A Tea Party Wants Mandatory Christmas Carols In Public Schools

[Emma]

Merry Hyatt, Tea Party Patriot, Wants Mandatory Christmas Carols In Public Schools

It's called the "Freedom to Present Christmas Music in Public School Classrooms or Assemblies" initiative.

Merry Hyatt, a substitute teacher and member of the Redding Tea Party Patriots, is behind the push. The Record Searchlight reports:

The initiative would require schools to provide children the opportunity to listen to or perform Christmas carols, and would subject the schools to litigation if the rule isn't followed.

Schools currently are allowed to offer Christmas music as long as it is used for academic purposes rather than devotional purposes and isn't used to promote a particular religious belief, according to an analysis by the California Legislative Analyst's Office.

Parents are allowed to have their students opt out of the caroling if they express that desire in advance.

The initiative has the support of the local Tea Party Patriots president.

Isn't the Tea Parties purpose suppose to be limited Government, not having the Government control our lives, etc. Doesn't this go directly against that?

Sounds like to me more people using the whole concept of "tea parties" to further their own agenda. Thoughts?

They only want limited government when it suits their agenda. But they're all for government forcing their 'morals and values' on the rest of us.

 

[Ravi]

It's more than just 'providing an opportunity' the way that's being implied:

"(a) Each public elementary and secondary school shall provide
opportunities to its pupils for listening to or performing Christmas music at an
appropriate time ofyear. The appreciation or performance ofthe Christmas music may be incorporated into the subject matter of an arts or social studies class, presented for
cultural enrichment during a school assembly, or both."

They are saying the schools must make it part of a curriculum, or staged as an event, or both.

you're lying....it says may, not must liar....

You completely skipped over that part...I wonder why?

shall:
2 a —used to express a command or exhortation <you shall go> b —used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory <it shall be unlawful to carry firearms>

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's more than just 'providing an opportunity' the way that's being implied:

"(a) Each public elementary and secondary school shall provide
opportunities to its pupils for listening to or performing Christmas music at an
appropriate time ofyear. The appreciation or performance ofthe Christmas music maybe incorporated into the subject matter of an arts or social studies class, presented for
cultural enrichment during a school assembly, or both."

They are saying the schools must make it part of a curriculum, or staged as an event, or both.

you're lying....it says may, not must liar....

No, the proposition says they 'shall', meaning they must. The 'may' refers to the options they have for carrying out the MANDATE.

 

[Kalam]

The First Amendment:

"Every analysis in this area must begin with consideration of the cumulative criteria developed by the Court over many years. Three such tests may be gleaned from our cases. First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion, Board of Education v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236, 243 (1968); [403 U.S. 602, 613] finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.' Walz, supra, at 674."

LEMON ET AL. v. KURTZMAN, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF
PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL. (1971)

By extension of your logic, I demand that all public schools with Muslim students play the call to prayer over the PA system at the appropriate times.

 

[Modbert]

By extension of your logic, I demand that all public schools with Muslim students play the call to prayer over the PA system at the appropriate times.

Talk about opening a can of worms that Mr. Wind would not be pleased with. Which is what my point was earlier.

 

[RadiomanATL]

The First Amendment:

"Every analysis in this area must begin with consideration of the cumulative criteria developed by the Court over many years. Three such tests may be gleaned from our cases. First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion, Board of Education v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236, 243 (1968); [403 U.S. 602, 613] finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.' Walz, supra, at 674."

LEMON ET AL. v. KURTZMAN, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF
PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL. (1971)

By extension of your logic, I demand that all public schools with Muslim students play the call to prayer over the PA system at the appropriate times.

More accurately, it would be:

I demand that all public schools with Muslim students give said students the opportunity to hear the call to prayer at the appropriate times.

But what good is logic in a good flamewar? Flame on me hearties....flame on....

 

[rightwinger]

By extension of your logic, I demand that all public schools with Muslim students play the call to prayer over the PA system at the appropriate times.

Sounds fair. We could probably do this in our schools. Other students wouldn't mind and they might learn something

 

[NYcarbineer]

what is with the logical fallacy of others pointing to other religions as some sort of debate point on this topic? it is a false analogy, and a red herring. when those religions have a national holiday, then you have a point. as it stands, christmas is a national holiday. and you libs, the so called supporters of freedom etc....don't want freedom when it comes to allowing the community/students to choose whether to sing carols or not. if you guys truly don't care, then what difference does it make to you if the admin chooses or the community/students choose?

in reality, it doesn't. and so far, no one has offered a single rational reason why the inititiave is harmful and how it could possibly violate the 1st amendment, given that christmas is a national holiday.

Christmas is not a national holiday.

Now, tell us where the courts have ever decided any cases in favor of Christianity, over other religions, on the grounds that Christmas is a national holiday (despite the fact it isn't).

 

[Ravi]

The First Amendment:

"Every analysis in this area must begin with consideration of the cumulative criteria developed by the Court over many years. Three such tests may be gleaned from our cases. First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion, Board of Education v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236, 243 (1968); [403 U.S. 602, 613] finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.' Walz, supra, at 674."

