"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." EO instead, then.

Does this violate the Establishment Clause?

  • Yes

  • No

  • No, and all government-recognized religious groups should be protected in the same way

  • It may, but I would make an exception for the Jews, given the circumstances.


Results are only viewable after voting.

Fort Fun Indiana

Diamond Member
Mar 10, 2017
92,114
56,467
2,645
POLITICS
Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
December 11, 20194:42 PM ET

LAUREL WAMSLEY

Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
*******************************************************************************************

"Establishment of religion"

In Everson v. Board of Education (1947):

"The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. " - wikipedia
******************************************************************************************

Does not making a group a "protected group", based on their specific religion, violate this idea? Shall we also protect Sikhs? Wiccans? Muslims?
 
Pretty sure the civil rights act already protects against religious/ethnic discrimination so this EO seems redundant.
 
Pretty sure the civil rights act already protects against religious/ethnic discrimination so this EO seems redundant.
Then you aren't reading it right. This EO doesn't address housing, university admission, employment, etc. Read:

"Title VI bans discrimination based on race, color or national origin in programs and activities, such as colleges and universities, that receive federal funding. The executive order will extend the ban to discrimination based on anti-Semitism."
 
th


And yet progressives felt it necessary to set a precedent and push to have Hate Crime Laws implemented in the United States that made certain groups of people protected classes.

*****SMILE*****



:)
 
It's very clear that this order doesn't establish or promote any religion. It does however, defend freedom of religion for people who are being persecuted by, in many cases, state funded institutions.
 
It's very clear that this order doesn't establish or promote any religion. It does however, defend freedom of religion for people who are being persecuted by, in many cases, state funded institutions.
Hoho, how about aid one religion more than another?
 
It's very clear that this order doesn't establish or promote any religion. It does however, defend freedom of religion for people who are being persecuted by, in many cases, state funded institutions.
Hoho, how about aid one religion more than another?

The executive order in this case addresses a single issue, the appalling rise of open antisemitism on federally funded college campuses. Rising antisemitism in direct defiance of the laws of the land.

Jewish groups on campus are harassed. Events hosted Jewish student groups on campuses are either shouted down by antagonists or forbidden to be held outright, citing 'security concerns'.

If publicly funded schools fail to protect and provide access for all their students, not just non-Jewish students, then they should lose public funding.
 
It's very clear that this order doesn't establish or promote any religion. It does however, defend freedom of religion for people who are being persecuted by, in many cases, state funded institutions.
Hoho, how about aid one religion more than another?

The executive order in this case addresses a single issue, the appalling rise of open antisemitism on federally funded college campuses. Rising antisemitism in direct defiance of the laws of the land.

Jewish groups on campus are harassed. Events hosted Jewish student groups on campuses are either shouted down by antagonists or forbidden to be held outright, citing 'security concerns'.

If publicly funded schools fail to protect and provide access for all their students, not just non-Jewish students, then they should lose public funding.

Now if only Trump would do something about the antiwhiteness being preached on campus.
 
The executive order in this case addresses a single issue, the appalling rise of open antisemitism on federally funded college campuses. Rising antisemitism in direct defiance of the laws of the land.
That's aiding one religion more than another, Shirley?
 
Events hosted Jewish student groups on campuses are either shouted down by antagonists or forbidden to be held outright, citing 'security concerns'.
Hasbara sessions?

Pity the code for 'don't criticise Israel' got included in an order 'protecting' a religion. The wording of the order makes that quite clear.
 
Last edited:
The object of the government’s response is the increased campus debate about Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, a movement advocating economic measures opposing Israel’s occupation of the West Bank. Whatever its intent, B.D.S. has helped to create a hostile environment for Jewish students, most of whom support Israel. At Emory University, for example, students with mezuzot on their door posts were served with mock eviction notices.
Opinion | Trump’s Executive Order and the Rise of Anti-Semitism
 
POLITICS
Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
December 11, 20194:42 PM ET

LAUREL WAMSLEY

Trump Signs Order Against Anti-Semitism At Colleges, Worrying Free Speech Advocates
*******************************************************************************************

"Establishment of religion"

In Everson v. Board of Education (1947):

"The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. " - wikipedia
******************************************************************************************

Does not making a group a "protected group", based on their specific religion, violate this idea? Shall we also protect Sikhs? Wiccans? Muslims?

Is the order referring anti-semitism of Jewish people, to Judaism or both. I never saw any reference to religion, but to "....Jewish community institutions and religious facilities....."
I am not a Jew but if I was, anyone displaying anti-semitism, depending on the severity, would be searching for either a dentist, a doctor or an undertaker.
 
Hoho, how about aid one religion more than another?

faith based inititives....

Rising antisemitism in direct defiance of the laws of the land.

By you're metric, Islamophobia would as well

OH WAIT....'semite' means Jews AND Arabs...

The term antisemitism was coined 150-years ago by Germans specifically to refer to hatred of Jews.

If that weren't the case, this picture could never have been taken.

mufti.jpeg
 
Hoho, how about aid one religion more than another?

faith based inititives....

Rising antisemitism in direct defiance of the laws of the land.

By you're metric, Islamophobia would as well

OH WAIT....'semite' means Jews AND Arabs...

The term antisemitism was coined 150-years ago by Germans specifically to refer to hatred of Jews.

If that weren't the case, this picture could never have been taken.

mufti.jpeg
Got a websters ?

>>>

Definition of Semitic. (Entry 1 of 2) 1 : of, relating to, or constituting a subfamily of the Afro-Asiatic language family that includes Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, and Amharic. 2 : of, relating to, or characteristic of the Semites

Doesn't lay claim to religion or race, does it fnnceo?

But hey, reditors abound it an owrellian dystopia

Maybe whoever TF Trump has for a press sec missed it, or just sided with the definition in vogue

Either way, they're flaming 1st Amd defying,consititutionally ignorant nazi Aholes

~S~
 

Forum List

Back
Top