An Athiest Student as she has claimed, brings a lawsuit with the help of the ACLU?

[beagle9]

It seems the 99% was intimidating the 1%

If she had asked nicely, would they have taken the banner down?

The law hasn't changed since 1962. No prayer in public school. The 13 year old girl was right and the 99% was wrong

It is the kind of phony cleverness that you espouse here, that has put this nation in the pickle that it is in, and that my friend is ashame.

When I was in elementory school, we said a small prayer before lunch (no big deal), and 100% agreed to that back then in that school, which made it a non-issue back then, but even so it could be based upon what we are talking about today. Next I went to middle school where none of these things were practiced, and it was like entering into the wild west, where anything goes or went.. The first thing that happened to me was a person bumped into me and stole my wallet, then next I saw two boy's walking in the hallway like they were boyfriend and girlfriend, then I missed the bus and got beat down by a group of black kids playing basketball, and this happened among other abuses I suffered within a tense black and white situation that was going on back then in that school. In this school the blacks were in the majority, and the whites were in the extreme minority at that time, and they (the blacks) didnot like what the government had forced on them to come to their school either.... Talk about a culture shock and a seperation from what I had been raised on and believed in up until that point....Wow... Oh and no I was not raised to be a racist, and the situations in that school didnot make me a racist either ( I am much smarter than that), so don't even go there.. I was just a poor kid at the time, that had no choices in the matter, so I had to deal with the cards that were delt to me back then.. Later some of my best friends were black, well really before then they were also, but that was only because their families were in the military, where as they were different than the ones who had grown up around the local areas it seemed.

The government by force caused every bit of the abuse I suffered to happen to me on the black and white issue, but they hide their hands upon this fact now, and still act as if only a certain group found under the civil rights laws or movement, are the only ones that have ever been abused in this nation, but I beg to differ with them or have proof to say otherwise to this very day on that note. I would tell them that yes also white kids were victims of revenge & worse racism at that time period just as well, and this in the forced exchange of cultures in which we were all subject to when the lines were redrawn back then, and all in order to accomodate the exchange. I'm living proof of that time period with my own personal story, but we won't go there any further now...

All I am saying is that God or Christianity in some form, fashion or another, seems to help sooth all these problems to some extent, and if allowed in a well balanced and un-intrusive way, be it by a vote sometimes if nessesary, then maybe some of the problems we are having even unto this very day, would then recede and be more non-avasive within our societies.

There are people who are from all walks of life right now in America, that want to experience the fullness of the American experience for their children and themselves, and yes a small or large amount of God and Christianity for some is also a part of that experience just as well.. So are we to deny them a vote on such matters, and instead just say to them that it is not allowed ever, even when a majority within a school, or otherwise might say that they are A-OK with it in a non-intrusive way such as with this banner ?

And all that would have been changed with a little prayer..

I imagine, if you tried, you could have prayed away the gay of those two gay guys

Don't under estimate the power of prayer my friend, isn't that what they say?

 

[rightwinger]

It is the kind of phony cleverness that you espouse here, that has put this nation in the pickle that it is in, and that my friend is ashame.

When I was in elementory school, we said a small prayer before lunch (no big deal), and 100% agreed to that back then in that school, which made it a non-issue back then, but even so it could be based upon what we are talking about today. Next I went to middle school where none of these things were practiced, and it was like entering into the wild west, where anything goes or went.. The first thing that happened to me was a person bumped into me and stole my wallet, then next I saw two boy's walking in the hallway like they were boyfriend and girlfriend, then I missed the bus and got beat down by a group of black kids playing basketball, and this happened among other abuses I suffered within a tense black and white situation that was going on back then in that school. In this school the blacks were in the majority, and the whites were in the extreme minority at that time, and they (the blacks) didnot like what the government had forced on them to come to their school either.... Talk about a culture shock and a seperation from what I had been raised on and believed in up until that point....Wow... Oh and no I was not raised to be a racist, and the situations in that school didnot make me a racist either ( I am much smarter than that), so don't even go there.. I was just a poor kid at the time, that had no choices in the matter, so I had to deal with the cards that were delt to me back then.. Later some of my best friends were black, well really before then they were also, but that was only because their families were in the military, where as they were different than the ones who had grown up around the local areas it seemed.

