Fed Judge Sides With Teen Atheist & Orders Public School to Remove Prayer Mural
- Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:12am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
Jessica Ahlquist (left) (Photo Credit: AP)
A federal judge has ruled in favor of a teenage atheist whose fight for the removal of a prayer mural in her public high school in Cranston, Rhode Island, has attracted national attention.
Jessica Ahlquist, 16, who was represented by the Rhode Island chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, was elated on Wednesday when her lawsuit against Crayton city and officials at Cranston High School West came to a close. In the ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Ronald Lagueux said that the school must remove the banner immediately. Additionally, he decided that legal fees should be provided to the plaintiff.
Ahlquist‘s main argument in the case has been that a prayer mural present in her school’s auditorium is offensive to non-Christians. Additionally, she claims that it has made her feel ostracized and, thus, she has petitioned fervently for its removal.
Here’s a news report from April 2011, during which Ahlquist discusses her opposition to the mural:
The banner, she contends, promotes religion. But city officials have argued that the mural plays an important role in the school’s history and that it is, in fact, an artifact worthy of being displayed.
Officials maintain that the prayer serves no religious purpose and that it merely encourages students to work hard academically. It does, as the Associated Press notes, begin with “Our Heavenly Father” and end with “Amen” — elements obviously associated with religious prayer.
Photo Credit: WPRO News Talk
In his decision Lagueux said, “The purpose of the prayer banner was clearly religious in nature” and he also said, “No amount of debate can make the school Prayer anything other than a prayer, and a Christian one at that.” He went on to state that the presence of the prayer was essentially a governmental endorsement of religion, reiterating his believe that, “The Government must not appear to take sides on issues of religious beliefs.”
Watch Ahlquist address the banner in a talk to the Secular Student Alliance in 2011:
Cranston School Committeeman Frank Lombardi, who had voted in support of the banner and who believed it truly was more secular in nature, voiced his disappointment with the ruling. “I really believe the purpose of this banner was more traditional in nature, more secular in nature, it wasn’t to promote any sort of religion or anything like that,” he said in an interview with the Matt Allen Show (listen here).
“I am upset, disappointed and not to say, outraged,” said David Bradley, who penned the prayer when he was in seventh grade in 1963. “It’s a shame that some judge with an appointment out of a Cracker Jack box can make a ruling like that.”
Ahlquist, though, couldn’t have been happier. She took to her Twitter account to voice her excitement over the decision:
City officials have 10 days to respond to the decision. They have not yet decided if they will appeal.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 688 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 537 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 466 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 374 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 334 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 308 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 316 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 216 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 301 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 308 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (893)
dnha14
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:41amThis is what the public schools are producing now a days. Be prepared for more. Self-centered, self-absorbed, me, me, me, it’s all about me people. With voters with brain cells like this, no wonder Obama is president. The dumbing of our great nation is almost complete.
Report Post »caveman74
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:12pmunfortunately this is where the constitution is week. It only tells us that congress can make no law prohibiting the free practice of religion. If a judge wanted to he could ban christianity all together with no constitutional protection. And congress can do nothing about that because the are banned from writing any laws regarding religion.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:28pm@Caveman
“And congress can do nothing about that because the are banned from writing any laws regarding religion.”
Congress passes amendments to the Constitution, buddy. They are literally the only ones authorized to do so. The president cannot veto an amendment with 2/3 of the votes, and the courts must abide by the amendments.
Report Post »Bluebonnet
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:30pmI wonder if this silly little girl would claim discrimination to the Muslims prayer, if it were shown anywhere on the school ground?
She obviously doesn’t like Tim Tebow? Her kind are all around us, but they are the real losers. Some day she will change her mind when she needs God.
Report Post »Quagaar Warrior
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:32pm~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Report Post »This country is long overdue for a nationwide Activist Judge impeach-a-thon!
I hope and pray that our next president appoints an Activist Judge Czar.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
4x4conserve
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:32pmI thought the constitution said the other way around where government can not prohibit the exercise of religion. “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.”
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:39pmOne thing I can assure you…….at the ripe old age of 16 this girl has absolutely no idea what she believes! Oh except I am quite sure she believes in the American dream of her 15 minutes of fame and attention for sensationalism.
There is hope for salvation yet for this child. God have mercy on the adults ingratiating her childish whims.
Report Post »db321
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:53pmIt is going to suck to be her.
Report Post »Idontdisagree
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:03pmFather, forgive them; for they know not what they do….
I say this 200 times a day or I go crazy. Now 201.
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:06pm“While the prayer is written with the hope of being mutual and non denominational it certainly does not fit with my own Jewish traditions,” said Rabbi Stein.
Report Post »4truth2all
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:07pmI’m offended by her being offended … can we put it back up now ???!!! Oh, and in the process fire the person that is called a judge.
Report Post »Miami
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:09pmGood gosh,
I’m offended by Marxist professors, does this mean we can get rid of them…?
I’m offended by OWS, does this mean they have to stop….?
I’m offended by a lot of things, maybe I should file suit…
Will they take down the Zero’s posters…?
Report Post »UseReasonNotMagic
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:18pmWhat about separation of church and state,? Taking prayer out of schools shouldn’t affect your religion. I mean if it‘s the ’one and only’ what does it matter? Believers will find it anyway.
I say give all religions a fair shot but not pushing any one…including Christianity.
Report Post »kfalcon22000
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:19pmHow do we save America? Our people have been so indoctrinated with this false premise of separation of church and state, that there may be no turning back.
How do judges justify the fact that Congress opens each day with a prayer, and that the Supreme Court opens with the Righteous Inculcation. I think Reagan said it best when he said, “I just think that children should have the same rights as Supreme Court justices.”
Report Post »Sister_Mary
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:26pmWith that hanging there what LAW did Congress make ??? Anyone? Also let’s work on getting religion out of prisons too !!! Let’s see te P U $$ Y ACLU take up that one !!!
Report Post »TH30PH1LUS
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:29pmAtheists,
Your hyper-self-absorbed and chronic Christ-ophobic mental disorder is becoming truly annoying.
Report Post »YourTearsAreDelicious
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:31pmwhat is wrong with you people? you preach the constitution and then spew idiocy about pushing your magic space-man on people. leave well enough alone. you’re all the cancer thats killing America
Report Post »NHwinter
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:31pmOne person = minority rule. Time for real hope and change. Throw them all out and we just might have hope for the first time in my adult life.
Report Post »maccow
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:39pm@Locked
Report Post »I thought We The People of each state had to ratify a constitutional amendment, one proposed and passed by 2/3 of the legislature, and passage in 2/3 of the states was needed to add the amendment to the constitution. The only other means that has never been tried is through a Constitutional Convention. The President and Supreme Court have no say in this process.
But heck, that’s the “same tired old way”. Obama can’t wait around for a do nothing country. He needs to act now for all of our good.
Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:41pm@Kfalcon
“Our people have been so indoctrinated with this false premise of separation of church and state, that there may be no turning back.”
I‘m afraid it seems you’re mistaken. Separation of church and state has been in our formal legal rulings since the 1870s. Ignoring the fact would be truly “turning back.”
Report Post »maccow
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:42pm@Yourtears
Report Post »That was incredible useless.
Thanks
Miami
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:44pmUseReasonNotMagic
Secularism is a religion as well yet its on her podium, where’s your outrage or do you just agree with that belief…?
Tolerance goes both ways
Report Post »Gilan57
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:44pmYou are so right DNHA14. The dumbing down of kids by the liberal school system is clear. If she is truly an atheist and doesn’t believe in god the mural shouldn’t bother her at all. If this girl is so afraid of that prayer mural she is obviously very afraid of God.
Report Post »M 4 Colt
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:49pmShe is a dupe, there are people behind her that are controlling her. I am thankful that i have raised both of my children to love and understand god’s word.
