Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: blueriver
THe dress code is repugnant to the Constituiton, specifically the 1st Amend. prohibition against infringement of religious practice. That amend. was incoporated by the SCOTUS to apply to the States and their political subdivisions.

"individual freedom has always been limited by the rules and regulations of any given institution."

That's an empty statement that usually accompanies the demands and arguments of a tyrant.

" I know for a fact that many schools across the country do not allow hats in the class room."

Name the religion whose members wear hats inside as a matter of religious tradition and then you'll know which ones have the right to wear them regardless.

"Why should she be allowed to bring her religious needs religious needs"

It is not her needs. Commies talk needs. It is her religion and her exercise thereof is protected by the US Constitution.

51 posted on 03/30/2004 8:55:48 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: spunkets
It is her religion and her exercise thereof is protected by the US Constitution.

I contend to you that no one is denying this girl her right to practice her religion. She is free to attend any religious school she wants to attend. No one is forcing her to go to public school. Religious practices have no place in the public school. That is why this country has so many private religious schools. If a parent wants their child to have a school cater to their religious requirements then they send them to religious schools. Many catholic parents send their kids to catholic schools for this purpose alone. Why should this girl be any different from them? Where do you draw the line on what a school has to do to accomadate every childs religion. A school should be able to make rules that help it maintain order in a classroom. If hats are a distraction and or cause another child to not be able to see the blackboard then the scoold should have the ability to set a policy that restricts hats. They should not have to be concerned with religious requirements as they are not a religious instituition.

61 posted on 03/30/2004 9:12:16 PM PST by blueriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: spunkets
THe dress code is repugnant to the Constituiton, specifically the 1st Amend. prohibition against infringement of religious practice. That amend. was incoporated by the SCOTUS to apply to the States and their political subdivisions.

If they can do it for the 1st, they damn well ought to do it for the 2nd.

225 posted on 03/31/2004 6:22:07 PM PST by Centurion2000 (Resolve to perform what you must; perform without fail that what you resolve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: spunkets
It is her religion and her exercise thereof is protected by the US Constitution.

Except that her religion demands the overthrow of the US Constitution and the placing of Sharia law over this land and so isn't protected. Islamics by definition cannot believe in the Constitution because it isn't the Koran and the Koran specifically states the whole world must follow Sharia law.

235 posted on 03/31/2004 7:58:34 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson