Should a religious song be banned from a school talent show?

[rcyannacci]

My guess is that the girl who sings about God will receive less ridicule than the gay kids who come out in the school newspaper, but for their sakes, I hope none are treated badly and that the school would discourage any backlash. I like "Oliver." I sang "Just a Spoonful of Sugar" in the second grade school show.

Not necessarily...10 years ago, maybe, but kids in highschool today are pretty tolerant of their lesbian/gay colleagues (we could take a few lessons from them...).

BTW- I have nothing against "Oliver," although I like plenty of musicals better.

 

[lyeag]

I'm not implying anything about their judges, never met them. What I am saying is the possibility exists in these situations. Yet you seem to think that because other possibilities for prejudicial juding exist, this one should, too.

Now, don't these circumstances seem a bit contrived...talent contest for school (while not officially during school hours, a school sponsored event, none the less). Girl want to sing religious song...principal says it is inappropriate. BOOM, parents immediately file suit for an "emergency" motion to allow her to sing it, with the help of a religious legal group based 3000 miles away. Sounds more and more like a planned set-up.

I mean, would the average resonable parent contact one of these groups if their intention was NOT to make a political statement? Or unless they were some sort of wacked-out stage parent think this silly contest would be a stepping stone to "American Idol"

No, I don't see it contrived. I could see where if my daughter knew a song, liked it and got shot down for a talent show simply because it had the word God in it, I could get upset. These kids are told to accept and be tolerant, love everybody, everybody is a winner, but when it comes to God-oops sorry?

Lots of schools have talent contests after hours. As far as an emergency motion, depends on what actually transpired between the parents and the school. Wasn't the principal making a political statement by telling the girl she couldn't sing the song? As far as I could tell from the article, it was the principal covering his butt.

 

[binny]

Im so glad I live where I do.

This would not even be an issue here. Here at the Christmas party ( yes we get to call it that!) we sing songs from any faith that is represented, no one bats an eye. Everyone cheers. The Jewish kids cheer for the Christian kids and the Christian kids cheer for those singing Kwanza songs. I never hear people grumble about stuff like that.

I dont understand why this such an issue, theyre KIDS for goodness sake! Cant we try to let them be kids for awhile, then they can grow up and join message boards and bicker all they want about the injustices of the world. For now, let them be kids and do what they love!

 

[Aidensmom]

How about in the Deep South? It certainly would be promoted as doing such on conservative websites, just as NOT allowing her do sing it seems to be offending some folks on this board saying there is NOT a seperation between church and state.

After all, her parents hav filed a lawsuit to ALLOW her to sing it, if it is "just a school talent show" then why couldn't she have chosen another song? They are being represented by a conservative legal group with an agenda.

I am sorry, but I still think you are giving an awful lot of power to a second grader. I am a conservative Christian in the "bible belt", and I do not view being allowed to sing a song in a talent show as being any sort of victory (not that I am looking for one). But I do see NOT being allowed to sing it as a violation of that little girl's free speech. Christianity is not a political party, it is a set of beliefs. If a 7 year old sings that her God is an awesome God, she is stating an opinion. It is a talent show, it is not part of the curriculum. I just really do not see how that is hurting anyone, or why it would even offend someone. If you tell me that you do not believe in God, or that you believe in a different one than I do, I am not the least bit offended. My opinion that she should be allowed to sing the song does not come from any kind of desire to "push" my God on people, it comes from a desire to preserve the right in this country that a person of any religion can talk (or in this case, sing) about their beliefs. I would feel the same way if it was a Muslim song, or a Jewish song, an atheist song, etc.

There IS a separation of church and state, it just doesn't mean that religious views cannot be expressed. It means the government can't sponsor a religion and can't favor one religion over another.

 

[Charade]

I'm not implying anything about their judges, never met them. What I am saying is the possibility exists in these situations. Yet you seem to think that because other possibilities for prejudicial judging exist, this one should, too.

No, it was you that did that. I was only following your logic.

