Atheist, agnostic books to be offered to Orange County students

[rug]

Group petitions Orange County School Board after Bibles passively distributed

Published On: Jan 17 2013 02:25:07 PM EST Updated On: Jan 17 2013 04:34:51 PM EST

ORLANDO, Fla. -
A Central Florida Freethinkers group will distribute materials about atheism, agnosticism and secular humanism to students in Orange County Public Schools after receiving permission from the school board.

According to a news release from the Central Florida Freethought Community, the group is in the planning stages with the Orange County school board to discuss how they can distribute to students.

The CFFC will meet with the school board in February to discuss the distribution of the atheist materials after the school board allowed Bibles to be passively distributed to students earlier this week.

Orange County Schools said the group's materials must first be reviewed by the county's legal department and the group members placing the items in schools must get clearance through a background check, just as the previous group did.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Atheist-agnostic-books-to-be-offered-to-Orange-County-students/-/1637132/18166098/-/15eiswh/-/index.html

[another_liberal]

1. At least the kids will know . . .

At least the kids will know that not all adults blindly accept Right Wing, Fundamentalist Christian superstitions. In this country, we do not have to stand for our children being brainwashed by Bible-thumping preachers on the make.

[cbayer]

3. Say what?

This is about the passive distribution of religious/atheist materials. The courts found that it was allowable but could not be restricted to certain religions.

I'm not sure where you are getting the bible-thumping preachers on the make brainwashing kids part.

[another_liberal]

4. You clearly have never been within shouting distance . . .

You clearly have never been within shouting distance of a Southern Baptist preacher on a roll.

How I envy you.

[cbayer]

7. I have, but this has nothing to do with them.

It has to do with passive distribution of materials. The court allowed that, but most certainly would not have allowed a SB preacher on a roll.

[another_liberal]

8. The very nature of Bibles . . .

The very nature of Bibles is anything but "passive."

[cleanhippie]

10. As well a stage act of placing them in schools, is anything but passive.

[another_liberal]

13. Exactly.

Are they also handing out Korans, or copies of the Upanishads? If so, then one might argue it was "passive."

[Jenoch]

32. From what I can tell from the

information contained in the OP, if a group wished to passively distribute Korans at that school, and the group followed the same rules as have been established, yes, they would be allowed to do so.

Did you hear about the agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac? He layed awake at night wondering if there really is a dog.

[cbayer]

12. Malarkey. The bible is just a bound volume that includes things

that you can either read or not read, buy or not buy, etc. It, in and of itself, is a passive object.

Are you trying to make the case that the atheist materials should be allowed, but not the bibles? Because that would be a very difficult position to support.

OTOH, I don't think they should make either available, except as references. Even if left out for passive distribution, it looks very close to prostelyzation in both cases.

[cleanhippie]

23. A very interesting change of definition. Is that how you ALWAYS view the bible?

or just when it is convenient?

[winterpark]

29. This is in response to governor dunderhead touting the court ruling and declaring some

religious freedom bullshit day. So the Atheists said: you gonna allow bibles to be given out, we're gonna give em our stuff too. And the idiot never saw it coming. Asshole rightwingers in my state never saw they were opening the door to exactly what they didn't want.

[cbayer]

30. Lol, great report from the front lines, winter park. Thanks!

The scenario you describe is happening frequently and due to the audacity of some religious groups not recognizing that there are other religious groups. So they appear to be completely surprised when a court's decision is applied to groups other than themselves.

Happened in Louisiana regarding the funding of religiously based charter schools. Some of the legislators were genuinely surprised when some Muslim groups requested the funds!

[cbayer]

2. Agree that if they allow the "passive" distribution of bibles, they must allow this as well.

[another_liberal]

5. Religion has no place in our public schools.

Religion has no place in our public schools. None!

Atheism is not a religion, so there is no Constitutional violation involved there.

[cbayer]

6. Except as an academic subject, I agree.

But the court did not, so I think this is a reasonable compromise.

This isn't about either or, it's about all or none.

Atheism is not a religion, but it is about religion. The 1st amendment applies to both believers and non-believers.

[another_liberal]

9. Teach it as history or teach it as myth . . .

Perhaps one might teach it as history or teach it as myth, but include every other major religion with equal treatment, and do not hand out religious propaganda such as Bibles.

