How can judges demand God be taken out of public places?

Autumnleaf said:

When people are happy and well adjusted they don't need drugs to feel okay.

Click to expand...

Unless they have a physiological disorder that impedes the body's ability to produce certain brain chemicals associated with mood.

someguy14 said:

Well, you have to admit, it is a nice reminder.

Click to expand...

Reminder of what? That we treat our faith as a superstitious chant?

Autumnleaf said:

When people are happy and well adjusted they don't need drugs to feel okay.

Click to expand...

Well... of course not.. they aren't clinically depressed.....

Pretty sure the anti-depressant claim is still wrong.

Denmark is one of those socialist "hell-holes" and also rated the happiest.

wanderingone said:

Well... of course not.. they aren't clinically depressed.....

Click to expand...

Apparently, clinical depression is a symptom of not having God in your life. I wonder if the same ought to be said of other chronic illnesses as well.

miniverchivi said:

Which one? The one about the judge ordering the bailiff to remove someone from the courtroom who's being a distraction and prolonging a court hearing? The judge is instructing the bailiff enforce the 6th amendment.

It's different because one is is a protection from a constitutional infringement, the other is a matter of personal preference.

Click to expand...

But why is personal preference not allowed if there's no other federal laws (such as, oh, say the 1st amendment) which prohibit that preference from being followed?

Burden of proof is on the affirmative position, but I'll answer anyway.

Click to expand...

Claiming that everyone in the past 100+ years has it wrong it is nothing if not an affirmative claim.

The case where author Kevin Thompson got his book banned...he attempted to publish a book called Exposing the Corruption in the Massachusetts Family Courts.

Massachusetts judge Peter DiGangi put a restraining order on the book. After being asked to recuse himself since he was target of one of the chapters, the case was handed over to Judge Mary Manzi who upheld the ban and impounded the case until 2021 so he has to wait 9 more years to even get an opportunity to get the ban lifted.

Click to expand...

What does this have to do with your opinion that the first amendment restrictions on establishment of religion don't apply to anyone but Congress?

BondiHarry said:

Hence the 1st Amendment which forbade Congress from the establishment of a national 'religion' or forbidding the free exercise thereof ... you apparently haven't grasped if people freely choose to practice their religion they can.

Click to expand...

Sure no one's stopping them. But freely choosing religion is far different from allowing the government to indoctrinate other people's children into a particular brand of religion, as is the case in illegal school-led prayers.

I don't know how to break this to you but our government is based in large part on Christian principles (liberty, freedom of conscience, limited government, justice etc.)

Click to expand...

Bible chapter and verse for each of these ideas, please. It's strange that no Christians knew these were Christian principles until a bunch of deists came along during the enlightenment to tell the Christians what Christianity is. Sounds like new-age liberalism rather than Biblical Christianity to me.

And where in the Constitution do you find support for this position of yours? There is no 'fair practices' clause which requires if the precepts of the religion of the local populace is taught in school so must the precepts of any and all other religions.

Click to expand...

Preferring one religion over another when teaching them falls afoul of the establishment clause, since government endorsement of one religion at the expense of others is one thing which that clause prohibits.

Again, you're running with your own thoughts of 'fairness' with nothing in the Constitution to back you up. And you're ignoring WHO is picking the religion to be taught ...

Click to expand...

In this case, it's would be government curriculum taught in government schools by government employees, so I'd say it's the government doing so. Doesn't matter if it's popular with the mob, it's still government actors doing the work.

If the consumer demand is there why shouldn't the precepts of Christianity be included for the children of Christians (or Muslims for Muslims or Hindus for Hindus?).

Click to expand...

Sure, that's what private schools are for. The government has laws it must follow other than simple popularity contests.

No doubt as many men are content with their own righteousness and wisdom and find God's righteousness and wisdom to be foolish.

Click to expand...

Considering God's not doing much talking these days, we don't have many other options.

Is that what the Bible says? In a word, NO!!!!!

Click to expand...

Yes, the Bible is wrong in lots of areas.

Autumnleaf said:

The highest rated nations in what area? If you look at use of antidepressants you'll find where God is and is not at.

Click to expand...

Leave Utah and the LDS culture there out of this discussion, please.

KCfromNC said:

Sure no one's stopping them. But freely choosing religion is far different from allowing the government to indoctrinate other people's children into a particular brand of religion, as is the case in illegal school-led prayers.

Click to expand...

You're still not grasping the 1st Amendment with regards to religion. Just because someone is a teacher or a school administrator doesn't mean they must therefore forego exercising their religion nor does it mean the parents of children going to the school must forego exercising their religion and what is taught to their children. You call school led prayers 'illegal' ... how are they illegal when they are protected by the Constitution? (careful, this is a trap to expose you go not by the Constitution but by a badly flawed court ruling which in effect nullifys the right of people to exercise their religion)

Bible chapter and verse for each of these ideas, please.