LEMON ET AL. v. KURTZMAN, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF
PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL. (1971)

By extension of your logic, I demand that all public schools with Muslim students play the call to prayer over the PA system at the appropriate times.

More accurately, it would be:

All public schools with Muslim students SHALL give said students the opportunity to hear the call to prayer at the appropriate times.

But what good is logic in a good flamewar? Flame on me hearties....flame on....

Fixed.

That makes it equal...at least for two religions.

 

[RadiomanATL]

"Every analysis in this area must begin with consideration of the cumulative criteria developed by the Court over many years. Three such tests may be gleaned from our cases. First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion, Board of Education v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236, 243 (1968); [403 U.S. 602, 613] finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.' Walz, supra, at 674."

LEMON ET AL. v. KURTZMAN, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF
PENNSYLVANIA, ET AL. (1971)

By extension of your logic, I demand that all public schools with Muslim students play the call to prayer over the PA system at the appropriate times.

More accurately, it would be:

All public schools with Muslim students SHALL give said students the opportunity to hear the call to prayer at the appropriate times.

But what good is logic in a good flamewar? Flame on me hearties....flame on....

Fixed.

That makes it equal...at least for two religions.

Eh, didn't change the meaning. to-may-to, to-mah-to.

 

[oreo]

Merry Hyatt, Tea Party Patriot, Wants Mandatory Christmas Carols In Public Schools

It's called the "Freedom to Present Christmas Music in Public School Classrooms or Assemblies" initiative.

Merry Hyatt, a substitute teacher and member of the Redding Tea Party Patriots, is behind the push. The Record Searchlight reports:

The initiative would require schools to provide children the opportunity to listen to or perform Christmas carols, and would subject the schools to litigation if the rule isn't followed.

Schools currently are allowed to offer Christmas music as long as it is used for academic purposes rather than devotional purposes and isn't used to promote a particular religious belief, according to an analysis by the California Legislative Analyst's Office.

Parents are allowed to have their students opt out of the caroling if they express that desire in advance.

The initiative has the support of the local Tea Party Patriots president.

Isn't the Tea Parties purpose suppose to be limited Government, not having the Government control our lives, etc. Doesn't this go directly against that?

Sounds like to me more people using the whole concept of "tea parties" to further their own agenda. Thoughts?

GOOD--it's about time we got back to traditional values in this country, instead of trying to be politically correct & accomodate all minority religions--with a stupid fear that we may insult them. If they don't like it, move the hell out of this country.

Kids love the Christmas plays & songs--so why deny them that?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's an interesting bit on this from World Net Daily:

Hyatt said she originally used the term "freedom," but the wording on the measure has been changed to the "Requires Public Schools to Offer Christmas Music" initiative.

Now we can argue what the word 'requires' means.

Christmas carols to be required in public schools?

 

[Yurt]

It's more than just 'providing an opportunity' the way that's being implied:

"(a) Each public elementary and secondary school shall provide
opportunities to its pupils for listening to or performing Christmas music at an
appropriate time ofyear. The appreciation or performance ofthe Christmas music may be incorporated into the subject matter of an arts or social studies class, presented for
cultural enrichment during a school assembly, or both."

They are saying the schools must make it part of a curriculum, or staged as an event, or both.

you're lying....it says may, not must liar....

You completely skipped over that part...I wonder why?

shall:
2 a —used to express a command or exhortation <you shall go> b —used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory <it shall be unlawful to carry firearms>

your reading comprehension is abysmal.....let's look again at what he said:

It's more than just 'providing an opportunity' the way that's being implied:

"(a) Each public elementary and secondary school shall provide
opportunities to its pupils for listening to or performing Christmas music at an
appropriate time ofyear. The appreciation or performance ofthe Christmas music may
be incorporated into the subject matter of an arts or social studies class, presented for
cultural enrichment during a school assembly, or both."

They are saying the schools must make it part of a curriculum, or staged as an event, or both.

he falsely claims the "schools MUST make it part of a curriculum, or staged as an event or both." the word shall is simply for the opportunity, the word MAY is for the activities...."may be incorporated into the subject matter etc..."....not "must" be incorporated....

you seriously just embarrassed yourself, hell, i'm embarrassed i had to even explain this to you

 

[Yurt]

It's more than just 'providing an opportunity' the way that's being implied:

"(a) Each public elementary and secondary school shall provide
opportunities to its pupils for listening to or performing Christmas music at an
appropriate time ofyear. The appreciation or performance ofthe Christmas music maybe incorporated into the subject matter of an arts or social studies class, presented for
cultural enrichment during a school assembly, or both."

They are saying the schools must make it part of a curriculum, or staged as an event, or both.

you're lying....it says may, not must liar....

