Post Reply
Page 2 of 6  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Sue the history teacher?
7 years ago  ::  Mar 07, 2008 - 8:55PM #11
TPaine
Posts: 9,385

Creedofcrusades wrote:

I wonder who sued him? There is always one who is ready to bend the community to his will. IF we can get one more Supreme Court justice appointed by the Republicans it may be that we can stop this silliness of huge liberal organizations coming in and sueing school districts. Schools are a state function and the states are Christian bodies. Most of them indicate that in their Constitutions.
   My kids go to a small district here in Louisiana and nobody here complains about the prayers or Christian teachings. My son was student body president and for that year he got to school five minutes early every morning and led the morning prayer over the loudspeaker. Its the way we want our local schools.
   How many times has the will of the people, their democratic expressions of self government, been crushed by an out of control judiciary? From abortion to school prayer to feminism to public expression of religion it always taks force to stop Americans.



You should have read the original post more carefully. In this case a Christian student, his parents, and some Christian groups are suing the teacher for comments the student found offensive.
As to some of your other points, in 1940 the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights applied to the states. Therefore, public schools are not allowed to endorse any religion be it Christian or otherwise. Perhaps it continues in your district because no one has complained, but that doesn't make it constitutional. You may not like the fact, but the job of government is to ensure the rights of all people to have the freedom to believe, or not believe in what they feel is the correct.

"The genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning it might have had in a world that is dead and gone, but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and current needs." -- Justice William Brennan: Speech to the Text and Teaching Symposium at Georgetown University (October 12, 1985)
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 07, 2008 - 9:58PM #12
Creedofcrusades
Posts: 1,571
[QUOTE=TPaine;340378]You should have read the original post more carefully. In this case a Christian student, his parents, and some Christian groups are suing the teacher for comments the student found offensive.
As to some of your other points, in 1940 the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights applied to the states. Therefore, public schools are not allowed to endorse any religion be it Christian or otherwise. Perhaps it continues in your district because no one has complained, but that doesn't make it constitutional. You may not like the fact, but the job of government is to ensure the rights of all people to have the freedom to believe, or not believe in what they feel is the correct.[/QUOTE]

  I think I did misread it but nevertheless I'm not very sympathetic to lawsuits and the like which force a community to the will of one person. And I would no more support a Christian doing that than any liberal group. I always took a dim view of those who complaiend about Halloween celebrations though i dont doubt their sicnereity.
     Fragmentation and entropy build and reach a sort of critical mass and if this keeps up then there will be no community left.
   I believe what happens in my school district is Constitutional. Our school board, all elected, have passed a resolution supporting and encouraging school prayer.  And no I dont think the Bill of Rights apply to the states. They *specifically* were added to protect the states and citizens from the Federal government. It is not even a matter of any doubt that the Bill of Rights never bound any state until that wacky decision based on the 14th amendment. I know it's the "law" for now..but I am optimistic about the future and the day when we go back to laws passed by legislatures rather than judges. Clarence Thomas and Scalia have both written decisions where they have indicated they share the view that the 14th "sucking" the Bill of Rights into the realm of state government just plain sucks.
  I also disagree that the job of the federal government is getting into religious beliefs. (1)The 1st Amendment bans the federal CONGRESS, by name, from passing laws interfering with the *exercise* of religion and (2) the Federal Government is required to guarantee every state a Republican form of government.
   Between those two principles I would feel safe...in fact much safer than today where a few men from Washington DC try and tell those of us involved in our little school every single day of our lives whats best for it. That kind of tyranny I can do without.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 07, 2008 - 8:05PM #13
Wulf
Posts: 109
The suit was filed by the student / parents and suported by some Christian groups.  The suit seeks to remove the teacher for alleged anit-christian statements.  The teacher is known for his provocative approach to history lessons and most people think that his statements were appropriate in the context of medieval history as taught to Advanced Placement sophomores.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 07, 2008 - 8:55PM #14
TPaine
Posts: 9,385

