third party talk about customs and beliefs. It's another thing to have an "true believer" extremist do the same thing. The first is education, the second indoctrination.

To a conservative, having representatives from CAIR go to a school to teach Islam is like having members of Westboro Baptist teach about Christianity.

you think the kids are sheep who are incapable of deciding their beliefs for themselves independent of an authority figure

Actually, it mean I think the kids have decided for themselves, and have decided that the presentation abridged their rights. The way you can tell is that the kids complained to their parents about the presentation.

their faith is so weak that it can be shifted dramatically after a PowerPoint slideshow

The offense is in the implicit government approval of an indoctrination session, not its potential effectiveness. Why is it that liberals can only understand this kind of thing when it involves the Pledge of Allegiance?

The way you can tell is that the kids complained to their parents about the presentation.

There's nothing in there that I can see that says the kids complained to their parents.

The offense is in the implicit government approval of an indoctrination session, not its potential effectiveness.

Again, how is this different from all the other times religions are taught in schools?  What about Native American religions or the different Christian denominations that came to the U.S. during European colonization and how that affected things (e.g. Puritans vs. Anglicans vs. Quakers, etc.)?  Are those "indoctrination sessions" too?

As I said before, we have to teach our kids about other viewpoints; it's the only way to prevent stereotyping from becoming even more widespread than it already is.  How many times have you heard people say that all Muslims are potential terrorists?  Don't you think it's important to teach kids how bigoted and stupid that is?

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

There's nothing in there that I can see that says the kids complained to their parents.

Then the parents learned about the class... how? Osmosis?

What about Native American religions or the different Christian denominations that came to the U.S. during European colonization and how that affected things (e.g. Puritans vs. Anglicans vs. Quakers, etc.)?  Are those "indoctrination sessions" too?

Are the classes being taught by practicing Quetzalcoatl worshipers or Friends, with the inclusion of recitals of prayers by the kids, without parental notification and alternate activities for those who object? If so, yes. If not, no.

How many times have you heard people say that all Muslims are potential terrorists?

Not as often as I've heard people complain that "other people say that all Muslims are potential terrorists" -- by a wide margin.

It's not just the "what" (I'm guessing the CAIR members didn't just read from the slideshow); it's also the "how." If the school is going to have a class on religious practices, it should have a class on religious practices, plural. It should not invite a missionary group from one faith without inviting others  -- and ideally, it shouldn't invite missionary groups at all, when a teacher could do just fine. It especially shouldn't try some ham-fisted last-minute secret training session thrown together in place of a Phys Ed.

This secretive shit doesn't exactly endear Islam to the general population.

I'm guessing

Good enough for me!

"When I was in high school, I hated...absofuckinglutely hated pep rallies.  Was I a victim of "Pep Indoctrination"?"

Depending on when and where you went, I might have contributed to that...  I was a member of the Pep Band (holds head in shame).  I think the only reason they wanted me is because I was the guy (nerd) with the 240-watt amp, Vox keyboard (same one the Beatles used), and 4-pickup electric guitar.  We all plugged into that big amp, We might not have been all that good, but you could hear us well into the next county!  When I got to college, I was dating an audiology student, and she tested me, and I already had a 30% hearing loss.  I've been a lot more careful ever since, but in the '60s, everyone thought louder was better.

As far as religious indoctrination, I was Baptized in the Protestant church, raised in a loosely-Catholic home (grandma always her Rosary beads close by), had a dad who was an atheist, belonged to a Jewish fraternity in college, befriended a couple of Buddhist Indians when I started working, and worked with one Islamic.  Somehow, we all got along.  The Islamic gent had to pray a couple of times a day, so he would go into our supply room, and we all knew to leave him alone during his prayer sessions.  No BFD.  

there's only one way to find out...

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

America has believed that in differentiation, not in uniformity, lies the path of progress. It acted on this belief; it has advanced human happiness, and it has prospered.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

The Declaration does not obligate us to accept foreigners, let alone hostile ones. The Founders certainly felt they could restrict immigration if they saw fit.

It's absurd to think a crappy poem from the side of the statue of liberty obligates us to do anything (the fact that the author of the crappy poem was a zionist makes it even more absurd).

