Well, it's good to see you back in your new persona, Boaz/Polycarp. A slight improvement on the old one - a more subdued tone, lighter on the capital letters - but the same old topics, spelling mistakes and funny faces ;)

Plus, of course, the odd wild assertion that - even when exposed - you will defend to the death.

B/P: >>The social impact after this case, is said to be very measurable by a number of indicators. -Teen pregnancy -STDs both of which skyrocketed after this decision.. it has been graphed.<<

examinator: >>The quantum leap to the consequences he claims is absurdly dogma based and devoid of any credibility<<

B/P: >>On the 'measurable indicators' let me rephrase.. There is a noticable coincidence' between the rates of increases and that decision.<<

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc, B/P. Check it out.

Incidentally, the new handle is interesting too. Tell me, how did you choose it?

I've always maintained that 'people' are not the issue Pericles.

"issues" are.

On the nick.."look it up" you might find it educational.

on the latin? aaah.. yes I see your point.

My position is that there is a definite connection between the increasing incidence of the various indicators and the decision of the 'gang of 10'.. but the connection is not direct as much as it is part of a flood of values abandonment which occurred around that time.

I was 13 in 62 and saw it all.

Academically, it would be hard to prove a direct connection..
intuitively, it's easy.

and who is this 'BOAZ' character? is he perchance someone who for you provides meaning in life? 0_^

BD/Polycarp

Yes, I agree with Pericles, you are a slightly improved version! And by the way I must complement his /her deductive skills!

I can only shake my head at how sad it must be to hate what you've become so badly that you have to reinvent yourself. Or maybe you were told to do so by the OLO editors. Either way, you're a very mixed-up person BD.

I will engage with the new persona however. Confusing though it might be. In a way I miss the old BD; at least with him you knew where you stood. Your absence by the way was extremely noticeable; I had wondered where you'd got to.

The trouble is, BD/PC, when you try to disguise hatred and bigotry in civilised dress, the niceties of the presentation are soon lost in the awfulness of the content. A quick skim of your new posting history soon reveals the same old pet themes and the same old divisive style. Stirring up the pot and then sinking in the boot. You've gone straight into stirring the pot; it will be interesting to see how long you refrain from sinking the boot! Not long is my bet.

I should have spotted it myself. Why would anyone but BD (or BD in disguise) want to start an obscure constitutional debate about forcing prayers into public school assemblies?

Polycarp, do you support gay marriage? The Australian Constitution did not exclude gay people from marriage until 2004, at which time both political parties deprived them of that right.

As for prayer in school, you would have to be an idiot to not see the intentions behind such a plan. Pericles made a good point point on this.

I think the real question that should be asked is, "why is a prayer at home before school not good enough?" This question reveals the deceitful intentions of those who ask for such laws.

I agree with Bronwyn than it is BOAZ...

Dear Bronwyn... I had to smile so many times reading your post..

Stirring the pot... I understand John Wesley used to preach on SIN for 3 days solid at his open air meetings (to which 10s of 1000s flocked) before he spoke about forgiveness, love and grace. I hardly think Wesley would have throttled back on the need to repent just because he began speaking about love and grace.

and.. you miss BD ? aaah...

Steel.. I don't support gay marriage.. not in the slightest.
I more than "don't support" it..I would actively oppose it. (No Bron, -no boot this is an emotion neutral political statement...:)

I would do so for the same reasons advocates of such a lifestyle choice would advance it... "democracy".

The "Gang of 10" showed how they could impose their will on the whole of American Educational life.. not a small feat by any means.

One problem with OLO is that it's most difficult to be 2 people at the same time or perhaps more that people confuse a principled stand for emotional hate.

As the wise and all knowing (not to mention humble :) BD used to say.."I am a member of democracy but also a Christian".. and sometimes the actions of opposing or supporting political issues can be confused with being a 'bad/good' Christian. It depends a lot on how Biblical is the understanding of the critic about the meaning of 'Christian'.

The example raised by Steel is one. "Gay Marraige".

It is probably difficult for the reader to fathom the real world feeings of a typer here..but reading words which go against the cherished hope of some people can be read as 'lacking compassion'...even 'hate', whether it is intended so or not.

In reality it has nothing to do with compassion but everything to do with principles of morality one adheres to.

Prayer in schools under the present socio political climate would not happen. If our society experienced serious revival though..it could and should come (voluntarily).