Another blatant Constitutional violation

[Sallow]

In that particular situation, not much can be done after the fact especially since the student went off script, but people who would do what this student did should take note that they are exposing the school to lawsuits which they will lose and which will result in higher taxes. There are too many people like him that are willing to violate the rights of others for their own selfish reasons.

In this particular situation they should have cut the mike..and had security walk him off stage.

They didn't.

So it's done in this instance.

The best thing they can do moving forward is issue a warning that if that happens again..that's what they will do.

So some student mentioning God or praying during his valerdictorian speech merits thugs escorting him off stage?

If you are so offended by prayer that you cant hear it for 2 minutes, i suggest you get a spine.

Meanwhile if he wanted to spout about things progressives actually like, he/she can drone on for hours.

Thugs?

No.

Security?

Yeah.

If he started chanting a Muslim prayer..I am pretty sure you would have wanted him shot.

 

[Ernie S.]

Link to video: LHS Valedictorian Address 2013 - YouTube

Constitutional violation? I don't know, I think that's quite an extreme assessment.

Perhaps if the public educators who are paid by tax dollars organized this reading, or created a Jesus-themed graduation ceremony then we could dive into some more serious violations.

But this is just a single, autonomous person who does not receive a salary from the state, talking about what he wants to talk about at a graduation ceremony.

Not a bid deal, in my opinion.


.

He was supposed to read a speech approved by the school but instead he disregarded their direction and lead the audience in a prayer and that constitutes government endorsement. He can stand in the hallway and recite prayers until he is blue in the face but when he stands at a school podium at a school graduation over a school PA system, he can't. He could have even gotten by if he spoke about how religion helped him be a successful student but the prayer was over the line (and was he really showing true christian behavior by lying to the school about his intentions in reading that prayer? - what he did was a real "fuck you" to the school and others in the crowd). People have the right to come to school functions and not be subjected to any religious indoctrination.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

He was not an agent of the government. He was exercising his rights as a private citizen. A private citizen reciting the Lord's Prayer, in no way indicates the establishment of a State religion regardless of where he was.

The first amendment is numero uno for a reason.

 

[Ernie S.]

In this particular situation they should have cut the mike..and had security walk him off stage.

They didn't.

So it's done in this instance.

The best thing they can do moving forward is issue a warning that if that happens again..that's what they will do.

So some student mentioning God or praying during his valerdictorian speech merits thugs escorting him off stage?

If you are so offended by prayer that you cant hear it for 2 minutes, i suggest you get a spine.

Meanwhile if he wanted to spout about things progressives actually like, he/she can drone on for hours.

Thugs?

No.

Security?

Yeah.

If he started chanting a Muslim prayer..I am pretty sure you would have wanted him shot.

Nope. I for one respect all religions. A Muslim prayer would have been fine unless he started spouting off about killing infidels.

 

[Sallow]

So some student mentioning God or praying during his valerdictorian speech merits thugs escorting him off stage?

If you are so offended by prayer that you cant hear it for 2 minutes, i suggest you get a spine.

Meanwhile if he wanted to spout about things progressives actually like, he/she can drone on for hours.

Thugs?

No.

Security?

Yeah.

If he started chanting a Muslim prayer..I am pretty sure you would have wanted him shot.

Nope. I for one respect all religions. A Muslim prayer would have been fine unless he started spouting off about killing infidels.

I'll take your word for it Ernie. I don't remember you going off on Muslims like the rest of the rabble.

 

[Sallow]

Constitutional violation? I don't know, I think that's quite an extreme assessment.

Perhaps if the public educators who are paid by tax dollars organized this reading, or created a Jesus-themed graduation ceremony then we could dive into some more serious violations.

But this is just a single, autonomous person who does not receive a salary from the state, talking about what he wants to talk about at a graduation ceremony.

Not a bid deal, in my opinion.


.

He was supposed to read a speech approved by the school but instead he disregarded their direction and lead the audience in a prayer and that constitutes government endorsement. He can stand in the hallway and recite prayers until he is blue in the face but when he stands at a school podium at a school graduation over a school PA system, he can't. He could have even gotten by if he spoke about how religion helped him be a successful student but the prayer was over the line (and was he really showing true christian behavior by lying to the school about his intentions in reading that prayer? - what he did was a real "fuck you" to the school and others in the crowd). People have the right to come to school functions and not be subjected to any religious indoctrination.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

He was not an agent of the government. He was exercising his rights as a private citizen. A private citizen reciting the Lord's Prayer, in no way indicates the establishment of a State religion regardless of where he was.

