Lower Court and Christians Again Snub Nose At First Amendment. YOU Will Pay For It.

[Minnesota]

.

Schools may pass out religious flyers to students

FROM Blade staff and wire reports


CINCINNATI - A Van Wert County school district is allowed to resume distributing flyers promoting religious events to students, a federal appeals court ruled yesterday.
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower-court decision that found the Crestview Local School District, based in Convoy, violated the Constitution's prohibition against a government establishment of religion by putting religious material in students' mailboxes.

MORE

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reviews appeals from the federal district courts in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee.

I will bet good money that should an appeal be allowed, the ruling will be overturned--and all at the expense of we Americans because a few Christians, and the court, lack common sense and a true regard for the Constitution.

[jason]

What are you whinging about now.

The school is only distributing flyers from groups that ask the school to.

Have they stopped any group from distributing flyers ?

If not then you don't have case. They are not advocating for anything, they are distributing all of the flyers equally.

Jason

[Cowthulu]

Jason is absolutely correct! Unless they are only allowing Christian material to be put in their mailboxes then it is completely constitutional. Freedom OF Religion, Not Freedom FROM Religion.

[Xavier]

lack common sense and a true regard for the Constitution.

Yep, that would define anyone who believes in the "Separation of Church and State" in its current condition...

[C. D. Ward]

From the article:

A 2002 ruling by U.S. District Judge James Carr of Toledo had stopped the school district from distributing material from churches and affiliated groups. The district had distributed those along with flyers from other nonprofit organizations, including the American Red Cross, 4-H Club, and sports leagues, Mr. Basinger said.

If the district is simply distributing flyers from groups that request flyers to be distributed and doesn't discriminate (outside of appropriateness for school-age children) amongst those that are being distributed, then I don't see any constitutional issue here.

[Pilgrim]

Spot on Jason and C.D. Seems like the people who would appeal such an obviously correct ruling are the ones to be blamed for a waste of tax payer money. Honestly, I can't believe anyone would have an issue with this unless the issue was based more on plain hate or bigotry than anything else.

Did you fail to read the whole article Minn?

[The Laughing Man]

Once again, Minnesota opens his mouth only to find that his foot immediately flies up and imbeds itself in the oriface. :fim:

Minnesota's comments are very telling:

Lower Court and Christians Again Snub Nose At First Amendment.

Who's snubbing their nose at the First Amendment? Who's trying to suppress the free exercise of religion? Who's advocating discrimination against Christians distributing fliers when other groups are allowed to do the same?

YOU Will Pay For It.

What we are paying for, Minn, is the ignorance, stupidity and foolishness of people like you who want "separation of religion and the religious (particularly Christianity and Christians) from society" instead of "separation of church and state" as it was originally intended. From kindergarteners being banned from asking their friends to say grace with them before eating to this issue - we're all paying the price for hyper-separationists who hate religion and the religious.

I will bet good money that should an appeal be allowed, the ruling will be overturned--

Are you really? If you're wrong, will you donate money to a fundamentalist Christian church or organization (and prove it by posting an image of the receipt)?

and all at the expense of we Americans because a few Christians, and the court, lack common sense and a true regard for the Constitution.

No, Christians and the court used far more common sense than you will ever have in recognizing that even Christians are allowed freedom of speech and free exercise of religion. No doubt that fact burns your butt to no end, which must be pretty uncomfortable for your head.

:bh:

[Nicholas]

This is an interesting case and I can see that it could be take both ways but allow to attempt to explain why I do not think that they should allow flyers of those sorts to be put into the students mail boxes.
While I see no problem with the placing of flyers for the American Red Cross and 4-H Clubs the fact is that by allowing religious groups to use the school to distribute religious material they are in a way establishing religion. By using a government funded establishment to advertize religious activities they are using the school to endorse those activities, and they are also forcing students to recieve them, because in the article they described students mail boxes as being "Stuffed full of flyers." The article does not say that this is a student led activity done on behalf of the school, it says that the school district is doing this. The school, being funded by the government, is not allowed to endorse any religion, but by using the school to advertize religious activities to students it is doing just that.

[Cowthulu]

This is an interesting case and I can see that it could be take both ways but allow to attempt to explain why I do not think that they should allow flyers of those sorts to be put into the students mail boxes.
While I see no problem with the placing of flyers for the American Red Cross and 4-H Clubs the fact is that by allowing religious groups to use the school to distribute religious material they are in a way establishing religion. By using a government funded establishment to advertize religious activities they are using the school to endorse those activities, and they are also forcing students to recieve them, because in the article they described students mail boxes as being "Stuffed full of flyers." The article does not say that this is a student led activity done on behalf of the school, it says that the school district is doing this. The school, being funded by the government, is not allowed to endorse any religion, but by using the school to advertize religious activities to students it is doing just that.

Allowing flyers to be distributed established religion? That is a HUGE leap of logic IMO. It sounds absurd IMO as well. Freedom of religion does not mean you must eliminate all traces of it from public/government life. It just means one form cannot be favored over any other. If they had refused some other religious material to be distributed then allowed these, that would un-constitutional.