Creedofcrusades wrote:

I wonder who sued him? There is always one who is ready to bend the community to his will. IF we can get one more Supreme Court justice appointed by the Republicans it may be that we can stop this silliness of huge liberal organizations coming in and sueing school districts. Schools are a state function and the states are Christian bodies. Most of them indicate that in their Constitutions.
   My kids go to a small district here in Louisiana and nobody here complains about the prayers or Christian teachings. My son was student body president and for that year he got to school five minutes early every morning and led the morning prayer over the loudspeaker. Its the way we want our local schools.
   How many times has the will of the people, their democratic expressions of self government, been crushed by an out of control judiciary? From abortion to school prayer to feminism to public expression of religion it always taks force to stop Americans.



You should have read the original post more carefully. In this case a Christian student, his parents, and some Christian groups are suing the teacher for comments the student found offensive.
As to some of your other points, in 1940 the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights applied to the states. Therefore, public schools are not allowed to endorse any religion be it Christian or otherwise. Perhaps it continues in your district because no one has complained, but that doesn't make it constitutional. You may not like the fact, but the job of government is to ensure the rights of all people to have the freedom to believe, or not believe in what they feel is the correct.

"The genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning it might have had in a world that is dead and gone, but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and current needs." -- Justice William Brennan: Speech to the Text and Teaching Symposium at Georgetown University (October 12, 1985)
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 07, 2008 - 9:58PM #15
Creedofcrusades
Posts: 1,571
[QUOTE=TPaine;340378]You should have read the original post more carefully. In this case a Christian student, his parents, and some Christian groups are suing the teacher for comments the student found offensive.
As to some of your other points, in 1940 the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights applied to the states. Therefore, public schools are not allowed to endorse any religion be it Christian or otherwise. Perhaps it continues in your district because no one has complained, but that doesn't make it constitutional. You may not like the fact, but the job of government is to ensure the rights of all people to have the freedom to believe, or not believe in what they feel is the correct.[/QUOTE]

  I think I did misread it but nevertheless I'm not very sympathetic to lawsuits and the like which force a community to the will of one person. And I would no more support a Christian doing that than any liberal group. I always took a dim view of those who complaiend about Halloween celebrations though i dont doubt their sicnereity.
     Fragmentation and entropy build and reach a sort of critical mass and if this keeps up then there will be no community left.
   I believe what happens in my school district is Constitutional. Our school board, all elected, have passed a resolution supporting and encouraging school prayer.  And no I dont think the Bill of Rights apply to the states. They *specifically* were added to protect the states and citizens from the Federal government. It is not even a matter of any doubt that the Bill of Rights never bound any state until that wacky decision based on the 14th amendment. I know it's the "law" for now..but I am optimistic about the future and the day when we go back to laws passed by legislatures rather than judges. Clarence Thomas and Scalia have both written decisions where they have indicated they share the view that the 14th "sucking" the Bill of Rights into the realm of state government just plain sucks.
  I also disagree that the job of the federal government is getting into religious beliefs. (1)The 1st Amendment bans the federal CONGRESS, by name, from passing laws interfering with the *exercise* of religion and (2) the Federal Government is required to guarantee every state a Republican form of government.
   Between those two principles I would feel safe...in fact much safer than today where a few men from Washington DC try and tell those of us involved in our little school every single day of our lives whats best for it. That kind of tyranny I can do without.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2008 - 12:18AM #16
TPaine
Posts: 9,385
Creed, The concept of Incorporation, or applying the Bill of Rights to state as well as federal law was first mentioned by the Supreme Court in the case of Gitlow v. New York (268 US 652) in 1925. That court was not exactly considered liberal. In fact, the two liberal justices, Holmes and Brandeis, dissented because they believed the court did not go far enough.
I'm curious, would you be upset if the Supreme Court overturned a rule passed by a local school board that required each day to begin with Muslim prayers and readings from the Qur'an?
"The genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning it might have had in a world that is dead and gone, but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and current needs." -- Justice William Brennan: Speech to the Text and Teaching Symposium at Georgetown University (October 12, 1985)
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2008 - 12:24AM #17
davelaw40
Posts: 19,669

