|
On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying"
What a misleading post. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent a school organized prayer."
|
On May 28 2011 07:12 Taku wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:09 Jswizzy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" He never tried to prevent people from praying he tried to prevent his school from promoting one religious belief over others. Yes...yes he did. I'm under the impression he wasn't amused by the fact that a prayer was put forward but a *student* as part of the ceremony which was widely approved of by the rest of the student body. The prayer was not put into the schedule by any school official as far as I know. If this is not a fact then tell me now.
What's your point? It's still written, quite explicity, in the first amendment that the state shouldn't favour any particular religion. If a student wanted to do it on their own, that's fine. The moment the school promotes it, it's breaking the first amendment.
|
|
|
On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... ....................................
That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen.
|
On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen.
Pure speculation about his motivations and intentions
|
On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen.
Blind speculation. He talked to the school, in private, to take the prayer out of the ceremony. They agreed. That would have been the end of it, until the incident was leaked out, the community caught wind, and decided to act on their self-righteousness.
|
On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen.
The student tried to stop the school from organizing an officia group prayer, yes.
That is not the same as trying to stop people from praying.
|
On May 28 2011 07:14 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:12 Taku wrote:On May 28 2011 07:09 Jswizzy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" He never tried to prevent people from praying he tried to prevent his school from promoting one religious belief over others. Yes...yes he did. I'm under the impression he wasn't amused by the fact that a prayer was put forward but a *student* as part of the ceremony which was widely approved of by the rest of the student body. The prayer was not put into the schedule by any school official as far as I know. If this is not a fact then tell me now. What's your point? It's still written, quite explicity, in the first amendment that the state shouldn't favour any particular religion. If a student wanted to do it on their own, that's fine. The moment the school promotes it, it's breaking the first amendment.
I still fail to see how printing a student-suggested activity is promotion. Granted, it may be endorsement of it as a school-acceptable activity but its not like the school brought in a pastor to lead the prayer or anything. Honestly I think the guy has conducted himself poorly during this whole affair. I don't have anything against him standing up for what he believes in, but the way he's gone about it is kinda dickish imo, there was probably a much less confrontational way to do so.
|
On May 28 2011 07:20 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. The student tried to stop the school from organizing an officia group prayer, yes. That is not the same as trying to stop people from praying.
Maybe not always or as a rule, but in this situation it exactly what he did.
|
On May 28 2011 07:19 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Blind speculation. He talked to the school, in private, to take the prayer out of the ceremony. They agreed. That would have been the end of it, until the incident was leaked out, the community caught wind, and decided to act on their self-righteousness.
On May 28 2011 07:19 Birnd wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Pure speculation about his motivations and intentions
...
Okay he reported it so it wouldn't happen but he actually wanted it to happen. How much sense does that make?
|
On May 28 2011 07:22 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:19 Bibdy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Blind speculation. He talked to the school, in private, to take the prayer out of the ceremony. They agreed. That would have been the end of it, until the incident was leaked out, the community caught wind, and decided to act on their self-righteousness. Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:19 Birnd wrote:On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Pure speculation about his motivations and intentions ... Okay he reported it so it wouldn't happen but he actually wanted it to happen. How much sense does that make?
You're assuming there was vindictiveness behind it, as opposed to not wanting to have state-endorsed religion forced down his throat.
|
GGTemplar, this is sad.
He reported it so that school endorsed prayer would not happen. This does not mean that personal prayer cannot happen. There could still be a period of silence for personal prayer.
|
On May 28 2011 07:20 Taku wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:14 Bibdy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:12 Taku wrote:On May 28 2011 07:09 Jswizzy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" He never tried to prevent people from praying he tried to prevent his school from promoting one religious belief over others. Yes...yes he did. I'm under the impression he wasn't amused by the fact that a prayer was put forward but a *student* as part of the ceremony which was widely approved of by the rest of the student body. The prayer was not put into the schedule by any school official as far as I know. If this is not a fact then tell me now. What's your point? It's still written, quite explicity, in the first amendment that the state shouldn't favour any particular religion. If a student wanted to do it on their own, that's fine. The moment the school promotes it, it's breaking the first amendment. I still fail to see how printing a student-suggested activity is promotion. Granted, it may be endorsement of it as a school-acceptable activity but its not like the school brought in a pastor to lead the prayer or anything. Honestly I think the guy has conducted himself poorly during this whole affair. I don't have anything against him standing up for what he believes in, but the way he's gone about it is kinda dickish imo, there was probably a much less confrontational way to do so.