I'm curious as to the context of the third quote, I suspect it may have been referring to the differences between the various states. If we didn't have Muslims around it wouldn't make us uniform and impair the advance of human happiness, anymore than not having lots of Nazis does.

Those documents Lou quoted are not legally binding (except for the third one), they are representations of the values of America.  Since you don't share them, you ought to leave our country for one that does share your values.  I believe you would be happier someplace like Singapore.

"I believe you would be happier someplace like Singapore."

Except Singapore is about 14% Muslim, and prides itself on diversity (not that it's majority ethnic Chinese are doing all THAT great at exercising tolerance, but they do aspire to, it seems.)

So... might have to find elsewhere to dump our ignorant.

The Lazarus whining isn't a representation of American values, it was a plea to change them.

Among other things Muslims don't believe all men have "certain unalienable" rights. They should stay in their own countries where they can be happy.

The people who put up the Statue of Liberty disagreed with you about American values.  But then, your American values are the ones that include lynching, so that's no surprise.

Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (from Wikipedia):

The Declaration starts by forbidding "any discrimination on the basis of race, colour, language, belief, sex, religion, political affiliation, social status or other considerations".

Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam

Those are certainly fine words, but sadly, words is all they are. Call me when the first non-Islamic house of worship open in Saudi Arabia, and the Iranian government allows bikini fashion shows.

Those are certainly fine words, but sadly, words is all they are.

The same has been said about the Constitution.

The same has been said about the Constitution.

Idiots say a lot of things. The difference is that the Constitution is backed up multiple levels of government in three competing branches, all of which are tasked with its enforcement, while Islamic countries have power structures which undermine human rights proclamations.

Urkel claimed that Muslims don't believe in unalienable rights, I gave him a list of unalienable rights that a large number of Muslims have attested they believe in.

Bikini shows and Wahabism have nothing to do with it.  And that's a lot more explanation than a brown shirt like you deserves.

"your American values are the ones that include lynching"

I prefer to call it extremely late term rope induced abortion.

"How about that, even the dirty mud people have values superior to yours."

I know you're slow, but seriously, how much of a simpleton do you have to be to accept at face value the claim muslims oppose discrimination based on "race, colour, language, belief, sex, religion, political affiliation, social status or other considerations"?  Do they act like they believe such things?

Do they act like they believe such things?

The majority do...the ones that pop up in the news, not so much.  To paraphrase Gerry from above, it's like thinking that folks from Westboro Baptist are representative of Christianity.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

"The majority do"

Muslims are just like Americans, except for the clothes and the rock worshipping?  

Yeah...at least them Christian types don't dress or look funny...nor do they worship weird rocks or other objects*.

*PS...Hey parents! It's never too soon to get your kids into Christian BSDM!

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

I prefer to call it extremely late term rope induced abortion.

This is going to come back to haunt you the next time you start yarbling about the rights of the unborn.  Look, it's pretty simple...abortions while in the womb are far more easy to clean up than an Extreme Late Term Abortion (ELTA) performed at the Ye Olde American Values Oak Tree in the town square.  Plus, the pay-per-view rights could actually take revenue away from extreme fighting.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

That's all you have, Urkel, not an actual argument.

You hate anyone different from you, and the facts be damned, you'll move the goalposts wherever they have to be to justify it.

You know...I can understand why you hate this poem so much.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

I'm curious, if some fundementalist kid has a conflict at school, would you support his fundementalist church coming in to teach the whole school about being tolerant of fundies? If the conflict was due to their religious beliefs then yes, I'd be cool with that.

You know, my bullshit meter just hit the peg so hard the dial face shattered. While I do not agree with Gordo's "send 'em all back to where they came from" philosophy, neither do I believe that you would be ok with some Falwell type running a "this is what evangelicals believe" seminar on a public school's time in front of your kids.

I sure as hell wouldn't be ok with it.

{Insert amusing quotation here}

neither do I believe that you would be ok with some Falwell type running a "this is what evangelicals believe" seminar on a public school's time in front of your kids.

