So the Poor Oppressed Christians believe that stretching is inherently religious. That is, it does not explicitly support Christian privilege, which makes it fundamentally pagan or at the very least irredeemably evil. On those apparent grounds, two San Diego parents sought to ban secular yoga classes taught at local schools for violating the separation of church and state. Fortunately, Superior Court Judge John S. Meyer rejected this logic - or, I suppose, the complete lack thereof.
Refering to lotus as the "crisscross applesauce" pose is so stripped of its original context that it just sounds stupid. To my way of thinking this shows that the district made every effort to ensure that nothing religious or even reflective of Indian culture was mentioned in the classes - which, by the way, families could opt out of. Still, for the Poor Oppressed Christians that's never enough. Hindus do these stretching exercises, so even if they are presented in a neutral context their kids are going to get heathen cooties or something by osmosis.
As usual, it's the hypocrisy that drives me nuts the most about these folks. When atheists file lawsuits to prevent authority figures in schools from leading sectarian prayers, the "separation of church and state" is a myth created by liberal activist judges that must be challenged at every turn. But the moment the Poor Oppressed Christians see anything that doesn't support their privilege, they go running to the courts offering up the exact same arguments as their atheist opponents.
Meyer sided instead in the Monday ruling with administrators from the Encinitas Union School District who argued the practice while often religious is taught in a secular way to promote strength, flexibility and balance. The judge said parents who objected relied on personal opinions, some culled from Internet searches. "It's almost like a trial by Wikipedia, which isn't what this court does," said Meyer, who took nearly two hours to explain a decision that explored yoga's Indian roots and philosophy.
The judge emphasized that the school district stripped classes of all cultural references, including the Sanskrit language. The lotus position was renamed the "crisscross applesauce" pose. Dean Broyles, an attorney for Encinitas parents Stephen and Jennifer Sedlock, said he would likely appeal.
Refering to lotus as the "crisscross applesauce" pose is so stripped of its original context that it just sounds stupid. To my way of thinking this shows that the district made every effort to ensure that nothing religious or even reflective of Indian culture was mentioned in the classes - which, by the way, families could opt out of. Still, for the Poor Oppressed Christians that's never enough. Hindus do these stretching exercises, so even if they are presented in a neutral context their kids are going to get heathen cooties or something by osmosis.
As usual, it's the hypocrisy that drives me nuts the most about these folks. When atheists file lawsuits to prevent authority figures in schools from leading sectarian prayers, the "separation of church and state" is a myth created by liberal activist judges that must be challenged at every turn. But the moment the Poor Oppressed Christians see anything that doesn't support their privilege, they go running to the courts offering up the exact same arguments as their atheist opponents.
No comments:
Post a Comment