[Captain Ochre]

Allowing flyers to be distributed established religion? That is a HUGE leap of logic IMO. It sounds absurd IMO as well. Freedom of religion does not mean you must eliminate all traces of it from public/government life. It just means one form cannot be favored over any other. If they had refused some other religious material to be distributed then allowed these, that would un-constitutional.

It's a good thing that the Post Office was privatized in the US, or Nicholas might restrict religous use of the mail service also.
Unless they weren't privatized enough and he just hasn't gotten around to complaining about it ...

That's what happens when you misinterpret the Constitution ...

[Minnesota]

The school is only distributing flyers from groups that ask the school to.

Have they stopped any group from distributing flyers ?

If not then you don't have case. They are not advocating for anything, they are distributing all of the flyers equally.

What has "stopping any group from distributing flyers" to do with the issue? Are you sure you read the article? The issue is not that the schools stopped the distribution of the material in question, but that the court has allowed it to resume.

And, the underlying basis of the my disagreement with the ruling--separation of church and state--is not nullified by equal representation of all religions. So it isn't a matter of all (religious) fliers being given distribution, but that no such fliers should be distributed by a government agency.

Jason is absolutely correct! Unless they are only allowing Christian material to be put in their mailboxes then it is completely constitutional. Freedom OF Religion, Not Freedom FROM Religion.

The same applies to your comment. When it comes to the government providing a benefit to religion, it is a no no. It doesn't matter one wit if the school offers the same service to all religions. The concept of separation of church and state has been seen as a principle that forbids offering any such benefit at all.

Yep, that would define anyone who believes in the "Separation of Church and State" in its current condition...

Your certainly welcome to your opinion as to the merits of the "current condition" of the separation of Church and State, but until the courts decide otherwise, it remains the law of the land, and deserves to be recognized as such.

If the district is simply distributing flyers from groups that request flyers to be distributed and doesn't discriminate (outside of appropriateness for school-age children) amongst those that are being distributed, then I don't see any constitutional issue here.

As I have indicated, the issue is that no agency of the government is allowed to help promote any or all religions. Schools cannot open their facility to the promotion Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Islam, or simply religions in general. And I consider the distribution of religious fliers, regardless of their content, to be a form of promotion.

Honestly, I can't believe anyone would have an issue with this unless the issue was based more on plain hate or bigotry than anything else.

Did you fail to read the whole article Minn?

I'm sure there are many like you who fail to understand the issue, in fact it is quite evident by the comments here. Yes, I did read it all, and unlike yourself, obviously better understood it.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah,

Sorry jinxy, but when you come up with things like,

"What we are paying for, Minn, is the ignorance, stupidity and foolishness of people like you who want "separation of religion and the religious (particularly Christianity and Christians) from society" instead of "separation of church and state" as it was originally intended. From kindergarteners being banned from asking their friends to say grace with them before eating to this issue - we're all paying the price for hyper-separationists who hate religion and the religious."

I just can't resist.

This is an interesting case and I can see that it could be take both ways but allow to attempt to explain why I do not think that they should allow flyers of those sorts to be put into the students mail boxes. .........................................

Ah, at last, a reasonable response. Thank you Nicholas.

[Cowthulu]

What has "stopping any group from distributing flyers" to do with the issue? Are you sure you read the article? The issue is not that the schools stopped the distribution of the material in question, but that the court has allowed it to resume.

And, the underlying basis of the my disagreement with the ruling--separation of church and state--is not nullified by equal representation of all religions. So it isn't a matter of all (religious) fliers being given distribution, but that no such fliers should be distributed by a government agency.

The government agency is not the one distributing them unless I missed that somewhere in the article. They are allowing private individuals to distribute them there. Nothing wrong with that.

The same applies to your comment. When it comes to the government providing a benefit to religion, it is a no no. It doesn't matter one wit if the school offers the same service to all religions. The concept of separation of church and state has been seen as a principle that forbids offering any such benefit at all.

How is allowing a private invidual to distribute flyers to other inviduals a benefit that is un-toward. Otherwise Captain's thoughts are spot on. The government is not supposed to black list religion either.

Ah, at last, a reasonable response. Thank you Nicholas.

That's rich. Note to self, disagreeing with Minn is always unreasonable.

[Pilgrim]

The school is not "endorsing" anything. The school is being an equal opportunity distributer of not for profit pamphlets. As long as it does it equally it is up holding both the "passing of no law establishing" and the "Passing of no law restricting the free practice of" religion. This school has taken the common sense approach to such things and the ruling will stand.

[Xavier]

The school is not "endorsing" anything. The school is being an equal opportunity distributer of not for profit pamphlets. As long as it does it equally it is up holding both the "passing of no law establishing" and the "Passing of no law restricting the free practice of" religion. This school has taken the common sense approach to such things and the ruling will stand.

[Xavier]

Your certainly welcome to your opinion as to the merits of the "current condition" of the separation of Church and State, but until the courts decide otherwise, it remains the law of the land, and deserves to be recognized as such.

Well... This court's opinion is now the law of the land... Recognize it as such.