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.
Any contract with a PUBLIC entity cannot violate the Constitution. The public school district presented an unconstitutional requirement. I'm siding with the teacher on this one.
For their employees.
Under subcontract, I work under way different expectations under the scope of MY contract, than that of the employees of the firm, performing the same work.
They agree to my terms, or they find someone else's business to run.
No she isn't.
Never has been employed by the school district.
She has been a independent contractor, not paying her taxes for a few years there. It is forbidden in Islam to pay tax or interest.
An independent contractor cannot be contracted to compelled speech by a public entity. Period. That's unconstitutional.
No she isn't.
Never has been employed by the school district.
She has been a independent contractor, not paying her taxes for a few years there. It is forbidden in Islam to pay tax or interest.
Taking or paying interest is forbidden in Islam, some people still do it and that's their choice.
There is nothing forbidden about paying Tax though.
Under subcontract, I work under way different expectations under the scope of MY contract, than that of the employees of the firm, performing the same work.
I don't doubt that. Do those contracts ever require compelled speech as a term of contraction?
Anti-Jewish settlement policy is not the same as anti-Semitic.
It matters not of which the attempt at compelled speech consists. What matters is that a public entity CANNOT compel speech. Private entity to private entity contracting? Have at it. When a public entity is the contractee? Compelled speech is unconstitutional.
Under subcontract, I work under way different expectations under the scope of MY contract, than that of the employees of the firm, performing the same work.
They agree to my terms, or they find someone else's business to run.
You are confusing private with public, she is being paid by the school district on a contract so these are state funds paid for by taxpayers. All contractors for state and federal need to comply with their regulations and laws, none of which is giving up free speech.
No, for everyone. That's why if a public entity allows room for a religious display on public property (town hall, public park, etc.), they must allow all who wish to do so to also have a religious display. That's why the satanic display next to the manger on public property is Constitutional. Allowing only one or the other, is not. Either ALL, or none.
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.