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

Skip to comments.

District pulls plug on speech
Review Journal ^ | June 17, 2006 | Antonio Planas

Posted on 06/19/2006 1:33:47 PM PDT by BradtotheBone

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: BradtotheBone

Wanna bet that if a Muslim had been the valedictorian,"Praise to Allah!" wouldn't have been questioned???


21 posted on 06/19/2006 3:39:07 PM PDT by GoldCountryRedneck ("I think, I think, therefor, I think, I am, I think." - Ephemeral Isle Blog)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

"In 2003, the Clark County School Board amended district regulations on religious free speech, prohibiting district officials from organizing a prayer at graduation or selecting speakers for such events in a manner that favors religious speech or a prayer. The remainder of the amendment allows for religious expression during school ceremonies."

This sounds like a lawsuit for breaking that regulation. The speaker was the valedictorian. Editing her speech for religious references would be exactly what the law does not allow--content-based government regulation.


22 posted on 06/19/2006 5:57:20 PM PDT by LibertarianInExile ('Is' and 'amnesty' both have clear, plain meanings. Are Billy Jeff, Pence, McQueeg & Bush related?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AzNASCARfan
you mean the ACLU wont advocate for Christians??
Only against us huh... Big surprise!


The ACLU has advocated for Christians many times.
The ACLU defended a Christian minister’s right to conduct baptisms in a public park.
The ACLU defended the rights of Christian students seeking to include religious messages in yearbook entries.
The ACLU defended the rights of a Missouri nurse who was fired because she wore a cross-shaped lapel pin on her uniform.
The ACLU defended the rights of students to distribute Christian literature at school.
The ACLU defended Christian students who were punished for distributing candy canes that contained religious messages.
The ACLU defended the rights of carolers to sing outside a prison on Christmas Eve
And...The ACLU even went to court to defend Rush Limbaugh's right to privacy.

The myth that the ACLU is anti Christian was started by Televangelists.
.
23 posted on 06/19/2006 9:56:44 PM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mugs99

The ACLU isn't about defending Christians' rights. The ACLU is all about defunding the taxpayer. This group will exploit whatever public treasury looks "ripe for picking."

A little research will show how the ACLU's roots are firmly planted in communism.


24 posted on 06/20/2006 3:25:35 AM PDT by ViLaLuz (Stop the ACLU - Support the Public Expression of Religion Act 2005 - Call your congressmen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
The ACLU was not involved in this decision. The administration made its decision on the advice of the district legal counsel, Bill Hoffman.
Allen Lichtenstein, general counsel for the ACLU of Nevada, was asked his opinion after the fact.

If Allah and Mohammad were substituted for God and Jesus in her sermon, you would be outraged...Be careful what you wish for.
.
25 posted on 06/20/2006 6:01:48 AM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mugs99
Here's what I wish for:

A vigorous first amendment for all, Muslims, Christians, Jews and secularists alike.

26 posted on 06/20/2006 6:04:30 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mugs99

Did not know about any of those except defending Rush's right to privacy... How long ago was it that they advocated for all the Christians you mentioned?? Seems to me that every time I have heard a reference to the ACLU Since GWB has been in office, it's been on the opposite side of Christians, and many issues similar to ones you mentioned.


27 posted on 06/20/2006 6:28:43 AM PDT by AzNASCARfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

Here is a suggested alternate version:

"....and lastly, I would like to thank the most important person in my life. However, the school board has determined that you should not be allowed to hear me thank the most important influence in my life.....

....Also, I would like to recognize the person is most responsible for me attaining the honor of Valedictorian of my class. Again, the school board has determined that you should not be allowed to hear me thank the most important influence in my life.

So, I will tell you who is not the most important influence in my education. That is the school board. They are tasked with teaching us to reason, to think objectivley, to seek knowledge, to learn.

Yet, when we reach a reasoned conclusion, they deny us the right to tell you what that conclusion is;

When we think objectively and examine the facts, they refuse to let us tell you what those facts are;

When we gain knowledge and wisdom, they show intolerance of the insights we have gained;

What have we learned?

They are not interested in reason, objectivity, knowledge and learning. They are interested only in THEIR conclusions, THEIR dogma, THEIR version of the facts and keeping our mind closed to the greatest source of knowledge known to mankind.

Happily, I can tell you my education will not end here today but will continue. Sadly, those who seek to teach us have ceased to learn.

Thank you.


28 posted on 06/20/2006 6:49:13 AM PDT by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone; derllak

If she were a muzzie, they would be burning down the branch of the ACLU right now, the school district scumbags would be issuing apologies left and right and "Foolhills" would be erecting a Mosque on school grounds within the month.

The sheer hypocrisy of the schools continues on unabated.


29 posted on 06/20/2006 6:54:48 AM PDT by Leatherneck_MT (In a world where Carpenters come back from the dead, ALL things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mugs99

"The myth that the ACLU is anti Christian was started by Televangelists"

Total horsecrap.

Revealing FACTS on the ACLU
from its own writings


by Diane Dew

Ever notice how the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) seems to take on only cases that are anti-Christian - pro-sodomy, pro-abortion, anti-family, pro-pornography, pro-prostitution, pro-euthanasia, pro-homosexual, pro-infanticide, pro-crime, pro-humanism, anti-God -- and, except for atheism, anti-religion?

It calls itself the American Civil Liberties Union, but the ACLU is not American; it is uncivil (to the unborn, which are shredded mercilessly to pieces without anesthetic); and it knows nothing of true liberty, which can only be found in Jesus Christ, when one is set free from the bondage of all the SIN this evil organization PROMOTES!