The government by force caused every bit of the abuse I suffered to happen to me on the black and white issue, but they hide their hands upon this fact now, and still act as if only a certain group found under the civil rights laws or movement, are the only ones that have ever been abused in this nation, but I beg to differ with them or have proof to say otherwise to this very day on that note. I would tell them that yes also white kids were victims of revenge & worse racism at that time period just as well, and this in the forced exchange of cultures in which we were all subject to when the lines were redrawn back then, and all in order to accomodate the exchange. I'm living proof of that time period with my own personal story, but we won't go there any further now...

All I am saying is that God or Christianity in some form, fashion or another, seems to help sooth all these problems to some extent, and if allowed in a well balanced and un-intrusive way, be it by a vote sometimes if nessesary, then maybe some of the problems we are having even unto this very day, would then recede and be more non-avasive within our societies.

There are people who are from all walks of life right now in America, that want to experience the fullness of the American experience for their children and themselves, and yes a small or large amount of God and Christianity for some is also a part of that experience just as well.. So are we to deny them a vote on such matters, and instead just say to them that it is not allowed ever, even when a majority within a school, or otherwise might say that they are A-OK with it in a non-intrusive way such as with this banner ?

And all that would have been changed with a little prayer..

I imagine, if you tried, you could have prayed away the gay of those two gay guys

Don't under estimate the power of prayer my friend, isn't that what they say?

Nothing stopped you from praying on your own did it?

Guess it didn't help

 

[beagle9]

Look beagle9, it's painfully obvious you're shooting from the hip here and that you don't understand that which you criticize. I'm going to do you a solid and help alleviate that problem. Please see the below website:

Introduction to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment

This is a website put up and maintained by a law professor that basically hits the high points of Establishment Clause jurisprudence.

Now, if you wish to continue to engage in empty platitudes and random accusations, that is your right, but you will probably only be met with same. However, if you would like to have a reasoned, intelligent conversation regarding what the Constitution says and how it has been interpreted thus far, you will have a much better conversation with the people on this site about this subject. Because, and I mean no offense, you're talking at a different level than certain of us here on this thread, and you really haven't done anything to advance your position to this point. Just saying "the judges were wrong" is a conclusion; supporting it with articulate, specific facts may get you somewhere.

Really, I'm not trying to insult or belittle you. I'm just trying to give you the tools you need to articulate your opinion on a subject for which you obviously have a passion.

As you know, it apears that there is this grave weakness found in the First Amendment between the two clauses, in which has been exploited and left in confusion by those who wish to confuse and destroy this nation (either with that weakness that is found between these two clashing clauses), or not destroy the nation with the clash being found. So I see that these clashing points are being found between the "Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause there of, where as this has left the door wide open for continued interpretation by whom ever, and at any given time I'm guessing, and so I'm guessing also that it may be found, that we are just letting the best mouth piece at any given time win, where as we all then move on from there.

Now here we are at a turning point once again, and all due to this weakness or confusion found between the two clauses that are wide open for continued interpretation, we are in a pickle again.. Now everyone is weighing in on the matter in which has brought up this First Amendment, so it's let the best mouthpiece win again I'm guessing ???

Maybe this is the very reason we should allow for a majority to record their vote on the matter, where as the majority would be allowed to weigh in heavily with that vote. Why? This would then allow for the First Amendment to be representitive of the generation who would vote either one way or the other on these matters, which are matters we continually find ourselves engauged in throughout time, so when we bring up or concern ourselves with this Amendment on such an issue or issues, it would take the confusion out of the situation for our generation lived hopefully, but even so it would be left for another generation to vote upon again.

Of course the vote would be attempted to be supressed by those who (even if are in a minority), would try and stop if thought that the vote will change this against them (or) would turn the tides against them, so we don't get that vote as needed now do we?

In summary - Due to the clash between the two clauses, a majority vote must be taken on such matters, and this in order to represent the generation at hand, as to their interpretation of these matters as decided upon with that vote.

What a mess, but not really if we operate in the right way in this nation.

It's seems to me, if our forefathers had intended the constitution to ban religion from anything government, they wouldn't have set it up so congress starts with a prayer.

Not establishing a religion is not the same as allowing religion and I don't believe our forefathers would be happy that one girl and the aclu forced this school to remove a banner given to it by their 1963 graduation class regardless of the religious overtones.

I agree 100%...... I think the part about not being allowed to establish a religion, means that the government cannot put it's signature onto a document or unto a law that would establish a religion (forcing that religion upon another), in which would tie them directly to it by that signature given, otherwise it cannot promote it in anyway shape or form by "signature" or by "stamp" from any government promotional level, in which to be found at the federal level, because it may find that what it was ok'ing by it's signature, will have been corrupted and/or was found to be a scam, just like what went on with Jim Jones and such.

