Florida Court, Teachers don't have First Amendment Rights

[NYcarbineer]

Two questions.

Can God only hear these prayers if they're done at the flagpole?

Can I go to this guy's church and show porn flicks? As an exercise in 'free speech'?

Get this.

He's equating praying at the flagpole with "porn flicks."

That is a liberal revealing what they really think.

Isn't pornography free speech?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Two questions.

Can God only hear these prayers if they're done at the flagpole?

Can I go to this guy's church and show porn flicks? As an exercise in 'free speech'?

Get this.

He's equating praying at the flagpole with "porn flicks."

That is a liberal revealing what they really think.

I see you couldn't answer the questions.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So, according to the court, Teachers don't have first amendment rights. Thank you liberals!

What in the world are you talking about? What court? There's no court case in your article. It was a county attorney issuing legal advice to the school system regarding government employees endorsing religion while at work. You have nothing here.

You're right. I misunderstood that.

.

Because you didn't even read the article you cut and pasted, as usual.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Show me where it says that in the Constitution?

THAT is your personal opinion, NOT the Constitution.

So, show me where that is in the Constittution.

I wasn't aware a Teacher was "Congress" which is the ONLY body I see restricted in any way by the First Amendment.

Subsequently, Everson v. Board of Education (1947) incorporated the Establishment Clause (i.e., made it apply against the states). However, it was not until the middle to late twentieth century that

the Supreme Court began to interpret the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in such a manner as to restrict the promotion of religion by the states. In the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion."[1]

Psst!

That's not wording in the Constituion. That's a USSC opinion.

The USSC once said that it was okay to keep slaves, and that Seperate but equal was okay.

Did that mean it was in the Constitution?

No sorry, I'M ASKING FOR THE WORDS IN THE CONSTITUTION.

Not some judge legislating his own religious bigotries from the bench.

The Constitution was amended to outlaw slavery. If you want prayer in schools, amend the Constitution.

 

[WorldWatcher]

>


Anyone wanna bet this thread would have been a whole different discussion if it was an Iman/Teacher who decided to exercise his Free Exercise/Free Speech right to lead classes in Muslim prayers prior to classes on school grounds and while functioning as a representative of the state.



>>>>

 

[NYcarbineer]

Psst!

That's not wording in the Constituion. That's a USSC opinion.

The USSC once said that it was okay to keep slaves, and that Seperate but equal was okay.

Did that mean it was in the Constitution?

No sorry, I'M ASKING FOR THE WORDS IN THE CONSTITUTION.

Not some judge legislating his own religious bigotries from the bench.

You seem to be proposing a standard of constitutional jurisprudence that requires explicit and specific language. To wit, teachers are allowed to lead prayers because the phrase "teachers cannot lead prayers" or some close equivalent does not appear in the Constitution. By that standard, the doctrine of "separate but equal" would prevail, since nowhere in the Constitution does it say "separate is not equal" or any equivalent.

You seem to treat the Constitution as a mystical, infallible document that only you and those who agree with you are qualified to interpret. Those who disagree are "bigoted", "judges", "liberal" or at least not "conservative".

There's no mention of fetuses in the Constitution, but I'll bet you TPS thinks they have Constitutional rights.

 

[Navy1960]

MCCOLLUM v. BOARD OF EDUCATION DIST

To hold that a state cannot consistently with the First and Fourteenth Amendments utilize its public school system to aid any or all religious faiths or sects in the dissemination of their doctrines and ideals does not, as counsel urge, manifest a governmental hostility to religion or religious teachings. A manifestation of such hostility would be at war with our national tradition as embodied in the First Amendment's guaranty of the free [333 U.S. 203 , 212] exercise of religion. For the First Amendment rests upon the premise that both religion and government can best work to achieve their lofty aims if each is left free from the other within its respective sphere. Or, as we said in the Everson case, the First Amendment had erected a wall between Church and State which must be kept high and impregnable.
Here not only are the state's taxsupported public school buildings used for the dissemination of religious doctrines. The State also affords sectarian groups an invaluable aid in that it helps to provide pupils for their religious classes through use of the state's compulsory public school machinery. This is not separation of Church and State
FindLaw | Cases and Codes

First Amendment

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.

Pretty , much answers your question as stated in the OPS post.

 

[DaGoose]

Florida Pastor to Defy Prayer Ban | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes

Really? It's a violation of the Constitution? Where? In the so called "Separation of Church and State that is NO WHERE IN THE CONSTITUION??

So, according to the court, Teachers don't have first amendment rights. Thank you liberals!

First of all it's not the "Liberals". It's called the Constitution. Keep in mind that the ACLU has sued schoool districts in the past to ALLOW students to hold Bible studies and prayer groups.

And the ACLU cannot "ban" anything. It takes a court of law.

Having said that I don't think that teachers are violating the Constitution by participating in a prayer session unless they are leading the prayer. That would be an "establishment of religion" and that would indeed be against the law and one of the things that the Constitution protects us from.

First of all it IS LIBERALS.

Show me the Conservative organizations trying to stop prayer in public.

Plus, show me in the Constitituion where a teacher cannot lead prayer.

Still waiting libs!

Show me a Liberal organization trying to stop prayers in school. (And don't try and say the ACLU is a Liberal orgaization. It will just make you look retarded.)

The only issue here is whether or not it is teacher led. And the SC has ruled that it does indeed violate the Establishment Clause. You don't like it? Take it up with them.

Silly me, all I want the teachers to concentrate on is teaching the subjects the kids were sent there to learn.

I will give you kudos though. At least you're trying to learn how to spell Constitution. One would think you would know how to spell something you proclaim to love.