Stated Goals

The ACLU's founder, Roger Baldwin, stated: "We are for SOCIALISM, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself... We seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the SOLE CONTROL of those who produce wealth. COMMUNISM is the goal." (Source: Trial and Error, by Geo. Grant)

The ACLU is destructive to the fabric of our society. Christians must recognize Satan as the source - the instigator - when the end results of an organization's efforts are only "to kill, to steal, and to destroy." All we need to is examine the (rotten) fruit.

Following are some of the stated goals of the ACLU, from its own published Policy Issues:

the legalization of prostitution (Policy 211);

the defense of all pornography, including CHILD PORN, as "free speech" (Policy 4);

the decriminalization and legalization of all drugs (Policy 210);

the promotion of homosexuality (Policy 264);

the opposition of rating of music and movies (Policy 18);

opposition against parental consent of minors seeking abortion (Policy 262);

opposition of informed consent preceding abortion procedures (Policy 263);

opposition of spousal consent preceding abortion (Policy 262);

opposition of parental choice in children's education (Policy 80)

-- not to mention the defense and promotion of euthanasia, polygamy, government control of church institutions, gun control, tax-funded abortion, birth limitation, etc. (Policies 263, 133, 402, 47, 261, 323, 271, 91, 85).

Following is a case in point (from David Barton's "America: To Pray or Not to Pray").

In 1988, California was considering adopting legislation on sex education for public schools requiring that course material and
instruction should stress that monogamous heterosexual intercourse within marriage is a traditional American value.

The Senator promoting the bill received a letter of protest from the ACLU dated April 18, 1988 stating:

"It is our position that monogamous, heterosexual intercourse within marriage
as a traditional American value is an unconstitutional establishment of religious
doctrine in public schools.... We believe [this bill] violates the First Amendment."

Truth is, liberals are unwilling to simply let others be, but rather seek to impose their UNgodliness upon Christians. It is a mission to
them and other atheists to pervert the freedoms of others. The ACLU does not run to the defense of those who are harmed; it aggressively
seeks out opportunities to corrupt pure freedoms.


30 posted on 06/20/2006 6:58:31 AM PDT by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Leatherneck_MT

Public schools are so screwed up these days, it's a wonder anyone comes out of them having learned anything useful. If I had little ones, they'd be home schooled.


31 posted on 06/20/2006 9:02:24 AM PDT by derllak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: derllak

I have one little guy and I wish I could homeschool him. Unfortunately his "mother" (legal not blood), has seen that possibility to an end.


32 posted on 06/20/2006 9:08:03 AM PDT by Leatherneck_MT (In a world where Carpenters come back from the dead, ALL things are possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Here's what I wish for:
A vigorous first amendment for all, Muslims, Christians, Jews and secularists alike.


Sounds good to me. Now all you have to do is get all four to stop their bickering and agree.
.
33 posted on 06/20/2006 10:05:09 AM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: AzNASCARfan
How long ago was it that they advocated for all the Christians you mentioned??

I believe all of those I mentioned were during the Bush 43 administration. They just don't get the coverage when they are helping a Christian, or Limbaugh.
They advocate for anyone, including Christians, whenever they are asked and can be of help. Christians just don't request their help as often as they once did, and that is because Christians have been told by televangelists that the ACLU is anti Christian. The ACLU has more Christian members than Atheist.

I'm not a fan of the ACLU and find many of their positions offensive. I do however, believe in giving credit where credit is due.
.
34 posted on 06/20/2006 10:17:08 AM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24
Total horsecrap.
Revealing FACTS on the ACLU by Diane Dew


LOL!
I'm familiar with Diane Dew and her Prayer Warriors. She's made a ton of money dealing in half truths and emotional propaganda. If you're going to cite a reference it should be a factual source, not evangelist horsecrap.

I'm retired now, but I spent many years working with several well known televangelists. Don't take that path with me or I'll give you more than you bargained for.
.
35 posted on 06/20/2006 10:26:23 AM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: mugs99
Lets start with you. Can we agree that the first amendment makes certain guarantees with regard to speech and religion?

If so, then can we agree that the SCOTUS has held in Tinker v De Moines that school officials can not censor speech absent a compelling interest to maintain order?

Can we then agree that mentioning God and ones faith at a graduation ceremony on a personal level does not reflect the states views at all?

And finally can we agree that more speech is better than less speech?

If we can agree on all of that, then we have no issues to debate.

36 posted on 06/20/2006 4:02:07 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Lets start with you. Can we agree that the first amendment makes certain guarantees with regard to speech and religion?

Of course we can agree on all of that. If it were up to me, the only limit I'd place on the kids would be time. My original reply was to AzNASCARfan, who said: "you mean the ACLU wont advocate for Christians?? Only against us huh... Big surprise!"

I cited cases where the ACLU has advocated for Christians. I also pointed out that the decision to stop her sermonizing was made by the school, not the ACLU. I can understand both sides of this issue, and I blame both the evangelicals and the secularists for this sorry state of affairs. Everyone needs to lighten up and stop this nonsense.
.
37 posted on 06/20/2006 9:31:16 PM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: mugs99

You familiar with armadillos and the center line of Texas roads?


38 posted on 06/21/2006 3:34:38 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

They get run over?


39 posted on 06/21/2006 3:50:58 PM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: mugs99
Yup! :-}

Choose a side, any side. Hopefully the constitutional one though.

40 posted on 06/21/2006 4:18:23 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

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.

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