An Athiest Student as she has claimed, brings a lawsuit with the help of the ACLU?

[HUGGY]

Do you have a link? Anything to prove what you just said?

Remember, not getting elected is not the same as "not allowed".

Absolutely.


Atheists disqualified from holding office or testifying as witness - Arkansas Constitution - Article XIX. Miscellaneous Provisions - Id 307413 - vLex



Maryland Constitution - Declaration of Rights


General Laws: CHAPTER 272, Section 36
Maryland Constitution - Declaration of Rights



Article 14 ("General Provisions"), Section 265




PA Manual
Special Protection for the religious.


http://www.state.tn.us/sos/bluebook/online/section6/tnconst.pdf


Texas Constitution and Statutes - Home

The Texas Constitution, Article I, Section 4: No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being.

State constitutions. Hmm...are they upholding those constitutions? If so, why isn't the aclu fighting them instead of the school with the prayer banner. Seems to me that actually is an infringement on an athiests right.

It is world wide Sheila. Atheists can be put to death in many countries. Many religious want to kill atheists and deny them even the most basic rights granted any who are religious. And you are so shocked that someone like me acknowledges it is war.

 

[Againsheila]

Cases have been made to attempt to appeal these, and people have been convicted and prevented from holding office using them.

It speaks volumes to the bigotry of the religious right in this country, able to circumvent the supreme law of this land to prevent those with dissenting ideas from participating in government. Laws are regularly submitted to remedy those few that make it into government, those are usually shot down thankfully.

What speaks volumes is the ACLU is going after a prayer banner that's been in a public school since 1963 while such laws are on the books in some states. Don't you think repealing those stupid laws would be more worthy of their time. I mean, that really does deny athiests rights.

You're all hot under the collar becasue of some prayer banner that just hangs there and denies athiests nothing except the right not to see a prayer banner, when you and all athiest should be going after those state constitutions that actually do deny you real rights.

No I completely agree, but it helps set presidence. Even then, religion should not be in a school in any form, even displays conveying disbelief shouldn't be allowed because a school is a place to learn.

You can't learn anything without being exposed to it. Believe it or not the mormons were very important in the expansion of our country. I'm not mormon, but I can recognize that fact. Our ancestors, many of them came here so they could worship according to their will instead of having to do their worship in hiding. You want to put it back in the closet. Well guess what, I refuse. There is no "new world" for me to go to so I can practice my religion so you're stuck with me here AND my religion.

 

[HUGGY]

What speaks volumes is the ACLU is going after a prayer banner that's been in a public school since 1963 while such laws are on the books in some states. Don't you think repealing those stupid laws would be more worthy of their time. I mean, that really does deny athiests rights.

You're all hot under the collar becasue of some prayer banner that just hangs there and denies athiests nothing except the right not to see a prayer banner, when you and all athiest should be going after those state constitutions that actually do deny you real rights.

No I completely agree, but it helps set presidence. Even then, religion should not be in a school in any form, even displays conveying disbelief shouldn't be allowed because a school is a place to learn.

You can't learn anything without being exposed to it. Believe it or not the mormons were very important in the expansion of our country. I'm not mormon, but I can recognize that fact. Our ancestors, many of them came here so they could worship according to their will instead of having to do their worship in hiding. You want to put it back in the closet. Well guess what, I refuse. There is no "new world" for me to go to so I can practice my religion so you're stuck with me here AND my religion.

AKA..swindling the Native Americans. Good point Sheila.

 

[Photonic]

What speaks volumes is the ACLU is going after a prayer banner that's been in a public school since 1963 while such laws are on the books in some states. Don't you think repealing those stupid laws would be more worthy of their time. I mean, that really does deny athiests rights.

You're all hot under the collar becasue of some prayer banner that just hangs there and denies athiests nothing except the right not to see a prayer banner, when you and all athiest should be going after those state constitutions that actually do deny you real rights.

No I completely agree, but it helps set presidence. Even then, religion should not be in a school in any form, even displays conveying disbelief shouldn't be allowed because a school is a place to learn.

You can't learn anything without being exposed to it. Believe it or not the mormons were very important in the expansion of our country. I'm not mormon, but I can recognize that fact. Our ancestors, many of them came here so they could worship according to their will instead of having to do their worship in hiding. You want to put it back in the closet. Well guess what, I refuse. There is no "new world" for me to go to so I can practice my religion so you're stuck with me here AND my religion.

Yea and what a history, civil war, slavery, witch burnings, oh my.

 

[Againsheila]

No I completely agree, but it helps set presidence. Even then, religion should not be in a school in any form, even displays conveying disbelief shouldn't be allowed because a school is a place to learn.