Click to expand...

Go to Bible.com and use their search engine to educate yourself about what the Bible teaches.

It's strange that no Christians knew these were Christian principles until a bunch of deists came along during the enlightenment to tell the Christians what Christianity is.

Click to expand...

I'm curious just who you think these 'deists' were and you're exposing your own lack of knowledge of American history (including the colonial period) and what many people taught between the time of Jesus and the enlightenment. Many people stepped forward to correct the errors that certain denominations were teaching ... something you should know if you bothered to study the history of Christianity.

Sounds like new-age liberalism rather than Biblical Christianity to me.

Click to expand...

What passes for liberalism today (at least in America) is just an effort to re-establish the tyranny of the state that we began to escape just a few scant centuries ago and is anti-Christian to the extreme.

Preferring one religion over another when teaching them falls afoul of the establishment clause, since government endorsement of one religion at the expense of others is one thing which that clause prohibits.

Click to expand...

Again, you're showing that you do not understand what the 1st Amendment does with regards to religion. In the example we are talking about you are saying that local people freely exercising their religion are prohibited from doing so even though Congress has done NOTHING respecting the establishment of religion.

In this case, it's would be government curriculum taught in government schools by government employees, so I'd say it's the government doing so. Doesn't matter if it's popular with the mob, it's still government actors doing the work.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, it seems you can't distinguish between a school teacher or school administrator and Congress.

Sure, that's what private schools are for. The government has laws it must follow other than simple popularity contests.

Click to expand...

Such as NOT prohibiting the free exercise of religion as you are so determined to do?

Considering God's not doing much talking these days, we don't have many other options.

Click to expand...

For those who will listen God is doing plenty of talking these days.

Yes, the Bible is wrong in lots of areas.

Click to expand...

Examples please!

I know this wasn’t directed to me but I wanna add my 2 cents worth

BondiHarry said:

You're still not grasping the 1st Amendment with regards to religion. Just because someone is a teacher or a school administrator doesn't mean they must therefore forego exercising their religion

Click to expand...

Teachers and school administrators are allowed to practice their religion, but they are not allowed to practice it at school when they are representing the governmental school system.

BondiHarry said:

not does it mean the parents of children going to the school must forego exercising their religion and what is taught to their children. You call school led prayers 'illegal' ... how are they illegal when they are protected by the Constitution? (careful, this is a trap to expose you go not by the Constitution but by a badly flawed court ruling which in effect nullifys the right of people to exercise their religion)

Click to expand...

School prayer by school administrators are not protected by the Constitution. School students are allowed to pray at school but the teachers and school administrators are not allowed to participate in the activities.

K

Ken-1122 said:

I know this wasn’t directed to me but I wanna add my 2 cents worth
Teachers and school administrators are allowed to practice their religion, but they are not allowed to practice it at school when they are representing the governmental school system.

Click to expand...

And just where is this exception to "nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof" found in the Constitution?

School prayer by school administrators are not protected by the Constitution.

Click to expand...

Please cite that part of the Constitution which says this.

School students are allowed to pray at school but the teachers and school administrators are not allowed to participate in the activities.

Click to expand...

Why aren't teachers and school adminstrators allowed to participate in such activities? I keep scanning the Constitution to find out where this comes from and scan as I may, I CAN'T FIND IT!

BondiHarry said:

[/color]

And just where is this exception to "nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof" found in the Constitution?



Please cite that part of the Constitution which says this.



Why aren't teachers and school adminstrators allowed to participate in such activities? I keep scanning the Constitution to find out where this comes from and scan as I may, I CAN'T FIND IT!

Click to expand...

That’s because it is not in the Constitution. The “Equal Access Act” was passed in 1984 and became law. It allowed students to pray and organize prayer clubs, etc at school on their own without the support of teachers and staff. This also allowed Gay rights and LBGT clubs to form as well.



Ken

Ken-1122 said:

That’s because it is not in the Constitution. The “Equal Access Act” was passed in 1984 and became law. It allowed students to pray and organize prayer clubs, etc at school on their own without the support of teachers and staff. This also allowed Gay rights and LBGT clubs to form as well.



Ken

Click to expand...

Thanks for the candor that what you're saying isn't found in the Constitution (ie the prohibition of citizens from freely exercising their religion if they happen to be teachers or school officials DESPITE what the Constitution actually says).

BondiHarry said:

Thanks for the candor that what you're saying isn't found in the Constitution (ie the prohibition of citizens from freely exercising their religion if they happen to be teachers or school officials DESPITE what the Constitution actually says).

Click to expand...

Except those teachers and school officials are at work and are acting in an official capacity of the government and shall not be permitted to do such things.

BondiHarry said:

What is silly is the anti-God judges warring against the very Constitution and liberty that God and our founding fathers established in our nation. As they have corrupted the plain meaning and obvious intent of the 1st Amendment's freedom OF RELIGION and gone so far as to ban the teaching of God's word in our schools our nation has fallen into decline calling good evil and evil good never mind the ruin that has come upon our nation as a result.