Now, don't these circumstances seem a bit contrived...talent contest for school (while not officially during school hours, a school sponsored event, none the less). Girl want to sing religious song...principal says it is inappropriate. BOOM, parents immediately file suit for an "emergency" motion to allow her to sing it, with the help of a religious legal group based 3000 miles away. Sounds more and more like a planned set-up.

So what if it was? If it was a "setup", then it worked because it caught the skool with it's pants down.

I mean, would the average reasonable parent contact one of these groups if their intention was NOT to make a political statement? Or unless they were some sort of whacked-out stage parent think this silly contest would be a stepping stone to "American Idol"

It's not a political statement per say, but a legal issue that's turned into a political statement.

These things happen all the time to bring to light injustices that are occurring.

Police run "stings" to catch bad guys but (unless they did it illegally) no one (but the bad guys) complains about that.

(I know that someone will say that I'm equating police stings with talent contest setups so.... I'll save you the typing )

 

[lyeag]

I dont understand why this such an issue, theyre KIDS for goodness sake! Cant we try to let them be kids for awhile, then they can grow up and join message boards and bicker all they want about the injustices of the world. For now, let them be kids and do what they love!

Exactly. She is second grade so 7 or 8 years old. Gee, she really needs to be suppressed. 2 minutes of most likely some off key singing and then she is finished. Next group up. These shows are cute at this age and the principal was more interested in himself. Is it possible someone could get offended? Yes, I suppose, but most normal people will just roll their eyes or wait for their kid to come on stage. Let the kid be a kid.

 

[Chuck S]

So what if it was? If it was a "setup", then it worked because it caught the skool with it's pants down.

But isn't it a shame then, that these supposedly Christian parents would put their young child in that sort of a situation to make a political statement...says a lot about the parents, the legal group, and their beliefs doesn't it?

I can't imagine anyone "using" their child in this manner. "Family Values?"

 

[lyeag]

But isn't it a shame then, that these supposedly Christian parents would put their young child in that sort of a situation to make a political statement...says a lot about the parents, the legal group, and their beliefs doesn't it?

I can't imagine anyone "using" their child in this manner.

It is no worse than the father who used his kid over the pledge in school....


Personally, I think you are projecting too much onto the family. But that is JMHO. Just curious, do you really think they had an agenda?

 

[rcyannacci]

Ah ha! This is what I mentioned in one of my other posts. I wasn't sure what exactly it was about, but remembered it involved high school students!

Its not really hard to figure out why conservative posters are acting a bit different in this situation: Religion

A bit hyprocritical perhaps? of course

I agree it's hypocritical, but I'm not sure it's intentional. I think a lot of people see these political issues as separate topics, so they don't see how their argument in one arena could actually dismantle arguments they make in other arenas. Again, this is my point about the current fevered pitch of political debate. Reason is being thrown out the window in the attempt to keep people fighting by convincing them that their "way of life" is under attack.

 

[Charade]

But isn't it a shame then, that these supposedly Christian parents would put their young child in that sort of a situation to make a political statement...says a lot about the parents, the legal group, and their beliefs doesn't it?

I can't imagine anyone "using" their child in this manner. "Family Values?"

If that was true, it would certainly be a catch-22 now wouldn't it. So it would be OK for a school to break the law but a Christian parent shouldn't try to trip them up into breaking the law because it's un-Christian to hold your government accountable? For all we know, this has happened before (without the fanfare and the school allowing a religious song to be sung) and this was that last straw. But IMO, this is a new trend in the more "liberal" areas of the country where (almost) anything goes except that God must go.

But then again, "Family Values" might also include standing up for your legal rights even you have to resort to something soooooo un-Christian as this.

If it were true.

 

[Chuck S]

It is no worse than the father who used his kid over the pledge in school....


Personally, I think you are projecting too much onto the family. But that is JMHO. Just curious, do you really think they had an agenda?

As to whether they "had" an ageda at the beginning, it is possible...maybe, maybe not. I can understand the parents not liking the principals decision, and then appealing to the school board...but once the board upheld the principals decision, they certainly MADE it an agenda by continuing to pursue it through the legal group. I mean, would an average parent want to involve their child in this, rather than simply have their child pick another song? How did the parents know about this legal group? It not like NJ (school) and Arizona (legal group) are nearby to each other.

