U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-30-2012, 10:37 AM
 
1,639 posts, read 1,566,998 times
Reputation: 1200

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by KCfromNC View Post
stupid court case,
You got that right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KCfromNC View Post
if you are so easily bothered by it. Problem solved.
Projection much? It doesn't bother me one bit. I actually said that I hope the school doesn't appeal it, just more money wasted in the courts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-30-2012, 10:40 AM
 
1,639 posts, read 1,566,998 times
Reputation: 1200
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier View Post
This just shows what christian love really means.
I acknowledged the threats as being wrong, so what are you talking about?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2012, 03:06 PM
 
40,084 posts, read 26,750,404 times
Reputation: 6050
Quote:
Originally Posted by orogenicman View Post
Your understanding of the Constitution and American law is dismal. By your reasoning, I don't make the law so I can ignore the Constitution.
You can't violate the establishment clause . . . you seem to have trouble parsing the applicability of the prohibitions on government power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2012, 03:07 PM
 
40,084 posts, read 26,750,404 times
Reputation: 6050
Quote:
Originally Posted by orogenicman View Post
Non-sequitur. But you knew that as well.
It shows that the Supreme Court decisions are not infallible or irreversible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2012, 03:14 PM
 
40,084 posts, read 26,750,404 times
Reputation: 6050
Quote:
Originally Posted by axemanjoe View Post
The esablishment clause has EVERYTHING to do with respecting religion, see my other post which explains exactly what respecting and establishing means.
From Lemon v Kurtamzn

The Court's decision in this case established the "Lemon test", which details the requirements for legislation concerning religion. It consists of three prongs:
  1. The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;
  2. The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
  3. The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.
It clearly indicates "government action" not just legislation, but action of any kind.
It clearly indicates no such thing. That is YOUR interpretation of government action . . . but the prohibition is against government legislative action regarding religion.
Quote:
That is not to say a more comtemporary ruling won't come about, hopefully one will as we are hopeful that logic and common sense will prevail on the Supremem Court bench.
I feel certain that the current rampant abuse of the establishment clause against any expression of belief in God will be curtailed. Pendulums have this tendency to swing to the farthest part of their arcs before returning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2012, 03:16 PM
 
Location: Dallas, Texas
1,807 posts, read 2,165,507 times
Reputation: 970
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
I actually said that I hope the school doesn't appeal it, just more money wasted in the courts.
So then you should blame for the school for allowing it to go to court in the first place. They had a chance to obey the law and take it down with no money wasted on the case. They chose otherwise.

So basically: school breaks the law, when it is pointed out that they are breaking the law, they stubbornly demand that they go to court so that they can keep breaking the law, and you declare that it is the girl who should be blamed for wasting everyone's time?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2012, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Dallas
242 posts, read 197,143 times
Reputation: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
It shows that the Supreme Court decisions are not infallible or irreversible.
And here is where we get to the actual crux of the matter. It's fine not to agree with the Supreme Court rulings (there are quite a few rulings that I've disagreed with over the years), but disagreeing doesn't make it any less the law of the land.

Earlier in the month, the Supreme court refused to even consider the appeal challenging the ruling that opening assemblies with prayer (http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-rejects-prayer-student-internet-cases-210127037.html - broken link) wasn't constitutional.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
I feel certain that the current rampant abuse of the establishment clause against any expression of belief in God will be curtailed. Pendulums have this tendency to swing to the farthest part of their arcs before returning.
Quote:
The high court rejected appeals by local government and school district officials who argued that opening their meetings with prayers did not violate the constitutional requirement on church-state separation.
...it would appear that even the present SCOTUS considers it pretty established as a precedent, so I doubt that pendulum swinging to favor only a single religion will happen in our lifetimes. It's fine if you want to disagree with them; but pretending they haven't been pretty consistent about it for the last sixty years is kind of pointless.

Last edited by greaemonkey; 01-30-2012 at 03:28 PM.. Reason: addition
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2012, 06:44 PM
 
705 posts, read 943,948 times
Reputation: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
It clearly indicates no such thing. That is YOUR interpretation of government action . . . but the prohibition is against government legislative action regarding religion.
I feel certain that the current rampant abuse of the establishment clause against any expression of belief in God will be curtailed. Pendulums have this tendency to swing to the farthest part of their arcs before returning.
"but the prohibition is against government legislative action regarding religion"

Your words, so why did the court order the removal of the prayer? Because the display was a "government action" in the context of the Lemon test. You're blinding yourself to the obvious due to the strong religious influence you are exibiting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2012, 08:13 PM
 
1,639 posts, read 1,566,998 times
Reputation: 1200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fillmont View Post
So then you should blame for the school for allowing it to go to court in the first place.
Um, that would be the troubled girls doing, although I don't blame her, I blame her parents. I still don't see it as a violation of anyone's rights.

Nothing was forced on her. Children like this are shown to be troubled by their craving for attention, that they are being starved of in their home life by their parents.

Poor girl. Not only is she being raised to think that whining can get you "your way" but, she is now being physically threatened by idiots. Her parents should be ashamed.

Last edited by jdaelectro; 01-30-2012 at 08:22 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2012, 09:30 PM
 
Location: Dallas, Texas
1,807 posts, read 2,165,507 times
Reputation: 970
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaelectro View Post
Um, that would be the troubled girls doing, although I don't blame her, I blame her parents. I still don't see it as a violation of anyone's rights.

Nothing was forced on her. Children like this are shown to be troubled by their craving for attention, that they are being starved of in their home life by their parents.

Poor girl. Not only is she being raised to think that whining can get you "your way" but, she is now being physically threatened by idiots. Her parents should be ashamed.
Any actual evidence that she is troubled? You keep saying that, and I don't see any reason for it. She took a principled stand to support the constitution. Has it made life for her more troublesome in the short term? Probably. But she's made a positive difference, and those interested in upholding the laws of our nation will get that and support her for it. Sounds like you're just (again) assuming that anyone who doesn't think like you must be sick and troubled. Learn to realize not everyone has to think they way you do.

She'll be just fine.

Edit: read some of her blog entries here: http://jessicaahlquist.com/

She sounds like a smart and lively person. Stop assuming things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top