Some parents express concern over Dalai Lama visit

[Cocoa]

http://www.ktvb.com/news/localnews/stories/ktvbn-sept1005-parents_lama.45be428d.html

CALDWELL -- Some parents say they're concerned that Governor Dirk Kempthorne is having their children communicate with the Dalai Lama.

The Dalai Lama, the Tibetan religious leader, is in Sun Valley this weekend.

Kempthorne plans to send busloads of children to see him speak in Sun Valley on Monday. He also had students write essays related to the Buddhist leader's visit.

Some parents say Kempthorne's plans violate the constitutional separation between church and state.

Pam Smart of Caldwell, who is Jewish, says Kempthorne is using his position to influence others.

more...

[Fenris]

1. Of ALL the things to get bent out of shape about...

:eyes:

[Kralizec]

24. Agreed. n/t

[DRoseDARs]

2. Bloody Hell, these people just don't quit...

IT'S THE DALAI LAMA!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES, HE'LL EAT YOUR CHILDREN AND CORRUPT THEIR SOULS WITH THOUGHTS OF PEACE AND TRANQUILITY!!! OH THE HUGE MANATEE!!!

:eyes:

[Gregorian]

13. Hahaha!

Of all the people on the planet, the Dalai Lama? This is how you tell if people are retarded or not. They might as well hold up a big sign- I'M RETARDED.
I can think of all kinds of people that I would keep my children away from. If I had children. Bush. Manson. The drug dealer on the corner.



edit- I've got to learn to temper my responses. Nothing is beneath the robot humanoids. I keep forgetting that. Instead of being shocked, I should try to predict what kind of stupid things they'll say next.

[shockra]

19. Oh Lawd.

:rofl:

[matt819]

29. What a bumper sticker that would make

It's the Dalai Lama!! Run for your lives!!

I guess you haven't read about those fundamentalist Tibetan Buddhists - no tolerance, pre-emptive strike an integral part of their political/religious philosophy. One teensy-weensy problem - they don't have a country!!

[MADem]

77. The idiots watched that MOVIE!!!!

Where they came and got the kid to be the new Dalai Lama, only it wasn't specifically the dalai lama...damn, cannot remember the name of the film, but they came and talked the parents into letting the kid go....it was so long ago I saw the thing, I do not even remember how it ended!!!

[tblue37]

85. "Little Buddha"?

It wasn't the Dalai Lama, though--just another revered religious teacher. His soul was divided among 3 children. One was an American boy in Seattle. One was a spoiled young girl. The monks thought it was his sense of humor that caused him to reincarnate in three children rather than one. It ended with the American boy taken his share of the monk's ashes to spread in the water of a bay or a lake (I don't know which) in Washington.

[MADem]

99. That's the one!!!! nt

[Up2Late]

113. Well that's how it ended after the "test screening" caused the Studio...

...to re-edit the ending. The Director, Bernardo Bertolucci, is said to have wanted his name taken OFF the film, because of the way they butchered it to please the U.S. audience.

It did end very strangely. I'd like to see the "Directors Cut."

[tblue37]

135. How did it originally end?

Also, that should be "taking," not "taken" in my original psot. I missed the editing window.

[Up2Late]

109. OH THE HUGE MANATEE!!! LOL!!!! Good one!

I'm going to have to remember that one. Best one I've heard since "Visualize Whirled Peas!"

[DRoseDARs]

130. Yeah, it's a great pun. Even comes with a picture...

[Megahurtz]

143. Hahahahahahaha!!!

:wtf::rofl:

[rkc3]

144. Do you have one for Standing Ovulations?

For Monumenstrual Proportions? Optical Delusions?

[Tight_rope]

112. No Shit!

:rofl:

[Angry Girl]

3. Yes, but they'll watch Pat Robertson's swill on TV

And corrupt their children's mind with *that* crap!

Nightweed's Hurricane Katrina Aid Organizations

[QC]

4. Jews watch Pat Robertson?

Well, heavens to Betsy!

[Cocoa]

8. right-wing Jews do

right-wing Jews and right-wing Christians are as one these days.

You won't see harder-line pro-Israel voice anywhere on TV than Pat Robertson.

[karynnj]

21. Not even right wing Jews watch Pat Robertson

Also, there are far fewer RW Jews than comments here indicate. Compared to their socio-economic peers, Jews are inexplicably more to the left. The percept of Jews who voted for Kerry was second only to the % of blacks. (Over 75%)

[IndianaGreen]

134. Jews for Jesus (who are really Xtina fundamentalists)

watch Pat Robertson. Of course, you also have the pro-settlement rabble who are in bed with the Christian Right.

[Angry Girl]

20. *LOL* didn't mean to imply that!

[sakabatou]

36. Really?

Wow...

[roguevalley]

5. so now they worry about church and state. remember that, sun

valley, if they try and introduce intelligent design into the schools.

[trogdor]

83. So what if it were Robertson who was coming over?

What would the DU consensus be? My reaction to this story was, "well, now the shoe's on the other foot for once, innit?" Any of those people who support "faith-based initatives" yet go nuts when they hear the Dalai Lama's coming to their school is a hypocrite, and so is any DU'er who wails about separation of church and state while telling people to "grow up" when the Dalai Lama comes to town.

[DRoseDARs]

146. The Dalai Lama isn't doing missionary work...

...and Pat Robertson does nothing else. That's the difference.

[Goldensilence]

6. wait wait

....freaking over a dalai lama visit...WTF?!

what might your children actually learn something?! Peace? Respect for all living things? That something else besides humans exist?

Are fundamentalist christians too blind to see they are exactly what they preach so feverantly about in fundamentalist islam?

[salinen]

7. Sure, ban the Dalai Lama

I want separation of church and state, and if this is what it takes, I'm down with it.