 

[lyeag]

As to whether they "had" an ageda at the beginning, it is possible...maybe, maybe not. I can understand the parents not liking the principals decision, and then appealing to the school board...but once the board upheld the principals decision, they certainly MADE it an agenda by continuing to pursue it through the legal group. I mean, would an average parent want to involve their child in this, rather than simply have their child pick another song? How did the parents know about this legal group? It not like NJ (school) and Arizona (legal group) are nearby to each other.

If they felt their rights were being suppressed, I can see how they might want to go ahead with a lawsuit. I wouldn't want to teach my children that their rights don't count. Perhaps they went to a local lawyer or a lawyer in their church and were referred to them. It happens all the time.

 

[Aidensmom]

If they felt their rights were being suppressed, I can see how they might want to go ahead with a lawsuit. I wouldn't want to teach my children that their rights don't count. Perhaps they went to a local lawyer or a lawyer in their church and were referred to them. It happens all the time.

I agree. It is a misconception that it is "unChristian" to stand up for your rights, and I would not want to teach that to my child.

 

[Charade]

Also include for your "entertainment" ...

The school’s talent show did include students dancing to “Objection,” by pop star Shakira, as well as students singing “You Give Love a Bad Name” by rock band Bon Jovi (www.absolutelyric.com/lyrics/view/bon_jovi/you_give_love_a_bad_name/). The show also included students dressed as witches performing the boiling cauldron scene from the play Macbeth (www.allshakespeare.com/macbeth/3362).

 

[momof2inPA]

I can understand the parents not liking the principals decision, and then appealing to the school board...but once the board upheld the principals decision, they certainly MADE it an agenda by continuing to pursue it through the legal group.

How does this family have "more" of an agenda than the gay school newspaper group? Or maybe you can tell me why it is only ok for one group to pursue their rights, and not the other.

The right wingers were being biased for saying the principal's decision should stand in one case and not the other, but now you are being biased, Chuck.

 

[JoeThaNo1Stunna]

Give me a break. Of course she should be allowed to sing a religious song. Allowing a kid to do so is not endorsing a religion, it is empowering their talent.

I've been to many school "winter" concerts where the Christmas songs they sing are all Santa, Snowman, Rudolph, while there are religious Chanukah songs sang. I'm not offended by it, but I see a huge double standard.

I'm not religious at all but I think Americans are pathetically shallow and have such thin skin that you can't do anything without worrying that you will offend some girly man along the line.

 

[Chuck S]

The right wingers were being biased for saying the principal's decision should stand in one case and not the other, but now you are being biased, Chuck.

What? Please show me where I mentioned those threads, or even POSTED to them...I did not.

By definition, one is biased whenever they take a position, thus you are also biased in taking the position that she should be allowed to sing a religious song.

 

[Miss Jasmine]

I didn't read through EVERY post, but I do have to chime in and say the girl should have been allowed to sing the song. I wonder why Christian's are expected to be tolerant of all religions and beliefs, but it's okay for society not to be tolerant of Christianity. The song mentions GOD. Before long a child going to school will not be allowed to profess his or her beliefs even when talking to friends.

 

[rcyannacci]

How does this family have "more" of an agenda than the gay school newspaper group? Or maybe you can tell me why it is only ok for one group to pursue their rights, and not the other.

The right wingers were being biased for saying the principal's decision should stand in one case and not the other, but now you are being biased, Chuck.

momof2inPA- I was the one who brought up this thread, not Chuck. I shouldn't have assumed that conservatives bashing the principal on this thread were the ones supporting the principal on the other thread...and I don't think we should assume Chuck's position either. My apologies for starting us down that road...

I also wanted to say that I agree with Chuck about the unlikelihood of the family instigating this action on their own. The religious right seems to be going out of their way to find any local incident that forwards their crusade and the impression that their way of life is under attack. They are the one's bringing incidents like this out of obscurity and into national prominence to promote their agenda. And by engaging in these debates, liberals are falling into thier trap and being distracted from more pressing issues of governance.

 

[lyeag]

I just find it funny, that only the religious right has this type of motivation in the minds of those who oppose it....