LC 1.18 Students Have Rights Too Act.

[Sestak]

Private prayer in schools should absolutely be allowed. Atlasian/American secularity is not and should not be laïcité.

[Sestak]

Private prayer in schools should absolutely be allowed. Atlasian/American secularity is not and should not be laïcité.

Usually it's liberals who support secularism, while conservatives tend to be more supportive of religious mentions. This is certainly a surprising view.

Secularism, in our cultural context, does NOT mean the same thing as French-style laïcité, which is what you seem to be advocating here.

[Sestak]

Private prayer in schools should absolutely be allowed. Atlasian/American secularity is not and should not be laïcité.

Usually it's liberals who support secularism, while conservatives tend to be more supportive of religious mentions. This is certainly a surprising view.

Secularism, in our cultural context, does NOT mean the same thing as French-style laïcité, which is what you seem to be advocating here.

I am not a Christian so, I feel that with any religious mention, me and other non-Christians will be persecuted and/or ostracized

But think about this from the other perspective for a second.

Let's take Muslim students for example. Islam mandates prayer five times a day, and at least one of those times is (I believe) almost certain to have its range mostly or entirely in school hours on any given day. Are you proposing that Muslim students should have to leave the campus daily to pray and then return to campus?

That sounds a lot more like actual persecution than some Christian students mentioning their faith in a non-school-promoted setting does.

[Sestak]

Private prayer in schools should absolutely be allowed. Atlasian/American secularity is not and should not be laïcité.

Usually it's liberals who support secularism, while conservatives tend to be more supportive of religious mentions. This is certainly a surprising view.

Secularism, in our cultural context, does NOT mean the same thing as French-style laïcité, which is what you seem to be advocating here.

I am not a Christian so, I feel that with any religious mention, me and other non-Christians will be persecuted and/or ostracized

But think about this from the other perspective for a second.

Let's take Muslim students for example. Islam mandates prayer five times a day, and at least one of those times is (I believe) almost certain to have its range mostly or entirely in school hours on any given day. Are you proposing that Muslim students should have to leave the campus daily to pray and then return to campus?

That sounds a lot more like actual persecution than some Christian students mentioning their faith in a non-school-promoted setting does.

I'm not a Muslim either, and while I have sympathy for these Christians and Muslims, them praying may make students of other religions, such as Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, feel ostracized. Why do you want to take us back to the era of school prayer. I am part of their other religions, I am very skeptical of bringing religion into schools. The SC already outlawed school prayer, this bill literally allows school prayer

I'm not advocating "taking us back" to anything. Private prayer is currently not just legal but constitutionally protected, while school-organized prayer is constitutionally prohibited. Which is exactly how it should be.

[Sestak]

The "school prayer" banned by SCOTUS IRL refers to school-facilitated prayer, not "prayer that just happens to be in a school".

[Sestak]

Private prayer in schools should absolutely be allowed. Atlasian/American secularity is not and should not be laïcité.

Usually it's liberals who support secularism, while conservatives tend to be more supportive of religious mentions. This is certainly a surprising view.

Secularism, in our cultural context, does NOT mean the same thing as French-style laïcité, which is what you seem to be advocating here.

I am not a Christian so, I feel that with any religious mention, me and other non-Christians will be persecuted and/or ostracized

But think about this from the other perspective for a second.

Let's take Muslim students for example. Islam mandates prayer five times a day, and at least one of those times is (I believe) almost certain to have its range mostly or entirely in school hours on any given day. Are you proposing that Muslim students should have to leave the campus daily to pray and then return to campus?

That sounds a lot more like actual persecution than some Christian students mentioning their faith in a non-school-promoted setting does.

I'm not a Muslim either, and while I have sympathy for these Christians and Muslims, them praying may make students of other religions, such as Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, feel ostracized. Why do you want to take us back to the era of school prayer

I'm not advocating "taking us back" to anything. Private prayer is currently not just legal but constitutionally protected, while school-organized prayer is constitutionally prohibited. Which is exactly how it should be.

People should not bring religion into schools, period. Why do you (a Mike Gravel supporter for California), of all people, support this bill?

People have a right to free exercise. Infringing on that is unconstitutional.

As a matter of fact, there are several parts of this bill that I think go too far. But what we're specifically discussing right now is the provision regarding private, voluntary prayer that happens to be taking place inside school property.

[Sestak]

Tack, you’re rushing. There is clearly a compromise to be found here.

[Sestak]

ATTN PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT THIS BILL: the unamended version is probably not passing. If you want parts of it at least, I’d recommend asking for debate to continue.

[Sestak]

I'm not entirely opposed to a more limited bill removing the controversial sections if that's the only way this will pass, but from reading the debate, given that it's been stated a lot of the rights stated in the bill have been affirmed by the SCOTUS, by omission aren't we denying rulings?

I think (ignoring SNJC) the primary sticking point is II.6 - I agree that just thanking Jesus once during a graduation speech is probably acceptable? But the section goes far beyond that, allowing student speakers to turn mandatory assemblies into basically sermons.  There is, I think, some rewording/tightening that can be done here.