Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should we let Bill Frist & Co. change the rules of the senate ?
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6384 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 123 of 256 (211758)
05-27-2005 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by crashfrog
05-27-2005 8:14 AM


Wow. Words fail me.

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by crashfrog, posted 05-27-2005 8:14 AM crashfrog has not replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6384 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 134 of 256 (211882)
05-27-2005 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by Monk
05-27-2005 3:09 PM


Regarding my article, why is the singer being deprived her free speech rights when other kids at the same ceremony were free to express their religious views?
This article may offer an insight. It is a report on a hearing as to whether the lawsuit could proceed.
Steve Zahn, an attorney for the school board, declined to comment after the hearing. He had argued that Windsor High School had the right to prohibit religious expression in some forums, such as graduation.
"If she had been permitted to go on and sing the song ... it was possible that someone who did not share her religious fervor might complain, might sue," Zahn told the judge.
Jackson (the judge - MT) said the "logical extension of your argument here" would mean that students also would not be allowed to recite the Pledge of Allegiance at graduation.
In his questioning of attorneys, Jackson focused on whether there is a distinction between a student leading the entire student body in prayer at graduation and one student volunteering to sing a song containing religious references.
"It is a sliding scale," Zahn replied. Zahn said previous court rulings have made it clear that the "knowing inclusion" of prayer at a public high school graduation violates the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution.
From your original article:
The student had volunteered along with a classmate to sing at the ceremony in response to a class sponsor's invitation.
I don't pretend to fully understand what this means (in the UK we didn't have commencement or graduation ceremonies or anything like that), but this suggests to me that this is more than an individual student expressing their religous views. Would what she was doing have some sort of quasi-official status - which means it is subject to the establishment clause?
But what do I know about the way you wacky colonials do things?
Edit: Fix tpyo
This message has been edited by MangyTiger, 05-27-2005 03:51 PM

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Monk, posted 05-27-2005 3:09 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Monk, posted 05-27-2005 4:14 PM MangyTiger has not replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6384 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 143 of 256 (211967)
05-27-2005 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by crashfrog
05-27-2005 8:14 AM


Just a thought
Is this what the Christian/NeoCon right mean when they complain about 'activist judges'?

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by crashfrog, posted 05-27-2005 8:14 AM crashfrog has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024