Sunday, March 6, 2011

RE: Fw: : A kid got an A+ for this paper

Once again, my inbox provides me with something I can't ignore. Email is on the left, my comments are on the right.



>
> BY A 15 yr. OLD SCHOOL KID
> who got an A+ for this entry
>  (TOTALLY AWESOME)!
>
Check out Snopes for the questionable factuality of the attribution.
This entry is totally awesome, if by awesome the author mean terrifying (which (s)he might, but I doubt).
> Since the Pledge of Allegiance
> And
> The Lord's Prayer
> Are not allowed in most
> Public schools anymore
What?  They aren't not allowed anywhere in the USA.  They are not allowed to be required, but they are allowed to be recited.
> Because the word 'God' is mentioned.....  
> A kid in Arizona wrote the attached
The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892, and the word 'God' was added in 1952.  And I'm pretty sure the word 'God' is not in the Lord's Prayer or the problem anyone has with public schools requiring students to recite it.
NEW Public School prayer:  
>
>  
"New Pledge of Allegiance"  
Yikes.

I'm pretty sure this prayer/pledge is going to be more disrespectful than this performance.
> Now I sit me down in school
> Where praying is against the rule
> For this great nation under God
> Finds mention of Him very odd.
>  
Why is this in rhyming couplets?  Why is this being derived from "Now I Lay Me Down to Sleep"?
Praying isn't against "the rule".  Forcing others to pray is against the rules, especially forcing others to pray in a specified way.  God can be mentioned; He cannot be asserted as undeniable.
> If scripture now the class recites,
> It violates the Bill of Rights.
> And anytime my head I bow
> Becomes a Federal matter now.
Scripture could possibly be recited as literature, but to be recited as fact does violate the Bill of Rights, specifically the First Amendment.  Bowing your head is not a problem.  Forcing someone else to bow his/her head is the "Federal matter", since 1791.  It's also been a state-and-local matter since 1925.
> Our hair can be purple, orange or green,  
> That's no offense; it's a freedom scene..  
> The law is specific, the law is precise.  
> Prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.  
>  
I have never been in a school that allowed "unnatural" hair colors.  Students were suspended from public schools that I attended for that very offense.  I'm disappointed (but not surprised) that the author does not cite "the law" (s)he references here; I'm pretty sure the author made this law up.
> For praying in a public hall
> Might offend someone with no faith at all..  
> In silence alone we must meditate,
> God's name is prohibited by the state.  
Please stop beating this poor, dead, misinformed horse.  You can pray.  You cannot force someone else to pray your way.  You might be offended by someone telling you that you must pray to Allah or Ganesh or Zeus or the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Xenu.
> We're allowed to cuss and dress like freaks,  
> And pierce our noses, tongues and cheeks...  
Again, I have never been in a public school where profanity is "allowed", and the phrase "dress like freaks" is extremely offensive and insensitive.  I do not know specifically what the author means, but I cannot imagine that phrase meaning anything unoffensive.
> They've outlawed guns, but FIRST the Bible.  
> To quote the Good Book makes me liable.
I do not know what this is talking about.  Was there a time in American history that students were allowed to bring guns to school?  I guess that could be true, but why are we talking about guns now?  Back on the dead horse, the Bible isn't banned.  The Bible is also not a textbook, especially a science text.
Liable?  For what?  Libel?
> We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen,
> And the 'unwed daddy,' our Senior King.   
Like Mary and Joseph!
> It's 'inappropriate' to teach right from wrong,  
> We're taught that such 'judgments' do not belong..  
>  
What?  I think the author is confused.  I know I am.
"Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you. Why do you notice the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove that splinter from your eye,' while the wooden beam is in your eye? You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother's eye." - Jesus (Matthew 7:1-5).  So now I'm really confused.  Is the author arguing for or against biblically taught morality?
> We can get our condoms and birth controls,  
> Study witchcraft, vampires and totem poles ..
> But the Ten Commandments are not allowed,  
> No word of God must reach this crowd.  
I am so tired and offended by this prayer/pledge.  Please excuse me while I give the dead horse (and myself) a rest.
> It's scary here I must confess,
> When chaos reigns the school's a mess.  
> So, Lord, this silent plea I make:
> Should I be shot; My soul please take!
Woah!  Surprise twist ending!  I thought the author was mad that guns are allegedly outlawed?  Can we find this student and tutor him/her in logical consistency?
> Amen
>
>
No.
> If you aren't ashamed to do this,  Please pass this on..
> Jesus said,  'If you are ashamed of me,  I will be ashamed of you before my Father.'
I really wish we could get some citations from this author.  I am not aware of any biblical reference to Jesus saying any such thing.  The closest reference that I am aware of is St. Paul's second letter to Timothy 1:7-8, "For God did not give us a spirit of cowardice but rather of power and love and self-control. So do not be ashamed of your testimony to our Lord, nor of me, a prisoner for his sake; but bear your share of hardship for the gospel with the strength that comes from God."  That's Paul talking, though, not Jesus.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~AWESOME~~~~~~~~~~Terrifying.
>

> Not ashamed. Pass this on.
>  



I'm just glad it's finally over!