More PC Nonsense in the Public Schools

 

Here’s anther reason to guard your children from the formation in the public schools.  Michelle Malkin has a post concerning the pandering to Muslims in the public schools while continuing to attempt to deny Christians prayer in school.

Compare and contrast…

In Dallas, a school district strikes the words “In God We Trust” from the photo of an enlarged nickel on a yearbook cover for fear of offending students of differing religions.

In California, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (the one that outlawed the Pledge of Allegiance for its reference to God) approved putting public school students through Muslim role-playing exercises. Investor’s Business Daily reminds us:

In a recent federal decision that got surprisingly little press, even from conservative talk radio, California’s 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled it’s OK to put public-school kids through Muslim role-playing exercises, including:

Reciting aloud Muslim prayers that begin with “In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful . . . .”

Memorizing the Muslim profession of faith: “Allah is the only true God and Muhammad is his messenger.”

Chanting “Praise be to Allah” in response to teacher prompts.

Professing as “true” the Muslim belief that “The Holy Quran is God’s word.”

Giving up candy and TV to demonstrate Ramadan, the Muslim holy month of fasting.

Designing prayer rugs, taking an Arabic name and essentially “becoming a Muslim” for two full weeks.

Meanwhile, creeping sharia in the public schools continues apace. Seattle is preparing to consider a proposal to accomodate Muslim student prayers.

Again I say, this is what comes from liberal ideology.  Liberals have this notion that if something makes them feel good (and pandering to Muslims which liberals consider an oppressed minority like women, blacks, Hispanics, homosexuals, etc. makes libs feel real good) then it must be the right thing to do.  How can there be a “strict wall of separation” which the libs like to constantly remind us of and still they support very bad ideas like the ones above?  I know that somehow this makes sense in the liberals’ parallel universe.

For Those Waiting for the Church to Condone Condoms…

 

Here’s a piece from www.chiesa.com regarding the speculation concerning the Church’s position on condom use when one partner is infected with HIV/AIDS.

And the answer is in the negative. Not only does the article make no direct reference to condoms, but it demonstrates that the Church’s activity is directed in an entirely different direction, which can be summed up in the word “chastity.” It maintains that the Church would do nothing but harm if its efforts in combating AIDS “seemed to support promiscuous, excessive, and destructive behavior.”

That this is also Benedict XVI’s thought is beyond all doubt. At the same time as “La Civiltà Cattolica” was publishing its article, the pope referred twice – in addresses on May 11 and 13 – to the encyclical “Humanae Vitae” by Paul VI, describing it as “prophetic and always relevant.”

As for Africa, which is being ravaged by AIDS, it too is among pope Joseph Ratzinger’s foremost thoughts. On a number of occasions, he has expressed his conviction that “the African continent is the Church’s great hope.”

Again, there is but one Truth and the Church is a servant not master of the Truth.

Commencement addresses

 

I was listening to the radio this morning and Bill Bennett was discussing various commencement speakers this year.  He made reference to a speech given by Ted Koppel to the Stanford class in the middle of the Clinton scandal.  I have found the address and linked it here.  It is worth the read.  I’m not a big Koppel fan, but I think that he addresses a number of issues of privacy and morality that we can learn from.  Here are a few of his closing paragraphs:

We will not change what’s wrong with our culture through legislation, or by choosing up sides on the basis of personal popularity or party affiliation. We will change it by small acts of courage and kindness; by recognizing, each of us, his or her own obligation to set a proper example.

Aspire to decency. Practice civility toward one another. Admire and emulate ethical behavior wherever you find it. Apply a rigid standard of morality to your lives; and if, periodically, you fail ­ as you surely will ­ adjust your lives, not the standards.[emphasis mine]

And I think that the last sentence is key.  By our nature, we want to justify our behavior in an attempt to provide for inner peace.  We seek others to aid us in our justification so that our behavior becomes the norm or standard to judge others.  The risk is for the zeitgeist to become the standard of morality.