Judge Orders La. School District to Stop Bible Giveaways

[Lord Undies]

School sports work to bring a community together, which is bad news for liberals.  Local pride in communities and good natured competition with other communities detracts from the notion of one-world Liberal Land where everyone is a carbon copy of everyone else. 

The problem is not the sports programs, but the amount of money spent on them.

Never assume I'm talking to you.

[The Night Owl]

Never assume I'm talking to you.

I'm well aware of the fact that you talk at people, not to them. Anyway, I'll now let you get back to endlessly expounding on the idea that liberals are bad people.

[Lord Undies]

I think this place is haunted!  I keep seeing posts but no one is there. 

Maybe it is the ghost of Madalyn Murray O'Hair trying to warn other liberals that hell really does exist!

[CactusCarlos]

The problem is not the sports programs, but the amount of money spent on them.

How about the money that they generate?  These Texas Class 4A and 5A football coaches aren't getting paid what they do because they look good in the coaches uniform: http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/statesman/pdf/coaching_salaries.pdf

[The Night Owl]

I think this place is haunted!  I keep seeing posts but no one is there. 

Maybe it is the ghost of Madalyn Murray O'Hair trying to warn other liberals that hell really does exist!

Heh... I guess you're the #5 who keeps appearing and disappearing.

[Lord Undies]

I think this place is haunted!  I keep seeing posts but no one is there. 

Maybe it is the ghost of Madalyn Murray O'Hair trying to warn other liberals that hell really does exist!

Heh... I guess you're the #5 who keeps appearing and disappearing.

Never ever assume I am talking to you.

[DixieBelle]

Since when did schools spend too much money on sports? Proof TNO?

I know some school districts that rely on the PTA to provide equipment and many programs have been cut because of the ever increasing need to meet the wrong-headed standards of NCLB.

Again, this is another thread topic entirely and ya'll are welcome to start a new one on the state of public education. I think it would be a good debate.

[Chris_]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

[Chris_]

If by "infrastructure," you mean common defense and interstate highways, railways, etc., yes. If you mean education, no. Millions of families choose private schools. I do for my children. This means I'm paying federal, state, and local taxes to support public schools, which I am not benefitting from at all, on top of paying tuition to the school.

The nation benefits from having a well educated populace.

The best way to reduce the cost of education is to greatly reduce or eliminate sports programs. Schools waste an incredible amount of money on sports programs which have no real benefit except for the close to zero percentage of students who go on to play sports professionally.

You obviously haven't the slightest idea what it means to participate in those sports.  The benefits are huge.

[Chris_]

Agreed. And the government is the LAST thing we need to achieve that. Since education has gone more and more federal, SAT scores have plummetted. The answer is to get the feds out of education.

At the risk of having a ghost excoriate me for knowing nothing of his work, I think that plummeting SAT scores are mostly the result of the societal transition toward tribalism. Read the Global Village entry at...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan

"plummeting SAT scores"???  Where did you get that one?  Wiki???   

[rich_t]

IMO there is NO First Amendment separation of church and state.

[rich_t]

My interpretation of the 1st Amendment is that Congress will not elevate a single religion above any other.

For a school that receives money from Congress, to pass out Bibles but no other religious text, then that may be a violation of the 1st amendment.

It is still nothing I would get my panties in a wad over.  If they where to begin using the bibles in their everyday teachings, I'd bring the hammer down, but there is nothing inherently wrong with this.


I must ask though.  What would you guys say if the school was handing the Quran out?

I've already answered your question.  Now I have a question or two.

How can congress interfere without prohibiting the free exercise thereof?  That's in the first amendment too.

Should this not be a local issue?  Constitutionally, our schools are none of congress' business.

Aha!, but you say, the schools accept federal money.  That causes me to have another couple of questions.

Why do free and independent people send their money to Washington thereby enabling Washington to give back or withhold tax money as it sees fit?  That is like giving your paycheck to your mother-in-law and having her dole back to you what she thinks you need and deciding why you need it.

Shouldn't the states be sending Washington what the states think Washington needs? 

I've been saying just that sort of thing for years.

[rich_t]

My interpretation of the 1st Amendment is that Congress will not elevate a single religion above any other.

For a school that recieves money from Congress, to pass out Bibles but no other religious text, then that may be a violation of the 1st amendment.

It is still nothing I would get my panties in a wad over.  If they where to begin using the bibles in their everyday teachings, I'd bring the hammer down, but there is nothing inherently wrong with this.


I must ask though.  What would you guys say if the school was handing the Quran out?

The Koran is required reading in some schools.  There have even been schools that required their students to dress appropriately, study the path to Mecca, and celebrate Ramadan.  Islamic kids are allowed prayer time during the day, and allowed to perform religious acts such as washing feet because "it's diversity."

Where is this happening?

California.

[DixieBelle]

I'm going to start a new thread in General Discussion on education.

[Chris_]

Never assume I'm talking to you.

I'm well aware of the fact that you talk at people, not to them. Anyway, I'll now let you get back to endlessly expounding on the idea that liberals are bad people.

*pats TNO on the head*
You still don't get it do you.  Liberals do bad/stupid things, but that doesn't necessarily make them bad/stupid people.

[djones520]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

[Chris_]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

Abortion pamphlets in a middle school?  Poor analogy.

[rich_t]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

In the military it is strictly prohibited a I recall.  At least it was when I was in eons ago.

[djones520]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

Abortion pamphlets in a middle school?  Poor analogy.

So do you have anything to say against the message, or are you just going to attack it's format?

If you think it's ok for a Public Official to take a stance in a controversial topic like this (and I don't care what your belief is, in today's world it is a controversial topic), then you have no right to ever complain when some other public official does something that you do not like.

[Chris_]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

Abortion pamphlets in a middle school?  Poor analogy.

So do you have anything to say against the message, or are you just going to attack it's format?

If you think it's ok for a Public Official to take a stance in a controversial topic like this (and I don't care what your belief is, in today's world it is a controversial topic), then you have no right to ever complain when some other public official does something that you do not like.

Um, there was no attack.  Like I said, poor analogy.
You think public officials should not be allowed to take a stand/have an opinion?  Does having an opinion automatically make them unethical?  Does permitting religion equal endorsement?

[djones520]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

Abortion pamphlets in a middle school?  Poor analogy.

So do you have anything to say against the message, or are you just going to attack it's format?

If you think it's ok for a Public Official to take a stance in a controversial topic like this (and I don't care what your belief is, in today's world it is a controversial topic), then you have no right to ever complain when some other public official does something that you do not like.

Um, there was no attack.  Like I said, poor analogy.
You think public officials should not be allowed to take a stand/have an opinion?  Does having an opinion automatically make them unethical?  Does permitting religion equal endorsement?

Not at all.  They have the rights to those opinions just like the rest of us.  They just shouldn't be voicing those opinions to the public, because their position gives them the ability to influence others.

It's a price one has to pay to hold the authority that they do, IMO.

[Chris_]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

Abortion pamphlets in a middle school?  Poor analogy.

So do you have anything to say against the message, or are you just going to attack it's format?

If you think it's ok for a Public Official to take a stance in a controversial topic like this (and I don't care what your belief is, in today's world it is a controversial topic), then you have no right to ever complain when some other public official does something that you do not like.

Um, there was no attack.  Like I said, poor analogy.
You think public officials should not be allowed to take a stand/have an opinion?  Does having an opinion automatically make them unethical?  Does permitting religion equal endorsement?

Not at all.  They have the rights to those opinions just like the rest of us.  They just shouldn't be voicing those opinions to the public, because their position gives them the ability to influence others.

It's a price one has to pay to hold the authority that they do, IMO.

Ok, is there such a thing as a public official who does not voice their opinions and influence others?

[djones520]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

Abortion pamphlets in a middle school?  Poor analogy.

So do you have anything to say against the message, or are you just going to attack it's format?

If you think it's ok for a Public Official to take a stance in a controversial topic like this (and I don't care what your belief is, in today's world it is a controversial topic), then you have no right to ever complain when some other public official does something that you do not like.

Um, there was no attack.  Like I said, poor analogy.
You think public officials should not be allowed to take a stand/have an opinion?  Does having an opinion automatically make them unethical?  Does permitting religion equal endorsement?

Not at all.  They have the rights to those opinions just like the rest of us.  They just shouldn't be voicing those opinions to the public, because their position gives them the ability to influence others.

It's a price one has to pay to hold the authority that they do, IMO.

Ok, is there such a thing as a public official who does not voice their opinions and influence others?

Sure there is.  You just don't hear about them because they are keeping their mouths shut.

When we join the military, we all voluntarily give up some of the rights garaunteed to use by the Bill of Rights (most namely, the 1st Amendment).  It is because when we wear this uniform we gain a stance of power in the public eye.  It would be an abuse of that power if we where to do things like campaign while in uniform and such.

The same holds true for a School Superintendant or Principal to be handing out Bibles, or partisan political literature, or other items like that, while on school grounds.

