Posted on 05/22/2006 6:46:45 AM PDT by dukeman
I was being sarcastic to make a point. Why must I spell it out. No matter how ridiculous I try to make it, there is always someone who takes it seriously.
Dare I ask, what prompted the judge to make the order in the first place?
More on the student prayer thing.
Personal prayer, fine. You guys have churches for the rest of that.
Bless their hearts and good for them.
So religious speech is to be limited to Churches?
> Why must I spell it out.
Because when it comes to religion, some people don't have a sense of either humor or sarcasm.
> So religious speech is to be limited to Churches?
No. But religious speech should be limited *from* government. A public school graduation is argueably a governemtn function. If the audience wants to say the Lord's Prayer, or fall on their knees, point their butts to the sky and worship Allah, that's their affair, and no law in the land has a word to say about it. If, however, an agent of the government - be it elected official, teacher, principal or (very arguably) a student speaker - chooses to use the power of the government to evangelize.... that's not right.
No, but I don't appreciate turning a graduation into a religious revival. It's not appropriate, it hijacked the occasion.
But like I said, I do understand why they did it. It wouldn't have happened if not for the judge.
Actually a strict reading of the Constitution would show it is only Congress that is disallowed from making laws. Extrapolating that down to a student's speech is an obscene reading of the wording and intent of the Constitution. But I suppose that is why we have judges for, to interpret the Constitution to what they think it should say.
Seem to recall Jeff Davis-Robert E.Lee--and other respected
Gentlemen also believed in this written Declaration.Some
have suggested that mere recognition of such invites another
Civil War.IMO ignoring such has led to this present darkness.
most probably a "progressive" education governed by the Soviet Communists and their "transmission belts in the ACLU.
Yea, absolutely. I mean, we can't have a secularist move to an area 90% Christian and have to undergo the pain of hearing that 90% decide they want to say a prayer together.... I like how your blessed tolerance only flows one way.
Suggesting that a simple prayer thanking God turns an event into a religous revival is pretty extreme viewpoint. Our country needs to come to a better balance. The current movement seems to be towards eliminating all public displays of faith is quite contrary to what our founding documents intended.
Stunned silence is NOT consent; nor is being gagged.
It is odd how liberal judges find flag burning and such 'protected speech', but tar & feathering or effigy burning not.
So you disagree with what Dr.Benjamin Rush said in Defense of the Use of the Bible in Schools.,1830--and what Horace
Mann said of "inculcation of a common code of Christian morality"in the common schools.Mann was hardly a born again Christian-but I believe he would be as appalled at the
course taken in our public schools since the 1960's.
Ah, but what about the publics right to know./sarcasm
You are so dead wrong on this. The student is not an agent of the government. The student does not work for the government. This is a very dangerous road you are travelling on. Try telling that or convincing parents of your logic. You are saying the student belongs to the government. That is wrong! The student has every right to thank God and/or offer a prayer.
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.