The best thing i ever did was send my children to a church school and keep them as far away from public schools as possible.
Now i have a grand daughter and i plan to home school her and all of you that can do the same would be very wise to do the same thing.
The public schools today are run by nothing but left wing nuts that are destroying the hearts and minds of our young people by telling them that killing unborn children is okay, telling our children all about sex against our wish’s, forcing our children to learn about homosexual lifestyles and telling them that that is a normal lifestyle.
None of that has anything to do with what a school should be teaching but looking at any public schools test scores it‘s easy to see that they are spending way to much time with that crap and not enough time on reading and math because we have 12TH graders who are getting out of school today that can’t even read and write at a second grade level and lets not forget that each kid in public school is costing the tax payers about $10.000 a year to teach them.
I for one would say that is a piss poor return on my tax payer investment in each kid but lets not forget that the union teachers are doing real well for themselves on our tax dime but that’s a story for a different day.
Report Post »ashestoashes
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:51pmJessica Ahlquist, You may have your moment in the spotlight of history.. but one day..every one above the earth..on the earth and“ below” the earth will bow and call Jesus/Yeshua Lord…..without exception Jessica…
Report Post »carbonyes
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:01pmJudge Ronald Ladueux is a real piece of work and a disgrace to the principles of law and our judicial system as well as the intent of the Founding Fathers. There never was the term Separation of church and state, nor was that the intent or purpose of Thomas Jefferson, in his misquoted letter to the Danbury Baptist Church. This Prayer does not establish a religion. The judges ruling profoundly interferes with the free exercise thereof. Get your head out of your derriere Judge Ladueux.
The young lady is causing more problems for herself than she would ever have dreamed. Dancing with glee over the matter, as does the devil she serves. She is past the age of accountability. One either serves God or satan. There is no middle ground.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:02pm@Maccow
“I thought We The People of each state had to ratify a constitutional amendment, one proposed and passed by 2/3 of the legislature, and passage in 2/3 of the states was needed to add the amendment to the constitution.”
Yes. And the only branch that can start that process is the legislative (ie, Congress), and neither the executive nor judicial branches may stop it. As it never even goes to states without 2/3 of both houses approving it, my statement is correct.
The final approval is with the states, of course, but Congress is the only branch of the government that can start it or affect the process.I thought We The People of each state had to ratify a constitutional amendment, one proposed and passed by 2/3 of the legislature, and passage in 2/3 of the states was needed to add the amendment to the constitution.
Report Post »SAM1234
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:17pm@Locked, @MACCOW
Why don’t you guys just read Article V instead of pretending you know everything? No, amendments do not have to originate in Congress, they can be proposed by 2/3 of the states. And regardless whether the amendment originates in Congress or the states, it must be ratified by 3/4 of the states. Stop being ********. Stop acting like you’re smart. Learn to read.
Article V:
Report Post »“The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid…when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several States…”
Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:25pm@Sam
You‘re right that it’s possible. However, never in the history of the country has a Convention been called. As such, a convention would need rules and regulation… which inevitably would fall to the legislative branch to form in law, and the judicial to decide any challenges.
I was going for the more likely of two scenarios.
Report Post »NOBAMA201258
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:59pmWhy can’t the little bimbo just not look at the banner? Enough of this B.S. How many students actually found the banner offensive? Just when you think you have seen the worst of these whiney atheists and their tearing down of anything decent
Report Post »Rob in Katy
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 3:30pm@CAVEMAN74, and Judges have no power to ban anything, only review cases and law for legality/constitutionality. The problem is when Judges start dictating that one can do this,or must buss that, or can’t hang this thing or must hang the other…they don’t have the Constitutional authority – not that it stops them.
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 3:58pmActually a federal Judge is part of the federal system and according to the First Amendment he has the athority to establish or prohibt the free exercise of religion. There for the Judges ruling is Unconstitutional. School are part of the community in which they are established not the federal goevrnment and it should be up the community to decide ifa prayer can be hung on their school’s wall.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 4:13pm@Smithclar (and others using similar arguments)
“School are part of the community in which they are established not the federal goevrnment and it should be up the community to decide ifa prayer can be hung on their school’s wall.”
14th amendment, part of section 1: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The due process clause here applies the US Constitution to all States’ laws, legislation, and individual Constitutions. States are bound by the US Constitution, including the Bill of Rights.
Public schools receive state funds and are state institutions. Thus, public schools are bound to the US Constitution. As the Constitution has been interpreted to have a separation of church and state through the Establishment Clause of the first amendment, promoting a single religious view is unconstitutional. This particular case (state-sponsored prayer in school) was ruled on almost 50 years ago, and the precedence of that decision still stands today.
Report Post »holy ghostbuster
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 8:38pm@copatriots – you say at 16 she has no idea what she believes? Then how come Catholics give kids the sacrament of first communion in grade school? Many have their Confirmations before they are 16. When I attended Methodist services they regularly baptized kids younger than 16. Why then do religions put the responsibility of belief and faith on kids, who in your opinion do not have the capacity to know what they believe at the age of 16? How old were you when you began professing your faith and beliefs in some fashion?
Report Post »mtebor
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:40amTort Reform is needed. If this is appealed it will be overturned.
Report Post »Continental Patriot
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:49amA religious war is being waged in America, like it or not. Radical atheists like this girl are using the court systems and the weapon of political correctness, along with the left wing ACLU (which NEVER defends the religious folks and their right to practice) to fundamentally tear down Catholicism in this country. It won’t surprise me when one day churches are burned or shuttered, priests are arrested for “practicing openly” and offending some poor little atheist, and Catholics are forced to practice in secret or of fear of persecution. We are being persecuted now, and liberals an their atheist attack dogs are leading the charge.
It’s also unreal how the Catholic Church is the only target of atheist attacks. The reasons why they are conveniently never offended by Islam should be obvious enough.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:50amNo, it will not be overturned, the school was in clear violation of the FIRST AMENDMENT.
Report Post »Gorp
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:02pmAll you have to do is read her first tweet in the article and you can tell her attitude right away.
She’s not standing up for something she believes in. She’s standing up for annoying and irritating her family, probably because they are Christians.
It’s time for Christians to stand up and tell these whackos where to put it!
Report Post »Marine 1
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:03pmHow can anyone today be surprised by this idiotic ruling which actually offends the Christians attending the school. Oh, that’s right, their feelings and concerns DO NOT COUNT ANYMORE.
So much for the concept of the “needs of the many good Christians outwiegh the needs of the few really ignorant, devil-following communist / socialist students and judges.”
Wake up folks! We are living in a police state and under a communist leader. King Obama and his liberal chums want to rule the world one stupid student at a time. Welcome to the New Age of public education and really screwed up parents.
Jessica Ahlquist now gets her 15 minutes of fame and laughs at every Christian everywhere. She won‘t be laughing when she has her ’come to Jesus meeting.’ Oops!
What’s really hard to take is that myself and so many others have defended this nation, too many to count have died, just so that this crap can happen?
This world, and this nation especially, is upside down. GOD help us all.
Report Post »booger71
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:06pmencinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:50am
No, it will not be overturned, the school was in clear violation of the FIRST AMENDMENT.
Report Post »——————————
Please enlighten us as to where the separation of church and state clause appears in the 1st Amendment.
Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:12pm@Continental
It seems you got really off-topic. Catholicism is not mentioned at all in this article. The school in question is a public high school, not a Catholic school. The prayer was a non-denominational Christian one. It seems illogical to suggest “radical atheists only attack Catholicism” when Catholicism seems to have had nothing to do with this article.
Report Post »Firebrand
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:18pm..or the free exercise thereof.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:19pm@Booger
“Please enlighten us as to where the separation of church and state clause appears in the 1st Amendment.”
