Why is it there is no problem turning over their personal info and showing ID for “Obama $” yet asking for voters to show ID is under attack? Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal.
April 12, 2012 at 11:46am
Obama half pink, so it applies to him too? Racist hypocrites! and why is no one charged with inciting violence? why is there a wanted poster for Zimmerman? that’s ok? are we lowered to lynch mobs now? c’mon woman, you are a shame to yourself and your race, the human race.
No but it does send a message. I personally think she should be ostrasized from the school by creating a united front that condemns her actions as intolerent and unacceptable. She should be treated as scurge. Basicly force her to leave through social networks and isolation.Make everyday she is in the school seem like an eternity. .....I don't think she should be threaten with rape however.
May you some day find the peace of God in your heart. On that day you'll realize that advocating mental abuse and bullying to force out a girl who defended the US Constitution was wrong. Christians will be waiting for you, as they will be waiting for this girl to find the light of God.
I have found Jesus and I found that he would defend his fathers works. As he did to the jewish hanging money is his fathers house.
I also believe that intolerence should met with the same intolerence. And as far as the Constitution goes it says congress shall make no law repsecting the establish of religion OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THERE OF. The parchment hanging in the school was no law respecting religion but this POS did her part in prohibiting the free exercise there of. And you whoi support her are doing the same.
I would turn the screws till she cried everyday she had to go to that school and every night when she went home. I WOULD SHOW WHAT THE INTOLERENCE OF ATHEISM BREEDS
I am happy to hear you've found God, although I don't believe your attitude reflects it. Meet intolerance with intolerance? How about violence with violence? Hate with hate? No. Jesus calls us to be better, to raise above. To turn the other cheek.
" it says congress shall make no law repsecting the establish of religion"
False. It says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Putting a school-sponsored prayer in a public school violates the establishment clause (as can be shown in several court cases). Before you set up some other strawmen:
- The 14th amendment gives the Establishment Clause protections to states and local government entities as well as the federal government. None of this "It says Congress!" junk, please.
- Please see the relevant court cases Engel v. Vitale (1962), Abington School District v. Schempp (1963), and Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971).
- If you want to argue the Supreme Court's opinion isn't valid, please see judicial review in Marbury v Madison (1803), and be advised you'll be arguing against both reality, and how our country has operated judicially for the past 200+ years.
"I would turn the screws till she cried everyday she had to go to that school and every night when she went home."
Turn the other cheek, brother. May Christ show you the way. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
The 14th amendment has nothing absolutely nothing to do with parchment hanging in a high school.
More to the point you attempting to apply the establish clause on a state level would infact strengthen my case. The tenth amendment state power not given to congress and not deny by the constitution revert to the state and the people.
WHAT PART OF PROHIBIT THE FREE FREE EXERCISE THER OF DON'T YOU GET
CONGRESS IS DENIED THE RIGHT TO PROHIBIT RELIGION THUS THE STATES ARE ALSO DENIED THE RIGHT TO PROHIBIT RELIGION.
Besicly put Religious freedom is an absolute EVEN IN A SCHOOL.
And that little witch would have to leave the state if that was my school. I would turn the screws non-stop she deserve to reap the intolerence she sowed.
I'll try to respond to each of your points.
"The 14th amendment has nothing absolutely nothing to do with parchment hanging in a high school."
No, but it does when we reference that the parchment is a "school prayer." The 14th amendment, as said, gives the protections of the establishment clause to state and local governments as well. Hence, the 14th amendment certainly does apply... if you were going to use a strawman like "It says Congress!" Which you didn't, so my bad. Or my good, if it stopped you :-)
"More to the point you attempting to apply the establish clause on a state level would infact strengthen my case. The tenth amendment state power not given to congress and not deny by the constitution revert to the state and the people."
Ah, you are ignoring the 14th amendment. See, the 14th amendment says that states need to follow the federal constitution protections as well. So the 10th no longer applies in the case of establishment.