 

[bodecea]

Subsequently, Everson v. Board of Education (1947) incorporated the Establishment Clause (i.e., made it apply against the states). However, it was not until the middle to late twentieth century that

the Supreme Court began to interpret the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses in such a manner as to restrict the promotion of religion by the states. In the Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687 (1994), Justice David Souter, writing for the majority, concluded that "government should not prefer one religion to another, or religion to irreligion."[1]

She wont understand this. Its facts and not made up insanity.

Then show me the wording in the Cosntitution.

Still waiting libs!

Show us the wording in the Constitution that you (or Palin) can have a high-powered rifle.

 

[bodecea]

Two questions.

Can God only hear these prayers if they're done at the flagpole?

Can I go to this guy's church and show porn flicks? As an exercise in 'free speech'?

Get this.

He's equating praying at the flagpole with "porn flicks."

That is a liberal revealing what they really think.

Yep...that's what you get from that. Color me surprised.

 

[whitehall]

It's like living in an alternate universe. The OWS mob is tresspassing and assaulting and raping and rioting but the government is worried about a Baptist Minister praying on school grounds.

 

[bodecea]

It's like living in an alternate universe. The OWS mob is tresspassing and assaulting and raping and rioting but the government is worried about a Baptist Minister praying on school grounds.

Well, if you want to simplify life to a level you and those like you can understand....sure. Run with that.

 

[Navy1960]

Here is the issue, the Minister Fl. according to his convictions feels that settled Case Law on the matter as well as settled Constitutional Law on the matter is wrong. In so doing, if the Minister so chooses he can seek to remedy this situation through the mechanisms set up in the constitution by seeking redress though the courts and mounting a challenge to the existing Case Law. The Supreme Court was established under Article 3 of the constitution and in section one this line .. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, so it does appear decisions made by the Supreme Court until overturned are a matter of law. Even if we may or may not agree with that.

 

[bodecea]

I would like a pagan, jewish, buddhist, hindu, muslim teacher make the same request.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Here is the issue, the Minister Fl. according to his convictions feels that settled Case Law on the matter as well as settled Constitutional Law on the matter is wrong. In so doing, if the Minister so chooses he can seek to remedy this situation through the mechanisms set up in the constitution by seeking redress though the courts and mounting a challenge to the existing Case Law. The Supreme Court was established under Article 3 of the constitution and in section one this line .. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, so it does appear decisions made by the Supreme Court until overturned are a matter of law. Even if we may or may not agree with that.

In addition the Florida Constitution states:

"SECTION 3. Religious freedom.—There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?Mode=Constitution&Submenu=3&Tab=statutes#A1"​

Teachers are not hourly employees, they are not paid for punching a clock, when on school grounds or attending an official function - teachers are always "on the clock". The teacher in this case is being paid as a government employee while leading such prayer sessions. That would also be a violation of the Florida Constitution, i.e. indirectly paying a member of the church to perform prayer services.



>>>>

 

[Charles_Main]

Florida Pastor to Defy Prayer Ban

A standoff over prayers at a school flagpole is looming between a longtime Baptist preacher and a Florida public school system.

Ron Baker, the pastor of Russell Baptist Church in Green Cove Springs, said he plans to keep on praying, regardless of what happens.

“Did you ever think that in America you’d be in trouble for praying at the flag?” Baker told Fox News. “It’s disturbing.”

Baker was referring to a legal opinion submitted by the Clay County School Board’s attorney and published in Jacksonville.com. The attorney determined that a series of prayers on the grounds of four schools was a violation of the U.S. Constitution. The attorney further declared that the prayers were a clear endorsement of religion and Christianity.

“It is a violation of the United States Constitution for a teacher, school administrator or other school district employee to join in a prayer session during their work time,” wrote J. Bruce Bickner in a story that appeared on Jacksonville.com.

Florida Pastor to Defy Prayer Ban | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes

Really? It's a violation of the Constitution? Where? In the so called "Separation of Church and State that is NO WHERE IN THE CONSTITUION??

So, according to the court, Teachers don't have first amendment rights. Thank you liberals!

I can't agree with you although I would like to, samurai. The teacher can pray at any free time she has from the children. Just as anyone from a completely different faith can do their praying in private when they have the chance. Freedom to pray is not restricted, just not appropriate with the students.

What are you basing this on? The Only thing the Constitution even says on the matter is the "Congress shall make no law regarding the Establishment of Religion" How that turns into you can't prey the kids might see you, I will never know.

 

[Inthemiddle]

However, as an attorney submitting a legal opinion, he should know there isn't anything in the Constitution barring a teacher from praying.

I haven't read what exactly he's said, but he's probably advising something along the lines of as employees of the government, the constitutional separation between church and state requires that teachers, while at work, refrain from any behavior which effectively endorses a religion. I'm not sure I agree with him. I know the courts have maintained that students have a constitutional right to create religious based clubs in public schools. But there is a degree of merit to the advice he's put out, at the very least.

That's what I'm pointing out. This school board is barring these teachers first amendment rights.

No, they're barring teachers from work place activities that, in the opinion of the county attorney, would amount to an unconstitutional endorsement of religion by the government. The courts have maintained that school employees remain agents of the state, and as such are obligated to maintain constitutional requirements.

There is nothing in the Constitution barring these teachers from praying at the flag pole.

The teachers are agents of the government. So the question is whether the constitution allows or prohibits the government from endorsing a religion or religious practice.

 

[BlindBoo]

More Faux outrage. Hahahhahahahahaha........anonanon.....

 

[JakeStarkey]

Teachers in their position cannot infringe on the rights of students religiously.

This is decided in law by SCOTUS.

Your opinion, teapartysamurai, is exactly that: only your opinion.

 

[DaGoose]

Hmmmm......It seems to me that if a teacher was doing anything besides teaching his or her class the RW would be accusing him or her of fucking off and want them FIRED on the spot.