what exactly was "dickish" about what he did? according to the article, all he did was contact the superintendent and tell him that the prayer shouldn't happen - which is true, its unconstitutional.
|
On May 28 2011 07:23 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:22 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:19 Bibdy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Blind speculation. He talked to the school, in private, to take the prayer out of the ceremony. They agreed. That would have been the end of it, until the incident was leaked out, the community caught wind, and decided to act on their self-righteousness. On May 28 2011 07:19 Birnd wrote:On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Pure speculation about his motivations and intentions ... Okay he reported it so it wouldn't happen but he actually wanted it to happen. How much sense does that make? You're assuming there was vindictiveness behind it, as opposed to not wanting to have state-endorsed religion forced down his throat.
No, I'm assuming he didn't want it to happen. He didn't want it to happen. He reported it to stop it from happening.
How can you try to argue against the idea that he didn't want it to happen?
On May 28 2011 07:24 travis wrote:
GGTemplar, this is sad.
He reported it so that school endorsed prayer would not happen. This does not mean that personal prayer cannot happen. There could still be a period of silence for personal prayer.
I agree, this is sad. I don't know what else to say.
|
On May 28 2011 07:20 Taku wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:14 Bibdy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:12 Taku wrote:On May 28 2011 07:09 Jswizzy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" He never tried to prevent people from praying he tried to prevent his school from promoting one religious belief over others. Yes...yes he did. I'm under the impression he wasn't amused by the fact that a prayer was put forward but a *student* as part of the ceremony which was widely approved of by the rest of the student body. The prayer was not put into the schedule by any school official as far as I know. If this is not a fact then tell me now. What's your point? It's still written, quite explicity, in the first amendment that the state shouldn't favour any particular religion. If a student wanted to do it on their own, that's fine. The moment the school promotes it, it's breaking the first amendment. I still fail to see how printing a student-suggested activity is promotion. Granted, it may be endorsement of it as a school-acceptable activity but its not like the school brought in a pastor to lead the prayer or anything. Honestly I think the guy has conducted himself poorly during this whole affair. I don't have anything against him standing up for what he believes in, but the way he's gone about it is kinda dickish imo, there was probably a much less confrontational way to do so.
Where was the Jewish reading? How about a piece from the Quran? Etc.
It appears to be an utterly trivial matter until you cite all the rioting, death and destroying in the bible belt in the mid-1850s over something as stupid as which version of the Bible should be used in schools. None of it should happen in even the slightest sense. State-funded institutions should remain completely neutral.
|
On May 27 2011 13:37 garlicface wrote:
Everyone in the story reacted too strongly to what he did, but it seems like he was just trying to be a smartass. Come on, threatening to get a "traditional" prayer cancelled?
Yeah. Traditionally, black people sit at the back of the bus. Traditionally, women get payed less for the same work as men.
etc.
|
On May 28 2011 07:25 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:23 Bibdy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:22 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:19 Bibdy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Blind speculation. He talked to the school, in private, to take the prayer out of the ceremony. They agreed. That would have been the end of it, until the incident was leaked out, the community caught wind, and decided to act on their self-righteousness. On May 28 2011 07:19 Birnd wrote:On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Pure speculation about his motivations and intentions ... Okay he reported it so it wouldn't happen but he actually wanted it to happen. How much sense does that make? You're assuming there was vindictiveness behind it, as opposed to not wanting to have state-endorsed religion forced down his throat. No, I'm assuming he didn't want it to happen. He didn't want it to happen. He reported it to stop it from happening. How can you try to argue against the idea that he didn't want it to happen?
Okay, so apparently I need to repeat myself.
You're ASSUMING his INTENTIONS BEHIND IT. Not the actual act itself.
Unless your point is entirely semantics, what's your freaking point?
|
On May 28 2011 06:48 Belial88 wrote:
Why do people think government sponsored prayer is against the constitution? Does no one read the damn thing anymore, so annoying.
It states clearly in the 1st Amendment that the government cannot make law in regards to religion - there is no law about prayer in schools, first off. This is more about free speech, and the school is, at least constitutionally, free to say whatever they want without inciting violence.
There is nothing in the Constitution about the separation of church and state, no where does it say that. It says *congress*, specifically, cannot impede or respect the establishment of religion. States are free to do what they like, and respecting religion and respecting an establishment like a specific church are totally different things.
I am an atheist, but it really bothers me when people try to ban prayer. If you don't like it, don't pray. No one is forcing you to pray.