"WHAT PART OF PROHIBIT THE FREE FREE EXERCISE THER OF DON’T YOU GET"
Tongue-in-cheek? The double free part. Is free free even freer than free?
But seriously, taking down an endorsement of religion on public property is not prohibiting free exercise. Forcing students to adhere to a school prayer does prohibit free exercise of religion.
(Cont from before)
"Besicly put Religious freedom is an absolute EVEN IN A SCHOOL."
Indeed! The problem you're having is that religious freedom is being impinged by having a public school forcing one particular religious view on their students through a school prayer. Thus, by removing the banner and not endorsing a religion, neutrality is once more attained. See? Now everyone has an equal praying field (heh, pun!).
Note that students can still pray, or bring their holy books to school. But the school itself cannot endorse specific religious views, as this banner did. The courts agreed.
"And that little witch would have to leave the state if that was my school. I would turn the screws non-stop she deserve to reap the intolerence she sowed."
Well, then you'd likely be fired. Let's list the issues with that:
- You can't carry out a personal vendetta against a teenager if you're a principal; especially if you yourself were in the wrong (proven legally by the courts in this case)
- You cannot physically or mentally intimidate a child to the point that she breaks. Heck, it's not only illegal, it's immoral. Again, I'm surprised you claim to be a Christian in one breath and demand torturing a teenager in the next.
- The "intolerance" she sowed can also be called "upholding the Constitution." I think she's a busybody, but her case was justified and the school was acting unconstitutionally.
You have her to thank for religious freedom at least!
Thank you. That was the best comment yet. I doubt most of the hate we see spewed here is from Christians, but rather from opportunists on both side using this platform to have their moment at the expense of Christianity.
I pray that the depraved person who wrote that note (probably some classmate at school. Have you seen what goes on in our schools these days?) is found and shut down. I pray that the girl herself someday finds God in this wonderful creation of his and in his people. I pray that the vindictiveness in these comments is revealed as the kabuki theater that most of it is.
Now... let's move on please? The country is spending itself into oblivion and we are losing real freedoms. Focus on the government, not on its pawns (on either side).
I'LL type slower so you can understand,
What part of OR PROHIBIT THE FREE EXERCISE THERE OF
don't you understand. If the people in the community have a problem with the parchment in the school they have a right to vote on it's removal at some sort of PTA assembly. It is beyond the CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS OF ANY COURT TO REMOVE IT OR FORCE THE SCHOOL TO REMOVE IT.
Even more to point as far as schools are concerned they aren't technically part of any government state or federal the fact that they get tax dollars in irrelivent as there's no constitutional amendment given the power to the fedearl government to control schools or dictate school policy. No the DOE is just another unconstitutional power grab made in the 70's that's full effect has just started being felt in the last decade.
Soon that fact will be laid out and the DOE will be just another exstinct spiecies.
"What part of OR PROHIBIT THE FREE EXERCISE THERE OF
don’t you understand."
None. It simply doesn't apply in this case. No free exercise of religion is being prohibited; an establishment is (which, you'll notice, is the first half of the sentence that keep refusing to quote).
" If the people in the community have a problem with the parchment in the school they have a right to vote on it’s removal at some sort of PTA assembly. It is beyond the CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS OF ANY COURT TO REMOVE IT OR FORCE THE SCHOOL TO REMOVE IT."
False, and false. Local votes do not override federal protections, and the Supreme Court has had judicial review for the past 200+ years.
Even more to point as far as schools are concerned they aren‘t technically part of any government state or federal the fact that they get tax dollars in irrelivent"
False again. Take government money - abide by government rules. Public schools are considered part of the government so far as Constitutional protections are concerned.
"as there’s no constitutional amendment given the power to the fedearl government to control schools or dictate school policy."
See protections (above) and the 14th amendment.
"Random doomsaying on the DoE"
Doesn't change the fact that the legal system of the US is clear on this point right now. It may be overturned in the future but for now, it's the law of the land.