Establishment clause, Booger. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” By judicial review, this has been interpreted as a separation of church and state since 1879, in Reynolds v. US. State-sanctioned prayer in public schools has been ruled as unconstitutional since 1963; ironically, the same year this state-sanctioned prayer was written. Go figure.
Of course, you can argue against judicial review… but doing so means you reject the workings of our legal system and the basis of our laws for over 200 years.
Report Post »leprechaun224
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:30pmre: encinon -
Exactly how was the school in violation of the First Amendment?:
“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.”
The school is NOT Congress and the school is NOT part of the Federal Government.
Report Post »ajentoranje
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:38pm@Leprechaun…..idiots like LOCKED dont have a clue to what the Constitution says or means. They just spew the same nonsense from left wingers like Soros and Obama.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:40pm@Marine1
“How can anyone today be surprised by this idiotic ruling which actually offends the Christians attending the school. Oh, that’s right, their feelings and concerns DO NOT COUNT ANYMORE.”
For better or for worse, “offending someone” does not trump the legal rulings of the country. Those rulings are clear; public schools are funded by the government. As part of that funding, the schools cannot sponsor one brand of religion over others.
A private school can do whatever they please. If you‘re on the government’s dime, you abide by their rules.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:41pm@leprechaun224
14th Amendment incorporates the bill of rights to the states. Becky U. needs to teach beckerheads basic civics.
Report Post »ValiantDefender
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:48pmThe First amendment was to protect the right to public worship AND to prevent the government from sponsoring church.
In the early years of the colonies, most – if not all of the colonies, had a state religion in which you were FORCED to pay tithes, etc. Even if you were of a different faith.
In my honest opinion, acceptable uses of first amendment would be:
- Prevent churches from receiving Federal Funds (states can make their own decisions)
- Prevent legislative branch from shutting down a church (states can make their own decisions).
That’s pretty much it.
The FED has NO authority in state and community run schools. NONE. 1st amendment doesn’t apply. Most states have their own constitutions which contain their own verbage regarding what the state will do. Everyone should go READ your state’s constitution.
President = voice of Nation
Congress = voice of the people
Senate = voice of the states (ruined by 17th amendment)
Supreme Court = voice (protect) the Constitution.
That body of politicians is meant only to govern National matters. States and communities need their power back. States and communities should decide about their local schools. If the Federal Judge has authority here in this matter, it is because the US constitution has been raped and impregnated with overblown egos and power hungry fools – then left unchecked for generations.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:52pm@AJENTORANJE
Actually, it seems you’re the one lacking knowledge. Do you understand the following concepts:
Judicial Review
Establishment Clause
Separation of Church and State
School-sponsored prayer
All of them are relevant here, and are established parts of our judicial system; if you’d like, I can refer you to Supreme Court cases for all of them. The end result is clear: a public institution like this school cannot sponsor a prayer.
You can, of course, disagree. But that doesn’t change the facts.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:02pm@locjed 200 years? No. Maybe 30-50 years. Which is when our Courts took drastic changes in their decisions. The Lord’s Prayer and Bible reading was ruled unconstitutional in 1963, this ruling went against the real past 200 years of judicial rulings, which encouraged, along with Congress, religious education in public schools. We’ve had a liberal Government and progressive judiciary since the early to mid 20th century. Many decisions from this past century have been radical, unfounded or unprecedented in our history.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:09pm@Colt
You should reread what I wrote. I said:
“Of course, you can argue against JUDICIAL REVIEW… but doing so means you reject the workings of our legal system and the basis of our laws for over 200 years.”
Judicial review was established in 1803, Marbury v. Madison.
Report Post »VRW Conspirator
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:35pmEncinom is right to a degree…
1 – there is a 1st Amendment and that amendment forbids Congress from establishing any law promoting a specific relgion
2 – there is a 14th Amendment and that amendment attached the first 10 amendments to the States.. which is kinda funny since the 10th Amendment CLEARLY states that any power not enumerated to Congress in the Constitution LEAVES that power to the States and the People.
after that Enciom is clueless…the Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment says that a religion can not be established by law by Congress..after the 14th..by any State legislature as well…
For the Founders…religion meant Denomination…not Christianity, Judism, Islam, or Hindu, Bali, or anything else…if was Denomination…Unitarian, Congregationalist, Catholic, Quaker, Baptist…etc…
So the Establishment Clause in MODERN language should read and be interpreted by REAL judges as “ Congress shall make no laws abridging the establishment of a denomination of any faith”
So…for all you separation of church and state people…first..NEVER is in the Constitution.. second.. LEARN HISTORICAL language changes….
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:43pm@VRW
“For the Founders…religion meant Denomination…not Christianity, Judism, Islam, or Hindu, Bali, or anything else…if was Denomination…Unitarian, Congregationalist, Catholic, Quaker, Baptist…etc…
So the Establishment Clause in MODERN language should read and be interpreted by REAL judges as “ Congress shall make no laws abridging the establishment of a denomination of any faith”
So…for all you separation of church and state people…first..NEVER is in the Constitution.. second.. LEARN HISTORICAL language changes….”
Or… we could go with the Supreme Court of the United States, which has been using judicial review for over 200 years to decide interpretation and intent. I think I‘d choose how the legal system works over your personal opinion on the founders’ intent.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:46pm@VRW Conspirator
“For the Founders…religion meant Denomination…not Christianity, Judism, Islam, or Hindu, Bali, or anything else…if was Denomination…Unitarian, Congregationalist, Catholic, Quaker, Baptist…etc…
So the Establishment Clause in MODERN language should read and be interpreted by REAL judges as “‘Congress shall make no laws abridging the establishment of a denomination of any faith’”
Huh? so the government can not establish a Christian denomination, but for arugement’s sake declare Budhism the official religion of the Nation. Is that really your argument?
No court of law has ever agreed with your ultra fringe positions. The holdings have taken the Amendment at on its face and applied it to religions. Your argument has zero validity, none, nada, it was a waste of server space to post it.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 3:18pm@encinom This has been a Christian Nation in the sense that the People were Christian, and therefore their Government reflected, through influence, the morality and religion of the People. Our Government or its Administration is and has not been Christian, and that is to say, it has never dictated by law or force any sort of Religion, creed or doctrine to the People. This was done in some colonies prior to our Nation, but was never adapted at a federal or national level.
This is a Christian Nation founded by Protestant Christians. Many believe that Nation means Government. That is not the case. The use of Nation consist of both the People and the Government. Though the Government (a political institution) be not Christian, the People certainly are, and have, by far, greatly influenced our form of Government the most. The religion and morality of the People was heavily reflected upon or adhered to by the actions and administration of our Government, who took its precepts and principles into serious consideration. Which led many Court decisions and political figures to proclaim this a Christian Nation. It cannot be denied that through all our history here in America, the People have been made up of an over whelming majority of Protestant Christians, and it is through their Faith and piety that we were best able to establish the greatest and most prosperous Nation to ever have existed in the whole history of the world.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 3:20pm@encinom “Finally, let us not forget the religious character of our origin. Our fathers were brought hither by their high veneration for the Christian religion. They journeyed by its light, and labored in its hope. They sought to incorporate its principles with the elements of their society, and to diffuse its influence through all their institutions, civil, political, or literary.” – Daniel Webster
“In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed….No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people.” – Noah Webster
“The religion which has introduced civil liberty is the religion of Christ and His apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledges in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen with equal rights. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free Constitutions of Government.” – Noah Webster
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 4:59pm@Colt
“Our Government or its Administration is and has not been Christian, and that is to say, it has never dictated by law or force any sort of Religion, creed or doctrine to the People.”