The first amendment is numero uno for a reason.

This is kind of one of those instances where it isn't so clear cut.

But in any case..he went off script. The school was well within it's rights to shut him down.

 

[Uncensored2008]

He was supposed to read a speech approved by the school but instead he disregarded their direction

What, does he think he has freedom of speech?

Obama forbid that this is another one of those vile cretins clinging to God, Guns, and the Constitution.

You of the valiant left are dedicated to stomping out the first amendment once and for all!

and lead the audience in a prayer and that constitutes government endorsement.

So the words of a private citizen determine the official government positions?

ROFL

You anti-liberty whackjobs are a hoot.

He can stand in the hallway and recite prayers until he is blue in the face but when he stands at a school podium at a school graduation over a school PA system, he can't.

MUST STOMP OUT FREEDOM OF RELIGION - OBAMA AKBAR!

He could have even gotten by if he spoke about how religion helped him be a successful student but the prayer was over the line (and was he really showing true christian behavior by lying to the school about his intentions in reading that prayer? - what he did was a real "fuck you" to the school and others in the crowd). People have the right to come to school functions and not be subjected to any religious indoctrination.

Any words spoken must be per-approved by the party - and you'll have no god but the state mentioned on holy, government ground...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Hey dude - fuck you, you fascist thug.

 

[Ernie S.]

Thought is not being stifled, speech is because it is religious in nature and the government can't promote/endorse it.



Again, if that religious speech violates someone else's rights, then it is not allowed.



Preventing constitutional violations does not violate anyone's rights.



I disagree. At an official school function like a graduation, a speaker reciting the Lord's Prayer is a call for others to join in and in his capacity as a speaker at the graduation, that student acted as a representative of the government. Read the reasoning in the Court decision I posted. It's all there.

Had the valedictorian been a Muslim and he started reciting prayers from the Koran, you know there would have been a furor but because the prayer was from the majority religion, it got applause from the crowd. Schools should be neutral on the subject of religion.

And yet, you find it perfectly acceptable that government promote and endorse your personal religion, or lack thereof.

You're making the mistake of equating religious neutrality with atheism.

Unless the speech being suppressed is a clear danger to others, i.e. yelling "fire" in a theater or inciting others to commit crimes, it is protected under the First Amendment.

Nope. The Courts have made it crystal clear that the government or anyone representing the government cannot endorse religion. The student as an individual does have that right but not when he is part of an official school graduation. He can pray in the hallway or out in the parking lot (or even to himself during the ceremony - a quiet prayer is as effective as an out loud group prayer, isn't it?)

My question: If this student was being a good christian, then why did he lie to the school and tell them he would recite the school approved speech?

Does large bold font make you feel more important?

Please reread the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America and then justify your position.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No, sounds like the OP clearly doesn't want religion in school.

And Satan (obviously) falls under that category, right?


.

The OP wants to force his belief system on all others using the implied violence of the state.

The OP is a typical fascist thug - no doubt an Obamunist.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You freedom of religion ends when it begins to violate the rights of others.

What right does it violate, Adolf?

Your right to silence ideas that offend you? Can you point to that in the Constitution? Or even in a letter written to the Danbury Baptist Church?

 

[martybegan]

In this particular situation they should have cut the mike..and had security walk him off stage.

They didn't.

So it's done in this instance.

The best thing they can do moving forward is issue a warning that if that happens again..that's what they will do.

So some student mentioning God or praying during his valerdictorian speech merits thugs escorting him off stage?

If you are so offended by prayer that you cant hear it for 2 minutes, i suggest you get a spine.

Meanwhile if he wanted to spout about things progressives actually like, he/she can drone on for hours.

Thugs?

No.

Security?

Yeah.

If he started chanting a Muslim prayer..I am pretty sure you would have wanted him shot.

I dont have an issue with it. If the principal did it, thats another story.

 

[martybegan]

First Amendment Schools: The Five Freedoms - Court Case

Cole v. Oroville Union High School District, 228 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir. 2000)

Facts:

Ferrin Cole and Chris Niemeyer, students at Oroville High School, were selected to give the invocation and valedictorian graduation speeches, respectively. The district had a policy of reviewing the speeches. During this review process, the school informed the students that their messages were too sectarian and proselytizing and had to be modified. When the students refused, they were denied the opportunity to speak at graduation. The students sued, seeking damages for denial of their First Amendment right of free speech.