April 12, 2012 at 11:32am
she was fired for the same reason the Black Panthers don’t have a white representative, Gyms/Spas don’t hire Fat reps, magazines don’t hire ugly models, Taco shops don’t hire non Spanish speakers and the KKK don’t have black reps. the list is endless. get over it and find another job
March 29, 2012 at 3:08am
I heartily agree with you. Although Carson was joking I’m sure someone’s ‘rights’ were harmed somehow
March 29, 2012 at 3:04am
Dave isn’t slowly turning to the right, he’s going back to his roots. I knew him when he was around 13 and he was raised in a Bible reading Christian home
November 17, 2010 at 10:31am
Now there’s a business friendly environment. Gawd, LA, you’re all NUTS! HELP! I live in California!
I LIVE IN LA COUNTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! **continue death wail**
Ugh. Seriously. I'll just bring my own one-use plastic bags I have from home. I have a good stockpile that could probably last me a few months.
Dude. I'm just in survival mode right now. My theory is that if we ONLY had to deal with LA, we'd be ok. BUT!!!!!!!!1 We not only have LA, but San-Fran, Sac-Town AND Berkley. Is there a constitutional amendment anywhere where we can just lop-off northern california??
I feel your pain. I feel like a Conservative leaf at the mercy of a Leftist wind.
YesToFreedom opined "Now there’s a business friendly environment. Gawd, LA, you’re all NUTS! HELP! I live in California!"
I was born and raised in LA county, fifth generation. I used to think it was the greatest place to live but in my mid 20's I had enough, liberalism and all the "look at me" people ruined it! I then moved to Hawaii for several years, the weather was even better but the liberalism was even worse. I then moved my business to Ohio 10 years ago and I finally felt at home. The Midwest is awesome; it feels like the real America. Good people, good values, no PC bull crap, everyone waves the flag on holidays and neighbors look after each other. We have Christmas plays at school, our district said no to Obama’s school speech, the teachers still hug kids, and it feels like LA did when I was a younger.
In California, Cinco de Mayo is far more celebrated than the fourth of July and everyone seems to be so angry and hyperkinetic. My strong advice to anyone thinking about leaving Cali, DO IT NOW you will not regret it. My stronger advice to those thinking of moving there, DON"T, you will lose your children to the decadence, selfishness, piercings and facial tattoos.
BTW do you know the definition of a California Virgin? An ugly third grader with no bothers...
El Paco, what are we gonna do about Hollyweird? The blue-red split goes down the center and runs the length of the state. Unfortunately, I live on the blue side. I'm not alone, though. Lots of conservatives around me. So when people castigate all of CA for the idiocy of the Left, we also are blamed. As for "getting out," I have a job, and elderly parents. Am I supposed to just walk away? Sometimes, the people who post on this site prove correct those who accuse the Right of being angry. Can we look past the generalities far enough to see that there are all kinds of people everywhere, and that stereotyping Californians is a form of bigotry? Can we raise the level of discourse just enough to stop sounding just like those with whom we have such strong fundamental differences?
November 17, 2010 at 10:30am
Eric Cartman already did that in South Park
October 19, 2010 at 11:07am
October 19, 2010 at 11:06am
Conway should be ashamed. WE THE PEOPLE want someone who’s not afraid to tell the TRUTH! Call all of the liars out and show them the respect they deserve . . . . NONE
October 19, 2010 at 10:53am
Q: How many of the DSA members sit on the Judiciary Committee?
A: Eleven: John Conyers [Chairman of the Judiciary Committee], Tammy Baldwin, Jerrold Nadler, Luis Gutierrez,
Melvin Watt, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, Robert Wexler, Linda Sanchez [there are 23 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of which eleven, almost half, are now members of the DSA].
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)
September 9, 2010 at 12:44pm
What’s that smell? (sniff) ahhh the stench of trolls………