Which is my point. I could care less what a person does in private, the issue s when an institution of the State, say a school acts in such a way as to seem to promote or burden any religion. That is also were the law is today. This would not be an issue in a private school, private schools are not state institutions.
“It cannot be denied that through all our history here in America, the People have been made up of an over whelming majority of Protestant Christians, and it is through their Faith and piety that we were best able to establish the greatest and most prosperous Nation to ever have existed in the whole history of the world.”
This statement is uncalled for and wrong. First the Catholics are the largest group of Christians in America, second it wasn’t the piety of the Protestants that formed the Know Nothing Party and greeted the “papist” with violence. The reason Fighting 69th lead the St. Patrick’s day Parade in NYC was to protect the marchers from the piety of Protestant brick and fists. You can keep your false piety and your ego boosting statements. It wasn’t our religion that made us great, it was us.
Report Post »leprechaun224
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 5:13pmre: encinom – the 14th amendment applies the 1st to the states -
Report Post »Of course, however, the 14th Amendment does not trump the “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” specified in the 1st Amendment.
encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 5:49pm@leprechaun224
Report Post »Posted on January 12, 2012 at 5:13pm
re: encinom – the 14th amendment applies the 1st to the states -
Of course, however, the 14th Amendment does not trump the “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” specified in the 1st Amendment.
____________________________
This is called moving the gaol post. Your first comment your attempted to argue that the school was not Congress, proven wrong you ignore your prior arguement and jump to another false statement. Teh school is not prohibiting any person from saying a private pray. The school can not display a public endorsement of religion.
leprechaun224
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 6:03pmre: encinom -
Re: your “goal post” analogy – In fact I was attempting to solidify the “goal post” that you (obviously) were not able to understand. Your statement re: the school advocating or promoting a religion is faulty. Displaying an example of a religious statement is not the same as “establishing” one. And, you failed to address the 1st Amendment’s “free exercise…”. Do you understand what that means?
Report Post »VRW Conspirator
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 6:08pm@ Locked
Judicial Review has no grounding in Constitutional Law. It wasn’t instituted as teaching in law school until the Progressive era in US History. Courts routinely overturned Courts that had ruled a certain way before, usually stating that the Court overstepped its bounds and voted AGAINST the Constitution.
IN FACT, if you read the Constitution, not use my opinion of Founder’s Intent, you will see that it states the SCOTUS is ONLY to rule on the constitutionality of laws created by Congress and orders given by the President. THAT IS THE ONLY JOB OF THE SCOTUS. The Constitution does not say that the Court should use past opinion, international opinion, or current opinion but ONLY the interpretation of the Constitution of those Justices which is supposed to be done WITHOUT attachment to personal political agenda or current public opinion or party that appointed them.
And you had better LEARN what the Courts opinions have been if you wish to use Judicial Review as the president for all future cases because up until 1958 (nearly 170 years of Judicial Review and president), the SCOTUS declared that the USA WAS a Christian Nation, that the Bible could be taught in schools and not just as a history textbook as is the ruling today, the prayer could be used in public schools and public spaces, that the Ten Commandments could be displayed in public places and schools and courtrooms and parks and government buildings, and that there IS NO separation of church and st
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 7:16pm@leprechaun224
Report Post »Another Beckerhead Scholar. like VRW. Yes I do know what free exercise means, and it is not at issue. Not one of the students of the school are prohibited from saying a prvate pray. You my friend have no understanding of the 1st Amendment or its jurispurdence.
colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 10:47pm@encinom Government operated, State managed public schools SHOULD NOT EVEN EXIST. Religion or biblical studies were always a part of public education: http://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/america.html The operation of public schools should be left to the local towns and cities, wherein the parents have the best chance of governing the education of their children.
When America was founded, it was a super majority Protestant Christian people. That’s a fact whether you like it or not. Today, Catholics are only the largest “group” of Christians because they don’t have numerous sects or denominations within their Religion. Protestant Christians still outnumber Catholic Christians.
The problem with Socialists, Communists, Fascists, and Tyrants is that they assume all power resides with the State first, and the State then benevolently grants us our freedom. Liberals believe that they must petition the government for their rights, while conservatives believe that our rights are God-given, and that the State’s job is to safeguard those rights in the individual, not exploit them. Our Founding Fathers understood that God grants our freedom and liberty to each of us as individuals, and we then voluntarily surrender some of those freedoms to a government so that we may have an orderly society, but the power is ours first, not the government’s.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 13, 2012 at 1:48pm@colt1860
A Public School Operated by a county, town or city still falls under the 14th and 1st Amendments, prohibiting religious instructions in those schools. Local controll does not matter with regards to the seperation of church and state. Any government entity on any level can not violate the Establishment Clause. The only schools that do not fall under this are private.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 13, 2012 at 5:33pm@encinom I understand your argument and the validity of it. However, I see the substance or sources you use to support it as corrupt, disingenuous to our history, and radical. The arguments you use are mostly based on rulings decided not more than 60+/- years ago. I see these as mere Progressive rulings to support and favor an ever growing liberal Government. I challenge those rulings. Granted, based on those rulings, you have valid arguments. However, my argument is, those were bad, incorrect, wrong, inaccurate, unsubstantial, unprecedented, radical, disingenuous, corrupt, agenda driven, (you get the point), rulings and decisions made by activist judges intent on fundamentally transforming our public education, as they did oppose our traditions, especially those long adhered to in public schools, using the power of the judiciary to forcefully stop and abruptly end the manner in which AMERICANS were educated for more than 200 years.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 13, 2012 at 5:40pm@encinom IMO, based on research and study, the 14th amendment has been misused, abused, and taken advantage of in order to apply to it an interpretation or meaning it was never intended to support or promote. This has distorted its original and sole intent for the purpose of continuing the radical and progressive change in our form of Government.
Report Post »Vladia
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:40amAll I can say is that I’m disgusted, disappointed, and saddened by this court decision, as well as by this girl’s efforts to restrict the religious freedom of others.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:48amThat‘s it isn’t it .. seems like she sees this all as a “game” ..“ I won you lost hahaha”. Hopefully this is appealed and is overturned .. she doesn’t believe in God? .. fine and dandy .. but don’t restrict the free speech and practice of others.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:52amFIrst Amendment, govenment should not pick a religion, the banner is a violationof the establishment clause.
Report Post »OhSuzieQ
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:01pmI’m with both of you Cat and Vladia. What a shame for the others.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:35pm@Vladia
“this girl’s efforts to restrict the religious freedom of others.”
I’m honestly curious: how does removing a banner with a Christian prayer restrict the religious freedom of others? I mean, if they replaced it with an edict outlawing prayer in school, then you’d have a point. But does the Bible say “You must pray to God using the school-sanctioned prayer placed on the wall of your building that only includes me”? Hint: no, it doesn’t.
Schools can’t sponsor or sanction prayers. They can have moments of silence; students can still pray; they can have religious student organizations (as long as every religious faith is given an equal opportunity to form such an organization). Placing a banner with the “SCHOOL PRAYER” written on it is far outside those guidelines.
My only issues with this is that it seems like a pretty pointless fight for the girl to take up (I can just as easily ask “How does seeing this harm you?”), and it bites that the school has to cover the costs of the case. But the verdict of such a case could never really be in doubt.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:05pm@locked Modern state run public schools being under the weight of this corrupt federal Government (which includes all branches) can’t sponsor or sanction prayers.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:14pm@Colt
” Modern state run public schools being under the weight of this corrupt federal Government (which includes all branches) can’t sponsor or sanction prayers.”
That’s what I said, without so much emotionally-laden language. I’m not sure what your point was, unless you’re agreeing with me. Public schools must abide by the rulings of the court.
Report Post »Hiswill
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:17pmIf they dropped Heavenly Father, School Prayer and Amen, would that make it acceptable to this little girl? The rest of the prayer is only asking the kids to be kinder, honest, show good sportmanship,helpful and to make the school a better place for the students.
Report Post »I’ll be praying for this girl that one day her eyes and heart will open to our Lord Jesus. I know he will forgive her.
Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:30pm“If they dropped Heavenly Father, School Prayer and Amen, would that make it acceptable to this little girl?”
Almost certainly. And if not to her, then it would be to the courts.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:00pm@Locked My point is that what we have now, as legal standing, is based on false notions and unsubstantiated rulings, which are radical in nature and have no resemblance to prior rulings or bearing in our Nation’s history. In other words, these court decisions (which are recent and modern) are incorrect and nothing more than rulings made by activist judges, intent on promoting some special agenda e.g. diversity, multiculturalism, revisionism, Marxism, secularism, atheism, etc.
You said, “Public schools must abide by the rulings of the court.” In short words, I’m saying, they’re unconstitutional and unfounded. They’re radical. We have been conned. These rulings should be challenged and fought in court.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 3:10pm@Colt
“In short words, I’m saying, they’re unconstitutional and unfounded. They’re radical. We have been conned. These rulings should be challenged and fought in court.”
I guess I still don’t see your point here. If the courts are the ones deciding these issues, and the highest court in the country has given their official rulings, then why would fighting them in court again change anything? The judges (even lower court judges) would simply note precedence in the prior rulings and say that’s that.
The only way it could possibly change is through a vast change in the SCotUS make-up. That’s not possible until some of the justices retire, and even then justices are notoriously unpredictable in how they’ll rule (since they cannot be removed in most situations, they’re relatively free from the political process).
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 4:04pm@Locked I guess, I’m arguing more importantly here, the core of the disease, and not its symptoms. We definitely must change the make-up of the SCOTUS. These decisions (which I insist are corrupt, wrong, unprecedented, etc.) have been ruled by activist judges pursuing some special interest or agenda. These judges mostly adhere to and base their opinions on modern day ideas or philosophies contrary to the intent of our founding fathers or Governmental duties and powers implicitly found in the Constitution, thus ignoring historical interpretation, and revising history to suit their needs. Remember, it was Progressive judges that ruled most of these decisions embracing new “ideas”, essentially expanding Government, as constitutional, lawful, or reasonable. They often focused their rulings on favoring socially engineered policies (Marxist in nature). I do believe that these kinds of Judges, whether at the highest or lower levels, are bent on transforming our nation, and distorting the actual meaning of our Constitution. To this I say, only the People have the sole right to reform, change, or abolish their form of Government. Judges cannot right laws, nor institute new forms of Governments.
Report Post »CRiggsby
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:38amHer Atheisum offends me. Remove her from the school!
Report Post »Sirfoldallot
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:43amObama follower , a fad of idiot’s
Report Post »EqualJustice
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:43amHAHAHAHAHA I agree. :)
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:48amThis is one of Gingrich’s platforms that I like bringing activist judges in front of Congress when they make abvious unConstitutional rulings. And It‘s also another reason I like Paul he’s wants to do away with the department of education all together. And put the education of students back in the hands of LOCAL PARENTS THAT PAY FOR THE SCHOOLS THROUGH PROPERTY TAXATION.
Report Post »Jeff
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:55amI hear ya.
Report Post »EarthtoMel
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:17pmMe too….I am offended that the sign is taken down and that makes me feel singled out and hurts my feelings….
Report Post »Why can’t she just ignore it?
CRiggsby
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:55pmNo Obamma Follower here. If she can say that the Prayer offends her I can say that her Atheisum offends me.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 4:17pmBeing offended is not in and of itself unconstitutional.
A public school sponsoring one religious viewpoint through the public display of a prayer is.
Report Post »jkilson
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:36amwhat about the rights of those who believe? oh thats right… they have none according to the the American Communist Lawyers Union…
Report Post »EarthtoMel
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:52amIf you are a Christian, then you have no rights in America anymore….only the atheist’s rule….or so it seems. How can ONE person over rule the rest?
Report Post »tmbell87
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:13pmWhat religious right is being violated? The government is not busting down the door to your house or your church. As of now you are still allowed to worship freely. When that is no longer the case then even I as an atheist will join your cause for religious freedom from persecution.
The issue is that it is a public building paid for with taxpayer dollars. Although, if it were me, I would have asked to put up a pro-atheist banner. If that was denied then she would have had a case because an establishment would have been made. I don’t think action #1 shoulld be to have the prayer removed. It‘s too much like those idiots wanting to remove nativity scene’s claiming violation of the establishment clause. In my mind, there is only a violation of the public facility only allows one over all others.
Report Post »Wyatt's Torch
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 3:45pmWhat would a “pro-atheist banner” prayer mural consist of?
Would it be a giant mirror to pray to yourself as the master of your domain as your own personal Alpha and Omega?
Or would it be a blank wall to symbolize the message against something that doesn’t exist (according to your logical carnal skull)?
Report Post »TEXASGRANNY73
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 4:08pm@EarthtoMel One person got us legal abortion. Isn‘t it just the greatest thing since apple pie and look how that’s turned out. Lotsa little atheists like it you think? And then that one person changed her mind. However it seems to me that teaching your children at home and knowing who their friends are is much better than turning out a loosey goosey or an Encinom. How would you like to have one of them in your family? It walks like a duck squacks like a duck and it is a duck–stay clear. Know who your friends are (the scriptures tell you that. Many kings were good or bad (OT) depending on who their mothers were.) I don’t know football or care but I do know who Tim Tebow is. We all know who Glenn Beck is but do you know this girl’s name? (without looking). Do you know who this crack is Encinom–someone who gets jollies off on discomforting others–NO. Please if you are a Christian quit calling names and remember Saul/Paul. The Lord giveth, the Lord taketh. Blessed be the name of the Lord. They have a “clause”–You have God and He has you. Who wins?
Report Post »Longing for Change
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:36amHow long is this nation going to allow the 1 person to dictate to the 1500 other people what they can and can’t read on a wall???
This has got to stop!!
Report Post »Mandors
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:34amThis person is not seeking to be free from government endorsement of religion, she is actively seeking to defeat religion itself. That is not the pursuit of rights, but the promotion of evil. Look evil in the face it is the SSA.
Report Post »GardenoftheGods
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:14pmI agree. That poem/prayer is addressed to: Dear God. Muslims talk to God, Christians talk to God, Jews talk to God, many people talk to God–but because one half formed little “atheist” doesn’t like it; all students suffer. It’s a darn shame. I hope people react to this, like the thousands of people who rallied for the manger scene in TX. Besides, as the old saying goes: Prayer will be out of schools when tests are out of school! Time to fight back
Report Post »NealPatrick
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:16pmSpot on!
Report Post »AnAppealToGod
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:34amTranslation – “My family’s morals and faith started to decay and I am here to further spread the disease that I inherited from them. My disease is putting all the faith in the world into my 3 pound piece of meat between my shoulders to know all things and to know right from wrong.”
Report Post »AmericanStrega
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:34amAnyone know her address? If we did, we could all send her the most religious (doesn’t matter what religion) greeting cards for any occasion we can find. Flood her mailbox with them! And write a nice “We’re all praying for you” note in each card.
Report Post »dnewton
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:55amMaybe the Post Office will be sued for sending the cards since they offend her.
Report Post »AmericanStrega
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:12pmYou’re right DNEWTON. But, does anyone know her address? Come on, this could be fun! Better yet, why don’t we all send a copy of the Constitution to the judge.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 3:50pmWow Strega… harassing teenage high schoolers? Very mature of you.
Report Post »binge_thinker
Posted on January 13, 2012 at 10:51pmMy opinion is that atheists like this poor little girl really have a problem with certainty. They actually know nothing with certainty except the few items that man is convinced that he has the truth. That certainty usually changes with some other unearthed truth. Atheists spend their time proving menial details with certainty while believers spend their time developing things of some value because our faith is our certainty.
Report Post »Rampart
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:31amThe US Constitution does NOT guarantee freedom FROM religion…Only freedom OF religion. The Constitution is clearly on the side of the school. HOW DOES A JUDGE NOT UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE PREMISE?!?
Unseat this activist judge–NOW. In the meantime, the school should refuse to remove the banner and simply point to the blank space beside it as the school‘s show of support for this poor soul’s absence of belief. Problem solved. She is no longer “ostracized.”
Report Post »HKS
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:37amMisery is lonely, needs company with no reason to live.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:54amTHE US Constitution also demands that the government remains neutral with regsards to religion, a Christian Prayer on walls of a public building is a violation of the establishment clause. We are a secular republic, not a theocracy.
Report Post »booger71
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:09pmencinom
Report Post »Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:54am
————————-
No it doesn’t. Do you have any reading comprehension skills at all?
encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:14pm@booger71
two words: ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE,,,,
Sorry, but no school pray for you.
Report Post »maccow
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:24pmEncinom
Report Post »I missed the whole neutrality clause in the Constitution.
You post ALOT here and by your postings you seem to live in some world where the rules are all of your own creation. Must be a lonely place.
I will pray for you my friend
BetterDays
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:35pmEncimon:
Report Post »The establishment clause? Please tell me specifically, which one of the 16,000 Christian denominations this banner established as a national or school religion? WHICH SINGLE RELIGION IS ESTABLISHED HERE ENCINOMON ? Christianity is not a religion, so which ONE of the Christian belief systems is promoted here, it is a belief, just like atheism is a belief system, Torcaso VS. Watkins, 1961, SCOTUS secular humanism IS a religion, and atheism is secular humanism. So in preventing the inalienable right to the free expression thereof by having the banner removed, this activist socialist judge just promoted the SINGULAR RELIGION of SECULAR HUMANISM and in so doing violated the rule of law and the constitution.
encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:57pm@Betterdays
“It is true that New York‘s establishment of its Regents’ prayer as an officially approved religious doctrine of that State does not amount to a total establishment of one particular religious sect to the exclusion of all others – that, indeed, the governmental endorsement of that prayer seems relatively insignificant when compared to the governmental encroachments upon religion which were commonplace 200 years ago. To those who may subscribe to the view that because the Regents’ official prayer is so brief and general there can be no danger to religious freedom in its governmental establishment, however, it may be appropriate to say in the words of James Madison, the author of the First Amendment:
“[I]t is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. . . . Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? That the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?”"
Engel v. Vitale, 370 u.s. 421 (1962)
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:58pm“So in preventing the inalienable right to the free expression thereof by having the banner removed, this activist socialist judge just promoted the SINGULAR RELIGION of SECULAR HUMANISM and in so doing violated the rule of law and the constitution.”
Wrong. The removal of a “positive” is not equivalent to replacement with a “negative”. Had the School Prayer been torn down and replaced with an atheistic manifesto, THEN your statement would hold some water. As it stands, it’s nothing more than a torrential logical fallacy.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:11pm@encinom In 1854 the House Judiciary Committee said, “in this age, there is no substitute for Christianity…That was the religion of the founders of the republic, and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants.”
In 1892 the S. Court stated, “No purpose of action against religion can be imputed to any legislation, State or national, because this is a religious people … This is a Christian nation. There is no dissonance in these declarations. There is a universal language pervading them all, having one meaning; they affirm and reaffirm that this is a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons: they are organic [legal, governmental] utterances; they speak the voice of the entire people. … These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation.”
The establishment clause does not imply “neutrality”, that is a liberal interpretation.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:16pm@Dr. NORDO
Report Post »Thanks for your response, he is my rebuttal.
Where’s as you regurgitate the atheist line of “negative or neutrality” I must show forth the insipid and erroneous nature of your, and athiesms “public face” position. Beyond a doubt you would have me belive that atheism is an “ unbelief system” rather than a “belief”system, and that atheists are therefor “blasé”, yes?
For debates sake, and because it’s in blackstones definitions, let us be clear what a belief system is shall we? A belief system is a set of concepts, factual or not, than and individual or group of individuals, make life choices upon that impact their lives as well as the lives of others. Therefor your position of “negative neutrality” flies in the face of reason, as it is clear that this girl, and every other “remove GOD” act has been based upon the actions of people acting upon a belief system. Furthermore, that belief system has already been adjudicated by SCOTUS as being religious, atheism or secular humanism. The empty space argument, also flies in the face of facts, when it is at the alter of man as GOD that secular humanists worship.
Additionally, I again challenge you to rebutt my main point, which singular Christian faith if the 16,000 denominations did this banner support? For the establishment class only covers the establishment of ONE STATE RELIGION, such as atheism as the national religion.
Have a nice day, and I’m praying for you.
Dr. Joel Fleischman
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:26pmbooger71
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:09pm
encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:54am
————————-
No it doesn’t. Do you have any reading comprehension skills at all?
Of course he does not, after all he repeated the 4th grade 6 times.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:31pm@Betterdays
The Supreme Court was clear in Engel v. Vitale, that even a non-denominational prayer is still a prayer. Your arguement fails.
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:42pm@BETTERDAYS
“Where’s as you regurgitate the atheist line of “negative or neutrality” I must show forth the insipid and erroneous nature of your, and athiesms “public face” position. Beyond a doubt you would have me belive that atheism is an “ unbelief system” rather than a “belief”system, and that atheists are therefor “blasé”, yes?”
Wrong, wrong, wrong, and….oh yeah, wrong. I do consider atheism to be a “belief system” of sorts, but that whole semantic argument is really quite meaningless. You also seem to insinuate that I am an atheist. Again, you would be wrong. I am a Christian.
Removing a Christian prayer is no more an endorsement of atheism than it is an endorsement of Hinduism or Buddhism or Neo-Paganism. In order for that argument to hold any water whatsoever, it would have needed to be replaced by something that actually comes out with an atheistic message.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:45pm@Colt
“The First Amendment commands government to have no interest in theology or ritual; it admonishes government to be interested in allowing religious freedom to flourish – whether the result is to produce Catholics, Jews, or Protestants, or to turn the people toward the path of Buddha, or to end in a predominantly Moslem nation, or to produce in the long run atheists or agnostics. On matters of this kind government must be neutral.” McGOWAN v. MARYLAND, 366 U.S. 420 (1961)
The neutraility of the government in matters of religion is the position of the US Supreme Court.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:06pm@encinom Those are modern day rulings which have no bearing in the history of our Nation. These decisions are based on an enlarged, all encompassing federal Government, intent on fundamentally transforming our nation. Basically, ruled on the unfounded premise that we must be or were intended to be a diverse, secular, multicultural people and Marxist Government. None of these cases use prior rulings to favor their new, radical, interpretations. They should be challenged.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:40pm@Colt,
At the end of the day what came prior to those rulings matter little, the decisions and everyone since are what govern today. While your arguement is subject to historic debate (the Founding Father were never in 100% agreement, Madson and Jefferson both agree with a limited role for religion), legally the line of cases is clear.
Report Post »Heffe44
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 3:04pmEncinom is right, and there have been countless court cases to back him up. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…” That is a direct quote from the constitution. What the courts have proven that means is, any time ANY religious imagery displayed on State or Federal property is unconstitutional because it shows the government favoring one religon over another.
Like Encinom has said a hundred times in this thread… THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUES!! How hard is this to understand?
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 3:05pm@enncinom Your last argument supports my reasoning.
You said:“At the end of the day what came prior to those rulings matter little”
And that is the why we have these problems today. Judges don’t care about our true history, and would rather revise it to suit their liking.
You said: “the decisions and everyone since are what govern today.”
The rulings of activist Judges who insist that their interpretations are lawful and correct should be challenged, and no more adhered to. These are Progressive rulings and liberal interpretations.
I don’t deny their legally binding today, I reject that they’re constitutional, lawful and historically based.
“On every question of construction [of the Constitution] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or intended against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.” Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), letter to Judge William Johnson, (from Monticello, June 12, 1823)
“Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.” James Madison
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 4:25pm@Heffe44 These court rulings you refer to are new, and radical in nature, compared to our long history.
After the creation of our Nation, the founding fathers held public prayers in Congress, allowed worship services in Congress, declared National Prayer and Fast days, promoted the teaching of the Bible in public schools, and often referenced the Bible to guide debate and discussion while speaking on the floor of Congress. This modern day interpretation that they must allow all religions or be punishable for favoring one is unfounded and irrational. Muslims, Muhammad, or the Quran were never referenced to or adopted to influence or guide any of their laws, policies, or actions, whether in public or private. While they would pray to the God of heaven and earth, they would never seek Buddha’s wisdom, or the Jews’ Talmud. This is our history, whether you like it or not. No one can deny that overwhelming majority of people in this Nation at its founding were Protestant Christians.
Report Post »Heffe44
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 8:25pmSorry Colt… you’re just plain wrong.
This is not a “new”, “radical” idea. Go back and read the constitution (1789), the Treaty of Tripoli (1796), Thomas Jefferson’s letter the Danbury Baptist Association (1802). It’s all in there.
Stop listening to Dan Barton.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 10:50pm@Heffe44 Sorry but you’re wrong. Our traditions, especially those long adhered to in public schools, were FORCEFULLY STOPPED by legal rulings dating back only 50 years. THAT IS NEW, and RADICAL, as IT DOES NOT RESEMBLE anything that our founders established, or how AMERICANS were educated for more than 200 years.
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:31amNow, lets see her walk into the U.S. Supreme Court building and try that. I would bet dollars to donuts that Federal judge is an activist judge.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:59pmSCOTUS ruled in 1961, Tocaso VS Watkins, secular humanism ( atheism ) is a religion.
Report Post »crosbycat
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:49pmThanks BETTERDAYS for that reference. My public school (Pine-Richland north of Pittsburgh PA, if anyone cares) drowns the HS kids in secular humanism, teaching them to experience it rather than teaching them what sec. humanism is. Parents at this school need to step up.
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:03pmAs a pens fan, I get the CrosbyCat moniker now, as a Christian I know it’s wrong of me to want to “face wash” atheists when they act like this, so I won’t, lol.
Report Post »Countrygirl1362
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:30amWould be more fair to ban her from the school than the prayer banner. Bet more people want the banner than her in the school.
Report Post »MS Patriot
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 8:23pmIf it were voted by the student body would that make it fair? What isn’t fair is the fact we are supposed to
be able to express our freedom of speech, which includes religion. The fact our schools are taking away our freedom of speech over the last 50 years has been very disturbing. What is more disturbing is we continue to “compromise” with the progressive socialist until they take all of our rights.
Wake up sheeples.
Report Post »TeriPettit
Posted on January 13, 2012 at 3:39pmIt was a Supreme Court led by the REPUBLICAN Chief Justice Earl Warren in 1962 that first ruled that non-denominational prayer that was led or endorsed by public school teachers or staff violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment.
It’s fair to oppose that ruling, and many Americans do.
But it is incorrect to think of it as a left wing ruling, or as “taking away” freedom of speech. It is precisely to PROTECT individual freedom that the courts, both conservative and liberal, both Republican and Democrat, have consistently trended towards greater recognition of student independence, and against school endorsement of any view for OR against religion, as well as against any school restrictions on religious displays by students. Note that if the poster had said “there isn’t any God”, it would have ALSO been just as illegal, and the courts would have ruled against it too.
If 500 students in the school all decide to display bible verses on their lockers, and pray together at lunch time, the courts and the ACLU will protect their rights to do so, and liberals will support them heartily.
Report Post »Watcher1952
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:30amAgain the needs of the few or one….outway the needs of the many……maybe she is objecting to doing her best each day….or maybe being morally strong and being helpful to her teachers and classmates………. If she thinks she was ostracized before just wait ….but who will she sue because none of her classmates will talk or associate with her……
Report Post »JLGunner
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:28amAh yes, the ACLU, Defenders of those who are members of NAMBLA. The group that feels its ok for grown men to have sex with 6 year old boys. That crazy ACLU. I’m so glad they are defending my traditional American values. My civil liberties have never been in better hands.
Report Post »Dr. Joel Fleischman
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:21pmACLU, another organization just as useful as the EPA, PETA, CAIR, and DNC
Report Post »booger71
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:27amI can see how a mural that recommends students be kind to themselves and teachers is so morally offensive to her based on her teenage tweets. It is all about her and no one else.
Report Post »Sirfoldallot
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:30amYup, a fad of the left !
Report Post »Hydra
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:26amGood get that crap out of there. Go pray on your own damn time and don‘t force it upon those that don’t want to see that nonsense.
Report Post »Rampart
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:36amSo Hydra, you hapless dolt, were you born without eyelids, impulse control or a rotating head? Get back under your rock and leave the rest of us surface dwellers to our plebeian lives of honesty, integrity, morality and ethical pursuit.
Report Post »AmericanStrega
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:39amThen DON’T LOOK!
Report Post »MiloArk
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:49amAtheism is a gutless choice.
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:53am“THEN DON’T LOOK”
Good point! While we’re at it, let’s legalize public sex. After all, if you don’t like it, all you have to do is not watch it.
Report Post »Hydra
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:56amWant to waste your time with religion? Fine go ahead, but do it on your own time or in your churches. At a public school with various religions its not needed. F off
Report Post »maroon67
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:04pmSaint Michael, the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil; May God rebuke him, we humbly pray and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, cast into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowel about the world seeking the ruin of souls.
Report Post »jonnyroyal
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:12pmAh yes, the “LiberalMindset” on full display, Our Way or the Highway! HYDRA says take that crap down and grow up and stop wasting your time on believing in God. Well at 55 I’m all grown up and as I recall this Country was founded on the belief that We all have the right to believe in any Religion (or not) that We wish too. A prayer on a piece of paper posted on a wall is just that, no one is being forced to look at or to read and memorize it and to repeat it at a future date. There are many things I see everyday that I find offensive but I’m not demanding that they be taken away. I personally am not a very religious person but I am enough of a “Grown Up” to know that “LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT of HAPPINESS” means just that. We each have the right to believe what we want just as much as You have the right not too!!!
Report Post »maccow
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:12pmThat blank wall next to the banner offends me.
Get that crap out of there. Go [not] pray [without ceasing] on your own time and don‘t force it upon those that don’t want to see that [atheist] nonsense.
Why do you get to decide what constitutes crap and nonsense?
Report Post »Doctor Nordo
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:04pm“A prayer on a piece of paper posted on a wall is just that, no one is being forced to look at or to read and memorize it and to repeat it at a future date.”
If the prayer was outwardly Islamic in nature, I’m sure that most of you people outraged at this court ruling would be changing your tune pretty quickly.
Report Post »Clever Username
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:19pmHYDRA,
Report Post »You have it a little mixed up. I don‘t believe that I’m better than other people because I believe in God…I believe in God because I KNOW that I am NOT better than any other person.
I think it would be arrogant to think that we as humans are the highest form of greatness and intellect. With the rationale of an Atheist it is possible for a human to be worthy to rule over all other “lesser” humans. Atheism is the easiest lifestyle to live because you only have to answer to other humans IF you get caught doing something you know in your heart is wrong. I know I have to answer to a higher power.
