 |
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Oregon Ping List.
Posted on 02/25/2008 12:10:00 AM PST by Global2010
Albany teens suspended for wearing crucifixes
YouNewsTV™ Story Published: Feb 24, 2008 at 2:55 PM PST Story Updated: Feb 24, 2008 at 2:55 PM PST By Associated Press
ALBANY, Ore. (AP) - A pair of Albany teenagers were suspended from high school for a few days recently because they were wearing crucifixes that school officials called "gang-related behavior."
Fourteen-year-old Jaime Salazar and his friend, 16-year-old Marco Castro, say their mothers gave them the crucifixes - and they deny they're involved with any gangs.
But South Albany High School Principal Chris Equinoa is clear about the school district's position. He says religious items are not banned. But he reserves the right to ask a student to remove, or cover up, any item he feels could indicate gang affiliation - even a crucifix.
A spokesman for the Roman Catholic archdiocese of Portland says the archdiocese has no reports of gangs using crucifixes to identify themselves in Western Oregon.
(Excerpt) Read more at katu.com ...
ping
I'd say this qualifies as slander.
A few years ago Crucifixes were the rage among drug dealers and pimps, or mostly among those who wanted to look like drug dealers and pimps in, at least, Atlanta, but the crucifixes in question were huge and garish.
A court case, especially if successful, would turn the items into gang IDs if there are actually any gangs there.
Sorry, that doesn't apply to Amendment I. Equal protection means that states cannot infringe on the people's protection from Congress.
The right afforded by Amendment I is a protection from Congress ONLY. It does not say the people have a right to free speech, etc. It only says they have the right of protection from the US Congress. And by the equal protection clause of Amendment XIV, that right of protection from an act of Congress is extended to everyone.
By whom and for what? So far as I'm aware, not even Michael Newdow or the ACLU has ever sued a school for "failure to prevent students from wearing crucifixes."
It's not that different, really, from acting a damn fool at a mall -- your right to do it, their right to make you leave.
Except that the government does not enforce compulsory mall attendance.
If they were English schoolboys they would have been expelled and thrown in jail for “inciting racial hatred” for daring to ackowledge their faith and thereby offending other faiths.
The entire premise of compulsory attendance, and forced compulsory tax funding of government schools needs to be challenged. Why?
Answer: Because government schools and the First Amendment can not coexist. Government schools are utterly incompatible with freedom of conscience. It is axiomatic!
All schools if they are to maintain order must restrict every one our First Amendment human rights. Private schools, since they are freely chosen, and not funded by the taxpayer have no conflict with the First Amendment. Government schools, though, are in conflict with the First Amendment, since the student is under police threat to be imprisoned in these government buildings, and the taxpayer is under police threat to pay for it.
Once imprisoned in the government indoctrination camp, the student is told to shut up for most of the day. ( violation of free speech).
The government dictates what he can publish or not publish ( violation of free press).
The government strictly orders the student to associate with people the government assigned to him. ( violation of freedom of association)
The student can not freely express his religious belief. ( violation of free expression of religion, free speech, and free press).
The student is subjected to a curriculum and school policies that can never be religiously neutral in content, worldview, or consequences. ( violation of establishment of government religion).
Solution: Begin the process of totally and completely privatizing universal K-12 education.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hm?..So?...Are police and social workers knocking at the door if a parent refuses to send their child to government mandated compulsory sidewalk walking?
Do families have foster care threatened because the refuse to participate in government ordered park attendance?
Axiom: Government schools are a First Amendment, freedom of conscience, and human rights abomination!!!
“sorry, but i find that reasonable...”
sorry, but i find it to be an indication of anti-christian bias. i’ve heard of too many instances of some kid telling another kid that “we don’t like christians in this school.” it’s only an indication that secular parents, who are hostile to any hint of christianity, are infected with bigotry and hatred and would condone such heavy-handed tactics. only a generation ago, such a wearing of a religious symbol would have been dismissed. now, all it takes is the complaint of a son or daughter of a bigot hiding behind the “establishment clause” and the kid wearing the cross gets booted. it doesn’t say anywhere in the constitution that atheism shall be institutionalized, yet that’s what’s happening. they are making the comrades of old very proud.
Exactly!
A police enforced government school will **ALWAYS** be in a Catch 22 situation. Always! It can not maintain order and prevent chaos, and respect the many conflicting First Amendment Rights of its many students. Some groups will have their most precious family religious, cultural, and political worldviews **established** by the police enforced government schools, and other families will have their traditions trashed.
Solution: Begin the process of privatizing universal K-12 education.
School principals are not legal scholars, but most are hard-working and well-meaning.
From their SAT and GRE scores it is evident they are not too bright, but well meaning Useful Idiots for the Marxists who have government education by the neck.
They don't need that s--t. They need a bright clear line, rules they can read and follow.
Clear lines are impossible because government schools can NOT simultaneously uphold and establish the many conflicting religious, cultural, and political worldviews of its students. Some families will have their religious, cultural, and political worldviews established, others will have their's trashed!
I'm sure there will be a lot of battles over what the standards should be -- I can hear the screaming about hijab coming over the next ridge --
There have been battles over government schools from the beginning. Why do you think the Catholic parochial schools were opened?
but we need lear and consistent standards, and immunity for officials who act within those standards. Either that, or keep watching these cases pop up in court every other week.
Clear standards are impossible without the government forcefully using police threat to trash the religious, political, and cultural traditions of a **LOT** of families.
By the way, if you are government school employee, or governemnt teacher, I am amazed that your college of education did not discuss with you the fundamental conflict that exists between compulsory government schools, freedom of conscience, and threat of police, court, and foster care action.
It always amazes me that so many people are unable to see how utterly impossible it is for any government school to equally respect the establishment clause and the free expression of religion clause of the First Amendment.
Both groups of students ( and their parents) are under police, foster care, and court threat to imprison their child in the government indoctrination camp.
If the government allows free expression of religion, the atheistic and Secular Humanist child is subjected to unwanted proselytizing.
If the government forbids free expression of religion, then the government is doing 2 things: 1) violating the student’s human and First Amendment Right to freely express his religious belief, and the government is establishing the government religion of atheism, materialism, and Secular Humanism.
Axiom: Government schools, the First Amendment, and freedom of conscience can NOT coexist. They are utterly incompatible!
I didn’t know this
that’s nice of the Govt they help this muslim girl wear her dress, the same Govt helps radical muslims to make a country out of a christian one
I left a country which will be muslim soon and where the Govt has help islam to spread so I never thought it would happen here
How Christian of you! LOL.
even the Govt is coming to help her
astounding this just after the same Govt helping radical islam make a country out of a christian one
200 years and every country will have a muslim majority and I wonder if the same Govts what helped to do this will look back as it was a mistake or still carry on with their nicey nicey lefty view
OMG!! Crucifixes are NOT gang related!! What is the Principal
s name? I want to contact him.
LOL!!
“...the secular humanist child is subject to proselytizing...”
it is not axiomatic that christian children proselytize. there is a law against such things and it is usually called harassment. if the proselytizing is unwanted, and someone is followed around for that purpose, then the person followed has the right to press criminal charges. it is a red herring to say that secular types are heroes trying to prevent religious harassment. it is obvious that the secular types have an agenda in mind and it is by all means hidden behind every manner of camouflage; one of those is the “establishment” clause in the constitution. it just does not exist and is being used to eradicate christianity from public view.
Thanks for the ping!
Catholic faith persecution!
|
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Oregon Ping List.
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.