Parents Bill of Rights, Wins Zero Support From Dems

[JackOfNoTrades]

Then don't do the prayer at the start of the day. Problem solved! Focus on what a school should focus on

LOL. Flashback to 1996 in my town after a right leaning schoolboard was elected. Daily prayer vs a moment of silence....geez..it's like a bad acid trip...30 years later.

 

[Anomalism]

Then don't do the prayer at the start of the day. Problem solved! Focus on what a school should focus on

That's why they don't want to teach 9 years olds about trans people and the LGBT community. Lol

 

[Auld Phart]

As long as it does not violate the Constitution. My solution avoids that.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; "

as long as COngress makes no law respecting the establishment, or prohibits the free exercise of religion, it's not violating the Constitution.

 

[HeyNorm]

Congress should have no role in our local school districts run their schools.

Big Government is not always the answer.

But they’ll tell them what to do, or take funding from em.

 

[Meister]

I did not put them there, but there is no getting them out since both sides love the Fed Govt being involved in every little fucking thing.

I didn't put them there either. The feds did that, it would take the feds to fix it.
Don't be placing blame on us trying to fix a major problem, if it takes the fed to
fix what they fucked up, so be it.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That's why they don't want to teach 9 years olds about trans people and the LGBT community. Lol

We should not be teaching 9 years olds about trans people and the LGBT community

 

[Harpy Eagle]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; "

as long as COngress makes no law respecting the establishment, or prohibits the free exercise of religion, it's not violating the Constitution.

States cannot violate the Fed Constitution. Only allowing one religion to pray before school would be both an endorsement of that religion and prohibiting of others. Unless you would be cool with it only being a Wiccan prayer said each day.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I didn't put them there either. The feds did that, it would take the feds to fix it.
Don't be placing blame on us trying to fix a major problem, if it takes the fed to
fix what they fucked up, so be it.

Involving the Feds even more will not fix the problem. Fighting fire with fire just turns you into what you are fighting against.

 

[MisterBeale]

Being protected by the 1st does not give tax free status. In fact in the case of Christianity, the Bible commands to give to government what is due.

Churches do themselves a disservice by taking the tax free status as it limits what they can say in the church.

Actually, it is the first Amendment that makes religious organizations tax free, and exempt from political machinations. In Anglo traditions, religious organizations have always been tax exempt, this goes back centuries, even before the founding.

The exhortation for individuals to pay taxes, is different than implying that the church should be, in anyway, involved, or not involved, in political matters.
Don't confuse LBJs disingenuous 501c STATIST scam, as having anything to do with American Constitutional conventions.

This is the reason our nation was founded. . . folks came to flee the old world, and the co-mingling of STATE and RELIGION. As soon as the state starts taxing churches, tax rates can be manipulated to favor different denominations, given how they are organized. . . thus, showing bias. And? In the end, give the appearance of a state church, violating the very reason this nation has a first Amendment in the first place.


You are out of your ever loving bloody statist mind, if you think Jefferson wrote the Constitution, with, in mind, that others folks should get their grubby mitts on the donations of religious members, for the use of government.

You don't have a clue what this government is based on, philosophically, or it's restraints.

Amendment I (Religion): Thomas Jefferson to Rev. Samuel Miller

Thomas Jefferson to Rev. Samuel Miller
23 Jan. 1808Works 11:7--9

"I have duly received your favor of the 18th and am thankful to you for having written it, because it is more agreeable to prevent than to refuse what I do not think myself authorized to comply with. I consider the government of the US. as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment, or free exercise, of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the U. S. Certainly no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the general government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority. But it is only proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe a day of fasting & prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the U. S. an authority over religious exercises which the Constitution has directly precluded them from. It must be meant too that this recommendation is to carry some authority, and to be sanctioned by some penalty on those who disregard it; not indeed of fine and imprisonment, but of some degree of proscription perhaps in public opinion. And does the change in the nature of the penalty make the recommendation the less a law of conduct for those to whom it is directed? I do not believe it is for the interest of religion to invite the civil magistrate to direct it's exercises, it's discipline, or it's doctrines; nor of the religious societies that the general government should be invested with the power of effecting any uniformity of time or matter among them. Fasting & prayer are religious exercises. The enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the times for these exercises, & the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their own hands, where the constitution has deposited it.

I am aware that the practice of my predecessors may be quoted. But I have ever believed that the example of state executives led to the assumption of that authority by the general government, without due examination, which would have discovered that what might be a right in a state government, was a violation of that right when assumed by another. Be this as it may, every one must act according to the dictates of his own reason, & mine tells me that civil powers alone have been given to the President of the US. and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.

I again express my satisfaction that you have been so good as to give me an opportunity of explaining myself in a private letter, in which I could give my reasons more in detail than might have been done in a public answer: and I pray you to accept the assurances of my high esteem & respect."

.. . . at best? You might be able to make a case that the states can tax them, but even that is iffy, IMO.

 

[Auld Phart]

States cannot violate the Fed Constitution. Only allowing one religion to pray before school would be both an endorsement of that religion and prohibiting of others. Unless you would be cool with it only being a Wiccan prayer said each day.

States cannot violate the Fed Constitution.

They aren't.

Only allowing one religion to pray before school would be both an endorsement of that religion and prohibiting of others.

Only by the school/school board.

Not the Fed

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Actually, it is the first Amendment that makes religious organizations tax free, and exempt from political machinations. In Anglo traditions, religious organizations have always been tax exempt, this goes back centuries, even before the founding.

The exhortation for individuals to pay taxes, is different than implying that the church should be, in anyway, involved, or not involved, in political matters.
Don't confuse LBJs disingenuous 501c STATIST scam, as having anything to do with American Constitutional conventions.

Whatever the case, in our country today the churches must agree to abide by the Govt rules to remain tax free. This is what the bible would call serving both mammon and God. And it is not looked highly upon.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Only by the school/school board.

Not the Fed

The school board is not allowed to ignore the Fed Constitution.

 

[Auld Phart]

The school board is not allowed to ignore the Fed Constitution.

They wouldn't be.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

They wouldn't be.

The SCOTUS disagrees

 

[MisterBeale]

Whatever the case, in our country today the churches must agree to abide by the Govt rules to remain tax free. This is what the bible would call serving both mammon and God. And it is not looked highly upon.

No they don't.

They just have two choices.

Either don't incorporate, or serve the, "politically correct," party.
I think we can all agree, we have a biased law system that serves a global agenda, and not the people of this nation or the constitution anymore.

 

[Meister]

Involving the Feds even more will not fix the problem. Fighting fire with fire just turns you into what you are fighting against.

Involving the Feds even more will not fix the problem. Fighting fire with fire just turns you into what you are fighting against.

Just keep the children away from getting an education, right?

 

[MisterBeale]

Just keep the children away from getting an education, right?

NY’s education ‘leaders’ again prove to be anti-education

Once again, the State Education Department is lowering standards for K-12 students — literally setting pandemic-related learning loss as the “new normal.”

nypost.com

NY changing minimum scores for ‘proficiency’ in ELA, math tests (update)

Many schools saw scores go down during the pandemic.

www.syracuse.com

 

[Curried Goats]

Parents protecting their children from liberal run schools.
Shame on them for getting in the way of the indoctrination process.

Indoctrination into what exactly? Philosophies of acceptance? Inclusivity? Compassion? The policies that exist to protect student confidentiality exist to foster an environment where students feel safe enough to open up and share their troubles and concerns. Without that confidential environment you are leaving educators with fewer tools to address the social, emotional and educational needs of your own children.

 

[Meister]

Indoctrination into what exactly? Philosophies of acceptance? Inclusivity? Compassion? The policies that exist to protect student confidentiality exist to foster an environment where students feel safe enough to open up and share their troubles and concerns. Without that confidential environment you are leaving educators with fewer tools to address the social, emotional and educational needs of your own children.

Something you would never be able to understand, CG. I wouldn't waste my time.

 

[Curried Goats]

Something you would never be able to understand, CG. I wouldn't waste my time.

Something none of you actually dare to name because then we'd naturally ask you for any evidence at all that's your conspiracy theory fueled fears are happening.