Creedofcrusades wrote:

I believe what happens in my school district is Constitutional. Our school board, all elected, have passed a resolution supporting and encouraging school prayer. And no I dont think the Bill of Rights apply to the states. They *specifically* were added to protect the states and citizens from the Federal government. It is not even a matter of any doubt that the Bill of Rights never bound any state until that wacky decision based on the 14th amendment. I know it's the "law" for now..but I am optimistic about the future and the day when we go back to laws passed by legislatures rather than judges. Clarence Thomas and Scalia have both written decisions where they have indicated they share the view that the 14th "sucking" the Bill of Rights into the realm of state government just plain sucks..



Can you giove me an example of Scalia disagreeing that "equal protection of the laws"  extends the Bill of rights to the states.  IMO, they would be much better served following Scalia's lead and reviving the 9th and 10th admendments.

Non Quis, Sed Quid
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2008 - 1:23AM #18
TPaine
Posts: 9,385

davelaw40 wrote:

Can you giove me an example of Scalia disagreeing that "equal protection of the laws"  extends the Bill of rights to the states.  IMO, they would be much better served following Scalia's lead and reviving the 9th and 10th admendments.



For Creeds benefit, I feel that I should inform him that the amendments read as follows:

ARTICLE IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others  retained by the people.

ARTICLE X
All powers not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved  to  the states respectively, or to the people.

"The genius of the Constitution rests not in any static meaning it might have had in a world that is dead and gone, but in the adaptability of its great principles to cope with current problems and current needs." -- Justice William Brennan: Speech to the Text and Teaching Symposium at Georgetown University (October 12, 1985)
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2008 - 1:56AM #19
Creedofcrusades
Posts: 1,571
[QUOTE=TPaine;340737]Creed, The concept of Incorporation, or applying the Bill of Rights to state as well as federal law was first mentioned by the Supreme Court in the case of Gitlow v. New York (268 US 652) in 1925. That court was not exactly considered liberal. In fact, the two liberal justices, Holmes and Brandeis, dissented because they believed the court did not go far enough.
I'm curious, would you be upset if the Supreme Court overturned a rule passed by a local school board that required each day to begin with Muslim prayers and readings from the Qur'an?[/QUOTE]

    I dont know what the Supreme Court of 1925 was. No idea. But I do know that the 14th Amendment's sinister reach was debated openly during ratification in Congress. So it should have come as no surprise.
   As I said Tpaine "I know its the law". I just think it is horrible law. The 14th and 17th Amendments were travesties that damaged the fabric of our government beyond repair. The "Progressive Amendments" were liberal amendments and hugely destructive.  In fact it was mostly fear of just such an action, a Federal power grab and interference with state perogatives, that caused a Bill of Rights to be demanded in the first place as a check on the Federal government. Yes the 16th is despicable as well but thats another issue.
    I know where you are going with that last question. The short answer is yes, I am upset everytime the Supreme Court meddles in local affairs. If Utah wants to teach Joseph Smith in their schools I have no objection..so long as the citizens of Utah dont. Do these Muslims elect a school board, and tax themselves for its support? Do they operate under a "republican form of government"?
   And the longer answer..will have to wait because it is late. :)
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2008 - 1:57AM #20
Creedofcrusades
Posts: 1,571
[QUOTE=TPaine;340823]For Creeds benefit, I feel that I should inform him that the amendments read as follows:

ARTICLE IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others  retained by the people.

ARTICLE X
All powers not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved  to  the states respectively, or to the people.[/QUOTE]

   Arent you kind....
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 6  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook