Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Thugs?
No.
Security?
Yeah.
If he started chanting a Muslim prayer..I am pretty sure you would have wanted him shot.
Not at all.
ALL religions have rights.
But I can go one better......
To the OP:
If the student was orating on the wonders of homosexuality and abortion would you be so adamantly against his speech?
Those things go against my religion, yet I would not fault the kid for speaking of these issues
Bad analogy. Homosexuality and abortion are not religions.
But when I say I have no problem with the student reciting the prayer in the school hallway, you ignore it because it doesn't fit into your rabid rants. Some christians think that having to follow the rules that we all have to follow is persecution of christians. That's bullshit.
If the student chose any other topic, then by you it would be fine, but the second religion is involved as a TOPIC, not a requirement, it becomes taboo.
So some saying they took inspiration from the sunrise for thier academic success could say it, but someone who said they were sucessful due to thier deep personal relationship with God would be censored.
That is infringment on free exercise. That is persecution of those with religous beliefs.
Why, in this case is the lords prayer nothing more than a poem? If he wanted to recite a poem it wouldnt be an issue, but the second religion is involved, even though the government is NOT ENDORSING IT, people get SO SO offended.
More nonsense.
The case law clearly indicates that schools indeed have the right to control student speech in the context of an official school function, such as graduation. The student sustains no First Amendment infringement.
Christian fundamentalists and conservatives in general, like to couch the First Amendment's Establishment Clause as being "hostile to religion," while ignoring the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause because it does not suit their purpose. Enforcement of the Establishment Clause is not being "hostile to religion." You may choose to characterize it as such, but it simply is not. All the Establishment Clause is doing, is preventing YOU from forcing YOUR religious views on me via the public sector. You can come come to my front door all you want and try to tell me I need religion, so long as you are acting in a private capacity. That's not violating anything except my personal space, and there are ways of handling that. Just don't try and use governmental platforms to do it.
A student at commencement, who chooses to inject religion into their talk, is a sticky point. Is he speaking for himself, or the school? Is the school deemed to be "behind" what he is saying? I don't know how this works in actual practice, but I think that most schools will want a preview of any valedictorian talk and will tell the valedictorian that religious references are off base. What happens when the valedictorian goes out on his own and ignores his instructions? I think it at least should let the school off the hook. They can't control a "rogue valedictorian." I think, most of the time, valedictorians will be smart enough to leave religion out of it. They should.
Show me where the studen'ts speech forced you to pay a tithe, or recognize a specific religion as the official US religion, or made you join the church he belonged to. That is ESTABLISHMENT of a national religion. Allowing someone to invoke God during their valerditorian speech, as long as the school did not FORCE the person to do it is in no whay endorsement or establishment of religion, just like allowing people to put a manger in a public space is not endorsement of relgion, or having a cross on public land is not endorsement of religion. Especially if these displays are paid for 100% in private.
Again, the overall goal is the removal of religous expression from the public commons, so basically Atheism becomes the de facto established religion.
Nonsense.
Establishment Clause jurisprudence applies only to government and law/policy making entities, and only when government seeks to conjoin itself with religion in a manner offensive to the Constitution.
Religious expression is allowed in all venues, public and private, provided religion concerning the former is not sanctioned by official government decree. The only goal with regard to First Amendment case law is to keep church and state separate in accordance with the Framers original intent.
And as already correctly noted, atheism is not religion, its ignorant idiocy to believe otherwise.
Holy fuck, just how stupid are you? No one said he couldn't mention god.
Really? just what do you think the pre-clearance was about?
And by your logic, he shouldnt be able to. What is a prayer except a poem about God?
You're still not getting it. Talking ABOUT religion is OK as I have already said a few times. Leading the audience to PRACTICE it by reciting a prayer with him is not.
First, the only position I've stated here is that lack of religious expression does not equal atheism.
Next, I haven't seen any atheistic speech being promoted in place of religious speech in government.
Last, the portion of your post I put in bold states that atheism has been established as the state religion. I find that funny, both because it is obviously not the case, as well as because atheism is not a religion.
