Ban on same sex marriage ruled unconstitutional by Texas Judge

Southern Man said:
Clearly, anyone who denies God's existence is not qualified.
Click to expand...

If the people elected someone who was buddhist, would he be allowed to take office? If a wiccan were elected, would they be allowed to serve?



Do you actually believe that the law against atheists (and those who do not believe in a God) is enforceable??
 
Damocles said:
It happens all the time, the only difference is there is no time set aside for such things. Personally I'd rather the school administrators better use the time for education. I'll teach my kids that if they pray they should pray quietly and privately.

Now, try leading a prayer as a Principal over the loudspeakers in North Carolina.
Click to expand...

The best story I ever heard, was about a High School Graduation.
Don't rememeber where it was; but the Class Valedictorian wanted to include a religous comment, in his speech, and the Principal said NO.
So he gave his editted speech and when he finished, he sneezed and the entire class said "GOD BLESS YOU".
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
The best story I ever heard, was about a High School Graduation.
Don't rememeber where it was; but the Class Valedictorian wanted to include a religous comment, in his speech, and the Principal said NO.
So he gave his editted speech and when he finished, he sneezed and the entire class said "GOD BLESS YOU".
Click to expand...
LOL, that rocks. The kid's speech is not a violation of the 1st, as the kid is not the government. We get all wacky about this stuff. Teacher leading prayer, not good, kid making speech and mentioning his faith, not bad. It isn't really all that hard to figure out.
 
Damocles said:
LOL, that rocks. The kid's speech is not a violation of the 1st, as the kid is not the government. We get all wacky about this stuff. Teacher leading prayer, not good, kid making speech and mentioning his faith, not bad. It isn't really all that hard to figure out.
Click to expand...
This is exactly right. So long as it is part of his or her overall valedictorian speech it is fine. When it is not fine is when the school invites someone to pray to the magic man as part of the ceremony. No one seems to get this and it is exagerated to the nth degree. Most schools know what is and isn't allowed.
 
Last edited:
Damocles said:
LOL, that rocks. The kid's speech is not a violation of the 1st, as the kid is not the government. We get all wacky about this stuff. Teacher leading prayer, not good, kid making speech and mentioning his faith, not bad. It isn't really all that hard to figure out.
Click to expand...

I thought it was a real interesting way, to get around the school's heavy handed policy.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I thought it was a real interesting way, to get around the school's heavy handed policy.
Click to expand...

Its not so much heavy handed. It is simply following the rules against the gov't advocating for a single religion (or any religion).
 
WinterBorn said:
Its not so much heavy handed. It is simply following the rules against the gov't advocating for a single religion (or any religion).
Click to expand...
Nah, they went too far actually. There is nothing against the kid making his Valedictorian Speech and mentioning his faith. It isn't even reasonable to assume that the kid's faith has anything to do with the official position of the school.

This was overkill, and likely more due to fear of notoriety from some upset atheist group than from any real idea that they would lose a lawsuit because the kid mentioned the holy ghost in his speech.
 
Damocles said:
Nah, they went too far actually. There is nothing against the kid making his Valedictorian Speech and mentioning his faith. It isn't even reasonable to assume that the kid's faith has anything to do with the official position of the school.

This was overkill, and likely more due to fear of notoriety from some upset atheist group than from any real idea that they would lose a lawsuit because the kid mentioned the holy ghost in his speech.
Click to expand...

It is the result of a fear of lawsuits. The schools cannot win. Either than ban all of it or they face lawsuits.

There is no real need to have any mention of it in a speech. If the school requires (as many do) that the kid submit a copy of the speech for approval, the school will be held responsible for the contents.
 
WinterBorn said:
It is the result of a fear of lawsuits. The schools cannot win. Either than ban all of it or they face lawsuits.

There is no real need to have any mention of it in a speech. If the school requires (as many do) that the kid submit a copy of the speech for approval, the school will be held responsible for the contents.
Click to expand...
Yet we have lawyers that support my side of the argument, at least one of them.