Issue:

Whether a school's revocation of students' opportunity to give invocation and valedictorian speeches at graduation due to the religious and proselytizing nature of their messages violates the students' freedom of speech.

Holding:

In a 3-0 decision, a Ninth Circuit panel ruled that a graduation ceremony is not an open speech forum but a government ceremony, and as such, the school has a responsibility to avoid Establishment Clause violations during its graduation ceremony.

Reasoning:

The court found that the close control the school exercised over every aspect of the ceremony gave the student speeches the implied endorsement of the school. Since the student messages bore the imprimatur of the school, the school had an obligation to make sure that the student messages would not violate the Establishment Clause. For these reasons, the court easily found that the graduation prayer was problematic irrelevant of its specific theological content.

The valedictorian speech posed harder problems. Yet in the end, the level of the school’s control over the content of the speech indicated that the speech was not purely private student speech, but bore the significant imprimatur of the school.

Majority:

"Because district approval of the content of student speech was required, allowing Niemeyer to make a sectarian, proselytizing speech as part of the graduation ceremony would have lent District approval to the religious message of the speech. Equally important, an objective observer familiar with the District's policy and its implementation would have likely perceived that the speech carried the District's seal of approval." (Judge Raymond C. Fisher)

This case was appealed to the US Supreme Court who declined to hear it leaving the lower court ruling stand.

Just because a bunch of unelected lawyers decide something is right, doesnt make it right.

So basically its OK to infringe upon someones free exercise of religion because some atheists may get all butthurt over it.

Freedom is dead. It dies because of assholes like you.

Ah..so..you weren't calling the Muslim Center built in lower Manhattan the victory mosque, right? And you fully supported it's building.

Right?

Yes or No.

Wrong person. It can be percieved as a "victory center" by some, But I did not call it that.

I think building it there is a dick move, and people have the right to be against it, but government can't interfere if somone wants to build it there and has the right permits for it.

 

[Ernie S.]

Thugs?

No.

Security?

Yeah.

If he started chanting a Muslim prayer..I am pretty sure you would have wanted him shot.

Nope. I for one respect all religions. A Muslim prayer would have been fine unless he started spouting off about killing infidels.

I'll take your word for it Ernie. I don't remember you going off on Muslims like the rest of the rabble.

I may be perturbed by the fact that not enough main stream Muslims speak out against what some do in the name of Islam, but I've come to know many Muslims. Except for some quirky customs and dogma, they are generally quite honorable people.

 

[Ernie S.]

He was supposed to read a speech approved by the school but instead he disregarded their direction and lead the audience in a prayer and that constitutes government endorsement. He can stand in the hallway and recite prayers until he is blue in the face but when he stands at a school podium at a school graduation over a school PA system, he can't. He could have even gotten by if he spoke about how religion helped him be a successful student but the prayer was over the line (and was he really showing true christian behavior by lying to the school about his intentions in reading that prayer? - what he did was a real "fuck you" to the school and others in the crowd). People have the right to come to school functions and not be subjected to any religious indoctrination.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

He was not an agent of the government. He was exercising his rights as a private citizen. A private citizen reciting the Lord's Prayer, in no way indicates the establishment of a State religion regardless of where he was.

The first amendment is numero uno for a reason.

This is kind of one of those instances where it isn't so clear cut.

But in any case..he went off script. The school was well within it's rights to shut him down.

It gets hairy there. Once he goes off script, he ceases to be an agent of the State and his rights as a private citizen become paramount.
The Principal, or who ever ordered security to shut him down IS a State agent and is forbidden to restrict his right to free exercise of religion or freedom of speech.
See the conundrum?

 

[YWN666]

It depends on the circumstances. A cross on an individual grave in a Veteran's cemetery is not a problem but if a large cross is installed at the gate to represent the cemetery, then it IS a problem.[/SIZE][/FONT][/B]

I would suggest that the distinction you apply to crosses also applies to schools and other public property. The key distinction being whether it is governmentally sanctioned and directed or whether it is the opinion or speech of an individual.

I did apply the same distinction. The point you're missing is that in the school graduation scenario, the valedictorian speech is considered to be sanctioned by the state.

