Posted on 04/07/2005 8:33:19 AM PDT by Houmatt
Then show me just how I was misquoting someone. I already gave you a response that merely implied you should sit down and shut up. Now I am telling you directly.
There is nothing preventing any American from praying in public. However, government officials (or anyone else, for that matter) cannot use government resources to advance their religion. Using a government-owned PA system certainly falls into this category.
Decades of court decisions have ruled that the church and state must be separate.
Too bad. You lose, I win.
ACLU has been on a crusade to destroy Christianity in America, promote filth under "freedom of speech and expression," and of course, vigorously defend the homosexual. Below are the communist goals being implemented by the ACLU in their quest to destroy America's culture and traditions:
1.Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions, by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
2.Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
3.Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all form of artistic expression. An American communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings," substituting shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.
4.Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."
5.Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
6.Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and television.
7.Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural and healthy."
8.Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
9.*Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
10.Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of "the big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the communists took over. Obliterating the American past, with its antecedents in principles of freedom, liberty and private ownership is a major goal of the communists then and now.
12.Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture – education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
13.Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
American Communist Lawyers Union
Read the Constitution some time. You will find the phrase, "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the document; in whole or in part, explicit or implied.
Furthermore, the basis for the SCOTUS decision that created this separation in the first place was not the Constitution, but a letter written ten years after the document was written and ratified by a man who was not present for either event. (Specifically, Thomas Jefferson. Look it up.)
So, unfortunately, that decision was, and is, in and of itself unconstitutional.
Next time, bring some knowledge to the table to keep yourself from proving Mark Twain right.
Then show me just how I was misquoting someone.
No problem. Here's the quote:
[Said Joe Cook, Executive Director, ACLU of Louisiana:] "The actors in this matter deserve jail and/or fines for their calculated un-American and immoral conduct to embarrass, hinder or obstruct the court in the administration of justice. Such behavior mimics segregationists who defied the federal courts rather than integrate the schools in Louisiana and elsewhere."
And here's what you wrote:
No, you are not dreaming: The Louisiana chapter of the ACLU has called school prayer "un-American" and "immoral."
The remark from which you're quoting is clearly referring to the defiance of the court order. First stop on the Clue Train is the phrase 'hinder or obstruct the court in the administration of justice'. Second stop is the reference to 'segregationists who defied the federal courts'.
As for the rest: as Modernman correctly says, 'believers do not have the right to use government resources to advance their religion.' Case closed.
So sad the communist anti-Christian Liars Union never took
any classes in American history ,nor on the history of
Education in America.How sad they rely upon the Fraud
perpetrated by the unAmericna ACLU and that court established by FDR to change the Constitution by changing
its' interpretation. And that Ku Klux Klansman Hugo Black
Everson v. Board of Education was from the git-Go anti-Catholic--and anti-Christian.As were/are those who established and maintain such Fraud.
I shall go further to say I am not concerned if believers feel welcome or not either, you are there to watch your kid play a sport. Shut up and watch or stay home.
A few minutes set aside for prayer are not violating anyone's rights. I care not to listen to all the fund raising dribble or community crap that is touted prior to and during each each event, but I am there to watch and I ignore it.
I also do not care for the droves of boosters that are constantly asking for money or selling something, but again I am there to watch so I walk past when I choose to do so.
You're right, Houmatt, that the words "separation of church and state" are nowhere to be found in the Constitution.
But neither are the words "Christian", "Jesus", or "this nation is intended to be a Christian nation."
Can we all at least agree on that?
And what say you about gov't-run schools? Don't you agree that gov't intrusion into education is the main problem here?
BS. My property tax dollars paid for the PA system. If that is your logic then everything belongs to the government, wrong, because it is all bought with tax dollars from us.
If the majority of tax payers want a prayer a prayer, they should get it. Last time I read teh constitution a majority still rules. If they will just get out and vote this issue along with gay marriage etcetera can be laid to rest.
"Then parents who want prayer in school can do so at their own facilities...
And the rest of us can just have our kids focus on reading, writing, and arithmetic. :-) "
Show me a school that prays, and I'll show you kids that Excel in any subject you can think of. : )
"As for the rest: as Modernman correctly says, 'believers do not have the right to use government resources to advance their religion.' Case closed."
In that case are you for all lobbyist that represent religious entities like CAIR and SBC being barred from access to legislatures. By lobbying they are advancing their religion though law making. All rules and regulations are promugated by an underlying faith, or lack of one.
Just wondering.
And what if the majority wants gay marriage taught in school? (That's the way it's going in some areas). And say the majority also wants truancy laws forcing your child to attend that school? Would you still say majority rules?
And what exactly was the court order for?
It was designed to stop the practice of religion in public schools. But nobody is practicing anything, just allowing kids to pray.
First stop on the Clue Train is the phrase 'hinder or obstruct the court in the administration of justice'. Second stop is the reference to 'segregationists who defied the federal courts'.
In order to more appreciate the latter reference, one must look at the sentence in its entirety:
Such behavior mimics segregationists who defied the federal courts rather than integrate the schools in Louisiana and elsewhere.
Notice the word "mimics" and how it is used. Are you going to tell me Mr. Cook was not, along with the other things he wrote, comparing children praying to racism?
Come on!
"Decades of court decisions have ruled that the church and state must be separate.
Too bad. You lose, I win."
Since when do court decisions become law? More specifically, since when do court decisions in civil cases become law? Answer: They don't. Courts have decided that their rulings become law, but they don't, Constitutionally.
Again, show me where in the Constitution you find this tripe. Find in that document where it gives the Judiciary the authority to make law. Find in that document where it gives the authority to the Judiciary to decide the Constitution says something it doesn't say. You won't find it, for it is not there. It is a power that the judges took upon themselves, and many (but not all) seem to have meekly accepted it.
And then explain to me why there were no such decisions prior to the 1900s, prior to the advent of the communist controled ACLU (read about the history and founding of that .org if you disbelieve the communist connection).
It is at the point you have a right to move to a city or state ( or country ) that does/does not allow it. One big reason why the feds should not make those decisions. It should be a state level issue. That was people eho think alike can live together, hence why I don't live in Greenwich Village.
I also have faith that the good people of the country will and are coming to their senses. It is a slow process but it will come one way or the other ( the Bible says so ).
Other tax payers, some of whom do not share your religious beliefs, also paid for part of the PA system. It is not legal for their tax dollars to be used to advance your religion.
If the majority of tax payers want a prayer a prayer, they should get it.
Taxpayers are free to pray pretty much anywhere they want. They are not free to use other people's tax money to help advance this purpose.
Last time I read teh constitution a majority still rules.
Read it again. The Founding Fathers made sure that the majority simply cannot vote to do certain things.
Court decisions interpret the law and are legally binding.
Courts have decided that their rulings become law, but they don't, Constitutionally.
You are incorrect. Our system of common law has determined that the judiciary is the final arbiter of the constitutionality of a given law.
Again, show me where in the Constitution you find this tripe.
The courts have interpreted that this is the meaning of the Constitution. Your interpretation is incorrect and is of no legal relevance.
"A man in the group wore a small sandwich board that read "FEAR GOD and keep his commandments" on one side and "JESUS SAVES" on the other."
Don Riley of Searcy, Ark., here on a missionary trip to help the First Baptist Church of Arcola, literally carries his message to the Tangipahoa Parish School Board meeting in Amite Tuesday. Roger Zettler/Daily Star
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.