You can't learn anything without being exposed to it. Believe it or not the mormons were very important in the expansion of our country. I'm not mormon, but I can recognize that fact. Our ancestors, many of them came here so they could worship according to their will instead of having to do their worship in hiding. You want to put it back in the closet. Well guess what, I refuse. There is no "new world" for me to go to so I can practice my religion so you're stuck with me here AND my religion.

AKA..swindling the Native Americans. Good point Sheila.

Have you read a history book?

 

[HUGGY]

You can't learn anything without being exposed to it. Believe it or not the mormons were very important in the expansion of our country. I'm not mormon, but I can recognize that fact. Our ancestors, many of them came here so they could worship according to their will instead of having to do their worship in hiding. You want to put it back in the closet. Well guess what, I refuse. There is no "new world" for me to go to so I can practice my religion so you're stuck with me here AND my religion.

AKA..swindling the Native Americans. Good point Sheila.

Have you read a history book?

Why would I do THAT? I'm proud to be just another willfully ignorant republican.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

State constitutions. Hmm...are they upholding those constitutions? If so, why isn't the aclu fighting them instead of the school with the prayer banner. Seems to me that actually is an infringement on an athiests right.

The ACLU doesn’t ‘fight’ anything, they provide resources to Americans to defend themselves in Federal court where those Americans couldn’t afford to do so otherwise.

No, I have the right to practice my religion in front of other people and they can do nothing to stop me....not the same thing at all.

No one said you didn’t.

You do not, however, to have the right to have your religious beliefs codified into secular law or policy, compelling others to abide, conform, or otherwise acknowledge your faith.

The mistake that you and other theists make is to incorrectly assume that the prohibition of religious expression the public sector is to somehow deny Christians the right to religious expression overall. It doesn’t, it’s not a violation of the Free Exercise Clause to enforce the Establishment Clause.

If it bothered the girl so much, I'm sure she was welcome to donate an athiest banner, instead she chose to ban the religious banner. Not the same thing at all.

That’s ridiculous – what would the ‘banner’ say? Another mistake by theists is the incorrect perception of ‘atheism’ as a ‘religion’ or ‘belief,’ when it’s clearly not. One can’t not believe in something that never existed in the first place; theists are the aberration, not those free from faith.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Now this is what rubs me wrong with cases like this, where as you have this gullable teen and the ACLU,

Stop right there. How do you know she is "gullable" ? Have you even met her?

, where as lets say that the school in a whopping 99% wanted the banner to fly in that specific school over the 1% that didnot want it to fly

Let's say? Where in the Constitution does it say the Constitution can be violated by a 99% majority vote of parents at a school?

 

[Photonic]

Now this is what rubs me wrong with cases like this, where as you have this gullable teen and the ACLU,

Stop right there. How do you know she is "gullable" ? Have you even met her?

, where as lets say that the school in a whopping 99% wanted the banner to fly in that specific school over the 1% that didnot want it to fly

Let's say? Where in the Constitution does it say the Constitution can be violated by a 99% majority vote of parents at a school?

She doesn't strike me as gullible, just inspired to move by the laws of our country.

I wish more people were like her.

 

[Againsheila]

State constitutions. Hmm...are they upholding those constitutions? If so, why isn't the aclu fighting them instead of the school with the prayer banner. Seems to me that actually is an infringement on an athiests right.

The ACLU doesn’t ‘fight’ anything, they provide resources to Americans to defend themselves in Federal court where those Americans couldn’t afford to do so otherwise.

No, I have the right to practice my religion in front of other people and they can do nothing to stop me....not the same thing at all.

No one said you didn’t.

You do not, however, to have the right to have your religious beliefs codified into secular law or policy, compelling others to abide, conform, or otherwise acknowledge your faith.

The mistake that you and other theists make is to incorrectly assume that the prohibition of religious expression the public sector is to somehow deny Christians the right to religious expression overall. It doesn’t, it’s not a violation of the Free Exercise Clause to enforce the Establishment Clause.

If it bothered the girl so much, I'm sure she was welcome to donate an athiest banner, instead she chose to ban the religious banner. Not the same thing at all.

That’s ridiculous – what would the ‘banner’ say? Another mistake by theists is the incorrect perception of ‘atheism’ as a ‘religion’ or ‘belief,’ when it’s clearly not. One can’t not believe in something that never existed in the first place; theists are the aberration, not those free from faith.

Concentrate on changing the laws against athiests, not on taking away the rights of religous people, which is what this girl and the aclu did. I have the right to my religion. I have the right to display my religion in puplic, you do not have the right to deny me that, nor do I have the right to deny you that. Again, concentrate on those state constitutions that clearly take away the rights of athiests instead of concentrating on taking away the rights of the religous, I'll back you 100%.