[insane_cratic_gal]

9. It's humorous if it weren't so absurd

Unlike Christianity there is no preaching in Buddhism, there is no recruitment requirements to save a seat in Nirvana. In fact Buddhism insists that you study the religion before committing yourself, even if it takes you years to accept.

Buddhism is the focus upon oneself and that of other's suffering, to appease your own and others suffering. To be released of suffering is the only way to attain true happiness.

As a new study the thoughts of Buddhism philosophy, there is nothing for these parents to be afraid of. If anything they should feel honored their children get to meet such a remarkable man. I know my own daughter would love to meet the Dali Lama, but I've taught her to be open to the world.

Here is a glimpse of what they might be exposed to!

Right Knowledge: Strive to comprehend the first three Noble Truths. This might seem a bit circular, but language is a tricky thing, and the Great Seer wanted to make sure you had all your bases covered. The Noble Truths perhaps aren't as straightforward as they may seem at first. So you must strive to fully comprehend them.


Right Thinking: Consciously dedicate yourself to a life in harmony with the Noble Truths elucidated by the Buddha.


Right Speech: No gossiping, lying, backbiting, and harsh language. If you don't have anything valuable to say, keep your big yapper shut. Always good advice.


Right Conduct: For lay Buddhists (meaning Buddhists who aren't monks), Right Conduct means following the Five Precepts (see below). If you're a monk, there are some more rules for conduct, but don't worry about them until you're ready to become a monk.


Right Livelihood: Go peacefully into the world and do no harm. So choose a profession that's harmless to living things, and refrain from killing people.


Right Effort: Conquer the flow of negative thoughts, replacing them with good thoughts.


Right Mindfulness: Achieve an intense awareness of your body, emotions, and mental states. Quiet the noises in your head and dwell in the present.


Right Concentration: Learn about (and practice) various kinds of meditation, an important booster rocket on the launch pad to enlightenment. Read this article for a full introduction to Meditation. An online course in meditation is also available.

[Blue_Tires]

11. what dangerous, subversive thoughts!!! n/t

[klyon]

38. thanks people need this message

sounds simple but it isn't
working on Zen here
politics is a big grey area for me

KL

[WiseButAngrySara]

95. I enjoyed reading this...I was raised Presbyterian, but have come to

appreciate the truth in ALL religions, and even 'philosophies' such as Plato, etc. The one religion/philosophy that has left me cold, until I discovered the Dalai Lama, was Buddhism. Do you have the link to the article which you mention here?

Read this article for a full introduction to Meditation. An online course in meditation is also available.

[insane_cratic_gal]

127. I sure do

http://www.soyouwanna.com/site/syws/buddhism/buddhism3.html

http://www.sabiduria.com/meditation/Buddhist/mindfulness.html

(incase you were reffering to the meditation aspect)

Happy reading.

[Hardrada]

10. Ha! What absurd people!

They would hate a philosophy I admire:

In summer, I'm a nudist.
In winter, I'm a Buddhist.

(courtesy of Joe Gould of NYC)

[pop goes the weasel]

12. not so much a church/state issue, I think

As yet another use of schoolchildren as political props.

I think it's fine to allow parents to choose to have their kids go see and hear an important speaker, whether religious, political, scientific, or whatnot. But it's another thing all together to coerce children into being used as a backdrop for high-publicity events or to fill seats.

[sandnsea]

14. Should he send them to see the Pope?

Have them write essays on the Pope? I bet if that's what were happening, DU would be in hysterical fits over it. Double standard, me thinks.

From a geopolitical angle, I have no problem with either. Kids need to understand religion affects politics.

[mvd]

86. Actually..

I was wondering if these parents would have a double standard. I think that's more possible than DU having one.

I just see this as the children seeing any major world leader.

[hollowdweller]

15. As long as they allow them to go to see other religious leaders it's OK.

Like the Pope or something. I love the Dali Lama, but he is basically like the Pope of Tibetan Buddhisim.

[Felix Mala]

93. I think he's the political Leader-in-exile of Tibet, too.

[Rex]

16. It might interfere with the parental unit brainwashing

of their poor children.

[Zenlitened]

17. I think their concern is valid, frankly.

Is the Dalai Lama likely to proselytize, give them the whole Buhdda Loves You sales pitch?

No, probably not.

But to claim that he is merely a head of state is disingenuous. He's a religious leader, a "spiritual" leader, and I just don't see any reason for a school to be dragging kids to listen to a religious leader, writing essays and everything else, no matter how generically he discusses "spirituality."

[VegasWolf]

18. I guess these parents just don't want their kids thinking about other

gods and religions. The kids might get confused as to which god is the correct and approved god/religion.

[Hand]

32. Not to worry...

Buddhism is a non-theistic religion that doesn't really worry about or acknowledge a supreme being--you might say that God is irrelevant to Buddhists.

That should be quite reassuring to the fundies! :evilgrin: :rofl:

[Johnny Noshoes]

40. "Buddhism is a non-theistic religion

that doesn't really worry about or acknowledge a supreme being--you might say that God is irrelevant to Buddhists."

I think for me that's part of the appeal of Buddhism. I'm not a buddhist but I have read quite a lot about it over the years. A recent issue of Tricycle magazine - a Buddhist publication - had an article about a catholic priest who was also a practicing buddhist.

Should kids be compelled to visit with any religious leader? No - but should they be given the option to do so and maybe have a positive learning experience - yes.

"Some in the name of peace, prepare us for war, in the name of liberty, prepare us for submission, in the name of courage, prepare us to be fearful. Let all Americans challenge war, submission, and fear! -- Rep. Dennis Kucinich

[VegasWolf]

43. But it is a supernatural based religion. Buddha under the Bodhi tree.

Enlightenment. Reincarnation. They have a distributed god. The christians do also when they say that god is in all of us. These people burn Harry Potter books because of fear of the supernatural.
Eastern concepts may be even more frightening to them.


:rofl:

So many religions, so little time.