[cbayer]

11. The academic field of religious studies generally includes many religions.

But, once again, this is not about that at all. It's about the passive distribution of religious/atheist materials. It does not address classroom education at all.

[another_liberal]

14. Were they also handing out copies of the Koran?

Were they also handing out copies of the Koran and the Upanishads? If that were the case, one might be able to say it was "passive." Otherwise this is plain and simple proselytizing the Christian religion.

[cbayer]

15. I don't know, but the court's ruling would indicate that if someone wanted to

passively supply the Koran, the schools would have to permit them to do that.

This is what it says:

The court order states that anyone must be allowed to distribute materials in a school, with certain exceptions, such as no promotion of drugs, alcohol, pornography and advertisements for products

That excludes nothing by source, only by content.

Does that not seem fair (if they are going to allow it at all)?

[another_liberal]

16. Those courts in Florida . . .

Those courts in Florida . . . jeez!

[cbayer]

17. Agree with you, but this decision is somewhat Solomonic and probably avoided the

most conflict or objection.

It's been nice talking to you, another_liberal. Hope to see you around.

[another_liberal]

18. Yes.

Be well.

[okasha]

19. As far as I can tell,

passive distribution simply means to make the literature available to the students without any promotion, for the kids to pick up or not, as they choose.

[another_liberal]

20. A Bible is still a Bible . . .

A Bible is still a Bible. Leaving a pile of them in a public school hallway will be taken as a clear endorsement by the school administration. If you want them available as literature, have couple copies in the library.

[okasha]

21. So making atheist and agnostic literature available

in the same way would also be a clear endorsement by the school administration?

[another_liberal]

22. Atheism is not a religion.

Neither is agnosticism. But books on those subjects should also be treated as literature, and be available in the school library.

[okasha]

24. It may not br a religion,

but it takes a polemical, and sometimes proseletyzing, position on religious matters, which does bring distribution of books on the subect.under the First Amendment. But I do agree that the place for the Bible, atheist works, etc. is in the library.

[another_liberal]

25. Not to put too fine a point on it . . .

Not to put too fine a point on it, but neither atheism nor agnosticism recognizes the existence of a deity, something which being a religion surely requires.

[cbayer]

26. they may not be religions, per se, but they concern themselves with religious matters.

Otherwise, why would so many self-identified non-believers participate in the religion group?

[cleanhippie]

27. Because they are concerned about the oppressive nature of religion?

Because religion still insists on having a say in how we go about making rules and laws for all to follow?

Because religion opposes science?

Because religious believers feel the need to proclaim a moral high ground?

[another_liberal]

33. Monty Python's . . .

Monty Python's "Life of Bryan" deals with religious matters too. But it is hardly a religion unto itself.

[cbayer]

35. I have already agreed with you that atheism is not a religion. I have only

said that it is about religion, as is Life of Bryan.

The literature that they will wish to leave will most certainly deal with religion, don't you think?

[another_liberal]

36. But a Bible . . .

But a Bible is the thing itself. It is the "Word of God" for fundamentalist Christians. It is not about religion, it is religion.

[cbayer]

38. While it may be religion to some, to others it's just a book.

And it's a book used as a reference guide, teaching tool, example of religious texts.

So is "The God Delusion".

So what?

I don't get your point, or perhaps we have no disagreement here.

I don't think they should be distributing any texts about religion or lack of religion. But if they are going to do it, then I am glad they are inclusive.

If you are trying to make the argument that literature on atheism should be allowed, but no other literature that is attached to a religion, then I just don't think you have a legitimate case at all.

[another_liberal]

39. The Christian Bible . . .

The Christian Bible, stripped of it's superstitious/religious baggage, is an important cultural and literary document. It can help us to understand the ages old story of humanity in ways few other historical texts can. It is, however, the difficulty of removing it from that realm of "holiness" which limits it practical usefulness in the American classroom.

[cbayer]

43. Again, I'm not sure of your point.

Having a religious studies or Introduction to Religion or any other course without the bible would be, well, silly.

Whether an individual imbues it with something connected to their specific religious beliefs is a purely independent act.

[another_liberal]

50. My point is . . .

My point is that though the Christian Bible might seem to be a valuable educational text, however, the difficulty of using it in a public school classroom without freighting one's lesson plan with all kinds of unintended and undesirable religious baggage makes the idea unworkable. In higher education, on the other hand, the Bible is often employed in the study of mythology and comparative religion, of course.