 

[Photonic]

State constitutions. Hmm...are they upholding those constitutions? If so, why isn't the aclu fighting them instead of the school with the prayer banner. Seems to me that actually is an infringement on an athiests right.

The ACLU doesn’t ‘fight’ anything, they provide resources to Americans to defend themselves in Federal court where those Americans couldn’t afford to do so otherwise.



No one said you didn’t.

You do not, however, to have the right to have your religious beliefs codified into secular law or policy, compelling others to abide, conform, or otherwise acknowledge your faith.

The mistake that you and other theists make is to incorrectly assume that the prohibition of religious expression the public sector is to somehow deny Christians the right to religious expression overall. It doesn’t, it’s not a violation of the Free Exercise Clause to enforce the Establishment Clause.

If it bothered the girl so much, I'm sure she was welcome to donate an athiest banner, instead she chose to ban the religious banner. Not the same thing at all.

That’s ridiculous – what would the ‘banner’ say? Another mistake by theists is the incorrect perception of ‘atheism’ as a ‘religion’ or ‘belief,’ when it’s clearly not. One can’t not believe in something that never existed in the first place; theists are the aberration, not those free from faith.

Concentrate on changing the laws against athiests, not on taking away the rights of religous people, which is what this girl and the aclu did. I have the right to my religion. I have the right to display my religion in puplic, you do not have the right to deny me that, nor do I have the right to deny you that. Again, concentrate on those state constitutions that clearly take away the rights of athiests instead of concentrating on taking away the rights of the religous, I'll back you 100%.

A school sponsored prayer is unconstitutional, this wasn't a private school.

You can certainly do that in a private school.

 

[Againsheila]

Whether it was their intent or not, the SCOTUS has made a ruling
/

True, and it's not the first time they've been wrong. Probably won't be the last either.

The SCOTUS has the job of interpreting the Constitution in constitutional cases as the Founding Fathers would have.

And as Jefferson said this, I doubt they had trouble with the ruling.
Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Mr. President

To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from prescribing even those occasional performances of devotion, practiced indeed by the Executive of another nation as the legal head of its church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association assurances of my high respect & esteem.

(signed) Thomas Jefferson
Jan.1.1802. <---Letter to the Danbury Baptist Church.

Art. 11, Treaty of Tripoli. Signed by John Adams as a representation of the laws of the United States Constitution. Constitution, Article VI, Sect.2: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

It's not really up for dispute.



And again, religion does not belong in an education facility during the school day, no matter how much you want to send us back to the bronze age

Source: US Treaty with Tripoli, 1796-1797

You can attempt to re-write history as much as you want, but welcome to the information age, history is readily available to anyone who wants to know the truth, and the truth is that it was set up to protect your shitty church from being crushed by state doctrine.

I fail to see how Christians are being attacked when there is only a single atheist in congress.

I don't belong to a shitty church, let alone any church. Interesting though, you're all in favor of taking the rights of the religous out of public while totally ignoring the fact that many states won't even let athiests run for public office, according to their constitutions. I'll stand by your side and fight for your right to run for office. I will also fight you to the death when you are so busy taking my rights away you've failed to even secure your own.

Do you even understand the difference? Athiests HAVE a right to run for public office, they don't have a right to take down religous symbols anywhere. That was never the intent of the establishment clause.

You do not have a right to freedom FROM religion.

Interesting how I'm willing to fight for what I think are your actual rights while you are too busy defending what you think is your right to take away mine.

 

[Againsheila]

The ACLU doesn’t ‘fight’ anything, they provide resources to Americans to defend themselves in Federal court where those Americans couldn’t afford to do so otherwise.



No one said you didn’t.

You do not, however, to have the right to have your religious beliefs codified into secular law or policy, compelling others to abide, conform, or otherwise acknowledge your faith.

The mistake that you and other theists make is to incorrectly assume that the prohibition of religious expression the public sector is to somehow deny Christians the right to religious expression overall. It doesn’t, it’s not a violation of the Free Exercise Clause to enforce the Establishment Clause.



That’s ridiculous – what would the ‘banner’ say? Another mistake by theists is the incorrect perception of ‘atheism’ as a ‘religion’ or ‘belief,’ when it’s clearly not. One can’t not believe in something that never existed in the first place; theists are the aberration, not those free from faith.