[Southpaw Bookworm]

54. Hell, yoga is frightening to them

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/7895/next0506.html

http://www.holyspiritinteractive.net/features/newage/cancer01_yoga.asp

http://www.christianitytoday.com/tcw/2001/005/3.50.html

[alfredo]

72. "Buddhism Without Beliefs" by Stephen Batchelor

A good intro to Buddhism.

I think the gods came from mixing Hindu beliefs with Buddhism. I haven't found anything in Buddha's teaching that compels one to worship him or any god.

[VegasWolf]

79. No. Worshiping Buddha is not a tenet of Buddhism as is worshiping

Christ in Christianity. My point is that it, like all religions, it believes in supernatural phenomena. In Buddha the tenants are enlightenment and reincarnation based on spiritual performance in this lifetime. I think that eastern religions can be a threat to some people that believe fiercely in the brimstone burning hell of some western religions.

There are many good books on the history of religion.

[alfredo]

80. I am in agreement with you. I was saying that Buddhism that

worships Buddha are missing the point. IMHO

[VegasWolf]

81. True!

:toast:

[alfredo]

84. I'll drink to that.

[psychopomp]

126. The gods were always there

Buddhism is an Indian religion, or was, until it was mostly expunged by the Hindus. Basically, it was a radical reform of and progression from Hindu beliefs. Just as Judiasm gave us Jesus Christ so Hinduism gave us Gautama Buddha. And just as Christians gave their new way credibility by fixing it within the tradition of the Prophets and the Talmud, Buddhists situated their teachings within the context of local, Indian ontological systems, while at the same time proposing a radical re-examination of those structures.

An important Buddhist text is "The Diamond Sutra" also known as the Vajracchedika Pranjaparamita.

edited to add an excerpt:

""Do you think, Subhuti," Buddha asked, "there is any dharma by which the Tathagata has known supreme enlightenment?"

"There is no such dharma, Buddha."

"Thus, Subhuti, no atom of dharma is to be found. Therefore, enlightenment is called supreme. This dharma is identical only with itself, and is undifferentiated. Therefore it is called 'supreme enlightenment'. Being unique and undifferentiated because of the absence of a self, entity or personality, this supreme enlightenment is known as the collectivity of all good dharmas. But Subhuti, the Tathagata has taught that dharmas are not in truth dharmas, even though they are called 'dharmas'.

"Does a Tathagata ever think, 'I have liberated beings'? Never imagine this, Subhuti, for there is no being to be liberated by the Tathagata. If the Tathagata thought to liberate any being, a concept of self, entity or personality would have arisen in him. The Tathagata has taught that the concept of self is no concept. Nevertheless, common people cling to the concept of self. The Tathagata has taught that the common people are not common people, even though they are called 'common people'."

Who sees me by form, Who sees me in sound, Perverted are his footsteps upon the way; For he cannot perceive the Tathagata. The Buddhas are seen through dharma, From dharma-bodies their guidance comes; But the nature of dharma is never discerned, It cannot be grasped by the mind alone."

http://www.io.com/~snewton/zen/diamond.html#tathagata

[Hand]

136. One little correction...

Buddhism in India was wiped out by the Muslims, not the Hindus--all the enormous centers of learning such as Nalanda and Kamalashila were destroyed and their occupants murdered or converted by force to Islam. (Nalanda had a student body of some 30,000 or so in the 12th century!) The Taliban would have approved.
:cry:

[psychopomp]

139. Thanks for pointing that out

and it is interesting to see the parallels today.

[psychopomp]

57. Vajrayana (Tibetan) Buddhism does have quite a few gods

Won't go into it here, but gods and goddesses play an important role in Vajrayana Buddhism.



Mahakala

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

22. no one should be forced to go

I think that is the last thing His Holiness the Dalai Lama would want. Those who do go will probably remember it the rest of their lives.

[Danmel]

23. What's a Jew doing in Idaho anyway?

Talk about diaspora!

[matt819]

30. Must be really, really reform, don't you think? (nt)

[Danmel]

42. Likely

I imagine getting kosher food and a minyan would be tough out there!

[skooooo]

25. Oh yeah, the Dalai will probably totally corrupt those kids.

[IDemo]

26. Here's the governor's website with more info:

http://www.gccfc.idaho.gov/HHDL.htm#eventinformation

"Why: Compassion, Kindness, Culture, Interconnectedness, Education, Ethics"

"You kids get away from that man right now!" :eyes:

[Vanje]

27. I'm so sorry, but Idaho is a stupid place

I should know. I live here.
Of all the states, even the really really rEALLY stupid ones,(like Alabama and Mississippi) the citizens of Idaho give Bush his highest approval ratings of all the states.
Idaho is the stupidest state of them all.

[Erika]

39. It's because of all the right wingers moving to Idaho

We had Cecil Andrus, a democrat, as a governor for three terms prior to the arrival of the conservatives.

[Vanje]

41. ...and Frank Church!

...back in the good old days

[Erika]

46. Yep

The days before the far righters took over Idaho.

[Enraged_Ape]

61. Cece Andrus and Frank Church were two of the greatest Dems

there have ever been.

I'll never forget when Cecil Andrus called the heads of the NRA "a bunch of gun nuts". Some Freeper-type TV commentator tried to somehow skewer him with this, asking him why he said it. As I recall, Cece's response was, "Because they're a bunch of gun nuts!"
He was just always a cool, decent, straight-talking governor.

And Frank Church was one of the greatest U.S. Senators ever. You have him to the thank for the Freedom of Information Act and the exposure of many bizarre CIA atrocities. There would BE no widespread skepticism of the CIA if it hadn't been for the efforts of Frank Church.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

28. "My religion is love," Dalai Lama. How can you argue with that statement.

[psychopomp]

60. Very interesting statement

"Love" is too intertwined with desire for most Buddhists, who prefer "compassion" as an empathic mode of being with living things. I wonder if H.H. was interpreting, and simplifying, for a western audience when he said that?