However,upon where it is that it is found to exist be it anywhere within our society, including in local public parks, schools, courthouses etc. it then must not prohibit the free expression of or deny the free display of it's findings once found, and this by any form of intervention that which would take away the rights of those who are in agreement to display it, express it or use it in these places appropriately, because actually these places are paid for by the citizens taxes, where as the government just manages it all for us.

Now if the government does not put it's signature upon any of it, and thus allows the free expresions of it upon a consensus or majority agreement honored at different levels in society by the citizens, then the government will have honored the First Amendment properly I think at that point.

 

[beagle9]

And all that would have been changed with a little prayer..

I imagine, if you tried, you could have prayed away the gay of those two gay guys

Don't under estimate the power of prayer my friend, isn't that what they say?

Nothing stopped you from praying on your own did it?

Guess it didn't help

No it didn't help, not when the cards are stacked by extreme liberals against it... B )

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In your mind, yes.

According to the Supreme Court, yes.

You’re welcome to cite a Supreme Court case overturning Engel v. Vitale.

Otherwise the fact that you don’t like or agree with the law is also subjective, irrelevant opinion.

Don't under estimate the power of prayer my friend, isn't that what they say?

The Framers included the Establishment Clause with you and your kind in mind. Thank goodness.

 

[beagle9]

In your mind, yes.

According to the Supreme Court, yes.

You’re welcome to cite a Supreme Court case overturning Engel v. Vitale.

Otherwise the fact that you don’t like or agree with the law is also subjective, irrelevant opinion.

Don't under estimate the power of prayer my friend, isn't that what they say?

The Framers included the Establishment Clause with you and your kind in mind. Thank goodness.

Who am I and my kind? I am just an American citizen, for whom is made up of alot of cultural experiences that I have been exposed to in this nation in my life.

Who are you, the devil himself maybe? Just kidding! B )

 

[beagle9]

Supper time yall....

 

[Crackerjack]

Don't under estimate the power of prayer my friend, isn't that what they say?

Nothing stopped you from praying on your own did it?

Guess it didn't help

No it didn't help, not when the cards are stacked by extreme liberals against it... B )

God is not stronger than "extreme liberals"?

They must be pretty extreme!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Who am I and my kind?

An advocate of subjecting civil rights to majority rule.

 

[casper4020322]

Or was it done through intimidation by a court order against the 99%, that which interpreted the law in the way that they see it or interpret it as, and this be it on any specific occasion or issue, yet going against the millions who may or would have seen it otherwise? I ask again, did society support her or were they against her ?

It seems the 99% was intimidating the 1%

If she had asked nicely, would they have taken the banner down?

The law hasn't changed since 1962. No prayer in public school. The 13 year old girl was right and the 99% was wrong

It is the kind of phony cleverness that you espouse here, that has put this nation in the pickle that it is in, and that my friend is ashame.

When I was in elementory school, we said a small prayer before lunch (no big deal), and 100% agreed to that back then in that school, which made it a non-issue back then, but even so it could be based upon what we are talking about today. Next I went to middle school where none of these things were practiced, and it was like entering into the wild west, where anything goes or went.. The first thing that happened to me was a person bumped into me and stole my wallet, then next I saw two boy's walking in the hallway like they were boyfriend and girlfriend, then I missed the bus and got beat down by a group of black kids playing basketball, and this happened among other abuses I suffered within a tense black and white situation that was going on back then in that school. In this school the blacks were in the majority, and the whites were in the extreme minority at that time, and they (the blacks) didnot like what the government had forced on them to come to their school either.... Talk about a culture shock and a seperation from what I had been raised on and believed in up until that point....Wow... Oh and no I was not raised to be a racist, and the situations in that school didnot make me a racist either ( I am much smarter than that), so don't even go there.. I was just a poor kid at the time, that had no choices in the matter, so I had to deal with the cards that were delt to me back then.. Later some of my best friends were black, well really before then they were also, but that was only because their families were in the military, where as they were different than the ones who had grown up around the local areas it seemed.

The government by force caused every bit of the abuse I suffered to happen to me on the black and white issue, but they hide their hands upon this fact now, and still act as if only a certain group found under the civil rights laws or movement, are the only ones that have ever been abused in this nation, but I beg to differ with them or have proof to say otherwise to this very day on that note. I would tell them that yes also white kids were victims of revenge & worse racism at that time period just as well, and this in the forced exchange of cultures in which we were all subject to when the lines were redrawn back then, and all in order to accomodate the exchange. I'm living proof of that time period with my own personal story, but we won't go there any further now...