No, the proposition says they 'shall', meaning they must. The 'may' refers to the options they have for carrying out the MANDATE.

exactly, so you're lying by saying they must make part of the curriculum....they don't have to, they may, not must

 

[oreo]

Here's an interesting bit on this from World Net Daily:

Hyatt said she originally used the term "freedom," but the wording on the measure has been changed to the "Requires Public Schools to Offer Christmas Music" initiative.

Now we can argue what the word 'requires' means.

Christmas carols to be required in public schools?

I wouldn't want my kid in any school that didn't celebrate Christmas in the traditional way. In fact, I would be offended by it. This country hasn't changed that much into the "politically correct" definition so truly guarded by people like you. Other religions are in the minority in this country & when I see Muslims in the middle east STOP all of their celebrations & gatherings--then maybe I will take notice.---But, I would imagine I will be waiting until hell freezes over for that one----

 

[Yurt]

what is with the logical fallacy of others pointing to other religions as some sort of debate point on this topic? it is a false analogy, and a red herring. when those religions have a national holiday, then you have a point. as it stands, christmas is a national holiday. and you libs, the so called supporters of freedom etc....don't want freedom when it comes to allowing the community/students to choose whether to sing carols or not. if you guys truly don't care, then what difference does it make to you if the admin chooses or the community/students choose?

in reality, it doesn't. and so far, no one has offered a single rational reason why the inititiave is harmful and how it could possibly violate the 1st amendment, given that christmas is a national holiday.

Christmas is not a national holiday.

Now, tell us where the courts have ever decided any cases in favor of Christianity, over other religions, on the grounds that Christmas is a national holiday (despite the fact it isn't).

its a federal and state holiday that celebrates the birth of christ...yet you don't want to allow people to sing about that....you hate free speech

 

[NYcarbineer]

you're lying....it says may, not must liar....

You completely skipped over that part...I wonder why?

shall:
2 a —used to express a command or exhortation <you shall go> b —used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory <it shall be unlawful to carry firearms>

your reading comprehension is abysmal.....let's look again at what he said:

It's more than just 'providing an opportunity' the way that's being implied:

"(a) Each public elementary and secondary school shall provide
opportunities to its pupils for listening to or performing Christmas music at an
appropriate time ofyear. The appreciation or performance ofthe Christmas music may
be incorporated into the subject matter of an arts or social studies class, presented for
cultural enrichment during a school assembly, or both."

They are saying the schools must make it part of a curriculum, or staged as an event, or both.

he falsely claims the "schools MUST make it part of a curriculum, or staged as an event or both." the word shall is simply for the opportunity, the word MAY is for the activities...."may be incorporated into the subject matter etc..."....not "must" be incorporated....

you seriously just embarrassed yourself, hell, i'm embarrassed i had to even explain this to you

You are wrong.

Ah, good timing. You can read my previous post and give us all an amusing definition for the word 'require'.

 

[NYcarbineer]

you're lying....it says may, not must liar....

No, the proposition says they 'shall', meaning they must. The 'may' refers to the options they have for carrying out the MANDATE.

exactly, so you're lying by saying they must make part of the curriculum....they don't have to, they may, not must

No, idiot, the may refers to means. The end is the same. It's like you having to be in court Monday. You MAY take your car, you MAY take the bus, you MAY walk,

but you still have to get there.

 

[NYcarbineer]

what is with the logical fallacy of others pointing to other religions as some sort of debate point on this topic? it is a false analogy, and a red herring. when those religions have a national holiday, then you have a point. as it stands, christmas is a national holiday. and you libs, the so called supporters of freedom etc....don't want freedom when it comes to allowing the community/students to choose whether to sing carols or not. if you guys truly don't care, then what difference does it make to you if the admin chooses or the community/students choose?

in reality, it doesn't. and so far, no one has offered a single rational reason why the inititiave is harmful and how it could possibly violate the 1st amendment, given that christmas is a national holiday.

Christmas is not a national holiday.

Now, tell us where the courts have ever decided any cases in favor of Christianity, over other religions, on the grounds that Christmas is a national holiday (despite the fact it isn't).

its a federal and state holiday that celebrates the birth of christ...yet you don't want to allow people to sing about that....you hate free speech

I don't want kids telling their teachers to go **** themselves. Free speech?

 

[NYcarbineer]

what is with the logical fallacy of others pointing to other religions as some sort of debate point on this topic? it is a false analogy, and a red herring. when those religions have a national holiday, then you have a point. as it stands, christmas is a national holiday. and you libs, the so called supporters of freedom etc....don't want freedom when it comes to allowing the community/students to choose whether to sing carols or not. if you guys truly don't care, then what difference does it make to you if the admin chooses or the community/students choose?

in reality, it doesn't. and so far, no one has offered a single rational reason why the inititiave is harmful and how it could possibly violate the 1st amendment, given that christmas is a national holiday.

Christmas is not a national holiday.

Now, tell us where the courts have ever decided any cases in favor of Christianity, over other religions, on the grounds that Christmas is a national holiday (despite the fact it isn't).

its a federal and state holiday that celebrates the birth of christ...yet you don't want to allow people to sing about that....you hate free speech

Aren't you going to cite some cases to back up your claim?