[pelagius]

92. "My religion is kindness" is the...

...exact quote, as I recall, which would be more "Buddhist" in its outlook, I believe.

http://www.actsofkindness.org/inspiration/quotes.asp

[MADem]

78. They'll find a way to confuse it with the Kama Sutra!!! n/t

[Akoto]

31. As a Buddhist ...

I would leap at the opportunity to meet the Dalai Lama! He is such a gentle and peaceful person, not at all like the religious leaders we have over here (who'd likely condemn him to death because he's not Christian, despite what he encourages).

[Mika]

33. "Some people say"

More media swill.

:puke:

[6000eliot]

34. I understand wanting to point out the hypocrisy of this response

But, I kinda agree with it. The government shouldn't be sponsoring a trip to see a religious leader. I sure as hell wouldn't like it if it was the pope.

[IDemo]

37. The government isn't sponsoring this

Even though the Idaho Governor's office has given it plenty of exposure.

http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/2005/9/10-2_4.html

"Kiril Sokoloff, a part-time Sun Valley resident and financial adviser who in 2001 brought the Dalai Lama's sister to Sun Valley to raise money for Tibetan school kids, is spending about $1 million on the event, including hiring security personnel who worked the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics."

[sakabatou]

35. I bet if it was some Cardinal, they wouldn't have a problem

[VegasWolf]

44. I agree totally, all religion should be kept separate from any kind of

state funding.

[IDemo]

45. See response #37 above n/t

[LiberalAmerican]

47. Seperation of church and state, as written in the Constitution

applies to the federal government, not the state. So while I happen to agree with you, the Constitution does not provide the basis for this conclusion.

Just saying.

[VegasWolf]

48. My personal opinion is that no government funding should go

to any religion, regardless of constitutional issues.

[Sgent]

49. The constitution

as iterpreted by the Supreme Court is the only one that matters.

The Supreme Ct says it applies to the States due to the equal protection clause of the 14th ammendment.

Until they change their mind (thus allowing states to restrict speech, press, privacy, etc), that's the law.

[patcox2]

59. I would not want my children required to write an essay about the Pope.

I see no difference.

[Bridget Burke]

65. Children were "invited" to write essays.

This was not a compulsory assignment.

http://www2.kbcitv.com/x5154.xml?ParentPageID=x5157&ContentID=x68197&Layout=KBCI.xsl&AdGroupID=x5154

[northzax]

76. sure, 'invited' and 'non-cumpulsory'

is fine, but that doesn't mean students really see it that way. They see their teacher, the one that holds their academic future in their hands and a role model (hopefully) 'suggesting' they do this. For kids, suggestions from authority often hold the status of commands.

[Bridget Burke]

82. Are your kids that regimented?

Do they regard every suggestion they hear in school as a "command"?

[northzax]

87. a 'suggestion' from their teacher

of work they 'might want to do?' tends to have influence on people (I'm not a parent, I have been a teacher) a suggestion coming from someone with authority over you bears the weight of authority.

Ever had a boss? a person who signs your paychecks? Ever had your boss 'suggest' the week before your performance evaluation that you might want to work late tonight? Sure, you don't need to, but you have to wonder, is the guy in the next cube, the one who is working late, getting the raise next week, or you? Whatever your decision, the pressure has been applied, even if the boss had no idea of the connection, and had no intention of judging you on this, you cannot know that for certain.

What if your boss 'suggested' you wear shorter skirts to work? it's only a suggestion, what's the problem? yes, it's the same thing.

You may be comfortable with opt-out conditions for religion in schools, I am not.

[Bridget Burke]

89. If my boss "suggested" I wear shorter skirts to work...

Human Resources would call him in for a discussion of sexual harrassment. I guess your girls would do as they are told!

[northzax]

90. so your boss can't suggest something to you

without repercussions, but you are fine with teachers suggesting religious assignments to students, without repercussions? You need HR to protect you from his crossing the line, but kids should be able to simply shrug it off?

why do you get more protection than a ten year old?

edited for word choice.

[Bridget Burke]

94. I don't NEED HR to protect me.

That's just the way I would proceed.

And I hardly think a sexist suggestion is the same as a chance to go on a field trip. Of course, some kids have PARENTS to protect them.

[northzax]

100. but what about the ones that don't?

the strong don't need rights and protections, they are ennurmerated to protect the weak from the strong.

ok, boss says 'wear short skirts and you can go to the conference in Hawaii this year' there's your field trip.

and what about the working late? do you work late at the suggestion of your boss? even if it's not in your work description?

[iverglas]

121. good lord - how tight can we twist it??

The fact that it would be inappropriate for an employer to "suggest" what a woman employee wear to work is precisely WHY "Human Resources would call him in for a discussion of sexual harrassment", for crying out loud.

How about in the olden days, when there were no sexual harassment policies? To apply your reasoning: I guess you would have just done as you were told!

Well duh, yeah. Unless you wanted to exercise your other option: getting fired.

Do the students in schools have the analogous option to the one you have offered -- you could complain to Human Resources about a discriminatory suggestion; to whom do they complain? How likely is a child going to be to single him/herself out by declining such "invitations"? What assurances are there that there would be no negative consequences, probably quite subtle, for a child who declined it?

How come you're protected from discriminatory "suggestions" and they're not?

[Bridget Burke]

51. The event is privately funded...

Please see post #37.

The kids who don't want to go can skip the trip. Of course, their parents are the ones who don't want them to go.

[northzax]

62. sorry, that excuse doesn't hold water

to say that the ones who don't want to go don't need to doesn't provide acceptable protections for religious minorities. It's the same line that people use in school prayer, 'well sure, but if you kid doesn't want to pray, he can sit there quietly, or leave the room, when the class prays' same difference.

For all his political clout, the Dalai Lama is a religious figure, and as such, the public schools have no business sponsoring a trip to hear him. No one who's title is 'His Holiness' can be anything but a religious figure, sorry.

