Crowd stunned after valedictorian rips up speech, recites Lord’s prayer

[Ravi]

I have to laugh. just a week ago liberals were supporting the actions of bill ayers committing acts of domestic terrorism and acts of destruction.

:esualiar:

check out the thread. or are you engaging in selective reading?

No, I just know that you're lying.

 

[Spoonman]

:esualiar:

check out the thread. or are you engaging in selective reading?

No, I just know that you're lying.

Well as long as you just know

 

[koshergrl]

You're confusing me with Sunni Man. The religion of "peace" is Islam.

So your religion is entitled to threaten people with war and swords in the name of your deity but the others can't? Does the term "hypocrisy" ring any bells?

You are making it up as you go along. Jesus said that when he returned it would be with a sword. That means JESUS would have the sword and He would have that sword when He returned. He didn't say all Christians would have a sword. Need I remind you that Jesus isn't here right now and does not even have that much of a sword.

Muslims however take beheading infidels as a personal duty.

Our religion is threatening people with war and swords in the name of our diety??

 

[AVG-JOE]

Mea culpa, I was using the wrong terminology. Let's begin again with the actual wording.



You are correct in that there is nothing specific stating that a government employee cannot exercise their own personal religious freedom. However in their official capacity they cannot do anything that would be perceived as an endorsement of any specific religion.

In order to make this simple let's use an example. Assume that there is a new governor elected in your state. One day he converts to Satanism. He then goes to your State house and says that he will give an opening prayer at the beginning of the session. His prayer consists of an endorsement of satanism and calls on everyone in the legislature to convert to satanism. Is he within his rights to use the power of his office to endorse satanism and convert others to his beliefs?

so if I say a prayer am I endorsing my religion or am I worshiping god? if I wear an Armani suit to work am I endorsing Armani or am I abiding by the proper dress code? if I chose to kiss another man in public am I endorsing homosexuality or am I displaying affection to my partner? how does a document which specifically says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
become interpreted as a prohibitive statement? and again a government that goes to the trouble of including such an expression of freedom become a document that denies the employees of that government those exact freedoms?

So just to get this straight, YOU are perfectly happy to have a governor who believes in Satanism using the power of his office to convert others to his beliefs? You are going to have no problem if he is invited to open a new school gymnasium and he takes the opportunity to tell the parents how they must teach their children to engage in satanic rituals? You don't have any problem with any of this?

There's a HUGE and civil difference between praying and proselytizing.

"Dear Lord, please keep the athletes safe from injury..."

"There's GOOD NEWS and it starts with me telling you that you're goin' to HELL!"​

Huge.

 

[koshergrl]

Not really. That's just the anti-Christian take. Essentially it's "you only have the right to say what I like to hear."

And there is no such right. There is no law against proselytizing, or prayer.

 

[koshergrl]

And in fact our freedom of religion is largely due to the fact that the first settlers objected mightily to laws that prevented them from standing on corners in England and elsewhere in Europe and PROSELYTIZING, specifically. The Puritans were thrown in jail (and often executed) for it. Anabaptists also were killed for doing just that...and the beauty of America was, and is, that they could come here and be free to express themselves in just such a manner.

 

[Dot Com]

when it is at a publicly-financed, institution & praises your sky pixie? I say sue.

 

[Spoonman]

And in fact our freedom of religion is largely due to the fact that the first settlers objected mightily to laws that prevented them from standing on corners in England and elsewhere in Europe and PROSELYTIZING, specifically. The Puritans were thrown in jail (and often executed) for it. Anabaptists also were killed for doing just that...and the beauty of America was, and is, that they could come here and be free to express themselves in just such a manner.

frankly i'm amazed at all the liberal aggressiveness towards so many of our rights. progressives my ass, protectors of civil liberties, my ass. they've gone mad.

