 |
|

04-26-2008, 06:50 PM
|
|
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nc
Posts: 1,886
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob
I suppose that it will be illegal to wear a chain with a cross on it too?
|
The principle in Oregon said the cross was a symbol for a hispanic gang and that is why he will not let the students wear a cross.
__________________
You don't have to be crazy to be a liberal, but it helps.
"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." JFK
Ask not was you can for your country, ask what your country can do for you. Obama Platform
|

04-26-2008, 09:25 PM
|
|
Political Guru
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 527
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Upton
Fire him, we don't need some religious freak trying to prove something in a public school.
|
You better read the Free Exercise clause of the 1st Amendment friend.
|

04-26-2008, 09:39 PM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington state
Posts: 3,038
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LisaSaprano
You better read the Free Exercise clause of the 1st Amendment friend.
|
This is in a public school it violates the Establishment Clause, plain and simple.
|

04-26-2008, 09:54 PM
|
 |
Political Guru
|
|
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 710
|
|
If he had the book "God is not Great" on his desk they would of thrown him a parade.
__________________
I'm not running for president because I think I'm blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save our country in its hour of need. My country saved me. My country saved me, and I cannot forget it. And I will fight for her for as long as I draw breath, so help me God!
McCain/Palin-2008 Real Reform. Real Change.
|

04-26-2008, 11:56 PM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,764
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LisaSaprano
You better read the Free Exercise clause of the 1st Amendment friend.
|
His firing would NOT be a violation of the Free Exercise Clause....the Constitution guarantees many freedoms including the freedom of religion; however, one of those freedoms is not a guaranteed right to teach at a public school.
__________________
The Lone Ranger of the AWE liberal elitists.....who was that masked man???
And now, I'm the Elitist of liberal Elitists...
|

04-27-2008, 09:47 AM
|
 |
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: California
Posts: 2,189
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by funktacular
If he had the book "God is not Great" on his desk they would of thrown him a parade.
|
And you have proof of that assertion...
__________________
"I consider Homo anal sex to be a religion." - Wow, AWE poster.
|

04-27-2008, 09:48 AM
|
 |
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: California
Posts: 2,189
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wow
You miss the point here or you choose to do so.
There are Govt funded Islamic schools in America.
There are schools with black students only that are funded by the Govt.
There are Govt funded schools that use the Koran.
This is an attack on Christians ONLY! 
|
Yes...Christians are so persecuted in this country. Boo Hoo.
__________________
"I consider Homo anal sex to be a religion." - Wow, AWE poster.
|

04-27-2008, 10:23 AM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: chapmanville, wv
Posts: 4,829
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by StormanNorman
His firing would NOT be a violation of the Free Exercise Clause....the Constitution guarantees many freedoms including the freedom of religion; however, one of those freedoms is not a guaranteed right to teach at a public school.
|
Yes, but it is a guaranteed right not to get fired "because" of one's race, religion, or sex. If the only reason that is presented for someone to be dismissed is because of some misapplied interpretation of the 1st amendment in regard to ones professed faith, HE/SHE INDEED HAS A WRONGFUL DISMISSAL CASE.....according to legal precedence....the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, TITLE SEVEN, which prohibits such action..it seems this sword is sharpened on both edges. As the anti-bigot bigots forgot that what goes around comes around.BD
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Last edited by bluedog; 04-27-2008 at 10:40 AM.
|

04-27-2008, 11:39 AM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,764
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedog
Yes, but it is a guaranteed right not to get fired "because" of one's race, religion, or sex. If the only reason that is presented for someone to be dismissed is because of some misapplied interpretation of the 1st amendment in regard to ones professed faith, HE/SHE INDEED HAS A WRONGFUL DISMISSAL CASE.....according to legal precedence.... the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, TITLE SEVEN, which prohibits such action..it seems this sword is sharpened on both edges. As the anti-bigot bigots forgot that what goes around comes around.BD
Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
Hi BD,
That's if he is indeed being fired only because of his religion, e.g., just for being a Christian. But, that's not the case here, BD. He would be fired because his actions were determined to violate that pesky Establishment Clause. The way I see it, BD....this situation involves two statements inside the First Amendment; 1) The Establishment Clause and 2) the Free Exercise Clause. And in this particular situation, they seem to be at odds with one another....and when that happens, it falls upon the courts to define and draw the boundary lines between these two Constitutional principles....at least in this situation. My guess is that the Establishment Clause wins out. Why? By law, kids have to attend school and most attend public schools....and by law, you, me and everyone else must pay taxes to support these schools....no way around it, BD. However, this teacher doesn't have to teach at a public school; he can teach at a private school....or he doesn't have to teach at all. He has a choice while others do not.
__________________
The Lone Ranger of the AWE liberal elitists.....who was that masked man???
And now, I'm the Elitist of liberal Elitists...
|

04-27-2008, 11:45 AM
|
 |
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: California
Posts: 2,189
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by StormanNorman
Hi BD,
That's if he is indeed being fired only because of his religion, e.g., just for being a Christian. But, that's not the case here, BD. He would be fired because his actions were determined to violate that pesky Establishment Clause. The way I see it, BD....this situation involves two statements inside the First Amendment; 1) The Establishment Clause and 2) the Free Exercise Clause. And in this particular situation, they seem to be at odds with one another....and when that happens, it falls upon the courts to define and draw the boundary lines between these two Constitutional principles....at least in this situation. My guess is that the Establishment Clause wins out. Why? By law, kids have to attend school and most attend public schools....and by law, you, me and everyone else must pay taxes to support these schools....no way around it, BD. However, this teacher doesn't have to teach at a public school; he can teach at a private school....or he doesn't have to teach at all. He has a choice while others do not.
|
If he is fired, it would most likely be for defiance of school rules and policies. Believe it or not, even tenured teachers have to follow the rules or else they are canned.
__________________
"I consider Homo anal sex to be a religion." - Wow, AWE poster.
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|