This does not mean you cannot read and study selected works by His Holiness in the correct context, or study him a political figure, as you might do with the Pope, the seminal 20th century works on civil disobediance and civil rights were written by religious figures, from Dr. King to Ghandi to the Dalai Lama and Catholic Archbishops, but care is needed. You can read the Confessions of St. Augustine as an ethical text, or in a religious history class, or as a work of literature, but not as a work of faith.

Your way leads to a revivial of a religious Plessy v. Ferguson situation.

[Bridget Burke]

64. You've discovered the secret plot!

Mahayana Buddhism is planning to take over the USA!

[northzax]

66. probably

but it doesn't matter, no matter what your religious beliefs, you should be comfortable that your children will not be forced, in a public school, to engage in another religion.

[Nihil]

68. Why not?

> to say that the ones who don't want to go don't need to doesn't
> provide acceptable protections for religious minorities.

I fail to see your problem with this.

If it is your wish (or, more pedantically, the parent's wish) that
the child does not go, the child does not go. This applies regardless
of whether the reason for the wish is religious bigotry, lack of money
or a simple desire to ignore people of a different race. It really
doesn't matter: free choice and all that.

The benefit of allowing your child to go is that they might learn
something that they would otherwise not learn; they might appreciate
things that they would otherwise be ignorant about; they might discover
that the whole thing is a storm in a teacup and thus be enlightened
about the essential nature of the modern American world.

Why the big deal?
It's not as if the governor is Buddhist and wanted to recruit ...

[northzax]

73. then it's also ok to say

that if your child doesn't want to say grace before lunch, he can get up and leave the room. or morning prayers. Or the afternoon bible study. There is intense pressure on children to be included in the group, whatever that group may be.

tell you what, I'll accept this deal, but from now on, your kid's class will watch the 700 club every friday. All children who don't want to partake of Pat Robertson may stand in the hallway. Is that fair? All children who don't want to go to bible study, where there is pizza and soda pop, can stay behind in study hall. All children who don't want to go to the religious theme park with roller coasters can stay behind in another classroom. See how it starts?

[Nihil]

129. More or less in agreement here

> that if your child doesn't want to say grace before lunch, he can
> get up and leave the room.

My kids know that if they don't want to say grace before lunch, they
just sit there quietly and wait (tolerantly) while others do.

> or morning prayers

We chose a school that does not indoctrinate children in such an
obvious manner. It is Anglican in foundation but not fanatically
so and gives more than lip-service to multi-denominational education.
I accept that other schools might be far more "pointed" in their
approach - even a single teacher can have a significant effect.

> Or the afternoon bible study

If the "bible study" is at a light level as part of the RE (religious
education) syllabus - along with understanding Islam, Hindu festivals
or Sikh beliefs - then the children sit & learn along with the rest
of the class. If "bible study" is an optional "club" then it is up
to the child. My eldest decided he wanted to go to bible study,
my other two children decided to do other things instead.

When there were specifically Christian events (other than lessons),
my youngest son would usually leave the classroom with his Hindu
friend and wait in the reading area.

(FWIW, one of the few "religious" events in the school year was
the Harvest Festival ... all the kids used to stay in for that as
they could all recognise that it wasn't a Christian festival anyway!)

I understand what you are saying about the subtle pressures that can
be placed on children and I am against the enforced attendance of
any school-age child at any religious event but my approach is to
support their choice rather than remove the opportunity.

(BTW, I am not getting at you as an individual in these posts but
find it easier to write to "you" rather than in the third person!)
:hi:

[northzax]

132. there's a key line in your post

We chose a school that does not indoctrinate children in such an
obvious manner. I assume that means your children go to a public school, not a state school? If you chose the school, instead of having the school chosen for you by simple geography then any religious pressures your children may come under are chosen by you, and you have the option of removing them from the situation if it makes you uncomfortable. (by the way, I went to an semi-Anglican pre-prep in Surrey and then to prep boarding school before coming back to the States, so I get the idea)

These children are in a State school, one at which attendance is compulsory and dictated by where their parents live. They cannot, without moving the family, switch schools, so they have no pressure to put on the school (loss of custom) as your family does. We need to be especially sensitive to those without the power to resist or fight back,.

[Nihil]

137. Unintentionally misleading

It is not a public school in the British sense (i.e., I do not pay
anything directly to the school, just through the usual taxes, etc.).

The school was "chosen" in as much as it is the nearest one and there
was nothing about it that I objected to (indeed, there was much that
I actively approved of - including the degree of tolerance with regard
to religious matters). If I had found it wanting, I would have had to
find a different one further away.

Point taken about the differences though.

(This is in Hampshire so the scenery would be pretty familiar to you :-))

[boise1]

69. "the public schools have no business sponsoring"....

You're absolutely correct on this. But neither the State of Idaho nor the public schools are sponsoring it, of course.

[northzax]

74. they aren't sponsoring the event

they are, however, sponsoring a trip to the event. If Billy Graham was in town on a crusade, privately financed, of course, I wouldn't expect a public school to organize a trip to see him, either. It's the same thing.

When a school organises a trip, or encouraged attendance at an event, it is, in essence, giving it the stamp of approval and appling pressure to students to attend. When that event involves religion, in any way, it is unnaceptable in a public school.

[NobleCynic]

110. Out of curiosity...

If a religious leader wishes to speak about something other than religion, under your definition of seperation of church and state, could he get state funding? I don't know if that is the case or not here, I haven't read what the Dalai Lama was speaking about specifically, but it is an interesting question. Does holding position within a faith exempt you from government support in non-religious functions?

[VegasWolf]

118. You are the second person to read more into what I said than what

I meant! I'll have to be more careful with my "agreement" in the future. I am against spending any public monies to support a religious function, regardless of any constitutional issues.

