Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://www.examiner.com/article/9-histo ... ic-schools" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's all very nice but all the First Amendment says it that the Congress of the United States shall not make a law with respect to the establishment of religion. It does not, for instance, say that religion shall not be introduced into public schools. Maybe one can agree with Edison that religion should not be introduced into public schools. But there's no Constitutional prohibition against that.

There is a Judicial edict with respect to that. But nothing in the Constitution about it.

If you disagree just make your argument for how, for instance, a principal reading a prayer over the school intercom at the beginning of the day constitutes a law passed by Congress with respect to the establishment of religion. Or, heck, tell me how a public school system deciding to have religion classes as part of its curriculum constitutes a law passed by Congress with respect to the establishment of religion.

kalm wrote:http://www.examiner.com/article/9-histo ... ic-schools

Baldy wrote:

kalm wrote:http://www.examiner.com/article/9-histo ... ic-schools

Translation:I have no valid response, so I'll just post a meme which I'm 30 years too old to be posting.

Grizalltheway wrote:

Baldy wrote:

Translation:I have no valid response, so I'll just post a meme which I'm 30 years too old to be posting.

I know breaking in a new pair of skinny jeans is stressful, but chill the fuck out jizzfan.
The topic of this thread is school prayer. What is this, the 19 fucking 80's?

Your government is killing its vets by the dozens maybe hundreds or thousands by not providing adequate health care, they are targeting groups of people it doesn't agree with politically, it is spying on innocent citizens by the tens of millions, it is destroying whats left of the economy and devaluing our currency by the second.

I reiterate...the topic of this thread is school fucking prayer.

Obvious troll post is obvious.

Baldy wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote: Translation:I have no valid response, so I'll just post a meme which I'm 30 years too old to be posting.

I know breaking in a new pair of skinny jeans is stressful, but chill the **** out jizzfan.
The topic of this thread is school prayer. What is this, the 19 **** 80's?

Your government is killing its vets by the dozens maybe hundreds or thousands by not providing adequate health care, they are targeting groups of people it doesn't agree with politically, it is spying on innocent citizens by the tens of millions, it is destroying whats left of the economy and devaluing our currency by the second.

I reiterate...the topic of this thread is school **** prayer.

Obvious troll post is obvious.

+100!

Someone else accusing WTAG of wearing skinny jeans...IT'S WORKING!!!

JohnStOnge wrote:That's all very nice but all the First Amendment says it that the Congress of the United States shall not make a law with respect to the establishment of religion. It does not, for instance, say that religion shall not be introduced into public schools. Maybe one can agree with Edison that religion should not be introduced into public schools. But there's no Constitutional prohibition against that.

There is a Judicial edict with respect to that. But nothing in the Constitution about it.

If you disagree just make your argument for how, for instance, a principal reading a prayer over the school intercom at the beginning of the day constitutes a law passed by Congress with respect to the establishment of religion. Or, heck, tell me how a public school system deciding to have religion classes as part of its curriculum constitutes a law passed by Congress with respect to the establishment of religion.

Keep in mind that the provisions of the First Amendment have been extended to the states, under the terms of the 14th Amendment. Therefore, the states are also barred from enacting laws with respect to the establishment of religion.

Now, don't you think enacting laws and regulations authorizing religious teaching in public schools are laws and regulations which tend to "establish religion?"

Besides, I don't want the state to be teaching my kids religion. I'll handle that issue myself.

andy7171 wrote:Someone else accusing WTAG of wearing skinny jeans...IT'S WORKING!!!

I thought it was common knowledge...no?

JoltinJoe wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:That's all very nice but all the First Amendment says it that the Congress of the United States shall not make a law with respect to the establishment of religion. It does not, for instance, say that religion shall not be introduced into public schools. Maybe one can agree with Edison that religion should not be introduced into public schools. But there's no Constitutional prohibition against that.

There is a Judicial edict with respect to that. But nothing in the Constitution about it.

If you disagree just make your argument for how, for instance, a principal reading a prayer over the school intercom at the beginning of the day constitutes a law passed by Congress with respect to the establishment of religion. Or, heck, tell me how a public school system deciding to have religion classes as part of its curriculum constitutes a law passed by Congress with respect to the establishment of religion.

Keep in mind that the provisions of the First Amendment have been extended to the states, under the terms of the 14th Amendment. Therefore, the states are also barred from enacting laws with respect to the establishment of religion.

Now, don't you think enacting laws and regulations authorizing religious teaching in public schools are laws and regulations which tend to "establish religion?"

Besides, I don't want the state to be teaching my kids religion. I'll handle that issue myself.

This. Well said, JoltinJoe.

What's the point of this thread? The article posted in the start of the thread is a nice collection of quotes, but they don't seem to tie together into any one particular point of view. What's prompted someone to take the time to even start this thread and even spend the time to hit ctrl-c and ctrl-v for that link?

Baldy wrote:

andy7171 wrote:Someone else accusing WTAG of wearing skinny jeans...IT'S WORKING!!!

I thought it was common knowledge...no?

I think it was SE, but I accuse him of it too.

I'm pretty sure that what Ulysses S Grant and Ben Frankling would consider "religion in school" would be a lot different than what today's Church and State fanatics consider religion in school.

GannonFan wrote:What's the point of this thread? The article posted in the start of the thread is a nice collection of quotes, but they don't seem to tie together into any one particular point of view. What's prompted someone to take the time to even start this thread and even spend the time to hit ctrl-c and ctrl-v for that link?

I like the topic of religion in America and appreciate these discussions, BDK. Why did you take the time to post on the thread instead of just moving on? Perhaps I should change the title to " 10 idiots" now.

kalm wrote:

GannonFan wrote:What's the point of this thread? The article posted in the start of the thread is a nice collection of quotes, but they don't seem to tie together into any one particular point of view. What's prompted someone to take the time to even start this thread and even spend the time to hit ctrl-c and ctrl-v for that link?

I like the topic of religion in America and appreciate these discussions, BDK. Why did you take the time to post on the thread instead of just moving on? Perhaps I should change the title to " 10 idiots" now.

I like to type, it's theraputic. And my, a little bit touchy there, aren't you? Long week?

GannonFan wrote:

kalm wrote:
I like the topic of religion in America and appreciate these discussions, BDK. Why did you take the time to post on the thread instead of just moving on? Perhaps I should change the title to " 10 idiots" now.

I like to type, it's theraputic. And my, a little bit touchy there, aren't you? Long week?

Not all, you fired the opening salvo my man...just returning the favor.

But you mindlessly typing for therapeutic reasons makes sense.

Pwns wrote:I'm pretty sure that what Ulysses S Grant and Ben Frankling would consider "religion in school" would be a lot different than what today's Church and State fanatics consider religion in school.

How the f_ck would you know..?
But they are plain and simple words of warning with very little gray area and completely lacking in subtlety

And this is absolutely valid thread... (attn: Baldy)
as valid as any other thread on a political forum
to pass it off as "not as important as" something else is silly
Nothing is important (period) in the grand scheme of 4.5 Billion years - so why draw some arbitrary line at this juncture or that when quite obviously none of it (regarding politics) is important



Either engage or do not engage
But to Engage and then dismiss based on your value system is pompous
(And I know pompous when I see it - because I have a mirror)

Pwns wrote:I'm pretty sure that what Ulysses S Grant and Ben Frankling would consider "religion in school" would be a lot different than what today's Church and State fanatics consider religion in school.

Frankling? My dear!


I don't give a damn.