From: grendel@camelot.bradley.edu (Alyosha Bourgea)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about:
Date: 11 Dec 92 21:44:11 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bradley University

In <1992Dec8.203109.22379@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:

>In article <grendel.723788680@camelot> grendel@camelot.bradley.edu (Alyosha Bourgea) writes:
>>In <1992Dec5.230018.23815@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
>>
>>>In article <nate.884@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:

>>I can't comment on the staring professor example, because I haven't read
>>about it.  

>How 'bout if I explain it to you?  An associate professor was swimming in 
>the campus pool (if you want the location, look it up in Rush's archives).
>He often swam under water, and women (students) felt he was "oogling" them.  
>He was warned by university officials that he could resign, submit to 
>summary hearing or submit to "re-education."  How do you feel about this?

I feel that the professor was victimized.  He had not committed any crime.

>>However, on the matter of school prayer: it's a bad idea because it
>>violates equal rights.  

>How does a voluntary moment of silence violate equal rights?  How does 

Because it is irrelevant to the purpose of school, which is secular education.
"Quiet time" might be a good idea for kindergarteners, but why is it necessary
in higher levels of education?  How does it educate?

>student-lead voluntary prayer violate equal rights?  Where are you 

I don't care who leads who in prayer, as long as it's done outside school
and doesn't interrupt the class schedule.  I go to school to learn about
science, math, history, English, etc., not to have the words of someone
else's religious mantra ringing in my ears.

>guaranteed the right to lead a life without being exposed to any religion?

Nowhere, and I don't consider this a "right" or even a reasonable expectation.
But I do consider it reasonable to expect the right to remove myself from
any religious situation.  If I'm walking down the street and some guy is
preaching the "Lord's Word" in a vacant lot, I can always walk in a different
direction.  But if I'm in a classroom, I can't get up and leave when someone
tells me that so-and-so is the Truth and the Light and the Way.  Besides,
it would be embarrassing for me to leave if I were a kid.  Why can't kids
pray on their own time?  Why do you need to institutionalize it?  Why can't
they finger their rosaries, or whatever, by themselves, as long as they keep
it quiet and don't keep others from learning?

>>The purpose of school is to educate, and every
>>student, be they fundie, Muslim, pagan, Jewish, atheist, or indifferent,
>>should be allowed to pursue that goal in peace.  If students want to pray,
>>that is certainly their right; however, they should do it individually.

>You apparently believe that this is true.  Let me attempt to convince you 
>that it is not.  A blind, grade-school girl was quietly praying her rosary 
>beads on the school bus.  The bus driver took them away and the school 
>forbade her from praying the rosary (even quietly) in public.  In Florida, 
>the principal tore the page depicting the Bible Club from all copies of 
>the yearbook.  He then apologized to the Spanish Club, whose picture was 
>on the reverse.  Examples, after examples, followed by more examples that 
>the most descriminated against group in public schools today is Christians.
>They most certainly are not allowed to pray individually in many schools.

If you had bothered to read my post thoroughly before you responded to it,
you might have noticed the word "should", used twice.  Personally, I find
the examples you list above a violation of fundamental rights.  If it is
indeed true that the girl's rosary beads were taken away, or that the Bible
Club's picture was removed from the yearbook, this is terribly wrong.
I don't see how you have refuted my statement that every student, no matter
their religious or non-religious inclination, SHOULD be allowed to pursue
their educational goals in peace, or that every student SHOULD be allowed
to peacefully express their religious/non-religious beliefs as long as they
do it without disrupting anyone else.

>>But just as a child has
>>the right to sit in class and be a Christian, though all his or her classmates
>>may be little agnostics, so does a soldier have the right to serve and be
>>homosexual, though all his or her comrades are heterosexual.  

>Again, where is the "right to serve in the military" specified.

Where is the "right to an education" specified?

Anyone should be allowed to serve in the military, barring a physical or
mental disability which would inhibit their ability to serve.  Women,
African-Americans, homosexuals; not much in common except the ability to
serve in the military just as well as white heterosexual males.  If
the military prevents any of these three groups from joining, it has
disqualified itself as a citizen's army, and becomes nothing more than
a training school for the elite.

>>They have
>>the right to be open about their gay nature, just as the child has the right
>>to openly express their Christian belief.  They do not have the right to
>>interrupt military activity with homosexual activity, just as the child
>>does not have the right to interrupt academic activity with Christian
>>activity.  Do you see?  It's not about who's PC and who's not.  The same
>>ethical standards apply to everyone.

>I hope that I have shown that they do not.

You haven't.  The same ethical standards apply to everyone; this doesn't mean
they cannot be violated.  When they are, those responsible should be held
accountable for it.

>Ted

--
Yosha Bourgea                   "Newspapers screamed for blood...
grendel@camelot.bradley.edu     it was the best of times."
Squid Power                              --Sting
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.space,sci.space