Controversial prayer bill is one step closer to becoming a law

Views: 255

Comment by Robert Karp on November 3, 2011 at 3:17pm

The lady who appears at 1:00 in the video makes me sick. Yes dear, you are right, god during your time of almost certain death, chose you over a millions of other people who are dying of starvation and disease in this world. How fucking selfish. I'm sick of this crap. Keep religion out of school!

Comment by daniel sanchez on November 3, 2011 at 7:57pm

is funny how the use the freedom of speech when it is convenient to them. the concept of freedom of speech most of the christians have is ludicrous.They think the freedom is allowed only to the christian beliefs, not to other religions or to non believers. that's not freedom at all.

Comment by Ron V on November 4, 2011 at 12:07am

These people are idiots- they ignore the US Constitution and Supreme Court rulings - specifically

Engel v. Vitale, (1962)

Any kind of prayer, composed by public school districts, even nondenominational prayer, is unconstitutional government sponsorship of religion.

 Abington Township School Dist v Schempp (1963)

The second so-called "school prayer" decision. But it was the more far-reaching — prohibiting school officials from organizing or leading prayers and devotional Bible reading in public schools. The Abington v. Schempp decision invalidated a devotional Bible-reading requirement in Pennsylvania; a case consolidated with it, Murray v. Curtlett, struck down a similar law in Maryland. Abington v. Schempp requires that teachers and administrators neither promote nor denigrate religion — a commitment to state neutrality that protects the religious freedom of students of all faiths and no faith.

 Wallace v. Jaffree, (1985)

State's moment of silence at public school statute is unconstitutional where legislative record reveals that motivation for statute was the encouragement of prayer. Court majority silent on whether "pure" moment of silence scheme, with no bias in favor of prayer or any other mental process, would be constitutional.

 Lee v. Weisman, (1992)

Comment by Ron V on November 4, 2011 at 12:08am

 Lee v. Weisman, (1992)

Unconstitutional for a school district to provide any clergy to perform nondenominational prayer at elementary or secondary school graduation. It involves government sponsorship of worship. Court majority was particularly concerned about psychological coercion to which children, as opposed to adults, would be subjected, by having prayers that may violate their beliefs recited at their graduation ceremonies.

 Santa Fe v. Doe, (2000)

The Supreme Court held a school may not ask students to lead prayers over the public address system before football games. The Court found the situation in Santa Fe, TX, similar to the situation in the Lee v. Weisman case. Santa Fe's practice was not a matter of private student speech, but of students speaking on behalf of and at the request of school officials. This factor changed the situation from being one of true private student speech to school-sponsored and -endorsed speech. This case demonstrated that schools cannot use a proxy, such as outside clergy or even students, to engage in activities they are themselves forbidden from practicing.

Comment by wisp on November 4, 2011 at 1:12am

If it passes, I can't see it holding up the first time it's challenged in court.

Comment by Darrell Mont on November 5, 2011 at 7:55am

@ 1:44 "I hate to see that a majority is going to be able to decide..." ok so you not only have no problem throwing seperation of church and state out the window but hey, let's not have any of that "majority rules" democracy stuff either!


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service