|
|
Hey, thank goodness for small favors. At least she didn't admit to being heterosexual. |
Posted on 06/22/2006 3:46:06 PM PDT by NYer
"If goverment schools are in conflict with the First Amendment, then governmnet schools have to go, not the First Amendment."
Well first of all, learn how to spell "government." I just realized you misspelled it twice. I believe freedom of speech is to be respected as long as it doesn't interfere with the education of the students or is counterproductive to it. I don't think this did at all. And yes, I say that on good authority.
The ACLU are not traitors, per se, they are marxists who use the 2nd Amendment, along with many of our elected officials in the house and senate, to undermine this Republic.
The one thing I see as most important in this battle against the ACLU is pulling all taxpayers money away from them........Do that, and see how far they get. (Of course to do that, you have to convince the marxists in our gubbmint to pull such funds...and that ain't gonna happen)
FMCDH(BITS)
If it weren't for people like you she wouldn't have to use deceit, your kind just keeps crapping on the constitution. Natural brute beasts made to be taken and destroyed
Been a while since you've been in high school.....or had high school aged children, eh? :)
You get such GPA's by taking Honors or AP (advanced placement) classes; they are more heavily 'weighted'. Hence, one can easily have a GPA above 4.0.
Oops. Is my age showing? Let me start over.
4.7 GPA? KEWL!
You disagree with the content of the post but instead of expressing the disagreement you make a lame attempt to ridicule me. My response was perhaps too tempered.
She knew it was coming.
The administrators knew it was coming.
Some fathers should have known it was coming, gotten on stage when it happened, and defended her right to say it.
Caving in only gives way to more evil. It was her moment to say what she, as top scholar, felt needed to be said. If the administrators would not stand to have something good said, they must be stopped on the spot - not her.
Jay Sekulow had her on his live show. She had every right to make that speech.
Did she originally say that she would give the edited version of the speech, or was that just assumed?
|
|
Hey, thank goodness for small favors. At least she didn't admit to being heterosexual. |
Beautiful! Christ's own words explain it all.
I don't believe she did, actually. Nowhere is that stated that I can find.
The only argument against her right freedom of speech and freedom of religion has been that "She agreed to give the edited speech, therefor she lied." Looks like that statement is the lie. I've been badgering people left and right, trying to get someone, anyone to confirm that she said that. Nobody can provide confirmation. I don't believe she said it.
Let me or McVey know if you want on or off this new combined list.
I may have to come up with a new graphic; let me know if you have suggestions.
Thank you for bringing support to my position
Grade weighting with AP and advanced classes, most likely.
Good for her, trying to speak what was important even in the face of persecution.
Not necessarily.
Even if she said it, it isn't a lie to change one's mind.
It is a lie to presently represent a fact as true when one knows at the time one utters it, it is not true. That test fails on many levels in the present instance.
But the atheist howler monkeys have with some success avoided the issue by hijacking the thread and turning it into a classic strawman thrashing.
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.