Well, all I can say is that you don't know me as well as you think you do.  If the circumstances were similar and the class was similar, I would see no problem with it.  I would have a problem with it if everyone in the school was already of that Christian denomination and the class was used as a back-door to implement mandatory weekly bible study or what have you, but that is hardly the case here and as long as our hypothetical case was similar (let's say a lone Christian fundamentalist going to a mainly Jewish school in New York City) I would have no objections.

Nowhere have you ennumerated the values you are talking about.

To say "American values" is vague and misleading as values between cities and regions in America vary.  Hence, the reason why there is a wide spectrum of voters, from extreme left to extreme right, from moderate left to moderate right, and everyone in the middle.

Since my belief is that "American values" are varied, I would appreciate a genuine attempt on your part to list them before coopting the rest of us in your belief system.

Why don't you make a list of muslim values that we should all find peachy?

Just because there is a range of opinion in America, does not mean there are no shared American values, or values most Americans share. I'm not going to list them all, but how about hijabs? I think nearly all Americans would agree that women walking around dressed like ninjas is repulsive, more than that, it's not American in any way. It's alien to our culture. It's in no way part of our traditions, it's not part of the fabric of our heritage.

Rather than replying in the negative, since you specifically talked about "our values" I would like to know exactly what values you are ascribing to me and the rest of Americans rather than what is not American and not part of what you are addressing.

If you cannot put down the details of "our values" then I must assume you are using empty words.

It would be simpler if you listed the fundemental values you don't have in common with most Americans.

Americans recognize our country is premised on indivuals having certain rights, and the premise of our government is "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Americans don't agree with the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights mentioned above that rights and freedoms "are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah", neither do Americans wish America to be an Islamic state, which is what the Koran requires.

I had no idea that the Koran mentioned America and required America to be an Islamic state, particularly given that the U.S. was not even founded when the Koran was written.

I had no idea you were so obtuse. To muslims, America is a nation of infidels, right?

Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it.
- Sura 2:216

The unbelievers are your sworn enemies ... Seek out your enemies relentlessly.
- Sura 4:101,104

Unbelievers are those who declare: "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" ... Those that make war against Allah and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the country.
- Sura 5:17,33

Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme.
- Sura 8:39

... slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and be in ambush everywhere for them.
- Sura 9:5

Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you.
- Sura 9:123

Exodus 15
The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

Numbers 10
And if ye go to war in your land against the enemy that oppresseth you, then ye shall blow an alarm with the trumpets; and ye shall be remembered before the LORD your God, and ye shall be saved from your enemies.

Deutoronomy 3
And I commanded you at that time, saying, The LORD your God hath given you this land to possess it: ye shall pass over armed before your brethren the children of Israel, all that are meet for the war.

Exodus 15
Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power: thy right hand, O LORD, hath dashed in pieces the enemy.

Exodus 23
But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries.

Deutoronomy 32
I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon the enemy.

Deutoronomy 33
The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.

Judgments 16
And when the people saw him, they praised their god: for they said, Our god hath delivered into our hands our enemy, and the destroyer of our country, which slew many of us.

It should be noted that while the origin of the Koran is still uncertain, there are scholars who think that the Koran could have been influenced by Christian writings.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

I absolutely believe in that.  And that is why it is important to make sure that civil rights of all people are respected equally, including those of all races and all religions.  This also includes not discriminating against  Muslims in the U.S.

Foreigners have no right to be here, and expelling them is not discrimination.

What about Foreigner ?

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

You do realize that there are Muslims who are born here as well as Muslims who are naturalized American citizens?  

Nowhere is there a religion qualification in order to be an American.  

Are you still here?  Get the fuck out, immigrant.

That was a message from my Arapaho great-grandmother.

Does that mean those of us with Amerindian ancestors have to walk our happy asses back across the Bering land bridge?  ;)

Only if you can't handle American values like tolerance.

"Americans don't agree with the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights mentioned above that rights and freedoms "are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah", neither do Americans wish America to be an Islamic state, which is what the Koran requires."

I'm sure you cannot produce any evidence to prove that all American Christians follow every letter of the bible 100% (which would be absurd in any event).

Likewise, find me some evidence that all (or even most) American Muslims agree 100% with the Cairo declaration, follow to the letter every word of the Koran, or desire Sharia law to be implemented in American courts.