You can feel free to show evidence of atheism having been established as the state religion, if you like. You can also feel free to show any evidence that I enforce any type of speech on anyone (excepting the little girl who I nanny).
Religious bigots have every right to speak too.
If the student chose any other topic, then by you it would be fine, but the second religion is involved as a TOPIC, not a requirement, it becomes taboo.
So some saying they took inspiration from the sunrise for thier academic success could say it, but someone who said they were sucessful due to thier deep personal relationship with God would be censored.
That is infringment on free exercise. That is persecution of those with religous beliefs.
Why, in this case is the lords prayer nothing more than a poem? If he wanted to recite a poem it wouldnt be an issue, but the second religion is involved, even though the government is NOT ENDORSING IT, people get SO SO offended.
More nonsense.
The case law clearly indicates that schools indeed have the right to control student speech in the context of an official school function, such as graduation. The student sustains no First Amendment infringement.
So a student of 18 years old is now controllable by the government, just because someone gets butthurt over a prayer.
More nonsense.
The case law clearly indicates that schools indeed have the right to control student speech in the context of an official school function, such as graduation. The student sustains no First Amendment infringement.
So a student of 18 years old is now controllable by the government, just because someone gets butthurt over a prayer.
How would you react if you were a student in a public school and the valedictorian delivered a graduation speech that was devoted to an argument about why there is no God and encouraging everyone in the audience to become atheists?
Yes, they do - in a private capacity.
How would you react if you were a student in a public school and the valedictorian delivered a graduation speech that was devoted to an argument about why there is no God and encouraging everyone in the audience to become atheists?
How would you react if you were a student in a public school and the valedictorian delivered a graduation speech that was devoted to an argument about why there is no God and encouraging everyone in the audience to become atheists?
The valedictorian at my nieces graduation a couple of years ago gave a speech devoted to the fraud religion of Global Warming. We all survived it.
But, we are not Taliban and have no urge to silence ideas we disagree with.
You don't quite grasp what an analogy is, do you?
Because Atheism is the established state religion, you view any contrary utterance, such as that which was made by this student, to be blasphemy.
I'll bite, exactly how does your position vary from the Taliban? Other than the obvious that the Taliban enforces Islam only and you enforce Atheism only speech?
First, the only position I've stated here is that lack of religious expression does not equal atheism.
Next, I haven't seen any atheistic speech being promoted in place of religious speech in government.
Last, the portion of your post I put in bold states that atheism has been established as the state religion. I find that funny, both because it is obviously not the case, as well as because atheism is not a religion.
You can feel free to show evidence of atheism having been established as the state religion, if you like. You can also feel free to show any evidence that I enforce any type of speech on anyone (excepting the little girl who I nanny
I guess you are as stupid as you appear to be. The absence of religion is not equal to atheism but I doubt that fact will sink into your thick skull very soon because it would take away your reason for foaming at the mouth over nothing.
I just bought a new refrigerator from Sears and God is not mentioned even once in the operating manual so according to Uncensored's "logic", it is an atheist refrigerator. Damn Sears for trying to take God out of everything!!!
Not at all.
ALL religions have rights.
But I can go one better......
To the OP:
If the student was orating on the wonders of homosexuality and abortion would you be so adamantly against his speech?
Those things go against my religion, yet I would not fault the kid for speaking of these issues
Bad analogy. Homosexuality and abortion are not religions.
They go directly opposite from my religious beliefs.
Using your logic, behind the OP, I should have the right to not be offended by someone speaking on the good points of such behavior.
You're still struggling with the "NO LAW", hunh?!
I guess you are as stupid as you appear to be. The absence of religion is not equal to atheism but I doubt that fact will sink into your thick skull very soon because it would take away your reason for foaming at the mouth over nothing.
Whimper off bolded boi, you've had your ass handed to you.
You are engaged in a war against civil liberty and seek to silence the views of others - you are simply the American Taliban.
I notice you avoided addressing the contradiction I pointed out in your "logic". I'm done with you, Mr. Troll.