You see religion as a waste of life. I see it as a fulfillment of life which helps me stay on the path of good. I by no means believe that I can change your mind and I don’t wish to push my religion on you, but know that I’m praying for you to see the light, and experience God.
maccow
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:56pm@Dr Nordo
Report Post »“If the prayer was outwardly Islamic in nature, I’m sure that most of you people outraged at this court ruling would be changing your tune pretty quickly.”
I am one of the outraged and I would support a whole wall of banners of prayers from various religions. But that might lead to critical thinking in our schools which is the one thing most forbidden.
Hydra
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 5:58pm@JONNYROYAL
I’m not liberal, but I can understand why you would think that.
Report Post »Deckle
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:25amAbsolutely NO!!! Stand up America!
Report Post »Clever Username
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:56pm@Doseofreality
Report Post »I know you’re not a stupid ignorant inferior person as you see us believers as. Becareful who you generalize.
I don’t know if “God did it” vs.evolution but I definitely believe God started it. I myself have a hard time with always taking the Bible literally, but look at the stories as parables of how to live. Don’t get hung up on talking snakes and “magic”, and try to understand what the lesson is
h20sue
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:22amThis is totally disgusting! The reason the USA is in the state it’s in is due to prayer being removed from schools, special events, etc. Morals are gone! This little lady (if you think this is more suitable then what I’d like to call her) doesn’t have sense enough to poor p–s out of a boot, and I find it deplorable that a judge would side with her. Our country is based of the believe of God and athiest should be rounded up and sent away. It’s okay if she wants to believe in this, because God is watching and he knows exactly what’s going on. He’s not happy with this world and I firmly believe this is why so many catistrophic problems are happening. It is his way of telling people to clean up their act. Obvisously the judge doesn’t see it, but some day, true justice will be served to each. It’s just a matter of TIME.
Report Post »Hydra
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:28amPrayer is a waste of time and God is a waste of your life. Grow up and realize reality.
Report Post »Docrow
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:38amI’m praying for you HYDRA.
Report Post »AmericanStrega
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:42amThis is for HYDRA: I will include you in my daily prayers.
Report Post »Jeff
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:35pmAgreed also God was removed from homes before it is permitted to be removed from public venues.
Report Post »biohazard23
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:36pm@DoseofUnreality, God bless you.
Report Post »jonnyroyal
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:40pmWell Mr. DOSEOFREALITY, Again the “Liberal Mindset” on full display! Just as a point of Historical fact wasn‘t it Martin Luther King’s belief in GOD and Equality for all that helped Him to Unite People of ALL Races, Colors and Credes?? Oh yes and lets not allow Teachers to stand in front of a class and say a prayer, that would be like having a Teacher tell thier class that Man “Evolved” from Apes and that it’s ok to have Gay sex and to express yourself any way you wish no matter what or who may be harmed by thier actions. Like that would never happen!!!
Report Post »DoseofReality
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:44pmIm not a liberal….I just dont believe in magical men in the sky…
Christianity….the belief that a Jewish Zombie will make you live forerever if you telepathically accept him as your master so he can remove sin that is in your soul from birth becasue a rib woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree. Doesnt anyone see how absurd that is?
Report Post »DoseofReality
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:46pmAnd no one states that man evolved from apes – you dont have the mental capabilty to understand the truth and plethora of scientific data, frmo every branch of science, that supports evolution. Its just easier for you simpletons to say god did it. And by the way, i’m not just attacking christianity..i think all religions are equally silly. You fools can point at islam, Hinduism, buddhism and all the other religions and see how foolish it is, why cant you apply that same logic to your own? idiots….
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:16pm@Hydra and @DoseofReality are the reasons why we need the federal Government (all three branches) to stay out of our public schools. Let each State, county, city and town take care of their own children’s education. We don’t need the welfare state or nanny state in our schools either! Let the people decide for themselves.
Report Post »DoseofReality
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:54pmI agree 100% with the feds staying out of public schools. Us reasonable intelligent folks can teach evolution and science, you guys can teach god-did-it. I would love that – then lets see whos more succesful in life, whos more educated, whos creating new technolgies, new medicines, etc. But you guys have to agree not to use any technolgies, innovations or medicines created by us heathens. Deal?
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:13pm@DoseofReality Most successful inventions, companies and universities in the history of this Nation (excluding our modern day culture) were founded by devout Christians. Most schools and universities, back then, required religious or biblical studies as part of their curriculum.
Here’s a good read on education in Christian America (‘way back then’): http://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/america.html
Report Post »Clever Username
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 2:20pmDoseofreality
DEAL!!!!! but you have to take Hollywood and all those that are addicted to liberal policies.
Let’s see how your Goddless civilization prospers…Oh wait, it was called Communist Russia.
Report Post »When humans think they are the highest force they will always treat those who are lesser as such. I wrote in a previous post:
I don‘t believe that I’m better than other people because I believe in God…I believe in God because I KNOW that I am NOT better than any other person… I by no means believe that I can change your mind and I don’t wish to push my religion on you, but know that I’m praying for you to see the light, and experience God.
stopthespending
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 4:10pm@hydra Hope you don’t spend any money because it has IN GOD WE TRUST on it.
Report Post »NewLife56
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:20amCouldn’t the young lady simple not read it or look at it? Nothing against her but shes a product of the PC groups. Hopefully a higher court (Including the HIGHEST ONE) will step in
Report Post »tirepitstop
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:20amThe minority, governing the Majority…..UNBELIEVABLE !!
Report Post »oldguy49
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:19amdoes majority rule matter anymore???
Report Post »tirepitstop
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:23ameventually, this will end, but NO…..the minority rules. Sickening!
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:03pmNever did, we are not a democracy (haven’t you listened to Glenn Becky), we a democratic republic, that limits the power of the majority to impose its will on the minority.
Report Post »Git-R-Done
Posted on January 13, 2012 at 12:37amEncinom – I’m sure that you have no problem with the minority ruling over the majority.
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:19am.
Report Post »I vote we make her a Conjugal vist girl to the U.S. Prison System………
ron2win
Posted on January 15, 2012 at 9:47amLong with her aclu cohorts.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:18amIt’s a pity that the ACLU can once again destroy an outward sign of basic American decency using this demented child as the focal point…She’ll go on to do bad things in life….
Report Post »HorseCrazy
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:29amshe will go on in life with the lesson she learned from this, if I whine about something that has the potential to make me uncomfortable or hurt my feelings or something I just dont like, I just get an attorney and get my way. great lesson to teach a teenager…sarcasm
Report Post »AJAYW
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:16amWhy does she exchange gifts then — another who wants the benifits of the holiday but no respect for it.
Report Post »microace
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:09pmExactly, evidently getting gifts for Christmas doesn’t offend her.
Report Post »USACommoner
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 4:06pmI saw a television segment recently where someone asked young kids if they knew why we celebrated Christmas. Many of them didn’t know. They all get cell phones, video games and ipods all wrapped with pretty paper, so I’m sure none really care WHY they get them, as long as they get them.
Report Post »bigfatslob
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 11:15amBurn this witch @ the stake.
Report Post »encinom
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 12:01pmLove the peaceful relgious response.
Report Post »Dr. Joel Fleischman
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 1:22pmyou’re next, Encinom!
Report Post »DeavonReye
Posted on January 12, 2012 at 7:43pmFirst reply for this topic . . . and a religious person calls for the death of her. What the HELL are you, Muslim???
Of course, you’re probably some sort of christian. You are NO different than the radical Jihadist, . . . you just don’t have the legal avenue to play out your murderous desires. You offend me!
Report Post »