 

[Spoonman]

when it is at a publicly financed institution & praises your sky pixie? I say sue.

so you are saying ows should have been booted off school property and out of zucotti park, being publically financed and all

 

[Dot Com]

when it is at a publicly financed institution & praises your sky pixie? I say sue.

so you are saying ows should have been booted off school property and out of zucotti park, being publically financed and all

Zuccotti Park - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is a privately owned public space (POPS) controlled by Brookfield Properties.

 

[Spoonman]

when it is at a publicly financed institution & praises your sky pixie? I say sue.

so you are saying ows should have been booted off school property and out of zucotti park, being publically financed and all

Zuccotti Park - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is a privately owned public space (POPS) controlled by Brookfield Properties.

so they were trespassing on private property, even worse

 

[hoosier88]

And in fact our freedom of religion is largely due to the fact that the first settlers objected mightily to laws that prevented them from standing on corners in England and elsewhere in Europe and PROSELYTIZING, specifically. The Puritans were thrown in jail (and often executed) for it. Anabaptists also were killed for doing just that...and the beauty of America was, and is, that they could come here and be free to express themselves in just such a manner.

(My bold)

Sure, once the Church of England & such were disestablished in the colonies, & later in the states. It took quite a while, the last disestablishment in the US was in the 1810s or so, if memory serves. & it was an uphill battle, the Baptists took a leading part. My apologies to any denomination I've forgotten, it's been so long.

 

[Unkotare]

That's what brain washing will get you. Start on them young and never let them think for themselves.

Sounds to me like the young man was very much thinking for himself. What makes insecure lefties like you so nervous is the idea that maybe he wasn't just thinking OF himself in a manner of which you approve.

 

[Spoonman]

That's what brain washing will get you. Start on them young and never let them think for themselves.

Sounds to me like the young man was very much thinking for himself. What makes insecure lefties like you so nervous is the idea that maybe he wasn't just thinking OF himself in a manner of which you approve.

libs are champions of freedoms only when it suits their own agenda

 

[Montrovant]

That's what brain washing will get you. Start on them young and never let them think for themselves.

Sounds to me like the young man was very much thinking for himself. What makes insecure lefties like you so nervous is the idea that maybe he wasn't just thinking OF himself in a manner of which you approve.

libs are champions of freedoms only when it suits their own agenda

I think that tends to be true of people in general, whatever their political persuasion.

 

[koshergrl]

No, it isn't true of people in general. Leftists always say "sure we're dishonest totalitarian crapheads, but so is everybody else!"

Everybody else isn't.

 

[Montrovant]

No, it isn't true of people in general. Leftists always say "sure we're dishonest totalitarian crapheads, but so is everybody else!"

Everybody else isn't.

So you wouldn't consider conservatives backing, say, the Patriot Act as an example of only championing freedom when it suits your agenda?

Or libertarians wanting to keep our military away from other countries unless they attack us, even if we are trying to free people from an abusive dictatorship, an example of championing freedom only when it suits your agenda?

I'm not trying to excuse anything, I just find the constant blather about 'liberals this' and 'conservatives that' to be ridiculous.

 

[AVG-JOE]

question: where does your god tell you to pray?


when you answer that you may feel a wee bit sillie about this public pray issue.....

So the government should dictate to us where we may pray?

No, but you should at least have the good common sense to pray where it's appropriate.

But....

But...​

But....​

Stupidity isn't illegal

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

I appreciate the kid even though I am not a Christian. I would also appreciate an atheist who refused to include a prayer in his/her speech after being required or pressured to do so.

All in the interest of the religious freedom protected by the Constitution, of course.

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

Additionally, I don't see why anybody who cherishes the Constitution would have a problem with this. The state clearly wasn't endorsing religion, and the kid was taking it upon himself to express his religious freedom. Everybody is in the clear.

I've come across two basic types of atheists when it comes to Constitutionalism: those that support religious freedom and those that don't. The former I respect. The latter are the only ones who would truly have a problem with the story.