One Would Think A Public High School Would At Least Try To Hide Its Overt Christianity

[Subduction Zone]

Relax, the saying was not put up by an act of congress.

It does not matter. The display in the locker room was illegal no matter who put it up. Why do you have trouble understanding the obvious?

 

[whirlingmerc]

It does not matter. The display in the locker room was illegal no matter who put it up. Why do you have trouble understanding the obvious?

The constitution;s wording clearly says "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW"
and does not speak to a school board or coach or other governmental body in the original wording...

Are you an advocate of judicial activism?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The constitution;s wording clearly says "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW"
and does not speak to a school board or coach or other governmental body in the original wording...

Are you an advocate of judicial activism?

Correct, the Constitution is the law. Why is this so hard for you to understand? It is the Constitution that makes the actions in that locker room illegal.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

.
​

Then again, if they're stupid enough to promote it why would they be bright enough to hide it.

". . . this is the locker room at Letcher County Central High School in Whitesburg, Kentucky:

The sign says “But the Lord is with me like a Mighty Warrior. Jeremiah 20:11.”

[The] Kentucky high school [was] called out for promoting Bible verse in locker room. So far, the district hasn’t responded to any of the concerns."
source
​

Considering how often this violation is committed down in Dixieland one is encouraged to wonder if the intellect of Southern Christians is rivaled only by garden tools.

.

What's wrong with it?

 

[Skwim]

What's wrong with it?

It's against the law.

.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

It's against the law.

.

Which law?

 

[Jose Fly]

The plain reading of the constitution says in this regard "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW...: not ABSOLUTELY ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT IN ANY MANNER IN THE US SHALL NOT MAKE A LAW..."

Why is it a problem to express an opinion. No one is disputing that's the original language.

Nobody said anything about anyone not being able to express their opinions. You're free to express your opinions as much as you like, no matter how absurd and contrary to decades of court rulings they are.

 

[Skwim]

Which law?

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

.​

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

.​

I don't see how what this school did violates the First Amendment.

Congress did not vote to write that on the school wall and what is written is not establishing any particular religion.

Is it your opinion that no public school could post the Declaration of Independence because it refers to a "Creator"?

 

[Skwim]

I don't see how what this school did violates the First Amendment.

Congress did not vote to write that on the school wall and what is written is not establishing any particular religion.

Is it your opinion that no public school could post the Declaration of Independence because it refers to a "Creator"?

Take it up with the Supreme Court. They're the ones who made the decision . . . . . which I happen to agree with.


.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Take it up with the Supreme Court. They're the ones who made the decision . . . . . which I happen to agree with.


.

Take what up? I don't care about what this school did or what the Supreme Court decided.

You still have yet to convince me that this school violated the First Amendment though.

Nor did you answer my question about the Declaration of Independence.

 

[Jainarayan]

PS: Jeremiah is Jewish scripture.

I think Jeremiah was talking about Rāma.

 

[Skwim]

Take what up? I don't care about what this school did or what the Supreme Court decided.

Of course you don't. Why bother with relevancies when it's much more fun to play dumb (I assume you are playing here) and goad people on.

You're not worth my time.

Have a good day.​

 

[Subduction Zone]

Take what up? I don't care about what this school did or what the Supreme Court decided.

You still have yet to convince me that this school violated the First Amendment though.

Nor did you answer my question about the Declaration of Independence.

You probably are not willing to learn even if someone answers you. But here it is in a nutshell, when a public institution supports one religion above another that is a violation since it is equivalent to government support for one religion. If it is illegal for Congress to write a law it is clearly illegal for lesser agencies to advocate for one particular religion over another.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Of course you don't. Why bother with relevancies when it's much more fun to play dumb (I assume you are playing here) and goad people on.

You're not worth my time.

Have a good day.​

You still have not convinced me that this has anything to do with the First Amendment, like you claimed.

Rather than playing dumb, I am asking you to back up your claims and answer my questions.

Which you won't, most likely because you know you can't.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

You probably are not willing to learn even if someone answers you.

Why assume this considering that the only conversation you and I ever had entailed me asking you to share the evidence of your claims and your refusing to do so?

But here it is in a nutshell, when a public institution supports one religion above another that is a violation since it is equivalent to government support for one religion. If it is illegal for Congress to write a law it is clearly illegal for lesser agencies to advocate for one particular religion over another.

That makes sense.

However, which "one religion" did this school supposedly support above all others?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Take what up? I don't care about what this school did or what the Supreme Court decided.

You still have yet to convince me that this school violated the First Amendment though.

Nor did you answer my question about the Declaration of Independence.

Maybe look up some Supreme Court cases on the subject for some detailed explanations.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Maybe look up some Supreme Court cases on the subject for some detailed explanations.

Thank you for the suggestion, but I believe the onus belongs on the OP.

 

[Skwim]

You still have not convinced me that this has anything to do with the First Amendment, like you claimed.

Don't care anymore. That's what "Good day" means.

.

.

 

[JesusKnowsYou]

Don't care anymore. That's what "Good day" means.

.

.

So you admit that you are unable to support the OP?