If they wanted to do it from home, or from a church, where these people are private citizens, then that is absolutely fine.  But in the place where they have authority and power, it would be an unjust use of tha power to push their opinions onto others.

[Lord Undies]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

Abortion pamphlets in a middle school?  Poor analogy.

So do you have anything to say against the message, or are you just going to attack it's format?

If you think it's ok for a Public Official to take a stance in a controversial topic like this (and I don't care what your belief is, in today's world it is a controversial topic), then you have no right to ever complain when some other public official does something that you do not like.

Um, there was no attack.  Like I said, poor analogy.
You think public officials should not be allowed to take a stand/have an opinion?  Does having an opinion automatically make them unethical?  Does permitting religion equal endorsement?

Not at all.  They have the rights to those opinions just like the rest of us.  They just shouldn't be voicing those opinions to the public, because their position gives them the ability to influence others.

It's a price one has to pay to hold the authority that they do, IMO.

Ok, is there such a thing as a public official who does not voice their opinions and influence others?

Sure there is.  You just don't hear about them because they are keeping their mouths shut.

When we join the military, we all voluntarily give up some of the rights garaunteed to use by the Bill of Rights (most namely, the 1st Amendment).  It is because when we wear this uniform we gain a stance of power in the public eye.  It would be an abuse of that power if we where to do things like campaign while in uniform and such.

The same holds true for a School Superintendant or Principal to be handing out Bibles, or partisan political literature, or other items like that, while on school grounds.

If they wanted to do it from home, or from a church, where these people are private citizens, then that is absolutely fine.  But in the place where they have authority and power, it would be an unjust use of tha power to push their opinions onto others.

Not exactly.  Schools are not military units, and school personnel are not some representatives of the greater nation.  They are members of a community who should reflect the ideas of the majority of the parents and children they serve.  That would be the 85% of the public who are Christians or are greatly in tune with Christian values. 

The other 15% can either tolerate the majority or seek private education.  There is nothing in the idea of American values which implies the 85% should turn their backs on their religious beliefs and their social system in order to accommodated the wishes of every freak and pagan who comes along.     

Schools should be an extension of the majority of children's home.  Not some foreign "salad bowl" with nothing to ground them.  Without values and the reason those values exist, what is the point?

As for the other 15%, learning and following the Ten Commandments never harmed anyone.

[Chris_]

I don't see a problem with allowing people to pass out religious texts in or near public schools as long as the people passing them out aren't school administrators or teachers.

Yeah, those people shouldn't have the same rights as the rest of us.    

Would you agree with them handing out abortion pamphlets?

I'm not trying to draw a correlation between religion and abortion, I'm just saying that in "controversial" matters, people of authority shouldn't be getting themselves into those situations.

It can easily be seen as an abuse of position.  It's nothing less then a Squadron/Battalion Commander handing out Vote for Obama buttons to their troops.  It's not something your supposed to do.

Abortion pamphlets in a middle school?  Poor analogy.

So do you have anything to say against the message, or are you just going to attack it's format?

If you think it's ok for a Public Official to take a stance in a controversial topic like this (and I don't care what your belief is, in today's world it is a controversial topic), then you have no right to ever complain when some other public official does something that you do not like.

Um, there was no attack.  Like I said, poor analogy.
You think public officials should not be allowed to take a stand/have an opinion?  Does having an opinion automatically make them unethical?  Does permitting religion equal endorsement?

Not at all.  They have the rights to those opinions just like the rest of us.  They just shouldn't be voicing those opinions to the public, because their position gives them the ability to influence others.

It's a price one has to pay to hold the authority that they do, IMO.

Ok, is there such a thing as a public official who does not voice their opinions and influence others?

Sure there is.  You just don't hear about them because they are keeping their mouths shut.

When we join the military, we all voluntarily give up some of the rights garaunteed to use by the Bill of Rights (most namely, the 1st Amendment).  It is because when we wear this uniform we gain a stance of power in the public eye.  It would be an abuse of that power if we where to do things like campaign while in uniform and such.

The same holds true for a School Superintendant or Principal to be handing out Bibles, or partisan political literature, or other items like that, while on school grounds.

If they wanted to do it from home, or from a church, where these people are private citizens, then that is absolutely fine.  But in the place where they have authority and power, it would be an unjust use of tha power to push their opinions onto others.

Therein lies the falacy.  You can't "push an opinion onto others".  Just as it's impossible to force another person to have faith.  It's their choice.

...and what Lord Undies said...