Concentrate on changing the laws against athiests, not on taking away the rights of religous people, which is what this girl and the aclu did. I have the right to my religion. I have the right to display my religion in puplic, you do not have the right to deny me that, nor do I have the right to deny you that. Again, concentrate on those state constitutions that clearly take away the rights of athiests instead of concentrating on taking away the rights of the religous, I'll back you 100%.

A school sponsored prayer is unconstitutional, this wasn't a private school.

You can certainly do that in a private school.

A banner given to the school by the graduating class 49 years ago is not school sponsored prayer. And what the heck is wrong with school sponsored prayer as long as they don't force you to participate? Do you really think our forefathers wanted prayer banned from public building, even schools when the set it up to start congress with a prayer?

 

[hortysir]

Do you really believe that our forefathers intended that clause to prevent any religion in any public building or meetings when they started congress out, and it still starts out with a prayer?????

Whether it was their intent or not, the SCOTUS has made a ruling
/

True, and it's not the first time they've been wrong. Probably won't be the last either.

Our only recourse is a change in Administration and Appointees that would hear a case to reverse it.
It ain't gonna happen, Cap'n.

 

[Againsheila]

Whether it was their intent or not, the SCOTUS has made a ruling
/

True, and it's not the first time they've been wrong. Probably won't be the last either.

Our only recourse is a change in Administration and Appointees that would hear a case to reverse it.
It ain't gonna happen, Cap'n.

No, it's not. we've basically lost our country.

 

[Photonic]

Concentrate on changing the laws against athiests, not on taking away the rights of religous people, which is what this girl and the aclu did. I have the right to my religion. I have the right to display my religion in puplic, you do not have the right to deny me that, nor do I have the right to deny you that. Again, concentrate on those state constitutions that clearly take away the rights of athiests instead of concentrating on taking away the rights of the religous, I'll back you 100%.

A school sponsored prayer is unconstitutional, this wasn't a private school.

You can certainly do that in a private school.

A banner given to the school by the graduating class 49 years ago is not school sponsored prayer. And what the heck is wrong with school sponsored prayer as long as they don't force you to participate? Do you really think our forefathers wanted prayer banned from public building, even schools when the set it up to start congress with a prayer?

"School Prayer"

It was adopted by the school staff as an official stance by the school in relation to the Christian religion in particular. Many of our founding fathers were Deists, they didn't believe in a personal God, much less the Christian one, Washington was disgusted with the Church, and refused to go, Thomas Jefferson literally took a razor to the Bible and cut out every bit of it that was supernatural or superstitious (called the Jeffersonian Bible, I suggest you read that).

I doubt they would have had much problem with following the supreme law.

Now, if the school had set up a display respecting every believe (or disbelief) of every student, you would have a completely valid argument. But they didn't, and they never would because this is a "Christian Nation(no it isn't)."

 

[Photonic]

True, and it's not the first time they've been wrong. Probably won't be the last either.

Our only recourse is a change in Administration and Appointees that would hear a case to reverse it.
It ain't gonna happen, Cap'n.

No, it's not. we've basically lost our country.

Oh I didn't realize Christians are barred from serving in government for their belief.

 

[rightwinger]

Concentrate on changing the laws against athiests, not on taking away the rights of religous people, which is what this girl and the aclu did. I have the right to my religion. I have the right to display my religion in puplic, you do not have the right to deny me that, nor do I have the right to deny you that. Again, concentrate on those state constitutions that clearly take away the rights of athiests instead of concentrating on taking away the rights of the religous, I'll back you 100%.

A school sponsored prayer is unconstitutional, this wasn't a private school.

You can certainly do that in a private school.

A banner given to the school by the graduating class 49 years ago is not school sponsored prayer. And what the heck is wrong with school sponsored prayer as long as they don't force you to participate? Do you really think our forefathers wanted prayer banned from public building, even schools when the set it up to start congress with a prayer?

The banner was in itself a prayer. It was given by a class before the school prayer edict had been settled. It was ok back then, grossly improper now

There are many things that were acceptable in the 60s that are no longer tolerated. Times change

School prayer is wrong and should not be tolerated any more than a school telling students there is no god. Public prayer belongs in churches and your homes....there is no need for it in our schools

 

[Photonic]

Martin Luther King Jr. (fitting) himself endorsed the US Supreme Court decision to ban school prayer.

Also, List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Thought you might enjoy that.

 

[Againsheila]

Our only recourse is a change in Administration and Appointees that would hear a case to reverse it.
It ain't gonna happen, Cap'n.

No, it's not. we've basically lost our country.

Oh I didn't realize Christians are barred from serving in government for their belief.

When I say "we", I mean "we" as in the American people. I've never claimed that we were a Christian nation, only that religions have the right to express their beliefs based on that same clause that you claim takes away that right.