All I am saying is that God or Christianity in some form, fashion or another, seems to help sooth all these problems to some extent, and if allowed in a well balanced and un-intrusive way, be it by a vote sometimes if nessesary, then maybe some of the problems we are having even unto this very day, would then recede and be more non-avasive within our societies.

There are people who are from all walks of life right now in America, that want to experience the fullness of the American experience for their children and themselves, and yes a small or large amount of God and Christianity for some is also a part of that experience just as well.. So are we to deny them a vote on such matters, and instead just say to them that it is not allowed ever, even when a majority within a school, or otherwise might say that they are A-OK with it in a non-intrusive way such as with this banner ?

Beagle9...I am Black and was also bullied by Black kids b/c I was small in stature, very light-skinned/green eyes/long hair and smart (my parents were black as well). It used to get me down and I started hating myself for looking the way I did. Then one day when I was in Junior High, I heard two black girls who were planning to grab me and pull my underwear down so that when the guys came out of the gym (our English class was next door) they would see my ass. I tried to be the first one out of the class but in my attempt to do so, I kept dropping my books. As it turned out, I was the last one leaving and when I walked thru the door they grabbed me. I fought like hell on wheels and they did not pull anything off of me, instead they ran off saying they were going to get me after school b/c I had kicked their asses!! I believe that God gave me the strength to fight them that day and there is nobody on this earth who will ever change my mind. BTW...one of them met me after school and we walked home together as if nothing ever happened. Go figure!

 

[beagle9]

Who am I and my kind?

An advocate of subjecting civil rights to majority rule.

No, not in all cases would I advocate the majority win, especially when it comes to the bad amongst us who might somehow be found within a specific issue as a majority or that may be found in some cases grouped together as a majority, but in some cases or many cases I most certainly would..

 

[beagle9]

It seems the 99% was intimidating the 1%

If she had asked nicely, would they have taken the banner down?

The law hasn't changed since 1962. No prayer in public school. The 13 year old girl was right and the 99% was wrong

It is the kind of phony cleverness that you espouse here, that has put this nation in the pickle that it is in, and that my friend is ashame.

When I was in elementory school, we said a small prayer before lunch (no big deal), and 100% agreed to that back then in that school, which made it a non-issue back then, but even so it could be based upon what we are talking about today. Next I went to middle school where none of these things were practiced, and it was like entering into the wild west, where anything goes or went.. The first thing that happened to me was a person bumped into me and stole my wallet, then next I saw two boy's walking in the hallway like they were boyfriend and girlfriend, then I missed the bus and got beat down by a group of black kids playing basketball, and this happened among other abuses I suffered within a tense black and white situation that was going on back then in that school. In this school the blacks were in the majority, and the whites were in the extreme minority at that time, and they (the blacks) didnot like what the government had forced on them to come to their school either.... Talk about a culture shock and a seperation from what I had been raised on and believed in up until that point....Wow... Oh and no I was not raised to be a racist, and the situations in that school didnot make me a racist either ( I am much smarter than that), so don't even go there.. I was just a poor kid at the time, that had no choices in the matter, so I had to deal with the cards that were delt to me back then.. Later some of my best friends were black, well really before then they were also, but that was only because their families were in the military, where as they were different than the ones who had grown up around the local areas it seemed.

The government by force caused every bit of the abuse I suffered to happen to me on the black and white issue, but they hide their hands upon this fact now, and still act as if only a certain group found under the civil rights laws or movement, are the only ones that have ever been abused in this nation, but I beg to differ with them or have proof to say otherwise to this very day on that note. I would tell them that yes also white kids were victims of revenge & worse racism at that time period just as well, and this in the forced exchange of cultures in which we were all subject to when the lines were redrawn back then, and all in order to accomodate the exchange. I'm living proof of that time period with my own personal story, but we won't go there any further now...

All I am saying is that God or Christianity in some form, fashion or another, seems to help sooth all these problems to some extent, and if allowed in a well balanced and un-intrusive way, be it by a vote sometimes if nessesary, then maybe some of the problems we are having even unto this very day, would then recede and be more non-avasive within our societies.

There are people who are from all walks of life right now in America, that want to experience the fullness of the American experience for their children and themselves, and yes a small or large amount of God and Christianity for some is also a part of that experience just as well.. So are we to deny them a vote on such matters, and instead just say to them that it is not allowed ever, even when a majority within a school, or otherwise might say that they are A-OK with it in a non-intrusive way such as with this banner ?