To answer your question about speaking in a purely non religious context, I would have no problems with that. In the case of the Dalia
Lama, I think I would have no trouble writing an essay that portrayed
his peaceful motivations for the entirety of the world.

Then , of course, what about a situation where Pat Robertson gives a talk independent of any religious clothing but simply limits himself to discussing the assignations of foreign leaders? Humm, slippery slope here ...

:toast:

[donheld]

50. Total proof - Americans are just plain stupid n/t

[leesa]

52. Lucky kids those are.

[iverglas]

53. "they"

Whew, what a lot of rushers to judgment.

Can someone share the information they have to establish that the people objecting to this field trip are fundamentalist Christians or any other distasteful breed?

Me, I'm an atheist and social-democrat-in-the-circumstances (that's to the left of "liberal"), and I might be objecting.

And he says Kempthorne is taking part because the Dalai Lama is a dignitary and head of state.

Uh ... no, he isn't; not the head of any state. His "dignitary" status is entirely in the eye of the beholder, but his "religious leader" status is indisputable. He's a private individual who is recognized by some people as a religious leader, and some people want him to be a head of state.

Hmm. And wouldn't that be some sort of violation of the principle of the separation of church and state? Wouldn't it be like the Pope being the head of state of Italy?

More specifically, he's a political leader. His public message is actually more political than religious. So he's a foreign national who advocates a particular political agenda, which is closely connected to a religious agenda ... and that puts him kinda outside the bounds of what a domestic educational system should be incorporating into its curriculum, I'd say.

Unless when

He also had students write essays related to the Buddhist leader's visit.

he made sure that they had been adequately exposed to all opinions about this individual's political agenda, or religious beliefs, or travel arrangements, or whatever it was they were supposed to be writing about.

No doubt that it would be a worthwhile academic experience for students to see him speak. But not if they didn't have the appropriate background to enable them to think critically about what they heard, and not if they aren't offered similar opportunities to see other foreign politicians speak.


Actually, I might be seeing a local politician taking an opportunity to rub shoulders with a political figure whom no one would dare criticize and who is regarded as an icon of nobleness and pure of heartedness and maybe hoping that some of that will rub off, with a bunch of little kids in the picture. Photo op. Hmm. Kempthorne's a Republican, right?

[marshall]

55. My coworker is thrilled

that her daughter gets to hear the Dalai Lama at UT-Austin. This is her daughter's first semester in college after being valedictorian at our high school. She had to stand in line for several hours to be sure and get one of the limited seats.
I wonder if the Dalai Lama will visit any of the hurricane survivors while he is in Austin?

[WiseButAngrySara]

103. The Dalai Lama announced last night on CNN that he hoped to visit

the evacuees at the Houston Astrodome...maybe the Austin Katrina survivors as well.

[defiant1]

56. Bahahaha....

No, not the Dalai Lama!!!

:scared:

[goforit]

58. I'm sure the parents can make decisions on their own without the

Phoney Christian Right Groups getting in the way!!!

[xdk999]

63. ...if there is a problem...

when dalai lama was asked how he can cope with the chinese occupation of Tibet, he gave this answer: "in buddism, we say, if there is a problem, one has to ask himself: is the problem solvable? If it's solvable, then there is nothing to worry about. If it's not solvable, then there is no reason to worry either".

Keep this in mind when b* drives you crazy:)

d.

[gauguin57]

67. My three nieces met the Dalai Lama a couple of years ago.

They said it was a fantastic experience. And they all came out of the experience as Episcopalian as they were before they met him.

Imagine that.

[northzax]

75. I've met His Holiness as well

and it was a fantastic experience that everyone who has the opportunity to have should take. But that doesn't mean that a public institution should be involved in promoting it.

[iverglas]

131. yup!

it was a fantastic experience that everyone who has the opportunity to have should take. But that doesn't mean that a public institution should be involved in promoting it.

And I once had a private audience (well, there were three of us) with the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (yeah, I'm old). It was actually a very silly and boring experience, but I wouldn't suggest that anyone else not try it, or try to prevent anyone from doing so. ;)

But I still wouldn't want my public school system bussing kids anywhere to see him, or "inviting" them to write things for him. Or for Wojtyla or Ratzenberger, or Khomeini, or Benny Hinn. Or any exile/pretender head of state, at least if not recognized by my government, or any leader of any foreign political opposition movement, at least if not an opponent of a government condemned by my country (I'm surprised that someone hasn't raised Mandela pre-new South Africa).

There simply is no PUBLIC POSITION or even CONSENSUS about the merit of either Tenzin Gyatso's religious (or "spiritual") teachings or political agenda.

There, I found his name (although his real name is Lhamo Thondup). I don't recognize him as "teacher whose wisdom is as great as the ocean"; an honorary title bestowed by the Mongolian prince Altan Khan on the third head of the Gelukpa school in 1578, so I have no reason to call him that ... let alone "his holiness". And I have no reason to agree to bestow a public school system's seal of approval on him or his teachings, or his political agenda ... which is actually to establish a theocracy. Damn, eh? Although he's open to ideas:

http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/1993/7/1_7.html

He said it will be up to the people of Tibet to decide if the institution of the Dalai Lama is still relevant and should be maintained. The Dalai Lama is both the spiritual and political leader of the world's 6 million Tibetan Buddhists.

Oh well, I guess we'll just have to hope he doesn't get into the specifics of things in his speech, because if he does, those vile fundie Christians objecting to the whole thing might find they're not so displeased after all:

On abortion and homosexuality, which have deeply divided other religious faiths, the Dalai Lama said he believed life is sacred and abortion is wrong - though there may be special circumstances, such as saving the life of the mother, when it might be an option. He said nature arranged male and female organs "in such a manner that is very suitable... Same-sex organs cannot manage well." But he stopped short of condemning homosexual relationships altogether, saying if two people agree to enter a relationship that is not sexually abusive, "then I don't know. It's difficult to say."