Click to expand...

Blah blah blah typical nonsense.

Ok, seriously? God didn't establish anything here, people did. Wow.

God's word has not been "banned" from school. Please stop perpetuating this silly little lie Christians like to throw around in the US to pretend they are persecuted.

Complex problems like the state of the US have simple, wrong, and idiotic reasons like "God taken out of schools, therefore decline of nation".

Ugh.

The funny part is Christians would highly disapprove of a Muslim teacher leading their students in a prayer, but of course as long as they are Christians it's a ok.

It's obvious the real reason and motive is power. Power to control what our children believe.

So much hypocrisy it is disgusting.

BondiHarry said:

You're still not grasping the 1st Amendment with regards to religion.

Click to expand...

I grasp it quite well, since the case law agrees with me.

Just because someone is a teacher or a school administrator doesn't mean they must therefore forego exercising their religion nor does it mean the parents of children going to the school must forego exercising their religion and what is taught to their children.

Click to expand...

Right, no one's stopping them from doing so.

You call school led prayers 'illegal' ... how are they illegal when they are protected by the Constitution?

Click to expand...

Where are they protected by the Constitution, specifically?

Go to Bible.com and use their search engine to educate yourself about what the Bible teaches.

Click to expand...

Or I could just ask one of the 30,000 different Christian denominations. I probably shouldn't ask too many of them, though, or I'll start to get different answers.

I'm curious just who you think these 'deists' were and you're exposing your own lack of knowledge of American history

Click to expand...

Jefferson, for one.

What passes for liberalism today (at least in America) is just an effort to re-establish the tyranny of the state that we began to escape just a few scant centuries ago and is anti-Christian to the extreme.

Click to expand...

As does conservatism. Two sides of the same coin.

Again, you're showing that you do not understand what the 1st Amendment does with regards to religion. In the example we are talking about you are saying that local people freely exercising their religion are prohibited from doing so even though Congress has done NOTHING respecting the establishment of religion.

Click to expand...

Nothing's stopping them from exercising their religion, unless their religion demands that they forcibly try to convert other people's children using the power of the state. For someone complaining that liberalism is an attempt to reestablish the tyranny of government, hopefully you'd oppose an attempt to use that tyranny to coerce innocent children against their parents' wishes.

Hmmm, it seems you can't distinguish between a school teacher or school administrator and Congress.

Click to expand...

Sure I can. How is that relevant here?

Such as NOT prohibiting the free exercise of religion as you are so determined to do?

Click to expand...

You're really stuck on this idea that free exercise of your religion requires that you use the force of the government to impose that religion on other people.

For those who will listen God is doing plenty of talking these days.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but we're not talking about Scientology here.

Examples please!

Click to expand...

The creation and the flood described in Genesis never happened, neither did the Exodus, the gospels have contradictory geneologies and resurrection stories for Jesus, and so on.

BondiHarry said:

Thanks for the candor that what you're saying isn't found in the Constitution (ie the prohibition of citizens from freely exercising their religion if they happen to be teachers or school officials DESPITE what the Constitution actually says).

Click to expand...

Are you kidding me??? The Constitution also say we have the right to bare arms as well! Does that mean you should be able to exercise this right and carry your gun when you board a plane? or go into a bank? Of course not! Where in the Constitution does it say a marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman? Bet you can't find that one either huh? Or is it okay for the Senate to only pass laws that YOU agree with.

Ken

Ken-1122 said:

Are you kidding me??? The Constitution also say we have the right to bare arms as well!

Click to expand...

The constitution makes no mention of sleeves. Either for or against.

BondiHarry said:

[/COLOR]Why aren't teachers and school adminstrators allowed to participate in such activities? I keep scanning the Constitution to find out where this comes from and scan as I may, I CAN'T FIND IT!

Click to expand...

You're confused. A teacher in school can pray to his/her heart's content as long as it doesn't interfere with his job duties. What they cannot do is lead the class in a prayer. Of any sort. This would mean the teacher was choosing a religion to be associated with and thus establishing a religion for the classroom. Since the class is a government-run institution this violates the first amendment to the Constitution which reads as follows:


An individual student can pray, a group of students can get together and use school facilities to pray. As long as the facilities are open to every religious group that asks...

If you want to know how the courts determine this, they use the "Lemon test" which was formulated by Chief Justice Warren Burger in 1973.

The court in Lemon v. Kurtzman ruled three requirements for government concerning religion, they are :

1.The government's action must have a secular legislative purpose;

2.The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion; and

3.The government's action must not result in an "excessive government entanglement" with religion.

Lemon test states that if any of the requirements are violated by government, the action is deemed to be unconstitutional under the Establishment clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. constitution.