Beagle9...I am Black and was also bullied by Black kids b/c I was small in stature, very light-skinned/green eyes/long hair and smart (my parents were black as well). It used to get me down and I started hating myself for looking the way I did. Then one day when I was in Junior High, I heard two black girls who were planning to grab me and pull my underwear down so that when the guys came out of the gym (our English class was next door) they would see my ass. I tried to be the first one out of the class but in my attempt to do so, I kept dropping my books. As it turned out, I was the last one leaving and when I walked thru the door they grabbed me. I fought like hell on wheels and they did not pull anything off of me, instead they ran off saying they were going to get me after school b/c I had kicked their asses!! I believe that God gave me the strength to fight them that day and there is nobody on this earth who will ever change my mind. BTW...one of them met me after school and we walked home together as if nothing ever happened. Go figure!

Ummm Ok then....

 

[hortysir]

Who am I and my kind?

An advocate of subjecting civil rights to majority rule.

No, not in all cases would I advocate the majority win, especially when it comes to the bad amongst us who might somehow be found within a specific issue as a majority or that may be found in some cases grouped together as a majority, but in some cases or many cases I most certainly would..

As decided by whom?

Whose standard are we going to use?

Rights are bestowed not voted on

 

[beagle9]

Yeah, we need more brats in America who say "to hell with the rest of you, I'm gonna force my beliefs on you!"

That’s not the case, the fault belongs to the school system, which failed to comply with the law in the first place. Disparaging the girl for bringing attention to the error – her motives being irrelevant – is simply wrong.

Yea, athism is a belief and they are much more forceful in their preaching than any Christian including the nuts like Jerry Falwell.

Atheism is not a ‘belief,’ and consequently nothing is being forced on anyone.



All laws can be subject to judicial review, and that review must be non-partisan; we can not have effective judicial review in the context of political controversy, as that context is subjective and emotional. Your posts are evidence of that.



No one ever said there was.



Correct, the Establishment Clause. And according to the Supreme Court the banner constitutes establishment of religion.



Incorrect on the first part, Americans do indeed have the right to be free from religion with regard to the conduct of public sector entities, to exercise freedom of conscience.

The court was wrong in this case.

Clearly not, given the case law.

The Constitution was never intended to grant you freedom from religion, only freedom OF religion. You don't have a right not to be offended.

And yet again, no one’s made a claim there’s a right to not being offended. This and other cases have noting to do with being offended, it has to do with a public sector entity’s failure to comply with establish law.

Who owns the school, the government or the taxpayers? If the taxpayers do, then why is the federal government sticking it's nose into something that should be decided by the taxpayers in that state and not by them?

The government does not own our money, infact the government has never made a dime in it's existance, other than what the taxpayers give to it (they work for us). Now should it be telling the taxpayers that they cannot display a religious a banner in their school, especially if the majority of those taxpayers who pay the bill's in the state in which the school is founded in, agree's to displaying that banner in that school with a positive consensus granted by the taxpaying citizens of that state ?

I should think not, but for some reason it (the federal government) does this based upon the First Amendment, that has within it a shakey clause or clauses that no one really truly knows how to interpret the clause or two clauses, be it one way or the other.

 

[beagle9]

An advocate of subjecting civil rights to majority rule.

No, not in all cases would I advocate the majority win, especially when it comes to the bad amongst us who might somehow be found within a specific issue as a majority or that may be found in some cases grouped together as a majority, but in some cases or many cases I most certainly would..

As decided by whom?

Whose standard are we going to use?

Rights are bestowed not voted on

Ahhh the old confusious and/or double speak, another tactic known by the left, in hopes to beat back the title wave majority who have been denide and abused by such sneakyness and spin, resulting in powergrabs for way to long now in this nation..

 

[Intense]

Who am I and my kind?

An advocate of subjecting civil rights to majority rule.

Civil Rights have Always been Subject to the Consent of the Super Majority, 75% Percent Popular Approval, or Congress, or the States. Care to run Anything on a Platform that ignores that??? I don't think so.

We Each have a Right to Individual Perspective and Argument, Granted. I would even go a Step further and suggest it's a part of Our Prime Directive here. Be, Fruitful, Multiply, Replenish the Earth, Bear Witness and Testify, of what You See and Don't see, Witness, From the Perspective only You Have, in Truth, in the Service of Justice. Be a Faithful Witness. "The Emperor's New Suit". Hans Christian Andersen: The Emperor?s New Suit One Voice can Effect Positive Change. When the shoe fits, wear it. Try not to add or take away, it is a temptation and a perversion.

