Steelplate
New member
Not me....which is who you are attacking.
More Indoctrination
- Thread starter Timshel
- Start date
Not me....which is who you are attacking.
Steelplate said he wanted to see the emails. I said it was alleged and if true a violation of the constitution. Everybody has indicated that it was conditional on more facts being presented. Except you, you insist that the school must be right based on a couple sentence they released. You are full of shit and thin skinned.
How does it violate the constitution?
Engel vs Vitale, 1962 Supreme Court Decision
Got it so where did congress pass a bill saying it was ok for this school system to do so, they didn't but when the SCOTUS ruled, they instituted a law that never existed, and circumvented the constitution, and it only said a composed official school prayer so where does it say Teachers can't just pray what they want
Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that determined that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and encourage its recitation in public schools.
The 14th amendment applies the first amendment to the states and their schools. Teachers are employees of the government. They cannot promote religion.
Why because SCOTUS stuck their nose in, and ruled on something not in the constitution, Had the founders intended what you say do you not think they would have stopped prayer when it started.
Steelplate
New member
That is their JOB.
Fine what they ruled on was not in the constitution, no one was advocating a single religion theocracy and no one was forced to participate
Canceled.2014.1
New member
According to claims in the OP, students who chose not to participate were told they were required to attend the assembly.
I honestly don't care that you disagree with the court. It does not matter. They are not likely to suddenly reverse course and undo 50 years of precedents to satisfy you.
Under the law as it exists now, this is a violation of the constitution, and therefore the law of the land.
Last edited:
Steelplate
New member
There are lots of things not specifically written into the Constitution. Things that the FF could not have forseen.
But they were smart enough to know what they didn't know...that's why they created the SCOTUS in the first place...to rule on the Constitutionality of those types of things.
Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it's unconstitutional. I feel the same way about Citizen's United...but it was deemed Constitutional that money=speech. I think it's wrong because that creates an atmosphere where those with the most money are allowed more speech and those without aren't heard.
Steelplate
New member
That remains to be seen. Like I said....the E-mails will tell all....well, and testimony from the truancy staff.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
riiight.....the left's posts to the thread have all oozed patience......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
AND according to the OP, the assembly was student run and voluntary.....
Steelplate
New member
So...obviously, it's a wait and see what happens kind if deal.
It is as bogus as the separation of church and state, and should be revisited
The SCOTUS should not have gotten involved because it set precedent, because now liberal use it to try and do all sorts of crap, like legalizing abortion. Politicians are a boil on the ass that is humanity, we should run them all out and start over
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
lol, obviously not so obvious to most here.....
Steelplate
New member
Do you think that the SCOTUS lives in a bubble? By the time a case gets to the United States Supreme Court, it's already passed through all the lower courts and one side or the other appeals it up to that level.
Abortion is something totally different. Let me ask you something....why are you so adamant on forcing religion down people's throat? Even God gave us free will. Why can't you be happy in the knowledge that you and yours are saved?