Constitutional Question for Legal Freepers

Free Republic | June 30, 2002 | The Raven

[The Raven]

Question is this:

Why not challenge the basis that schools are an arm of the government? It seems that each court takes for granted that the government (in the form of public schools) can't force kids to recite the pledge, pray, etc) - but these are local/State community based schools. What right does the court have in directing actions and behaviors? Teachers aren't Congressmen.

Or better yet, if the government is caught between a rock and a hard place --- why not challenge the Constitutionality of public schools period. A school receiving ANY instructions whatsoever from the Federal/State government - whether for or against religions, or text books touting the political agendas or fad of the moment - coupled with the States forcing children into schools - is collectivism, not individual freedom.

If Congress must interfere with freedom to worship in schools so that Congress is not forcing religion in the schools, it's a rock and a hard place - since "Congress shall make no law".....[either way]

[tpaine]

First amendment safeguards have 'marxist roots'?

You're such a tar baby, roscoe, that you've lost all sense of historical reality.

[Roscoe]

First amendment safeguards have 'marxist roots'?

Bacwards, as usual.

Liberals and their Libertarian comrades initiating force to silence a child from saying the pledge shows the Marxist roots of the their detestable philosophies.

[max61]

Once again you've ignored the question as posed; that being:

Please explain as to why any theologic system should be advocated by government.

One question only, try and answer directly instead of attempting to obfuscate.

---max

[tpaine]

Your Hillarian type dementia is showing again. No one is 'silencing children'.

-- Government pronoucements about 'God' however, are forbidden by the constitution.

[Roscoe]

No one is 'silencing children'.

False, as usual.

The court ordered a prohibition on the voluntary recitation of the Pledge by children in public schools. Leftists and Libertarians cheered.

[Roscoe]

Please explain as to why any theologic system the voluntary recitation of the Pledge should be advocated by government allowed in local public schools.

It's called freedom of expression.

Under a Libertarian hegemony, our historic American rights of local self-government would repressed by force. Fortunately for our country, the members of that anarchist cult lack the intelligence and competence to accomplish its loathsome goals.

[tpaine]

False info, as usual, - from roscoe.

-- The court opinion said that adding the words 'under God', to the pledge, -- was an unconstitutional act of congress. - See the 1st amendment.

[Roscoe]

The court opinion said that adding the words 'under God', to the pledge, -- was an unconstitutional act of congress.

Backwards again.

The local public school's students were voluntarily reciting the Pledge. They were silenced, not Congress.

[Roscoe]

From the actual decision: "...the federal courts lack jurisdiction to issue orders directing Congress to enact or amend legislation."

[tpaine]

Wrong, --- the students can recite either version of the the pledge at will.

-- But a government school hierarchy cannot lead them in reciting the unconstututional version.

[Roscoe]

But a government school hierarchy

A local public school isn't Congress.

Under a Libertarian hegemony, our historic American rights of local self-government would repressed by force. Fortunately for our country, the members of that anarchist cult lack the intelligence and competence to accomplish its loathsome goals.

[tpaine]

From the actual decision: "...the federal courts lack jurisdiction to issue orders directing Congress to enact or amend legislation."

---

Exactly. -- That's why the government schools are so 'ordered'. -- They aren't congress.

[tpaine]

Whatta laugh! -- You're reduced to repeating your rant, and my point, --- just as if you had made a real one of your own. - Dementia.

[Roscoe]

Exactly. -- That's why the government schools are so 'ordered'. -- They aren't congress.

Ignorance and irrationality are very Libertarian attributes.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[Ohioan]

The actions of the public schools are interpreted by the Courts as being actions by the State. But your real point is still relevant. The First Amendment was never intended as any form of limitation on the rights of the States to promote religious sentiments. Indeed, the Founding Fathers strongly supported the idea of the States promoting religious sentiments. (See Leftwing Word Games & Relgious Freedom.)

William Flax

[tpaine]

Whatever.
- Your inane repetitions are boring, roscoe. -- Get a new style.

[The Raven]

>>But your real point is still relevant.

We folks on this side of the fence aren't organized. The libs seem to have an attack group for every issue.

[Ohioan]

You are right. The Left sets up ad hoc groups for every useful purpose. Having separate groups draws in as many as they can on the particular issue, without compromising their positions on others. While their actual arguments are often irrational appeals to human fear and confusion, their tactics in this regard--i.e. creating a lot of specialized advocacy groups--should be studied.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[El Gato]

Courts struggled with this complex Amendment for years before finally concluding that the bold-faced language could only be workably construed as incorporating all the previous Amendments and rendering states subject to them.

Except for that Black Sheep, the Second Amendment of Course. That one they rely on antebellum interpretations of the what governmental entities the Bill of Rights acts upon. Those decisions took the "Congress shall make no law" restriction in the first amendment, and applied to all the rest, when that is clearly not what was contemplated. They continue to do this, inspite of the clear and stated intentions of the authors and those who voted for the 14th amendment in Congress, that the second amendment, along with the other 8 of the first 9 Amendments be applied to the state (and local) governments.

[afuturegovernor]

I'm just going to throw something out and see how others feel about it, but wasn't Thomas Jefferson the founder of the public University of Virginia.