[cbayer]

51. This is not about using it in a public school classroom.

You get that, right?

It is about having them out for students to take if they want.

[another_liberal]

55. By allowing Bibles to be handed out . . .

By allowing Bibles to be handed out in the school, that school's administration is sending the message that Bibles are something students should accept and, by extension, believe in. To send that message to students in a public school is just plain wrong.

I hate to be rude, cbayer, but we have been over and over this same ground several times. If you have actually been reading what I have written, you should understand my position. If you don't, go back and reread what I told you earlier.

[cbayer]

57. So if they also allow atheist material to be handed out, which is what this

article is about, can not the same argument be made - that they are endorsing atheism?

I understand your position, I think. You don't think the bible should be handed out. I agree with you.

What I don't understand is whether you think the atheist materials should be allowed, even if the bible is prohibited.

[DallasNina]

28. There are eastern religions that don't have 'a deity'.

Buddhism for example

[another_liberal]

34. There are those . . .

There are those who would give you an argument on that point. I am certainly not an authority on Buddhism, however, I have read the Budda is considered a "Perfect Being." He is thought to have attained complete enlightenment and oneness with the universe while he was still in human form.

Again, my knowledge of Buddhism is limited, but that does sound a lot like a deity.

[immoderate]

31. Atheism is not a religion, but what are atheist books about?

If atheism does not deal with religion what is it about?

--imm

[another_liberal]

37. Freedom . . .?

Freedom from the chains of superstition maybe?

I see it that way.

[immoderate]

40. Like not walking under a ladder?

--imm

[cleanhippie]

42. Maybe a better example would be how walking under a ladder does not bring bad luck.

Your analogy is weak, but I think I know what you mean.

[immoderate]

45. My point was there is no strong analogy. Should I break a mirror?

Interestingly, I know atheists who are superstitious, or harbor other irrational beliefs.

I know James Randi. He debunks superstition but not as an atheist.

--imm

[cleanhippie]

60. Atheism has noting to do with superstition.

It's simply the lack of belief in a god. Being superstitious or not is a whole other matter and is unrelated.

[immoderate]

61. Depends. Does religion have a relation to superstition?

It's a semantic, and perhaps personal thing. Anyway, I'm reflecting on statements from the OP.

--imm

[another_liberal]

46. And believing in angels . . .

And believing in angels; and in people rising from the dead; and in heaven and hell; and in the virgin birth; and in the immaculate conception; and in Noah's Ark; and in a very huge, very old white man on a throne in the clouds, with a long white beard and flowing robes who created the whole universe in six days. Yeah, and like not walking under a frickin' ladder.

"We'll all have pie in the sky when we die!"

[okasha]

49. Im other words,

you simply claim privilege for your own superstitions.

[another_liberal]

53. I do?

What superstition is that? My refusal to accept the superstitious beliefs of Christianity is not, in turn, another superstition. It is an effort to be free from the chains of superstition and religious dogma. I will be free!

[cleanhippie]

41. What is an "atheist book"? Or do you mean a book written by an atheist?

[immoderate]

44. If a book is written from an atheist POV, what is it about?

Usually?

--imm

[another_liberal]

47. I already told you . . .

I already told you, it's about freedom.

Wise up. The sky pilots just want you to fill their collection plate.

[immoderate]

48. Can Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., write books about Freedom?

Like the "freedom to worship?"



Everybody likes freedom! It's not an atheist exclusive.

--imm

[another_liberal]

52. And freedom to not worship as well.

True freedom is a universal good. Free your mind first, then you are truly free.

[immoderate]

54. Thanks for the tip!

--imm

[another_liberal]

56. Or try Ted Hughes . . .

Or try Ted Hughes:

. . .

The sun is behind me.
Nothing has changed since I began.
My eye has permitted no change.
I am going to keep things like this

[DonCoquixote]

58. Good for the goose

Good for the gander..
the only minor risk of harm is that people might think "atheists" are some unified group, which is not the case, as the term covers everyone from some Unitarian Universalists to types that think ANY organization is bad.

[cbayer]

59. Some people think all "christians" are some unified group and some "muslims" are

some unified group, but they also span a great range.