 

[YWN666]

And again, a student graduating is not a government actor, and said student saying a prayer as part of his graduation speech is not an endorsement via government of his religion.

In the eyes of the Courts, he is.



In the eyes of the Courts, it does. No one is saying that his actions were making us members of the church or forcing us to tithe.

What is actually happening is government supression of the students religious freedom in favor of atheists not having to hear a prayer.

Nonsense. I will once again point out that atheists are not the only ones trying to preserve separation of church and state. The bottom line is that a public school is a government entity and no individual has the right to commandeer shared school resources for their own religious purposes.

What is created is hostilty to religion, not neutrality. What is the reason is butthurt atheists who want the government to be hostile to religion, and not neutral to it.

Again, no force is done to make you join a church or pay into it. No government actor is endorsing the religion when some valerdictorian mentions god or prays during his speech.

It would take the Principal of the school praying or endoring religion to make it the acts of a government actor.

You keep repeating the same false ideas that I've already explained away so I'm wasting my time. The Courts say you're wrong and I agree with the Courts.

 

[martybegan]

In the eyes of the Courts, he is.



In the eyes of the Courts, it does. No one is saying that his actions were making us members of the church or forcing us to tithe.



Nonsense. I will once again point out that atheists are not the only ones trying to preserve separation of church and state. The bottom line is that a public school is a government entity and no individual has the right to commandeer shared school resources for their own religious purposes.

What is created is hostilty to religion, not neutrality. What is the reason is butthurt atheists who want the government to be hostile to religion, and not neutral to it.

Again, no force is done to make you join a church or pay into it. No government actor is endorsing the religion when some valerdictorian mentions god or prays during his speech.

It would take the Principal of the school praying or endoring religion to make it the acts of a government actor.

You keep repeating the same false ideas that I've already explained away so I'm wasting my time. The Courts say you're wrong and I agree with the Courts.

So you agree with courts 100% of the time?

So Plessey V. Fergueson was good law?

 

[Ernie S.]

It depends on the circumstances. A cross on an individual grave in a Veteran's cemetery is not a problem but if a large cross is installed at the gate to represent the cemetery, then it IS a problem.[/SIZE][/FONT][/B]

I would suggest that the distinction you apply to crosses also applies to schools and other public property. The key distinction being whether it is governmentally sanctioned and directed or whether it is the opinion or speech of an individual.

I did apply the same distinction. The point you're missing is that in the school graduation scenario, the valedictorian speech is considered to be sanctioned by the state.

Once the kid went off script, all state sanction ceased. AT THAT POINT, he became a private citizen with all inherent rights.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You keep repeating the same false ideas that I've already explained away so I'm wasting my time. The Courts say you're wrong and I agree with the Courts.

It is clearly your goal to end civil liberties.

Have you noticed that there are more standing up to you as time goes on?

 

[YWN666]

Constitutional violation? I don't know, I think that's quite an extreme assessment.

Perhaps if the public educators who are paid by tax dollars organized this reading, or created a Jesus-themed graduation ceremony then we could dive into some more serious violations.

But this is just a single, autonomous person who does not receive a salary from the state, talking about what he wants to talk about at a graduation ceremony.

Not a bid deal, in my opinion.


.

He was supposed to read a speech approved by the school but instead he disregarded their direction and lead the audience in a prayer and that constitutes government endorsement. He can stand in the hallway and recite prayers until he is blue in the face but when he stands at a school podium at a school graduation over a school PA system, he can't. He could have even gotten by if he spoke about how religion helped him be a successful student but the prayer was over the line (and was he really showing true christian behavior by lying to the school about his intentions in reading that prayer? - what he did was a real "fuck you" to the school and others in the crowd). People have the right to come to school functions and not be subjected to any religious indoctrination.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

He was not an agent of the government. He was exercising his rights as a private citizen. A private citizen reciting the Lord's Prayer, in no way indicates the establishment of a State religion regardless of where he was.

The first amendment is numero uno for a reason.

There are reasonable limits to our constitutional freedoms and this is one of them.

 

[Uncensored2008]

There are reasonable limits to our constitutional freedoms and this is one of them.

You failed to elucidate what rights of yours are infringed by a private citizen expressing views your disagree with are?

I realize that you want to use the state to force your views on all others, but what rights are infringed that warrant you revoking the first amendment?

I don't expect and answer, nor will I get one.