header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: School: You may not recite prayer in the name of Jesus Christ

 (Read 1968 times)

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: School: You may not recite prayer in the name of Jesus Christ
« Reply #14 on: December 17, 2017, 06:01:40 PM »

5

Post reply

Subject:Message icon:                         Football                         Basketball                         Baseball                         Thumb Up                         Thumb Down                         Exclamation point                         Question mark                         Lamp                       

             
[more]
Toggle View
Bold
Italicized
Underline
Strikethrough
Left Align
Centered
Right Align
Justify
Font Face
Font Size
Change Color
Remove Formatting
Insert Unordered List
Insert Ordered List
Insert Table
Insert Code
Insert Quote
Insert Image
Insert Hyperlink
Unlink
Add Smileys
Cut
Copy
Paste
Paste Text


 Attachments and other options
shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview
 


Topic Summary

Posted by: DunkingDan
« on: Today at 05:42:02 PM »


Quote from: P1tchBlack on Today at 05:31:58 PM
Quote from: P1tchBlack on Today at 05:31:58 PM
Quote
My reading comprehension skills are lacking 
I cannot understand '

Quote
Quote
the guidelines you referenced:

Schools may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation or organize baccalaureate ceremonies.  - nobody is accusing the School of mandating prayer at graduation or a bachelorette ceremony. Why are you even referencing that?
Quote
as well as Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, art, orally, or in the written form. - yes, outside of school Activities. Are you disputing that graduation is a school activity?


Which means a student can lead prayer or mention Jesus name - correct. Outside of school activities. During times when normal conversation would take place.
but then again you failed to get the point and note what you have ascted like an ass an ignored from my first response to you
which was all you did was ''repeat what the article basically said as it helps reinforce my bigotry and hatred of all things Christian. Likewise I ignore the very narrow ruling of the USC as it only pertained to football games- and I asked you what difference there is between football games and graduation ceremonies, it would make the USC ruled differently.

 

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 27219
  • Liked:
Diaper Boy aka Pitchy strikes out again
« Reply #15 on: December 17, 2017, 06:11:19 PM »


Quote
My reading comprehension skills are lacking
I cannot understand '


Quote
Quote
Quote
the guidelines you referenced:

Schools may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation or organize baccalaureate ceremonies.  - nobody is accusing the School of mandating prayer at graduation or a bachelorette ceremony. Why are you even referencing that?

Are you to deft to add 1+1 it goes with the issue below as the courts have said students on their own may
express their beliefs about religion in homework, art, orally, or in the written form.

Quote
Quote
as well as Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, art, orally, or in the written form. - yes, outside of school Activities. Are you disputing that graduation is a school activity?
That is not what the guidelines or rulings say. If it was outside of school or school activities it would not be addressed in school
guidelines.

as I said you ignore the notorious double standards of the USC as point out to me in this thread   https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?topic=1793.0''
Now we know you ignore it and other rulings''

As usual

« Last Edit: December 18, 2017, 02:27:32 PM by DunkingDan »
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: School: You may not recite prayer in the name of Jesus Christ
« Reply #16 on: December 17, 2017, 06:27:51 PM »

Did you even read the guidelines? If so, what makes you think that an event like graduation would be a permitted venue for religious expression?  And, this line fits the situation perfectly:

"Local school authorities possess substantial discretion to impose rules of order and other pedagogical restrictions on student activities,"

Student prayer and religious discussion:  The Establishment Clause
of the First Amendment does not prohibit purely private religious
speech by students.  Students therefore have the same right to
engage in individual or group prayer and religious discussion
during the school day as they do to engage in other comparable
activity.  For example, students may read their Bibles or other
scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray beforetests to the
same extent they may engage in comparable non-disruptive
activities.  Local school authorities possess substantial
discretion to impose rules of order and other pedagogical
restrictions on student activities, but they may not structure or
administer such rules to discriminate against religious activity or
speech.

Generally, students may pray in a non-disruptive manner when not
engaged in school activities or instruction, and subject to the
rules that normally pertain in the applicable setting.
Specifically, students in informal settings, such as cafeterias and
hallways, may pray and discuss their religious views with each
other, subject to the same rules of order as apply to other student
activities and speech.  Students may also speak to, and attempt to
persuade, their peers about religious topics just as they do with
regard to political topics.  School officials, however, should
intercede to stop student speech that constitutes harassment aimed
at a student or a group of students.


DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 27219
  • Liked:
Diaper Boy aka Pitchy strikes out again
« Reply #17 on: December 17, 2017, 06:46:53 PM »
I cannot read the guidelines and ignore a lot such as the notorious double standards of the USC as point out to me in this thread   https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?topic=1793.0 Nor can I grasp the simple concept that the guidlines say 'Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, art, orally, or in the written form'
That is not outside of school activities. Once again the USC has conflicting rulings and many school boards to apease cry babies, such as yourself from filing a lawsuit give in and deny students their rights


The U.S. Department of Education has a long-standing policy regarding student speech – a policy that covers graduation ceremonies.