 

[hortysir]

No, not in all cases would I advocate the majority win, especially when it comes to the bad amongst us who might somehow be found within a specific issue as a majority or that may be found in some cases grouped together as a majority, but in some cases or many cases I most certainly would..

As decided by whom?

Whose standard are we going to use?

Rights are bestowed not voted on

Ahhh the old confusious and/or double speak, another tactic known by the left, in hopes to beat back the title wave majority who have been denide and abused by such sneakyness and spin, resulting in powergrabs for way to long now in this nation..

Did you just call me a Lefty??


I just want to know who gets to decide who is Bad or Good....who gets to decide whose standards we live by.
Yours?
By whose authority?

Don't side-step, Pubes.
Answer the question.

 

[Crackerjack]

Who owns the school, the government or the taxpayers? If the taxpayers do, then why is the federal government sticking it's nose into something that should be decided by the taxpayers in that state and not by them?

May any random taxpayer enter school property at any time for any purpose? No. Thus, the taxpayers do not own it. The government owns the property, just like any other person or entity.

The government does not own our money, infact the government has never made a dime in it's existance, other than what the taxpayers give to it (they work for us). Now should it be telling the taxpayers that they cannot display a religious a banner in their school, especially if the majority of those taxpayers who pay the bill's in the state in which the school is founded in, agree's to displaying that banner in that school with a positive consensus granted by the taxpaying citizens of that state ?

MAJORITY

HAS

NOTHING

TO

DO

WITH

THIS

ARGUMENT.


​

I should think not, but for some reason it (the federal government) does this based upon the First Amendment, that has within it a shakey clause or clauses that no one really truly knows how to interpret the clause or two clauses, be it one way or the other.

If you had read anything at all on that link I sent you, you would not say "no one really truly knows how to interpret" the Establishment Clause.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Who owns the school, the government or the taxpayers? If the taxpayers do, then why is the federal government sticking it's nose into something that should be decided by the taxpayers in that state and not by them?

Because the Supreme Court held in 1925 that the 14th Amendment incorporates (applies) the First Amendment to the states. See: Gitlow v. New York.

Civil Rights have Always been Subject to the Consent of the Super Majority, 75% Percent Popular Approval, or Congress, or the States. Care to run Anything on a Platform that ignores that??? I don't think so.

We Each have a Right to Individual Perspective and Argument, Granted. I would even go a Step further and suggest it's a part of Our Prime Directive here. Be, Fruitful, Multiply, Replenish the Earth, Bear Witness and Testify, of what You See and Don't see, Witness, From the Perspective only You Have, in Truth, in the Service of Justice. Be a Faithful Witness. "The Emperor's New Suit". Hans Christian Andersen: The Emperor?s New Suit One Voice can Effect Positive Change. When the shoe fits, wear it. Try not to add or take away, it is a temptation and a perversion.

?

What does this even mean?

If by ‘75% Percent Popular Approval’ you’re referring to the amendment process, the last amendment addressing civil rights was the 24th Amendment in 1964 prohibiting a poll tax, having noting to do with the First Amendment.

 

[Againsheila]

Who owns the school, the government or the taxpayers? If the taxpayers do, then why is the federal government sticking it's nose into something that should be decided by the taxpayers in that state and not by them?

May any random taxpayer enter school property at any time for any purpose? No. Thus, the taxpayers do not own it. The government owns the property, just like any other person or entity.

The government does not own our money, infact the government has never made a dime in it's existance, other than what the taxpayers give to it (they work for us). Now should it be telling the taxpayers that they cannot display a religious a banner in their school, especially if the majority of those taxpayers who pay the bill's in the state in which the school is founded in, agree's to displaying that banner in that school with a positive consensus granted by the taxpaying citizens of that state ?

MAJORITY

HAS

NOTHING

TO

DO

WITH

THIS

ARGUMENT.


​

I should think not, but for some reason it (the federal government) does this based upon the First Amendment, that has within it a shakey clause or clauses that no one really truly knows how to interpret the clause or two clauses, be it one way or the other.

If you had read anything at all on that link I sent you, you would not say "no one really truly knows how to interpret" the Establishment Clause.

Do you really believe that our forefathers intended that clause to prevent any religion in any public building or meetings when they started congress out, and it still starts out with a prayer?????