Yes, there are groups who do, but there are also plenty of Muslims who want nothing to do with Sharia. Even most Muslim countries do not use Sharia as the dominant form of law (mostly for family law - marriages, etc.) The countries that do use strict religious courts are ones we've already decided to be awful places: Saudi Arabia, and Iran. In other Muslim countries, sharia has even been outright rejected (Turkey) and secular civil law installed and supported.

So, you're going to have a hard time convincing me that American Muslims, immigrant or not, are going to corrupt the American legal system, or that they even desire to do so in the first place. There is hardly a Muslim consensus on the role of Sharia in modern law or human rights.

"It's alien to our culture."

http://www.beccleshelpinghands.co.uk/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/quakers.jpg

Kinda reminds me of these kind of Americans, though.

When have the quakers ever blown anything up?

There have been very real conflicts in the past between quakers and other Americans arising from quaker pacifism.  

Whether they've blown anything up or not is irrelevant to your comment about "alien" clothing habits. Restrictive "conservative" clothing for females are not alien to Western culture. Out-dated, perhaps, but not alien. And frankly, I've heard plenty of non-foreigners, under the guise of "traditional values" bemoan the scanty clothing choices of all sorts of people, but mostly women.

On one hand, people complain that these women are wearing too much clothing. On the other hand, some women are wearing too little. The common theme seems to be "they're not doing what I'm doing, so they must be wrong."

When have the quakers ever blown anything up?

American soldiers are blowing plenty of things up as well at the behest of our American government.  

"Those" kinds of American dressed that way 200 years ago. I don't see members of the Friends dressed that way in modern America.

{Insert amusing quotation here}

Not Quakers, but there's plenty of Amish who still dress in traditional clothes.  Just go to the Reading Terminal in Philly on the days they are there.  Make sure you buy some bread and ribs from them; it makes a great meal.

Which brings me to this point: instead of a powerpoint presentation, maybe they should have just fed these kids some different foods from the Middle East.  

Dude, no way, forget the bread and ribs. When you go to the Reading Terminal in Philly you have to go to the Amish stand in the middle where they have the amazing soft pretzels and milk shakes. In fact, when you go to Philly, you have to go to the Reading Terminal to go to the Amish stand in the middle where they have the amazing soft pretzels and milk shakes...best in Philly and you know how much that is saying!

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

Excellent.  I am supposed to be in Philly in mid-August for work.  I will definitely check it out.  I also have to try to remember to book my trip for the days when the Amish are at the food market...it's always a major disappointment when I forget and end up there when they aren't.   Although then, I can get fried oysters.

The place is Fisher's. They're not open Sunday, Monday or Tuesday. On Saturday mornings, the line can be literally ten minutes long just for their pretzels. Really a fabulous pretzel--I don't think I can raise your expectations too high.

One key difference I'd point out between Amish and just about every other religion is that during the late teens years, they let their children do whatever they wish. This includes car driving, promiscuous sex and drugs and (gasp) talking on the phone. In an extreme religion like the Amish have, this isn't the going through the motions coming of age "choice" a religion like Catholicism presents. It does of course lead to such things as the infamous Amish-biker gang drug ring that was busted a few years ago. But overall, it leads to a rather well adjusted population--in order to be in the religion, you have to choose to come back to it. That's far cry from the coercive aspects of say conservative LDS or Islam.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

One could argue that the Amish reasons for dressing that way are vastly different from the Islamic reasons for hiding their women.

One could also argue that the fully-observant Amish population is in decline in almost all areas of the US where Amish people have settled.

But from what I've seen  - on this topic anyway - you don't seem to very open to entertaining any arguments that diverge from your beliefs.

So I am not going to waste my time.

{Insert amusing quotation here}

One could also argue that the fully-observant Amish population is in decline in almost all areas of the US where Amish people have settled.

One could do that, but one would be wrong.

Please note that I typed  the phrase "fully observant". The  Amish - especially the PA colonies - are wealthy folks who have done a remarkable job retaining their numbers.

But having observed extensively and first-hand what is happening in eastern Ohio, I stand by my statement. Cell phones are everywhere. Radios are everywhere. Propane-fired gen