“Where students or other private graduation speakers are selected on the basis of genuinely neutral, evenhanded criteria and retain primary control over the content of their expression, however, that expression is not attributable to the school and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious (or anti-religious) content,” the policy reads.
Any clue as to what that means?

Now lets see a little bit more of the story from the original post in this thread


Moriah didn’t submit to such a flagrant misrepresentation of the law. Not only did she defiantly invoke “the righteous name of Jesus Christ” at the end of her speech, she immediately contacted the First Liberty law instituteabout the Pennsylvania School District for discrimination and infringement of her rights, according to Fox News.

Quote
“The last lesson this school district taught its students is that they should hide their religious beliefs from public view,” First Liberty Institute attorney Jeremy Dys told me. “That fails the test of the First Amendment.”

The district is in hot water as Dys explained that Moriah was acting within her constitutional rights while the school district undeniably broke the law.

Quote
“In short, school officials – in violation of the First Amendment – forced Moriah to censor her personal remarks during the closing exercise of her commencement ceremony merely because of the religious viewpoint of her remarks,” the attorney said. “Because of Dr. Rowe’s instructions, Moriah was muzzled and restrained by school officials on the penultimate day of her high school career.”

Understanding the seriousness of her actions, Dr. Rowe quickly responded to Moriah’s alliance with the law firm, blaming her decision on supposed legal advice she received from the district’s solicitor.

Quote
“Although I can understand why this restriction might upset members of the community,” she said, “I cannot choose which laws to follow.”

However, Dr. Rowe never mentions which “laws” prohibit a student from mentioning Jesus Christ in their graduation speech. Instead, she appears to want to quickly and quietly resolve the issue out of court as she has requested a meeting with school administrators to instead discuss how to protect the religious rights of students.

Hopefully, Dr. Rowe has learned 2 lessons — know your rights as an educator and know the rights of your students. Moriah wasn’t forcing students to pray neither was she attempting to sway students toward her religious beliefs. She was simply thanking her GOD for her success, which is in accordance with her faith.

She was legal, Now you might want to do some research about what Muslims are allowed to do in some schools in the USA



« Last Edit: December 18, 2017, 02:27:11 PM by DunkingDan »
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 7168
  • Liked:
Re: School: You may not recite prayer in the name of Jesus Christ
« Reply #18 on: December 18, 2017, 11:26:39 AM »
@P1tchBlack , out of curiosity, do you want to share the explicit separation of church and state from any founding document? 

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: School: You may not recite prayer in the name of Jesus Christ
« Reply #19 on: December 18, 2017, 11:33:16 AM »
@P1tchBlack , out of curiosity, do you want to share the explicit separation of church and state from any founding document?
I see what you're doing, here.  That phrase isn't in any founding documents.  What IS in a founding document is the Establishment clause.  That's the basis for the supreme court rulings.

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 7168
  • Liked:
Re: School: You may not recite prayer in the name of Jesus Christ
« Reply #20 on: December 18, 2017, 11:51:47 AM »
I see what you're doing, here.  That phrase isn't in any founding documents.  What IS in a founding document is the Establishment clause.  That's the basis for the supreme court rulings.
and it took them how many generations to extract that definition? every generation prior was too thick to see it plainly?  this isn't unlike your lack of reasoning on the baker or venue host argument. 
the concept of man being a 'noble savage' and 'contract with society' go hand in hand- being that man is a social creature and that in order to have a society there are qualifications a person must meet in order to 'join' or participate with that society.  
if a person wishes to offer a prayer on public property, and the majority of the audience appreciates that, is it not discriminatory to tell them "no- you can't"?  I would offer it is.  I would also offer the 'rulings' were a cheap and expeditious 'way out' by simply avoiding the conflict altogether.  
in your way of reasoning, if i understand it correctly, it's okay for someone who is a minority in a circumstance to deny the majority of their wishes as it somehow 'infringes' on them- which in the case of individual liberties that prove harm i am in full agreement.  the majority of blonde haired people shouldn't have any 'right' to causing harm to dark haired people simply because they are the majority- interrupting harm administered by the majority is the concern... how much 'harm' is endured by 'having' to listen to somebody else pray? 
i would offer sensibilities have changed.. i would offer that people living in such a pampered condition that they're able to conflict or fluidly exchange true harm with perceived emotional harm is the issue here- and i would offer that every single time a person claims the victim role of 'discrimination' based on how something makes them feel detracts greatly from the purpose and spirit of true discrimination, where actual physical harm was done with impunity because "majority rules". 
curious, it is, that when dems win something they make snide remarks about having 'majority' rule, while in defeat they go on and on about individual rights and liberties.... that lack of consistency denotes lack of integrity, and something the left is void of.  
i think it was Jefferson who said (paraphrased) "the party of the legislative and executive branches can ebb and flow depending on the needs of the country at the time; the judicial branch should always remain conservative for a healthy country to prosper"..  wanna guess where i believe we have an issue? 
furthermore- the legislative and executive branches can be just as partisan as they like and there is no real harm done (elections withstanding)- but the judicial?  how hard is it to translate/apply some reading comprehension to a document and reconcile the intent?  the SCOTUS becoming politicized is the undoing of this nation.  we could afford stupidity elsewhere, but not there... 