His religion is "love", let alone "compassion", my feminist atheist ass.

[54anickel]

70. Heh, NOW they mention "constitutional separation between church and state"

Bwahahahaha!

[VegasWolf]

71. If I had to listen to a religious authority, I would far rather listen to

the Dalai Lama rather than any Christian evangelical figure, esp Pat Robertson.

[Bridget Burke]

88. Crossroads Christian Church is concerned....

Parents raising children in the Judeo-Christian tradition will perhaps want to steer their children away from this event, particularly because of its spiritual overtones. If there are no spiritual realities, then of course a blessing can neither do harm nor good. But if there are spiritual realities, and not all of them are friendly, then a blessing received from a spiritual leader can actually be harmful to spiritual health if it does not proceed from the God revealed in Judeo-Christian teaching.

http://www.crossroadschristian.org/

A visit to an anti-evolution conference is suggested as an alternative. The source seems to be the Keep the Commandments Coalition.

http://www.keepthecommandmentsboise.com/news.asp?id=64

Were the "concerned parents" part of a grass-roots movement? Most stories out of Idaho indicate the Dalai Lama's visit was a very big thing.

[VegasWolf]

105. Wow!! Tell me this church is not REAL please!!!! Get your anti-evolution

hot dogs right here!

[IDemo]

128. How ironic that 'keepthecommandmentsboise.com' favored ignoring - -

the separation of Church and State when it came to their own pet issue: the removal of a stone monument depicting the 'Ten Commandments' from Boise's Julia Davis Park.

[Iris]

91. The study of other religions is part of a decent education.

Many colleges offer comparative religion courses. I can remember social studies units where we studied most major world religions.

These people are not only getting their panties in a wad, they are showing their ignorance.

[Contrary1]

96. So they don't sign the permission slip for their kid to go.

Simple solution for a blown out of proportion "problem".

The Dalai Lama visits Bloomington, Indiana quite often,
as he has an older brother living there.

One of these days I hope to get to hear him speak.

[lilymidnite]

97. Oh my f------ god!

The Dalai Lama generally doesn't speak in English in large public gatherings. Unless these kids speak Tibetan, I suspect they're only going to pick up 1/3 of what his interpreter says in his highly-accented English.

These wingnuts, I swear. Too much time on their hands.

[progressivebydesign]

98. And if it were Mother Teresa? Or Ghandi? would they complain? n/t

[northzax]

101. about the smell, I'd guess

given that both are dead.

[AngryAmish]

102. Maybe they are afraid he will make them caddy for him

and then stiff the kid at the end of the round.

[MadisonProgressive]

104. One of the great men of our time

He wouldn't hurt a flea, and he WILL NOT indoctrinte your kids! Unlike the Christo-fascists...

[Walt Starr]

106. Hmmmm, seems to me school officials send kids when the Pope visits

I don't remember anybody getting bent out of shape over that.

[iverglas]

122. what a strange country you must live in

PUBLIC schools send kids when a pope visits??

That's just plain bizarre, if you'll forgive my foreign astonishment.

Up here, RC "separate" schools (which do get public funding, and that's a whooooole nother can of constitutional history worms) do, but the public schools sure as heck don't. Whew, I can just hear the firestorm now ...

[NobleCynic]

107. Too little information

I think there is too little information on this subject, at least within this forum at the moment, to make a solid argument one way or the other on this.

1st: How many parents were objecting to this? If it was a half dozen, they're just a few fringe nutballs and should be ignored. If it was a thousand or more, then it is a real issue.

2nd: In what function is the Dalai Lama speaking? Is there speaking as a religious leader about religion? As a religious leader about politics? As a political leader about religion? As a political leader about politics? About all religions? About Buddhism? About just Tibetan Buddhism? Is he preaching Buddhism or giving a comparative lesson in world religions? Without such knowledge there is no way to tell if this is pushing seperation between church and state or not.

In any case though, my gut instinct is to say it's not a big deal and the people complaining are just intolerant and whiny small town folk. If someone can present to me evidence that what the Dalai Lama is doing there is primarily preaching and attempting to convert children, then I will gladly agree that it shouldn't be endorsed by the state in such a manner. As I suspect, and quite strongly I might add, that this is not the case, until shown otherwise my position is that the people complaining are out of line and should be ignored.

[northzax]

111. so you would accept Pat Robertson

if he is only speaking about politics? Having heard His Holiness' speak in the past, I would wager he will speak on a combination of religion, politics and ethics, for him they are interwined, you can't be a religious leader and not talk about religion.

The number of complainants isn't the point. The rules protect everyone, or are supposed to, whether or not they complain. It's designed to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. There may be only one Jewish family in town, but that doesn't mean they don't get to complain about Jerry Falwell speaking at an assembly.

[iverglas]

119. ah, fringe nutballs

1st: How many parents were objecting to this? If it was a half dozen, they're just a few fringe nutballs and should be ignored. If it was a thousand or more, then it is a real issue.

Yes, like those few fringe nutballs who object to their children reciting pledges containing religious references in them, or taking abstinence-only "sex ed" courses at school.

The number of people who hold an opinion has really never been an appropriate standard for judging the worthiness of the opinion, has it? Or even for determining whether there is a "real" issue, I'd say.

2nd: In what function is the Dalai Lama speaking? Is there speaking as a religious leader about religion? As a religious leader about politics? As a political leader about religion? As a political leader about politics? About all religions? About Buddhism? About just Tibetan Buddhism? Is he preaching Buddhism or giving a comparative lesson in world religions? Without such knowledge there is no way to tell if this is pushing seperation between church and state or not.

I dunno ... why I'd think that this particular individual was planning to deliver a lesson in comparative religion ... but in any event I don't know why I'd think that a leader of one particular religion was the appropriate person (no others apparently having been invited to join him in doing it) for the job.