Sorry to hear what has happened to this guy though, but it's a christian country and people are idiots. There's a lot of blame to go with who leaked his name.
1. Its not a christian country. The US is a secular democratic republic. It has no state religion.
2. Who do you think usually decides matter of constitutionality? If your answer is not the supreme court, please go back to civics class.
3. the establishment clause in the constitution has been understood to ban religious endorsement by the government. There is a rich history of court cases on this point.
4. The school is an arm of the government, as such it does not have the right to free speech in its official capacity. The officials at the school do have freedom of speech but even the students do not. The endorsement of religion by a public school is absolutely against the law.
Here is the result of 2 seconds of googling
Those rulings were two landmark Supreme Court decisions, Engel v. Vitale [1962] and Abington School District v. Schempp [1963] (which included the well publicised case of Murray v. Curlett), establishing the current prohibition on state-sponsored prayer in schools. Following these two cases came the Court's decision in Lemon v. Kurtzman [1971]. This ruling established the so-called "Lemon test" which states that in order to be constitutional under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment any practice sponsored within state run schools (or other public, state sponsored activities) must:
1.Have a secular purpose;
2.Must neither advance nor inhibit religion; and
3.Must not result in an excessive entanglement between government and religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_prayer#Controversy_in_United_States
|
On May 28 2011 07:27 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:25 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:23 Bibdy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:22 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:19 Bibdy wrote:On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Blind speculation. He talked to the school, in private, to take the prayer out of the ceremony. They agreed. That would have been the end of it, until the incident was leaked out, the community caught wind, and decided to act on their self-righteousness. On May 28 2011 07:19 Birnd wrote:On May 28 2011 07:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Barrin wrote:On May 28 2011 07:06 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On May 28 2011 07:03 Taku wrote:
What a misleading title. It should read "Student gets ostracized for trying to prevent everyone else from praying" That's true. No. No it's not. They are still allowed to pray (as the article makes abundantly clear). It's just unconstitutional for the school itself to perform the prayer as part of the ceremony. Everyone is still allowed to pray. Hell they could all just ignore the school and all together start praying, forcing the school to wait a minute for them. Just because it's not allowed to be endorsed by the school as part of the official ceremony doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to pray... .... .................................... That doesn't mean the student didn't try to stop them. He reported the illegal activity for a reason: He didn't want it to happen. Pure speculation about his motivations and intentions ... Okay he reported it so it wouldn't happen but he actually wanted it to happen. How much sense does that make? You're assuming there was vindictiveness behind it, as opposed to not wanting to have state-endorsed religion forced down his throat. No, I'm assuming he didn't want it to happen. He didn't want it to happen. He reported it to stop it from happening. How can you try to argue against the idea that he didn't want it to happen? Okay, so apparently I need to repeat myself. You're ASSUMING his INTENTIONS BEHIND IT. Not the actual act itself.
Okay so apparently I need to repeat myself.
Is that not an obvious thing to assume? Am I to assume that when he reported this activity, he actually didn't mean to report it?
It seems like you're the one using semantics to try to say he didn't actually do what he did. You can use them all you want to try to say he didn't do what he did, but in the end it doesn't undo it, regardless of his justification.
|
On May 28 2011 07:24 rycho wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2011 07:20 Taku wrote:On May 28 2011 07:14 Bibdy wrote:
What's your point? It's still written, quite explicity, in the first amendment that the state shouldn't favour any particular religion. If a student wanted to do it on their own, that's fine. The moment the school promotes it, it's breaking the first amendment. I still fail to see how printing a student-suggested activity is promotion. Granted, it may be endorsement of it as a school-acceptable activity but its not like the school brought in a pastor to lead the prayer or anything. Honestly I think the guy has conducted himself poorly during this whole affair. I don't have anything against him standing up for what he believes in, but the way he's gone about it is kinda dickish imo, there was probably a much less confrontational way to do so. what exactly was "dickish" about what he did? according to the article, all he did was contact the superintendent and tell him that the prayer shouldn't happen - which is true, its unconstitutional.
Well he was right in first quietly approaching the administration with his concerns, but threatening to sick the ACLU on them? That was probably why it ended up getting leaked, because a student was being so combative and threatening to sue. Smarter move would have been to first contact them with his concerns and document this process, and after exhausting reasonable rigor in his arguments *then* go public with the documented emails and stuff. By being combative you're just giving the crazies more ammo to go with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