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: School: You may not recite prayer in the name of Jesus Christ
« Reply #21 on: December 18, 2017, 12:12:01 PM »
if a person wishes to offer a prayer on public property, and the majority of the audience appreciates that, is it not discriminatory to tell them "no- you can't"?  I would offer it is.  I would also offer the 'rulings' were a cheap and expeditious 'way out' by simply avoiding the conflict altogether.  

If a person wants to hold prayer in a public parks, 24/7, I don't care.  What the supreme Court is/has ruled on is when prayer can be viewed as Establishment of religion; the government endorsing religion.  One thing has been consistent, as it pertains to school prayer- prayer is not permitted when organized and/or lead by the school or a person acting on behalf of the school.  That has consistently been determined to violate the establishment clause.

The supreme Court first ruled against school prayer in the 1950's or 60's.  The supreme court can't rule on constitutional issues until they have a case to rule on.  It doesn't always happen fast.  The gay rights issue really just came to the fore front recently.

I don't think there is much having to do with "feeling" or majority/minority in the supreme Court rulings, nor should there be.  Right and wrong isn't determined by how many people support it, ie slavery.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2017, 12:17:39 PM by P1tchBlack »

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 7168
  • Liked:
Re: School: You may not recite prayer in the name of Jesus Christ
« Reply #22 on: December 18, 2017, 12:21:30 PM »
it has everything to do with 'feelings' and little to do with logic.  it has everything to do with authoritarian and totalitarian rule of 'subjects' instead of laws being governed by the people.  

your consistency here is severely lacking.  

if a person demands the use of private property (for a fee or not) to do something that is in opposition to the property owners individual principles, the property owner should be forced to 'shup up and deal with it', but when a person wants to pray in front of heathens while on publicly funded property, they are told it's not permissible?    

your lack of consistency betrays your apparent effort to preach to us about 'right an wrong', which was an already uphill battle for a person who attacks Christian's and their principles (though curiously silent about Muslims) as feverishly as you do.... but oh yeah- there is no assault on Christianity, as you have so appropriately demonstrated over the last few weeks. constantly. multiple time.  without any appearance to slow down.  

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: School: You may not recite prayer in the name of Jesus Christ
« Reply #23 on: December 18, 2017, 12:45:36 PM »
it has everything to do with 'feelings' and little to do with logic.  it has everything to do with authoritarian and totalitarian rule of 'subjects' instead of laws being governed by the people.  

your consistency here is severely lacking.  

if a person demands the use of private property (for a fee or not) to do something that is in opposition to the property owners individual principles, the property owner should be forced to 'shup up and deal with it', but when a person wants to pray in front of heathens while on publicly funded property, they are told it's not permissible?    

your lack of consistency betrays your apparent effort to preach to us about 'right an wrong', which was an already uphill battle for a person who attacks Christian's and their principles (though curiously silent about Muslims) as feverishly as you do.... but oh yeah- there is no assault on Christianity, as you have so appropriately demonstrated over the last few weeks. constantly. multiple time.  without any appearance to slow down.  
if a person demands the use of private property (for a fee or not) to do something that is in opposition to the property owners individual principles, the property owner should be forced to 'shup up and deal with it', - correct.  That's part of living in a civilized society because, again, businesses don't have 'rights'; individuals have rights and that's what the Supreme is trying to draw the line between.  Islamists can't deny service to  all Jews.  Blacks can't deny service to all whites.  Gays can't deny service to all straight people.  If you, in your personal life, want to  never associate with a specific group of people, that's fine. In a perfect world, we would all be adults, when it came to business, and just do your job, but I'm willing to acknowledge a businesses right to not do custom things.


but when a person wants to pray in front of heathens while on publicly funded property, they are told it's not permissible? - that's not true.  A citizen, who isn't employed by, nor representing, the government can stand in front of a court house and pray all day to anyone that will listen.  

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.