The kid has every right to mention his faith in his speech, in fact schools have lost lawsuits in that direction yet continue the overkill approach. Not all of it can be fear, but this one likely was.
 
Damocles said:
Yet we have lawyers that support my side of the argument, at least one of them.

The kid has every right to mention his faith in his speech, in fact schools have lost lawsuits in that direction yet continue the overkill approach. Not all of it can be fear, but this one likely was.
Click to expand...

Like most endeavors, they will likely err on the side of caution.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
A youth making a statement, is not the Gov't "advocating" anything.
The School was denying him the ability to do so.
Click to expand...

And the student is guaranteed nothing. Yes, they deny him the ability to speak his mind. But they are also avoiding a topic that will get them busted from one side or another no matter what they decide.
 
WinterBorn said:
And the student is guaranteed nothing. Yes, they deny him the ability to speak his mind. But they are also avoiding a topic that will get them busted from one side or another no matter what they decide.
Click to expand...

If he wants to say "I thank the Lord for watching over me, these last 4 years", what would be wrong with that.
It's the way he thinks.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
If he wants to say "I thank the Lord for watching over me, these last 4 years", what would be wrong with that.
It's the way he thinks.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily think there would be anything wrong with it.

However, since lawsuits from either side of this argument are common, and since our education system is constantly strapped for money, I see avoiding the entire issue is a smart decision.

Is there anything wrong with saying "I thank the Lord for watching over me, these last 4 years"?

Is there anything wrong with saying "I thank the Lord for watching over us, these last 4 years"?

Is there anything wrong with saying "I thank the Lord for watching over all of us these last 4 years and praise him"?



I don't know the answer, and neither do most people. But what is wrong now may be ok in 5 years and vice versa.
 
WinterBorn said:
I don't necessarily think there would be anything wrong with it.

However, since lawsuits from either side of this argument are common, and since our education system is constantly strapped for money, I see avoiding the entire issue is a smart decision.

Is there anything wrong with saying "I thank the Lord for watching over me, these last 4 years"?

Is there anything wrong with saying "I thank the Lord for watching over us, these last 4 years"?

Is there anything wrong with saying "I thank the Lord for watching over all of us these last 4 years and praise him"?



I don't know the answer, and neither do most people. But what is wrong now may be ok in 5 years and vice versa.
Click to expand...

What lawsuit??

It's the feelings of the speaker.
You appear to be to willing to follow whoever is in the lead.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
What lawsuit??

It's the feelings of the speaker.
You appear to be to willing to follow whoever is in the lead.
Click to expand...

I appear what? I am apparently the only one on these forums with this opinion.


Ok, so its the feelings of the speaker. And the speakers feelings are all important? If the speaker is not allowed to tell us all how he feels about god, what will happen?
 
WinterBorn said:
I appear what? I am apparently the only one on these forums with this opinion.


Ok, so its the feelings of the speaker. And the speakers feelings are all important? If the speaker is not allowed to tell us all how he feels about god, what will happen?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter "what will happen".
It's his moment.

Why doesn't the school just write it for him??
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
It doesn't matter "what will happen".
It's his moment.

Why doesn't the school just write it for him??
Click to expand...

So by being the valedictorian, he gets to say whatever he wants and the rest have to keep quiet?

Schools regularly forbid applause by parents during graduation ceremonies, but this one person gets to say what he feels?

And when someone applauds his speech? And then someone sues because they were made to feel inadequate?
 
WinterBorn said:
So by being the valedictorian, he gets to say whatever he wants and the rest have to keep quiet?

Schools regularly forbid applause by parents during graduation ceremonies, but this one person gets to say what he feels?

And when someone applauds his speech? And then someone sues because they were made to feel inadequate?
Click to expand...

And there's the rub.
It's all about "feelings".

The Constitution does not prohibit the freedom to "feel" insulted.

I'm beginnig to believe that you're the kind of person that want's children's games to be scoreless.
We sure wouldn't want someone to feel "inadequate", by losing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top