In any case though, my gut instinct is to say it's not a big deal and the people complaining are just intolerant and whiny small town folk.

Yeah, I find that that's what most people who disagree with me are, too. And out of line, and should be ignored. And I'll say so even if I have absolutely no basis for my characterization of them, and have produced nothing to counter their reasonable arguments.

It really is a pretty reasonable argument to say that a public school system, and any other public authority, should not be privileging any religion over another, or inviting or bussing students to any religious event at all.

[Skidmore]

108. I'm wondering if this lady would feel the same way if

a reknown rabbi were to visit.

[northzax]

114. I would, if Maimonides himself

was resurrected.

[iverglas]

115. why?

Just curious. Must be some reason.

[Skidmore]

116. Just because I am very distrustful of people of any

religious group who develop angst about whether their children will be corrupted by exposure to an adherent to another religion. I've seen way too many fundmentalists in a number of faiths use that argument while being perfectly content to provide access to a member of their own faith. I have no problem with people learning about other cultures and religions. We all need to know about the world we live in. I just get squeamish when I hear that particular argument combined with a protest.

[iverglas]

117. well, that's one way of characterizing her

people of any religious group who develop angst about whether their children will be corrupted by exposure to an adherent to another religion

It just doesn't look to me like it's based on any facts.

Pam Smart of Caldwell, who is Jewish,
says Kempthorne is using his position
to influence others.

Just not seeing any angst about her children being corrupted by exposure to an adherent of another religion. Not seeing it.

So not seeing any reason to insinuate that she would be perfectly happy if the governor or some other state authority bussed her kid and other kids to hear a rabbi speak.

Not seeing any reason to impugn the integrity of anyone not here to defend herself, without a really good reason for doing it.

Seeing a whole lot of it at DU in recent weeks though, I must say.

I have no problem with people learning about other cultures and religions.

Good. I'm an atheist, and neither do I.

I prefer them to learn in a context of impartiality and from teachers who are actually enabling them to learn, however, and not in a context specially devoted to one message that is not made available for other messages, or from people preaching their own message rather than educating about it.

No matter now nicey-nice some people might think that message is.

The Dalai Lama (who I'm sure must have a name, which I'd like to see used in secular contexts) is not an educator, he is a political and religious leader, and there is no general consensus in agreement with the political or religious agenda he stands for or the political or religious message he carries.

Popes regularly hold massive events for children and youth. RC schools bus students to them; public schools do not, nor are children "invited" by their school systems to write essays for popes, or for archbishops, or exiled heads of state / pretenders to office from foreign countries.

Doing so would imply approval by the school system of the message carried by those people, whether religious or political, and it ain't the job of a school system to do that.

And I'm just not seeing anything wrong with anyone saying that it isn't her children's school system's job to do this, or any reason to insinuate that she is a religious fanatic or fundamentalist or bigot.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

120. I demand a SCIENTIFIC theory of Peace and Tranquility be presented, too!!!

[yorkiemommie1]

123. can i go in their place ?

n/t

[anotherdrew]

124. so none of these idiots ever heard of a "permission slip" ?

screw these twits with nothing better to do than bitch about this, where are they when their country needs them to care about real issues? watching tv made for morons...

[iverglas]

125. I grow ever more appalled

But I've just ceased being surprised.

so none of these idiots ever heard of a "permission slip"?

Why would you ask? Why would you assume, and insinuate, this to be true?

Why would you suggest that a "permission slip" is a sufficient response to someone's objection to a school system doing something that it is, at least arguably, quite inappropriate for a school system to do?

If your school system proposed to bus your children to a Pentecostal faith-healing rally, would you think that a "permission slip" to keep your children out of it would be an appropriate response? Would you really not CARE that your children were having to single themselves out from the crowd that way, and really not expect that your children would be treated differently by other children and by the school system that chose to organize the event?

Would you be an idiot for thinking any of that?

Why would you call complete strangers ABOUT WHOM YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING "idiots" in public?

where are they when their country needs them to care about real issues? watching tv made for morons...

Do you THINK?

I find cause to wonder.

How could you possibly know what those people do about ANYTHING from what you read in that report? How could you possibly know that they are not out collecting goods for evacuees, raising money for relief, lobbying elected representatives for aid, and organizing for the Democratic Party on their off weeks?

Why would you say things like this about complete strangers?

And why would other people -- no matter how obnoxiously fundamentalist Christian they might be, not that we know -- not be entitled to object to THEIR children's school system organizing events involving religious leaders preaching a religious or political agenda that THEY do not recognize as valid?



Why does nobody else see this as a bunch of bloody photo ops for a Republican governor?

[anotherdrew]

141. good points, it's all about Anti-China photo-op for this Rethug gov

so you're right, what the hell?

[iverglas]

142. I'd meant to make that bit plainer ;)

Yes: anti-China. Eek, what a shock!

Why anyone would think that a Republican state governor would be shipping schoolkids off to get a message of love and compassion and peace, I simply don't get.

Well, except, of course, that (as described in my post "yup!"), the individual delivering the message opposes legal abortion and finds homosexual relationships unnatural ...

Wot a guy, eh?

[anotherdrew]

145. Buddhism is great, but state-run Buddhism in tibet isn't sooo perfect eith

I can't go into it at length but there can be a big difference between the teachings of the Buddha's and the teachings of men who try to follow those teachings. It's a fundamental problem with religion. Buddha's teachings do not lead to a religious/political ruling power, yet that is what was made in Tibet.

I find it odd that he would take positions on homosexuality and abortion for instance. Never knew he did

[Bassic]

133. Yeah,

God forbid they hear a message of peace and well-being.

[Canuckistanian]

138. I don't remember this outrage over the Pope visits...

Well, maybe all religious leaders should be banned from official visits.

Works for me.

[northzax]

140. and I don't recall public schools sending kids to see the Pope

perhaps you can find some evidence they did? If not, then your comment really isn't relevant, is it?