Hmm... My "shut down GLSEN" or the ACLU's "remove these people from society?"

[The Laughing Man]

Which one do you think the liberals find rational?

ACLU Wants Teachers, Principal Jailed For Praying

The American Civil Liberties Union has asked a federal judge to jail public school teachers and administrators for allegedly violating a court-imposed ban on school prayers.

...

The ACLU said school officials' violation of the prayer ban "must result in their removal from society."

*plays the "Imperial March" from "Star Wars"*

[C. D. Ward]

Well, isn't jail where we normally put criminals? How does the ACLU become an "evil empire" by seeking to have state and federal laws upheld? Shouldn't we punish deliberate and recalcitrant scofflaws?

[The Laughing Man]

So you think praying is a jail-worthy crime? Interesting. Meanwhile, drug-users and other criminals who are considered "less dangerous" are spared jail time because of overcrowding and funding concerns.

[technomage]

The point is not praying--the point is contempt of court and willful violation of the law.

[Jack777]

The Laughing Man


Nice snag, you got 'em and by their own arguments prove your argument...

Mwwuuuaaaahhhaaaahaaa, ha ha, heh hee ho ho

[technomage]

The Laughing Man


Nice snag, you got 'em and by their own arguments prove your argument...

Mwwuuuaaaahhhaaaahaaa, ha ha, heh hee ho ho

Not quite, Jack. The situations are not parallel. Those responsible for distributing pornographic materials to minors--whether or not it was an accident--deserve jailtime or whatever sentence is appropriate for such an act. Distributing pornographic material to minors is against the law. By the same token, violating a court order is against the law, and those who do so should receive the results of their actions.

Justin

[C. D. Ward]

So you think praying is a jail-worthy crime? Interesting. Meanwhile, drug-users and other criminals who are considered "less dangerous" are spared jail time because of overcrowding and funding concerns.

I have difficulty believing that you're that dense, so I'm inclined to think your misrepresentation is willful. I'll bet you know full well that the issue isn't "praying" but "forcing prayer on others".

And of course none of this has anything to do with other criminals who should be in jail as well. Take your dishonest tactics elsewhere, please.

[Jack777]

Justin,


Did too.

[technomage]

Did too.

Y'know, Jack, there's this little grammatical device called "complete sentences." They add so much to the conversation.

[Rahab]

I have difficulty believing that you're that dense, so I'm inclined to think your misrepresentation is willful. I'll bet you know full well that the issue isn't "praying" but "forcing prayer on others".

And of course none of this has anything to do with other criminals who should be in jail as well. Take your dishonest tactics elsewhere, please.

I am not aware of faculty or staff members in any public schools as well as the student body being jailed for praying on their own time. What most of us are aware of is that the Establishment Clause does differenciate between the use of intruction time by faculty and staff to promote the practice of any religion including led prayer on any mandated audience and the practice of religious rights for religious individuals in the public school system.

I am not sure why Laughing Man persists in promoting the rumor that prayer is forbidden in our schools and if practiced results in a judiciary action. Maybe it is due to a lack of informing himself as to what the Establishment Clause specificaly attempts to prevent : which is the use of any state funds or officials on state funded salary to promote any particular religion. It is the endorsement of religion in any form by the state that the Clause is targeting. Not the private practice of individual religious rights of religious individuals.

[The Laughing Man]

The point is not praying--the point is contempt of court and willful violation of the law.

...by praying. Yes, most assuredly, the great ACLU is correct and these awful people must be removed from society.



Don't we have better things to jail people for? (Not according to the ACLU, apparently.)

[The Laughing Man]

I am not aware of faculty or staff members in any public schools as well as the student body being jailed for praying on their own time.

I'm not aware of anyone in this country being jailed or being threatened with jail for praying at all - whether "illegally" or not.

What most of us are aware of is that the Establishment Clause does differenciate between the use of intruction time by faculty and staff to promote the practice of any religion including led prayer on any mandated audience and the practice of religious rights for religious individuals in the public school system.

Actually, the "Establishment Clause" does no such thing. People have interpreted it that way.

I am not sure why Laughing Man persists in promoting the rumor that prayer is forbidden in our schools and if practiced results in a judiciary action.

Gee, it couldn't be cases like this, could it?

Actually, prayer in schools, if practiced, often results in action by school faculty. Typically, these actions are dead wrong, but they keep happening. Why is that?

Maybe it is due to a lack of informing himself as to what the Establishment Clause specificaly attempts to prevent : which is the use of any state funds or officials on state funded salary to promote any particular religion. It is the endorsement of religion in any form by the state that the Clause is targeting. Not the private practice of individual religious rights of religious individuals.

You know what? Let me clarify. My beef is with the ACLU threatening these people with jail time. I actually think what they are doing is wrong, but the ACLU's call to "remove them from society" is completely irrational and quite odd considering their defense of NAMBLA (people who actually should be removed from society).

[technomage]

...by praying. Yes, most assuredly, the great ACLU is correct and these awful people must be removed from society.



Don't we have better things to jail people for? (Not according to the ACLU, apparently.)

No, Jinx.

This time, the ACLU said an elementary school teacher repeatedly held prayers in her fourth-grade class, encouraged students to bring their Bibles to school, held Bible studies in the school cafeteria and admonished students who didn't show up.


In addition, the ACLU cited a prayer "in Jesus' name" that was recently given over a high school's public address system while the principal sat by silently.

Your repeated assertion that the ACLU is requesting jail time simply for people praying is dishonest. They are requesting jail time for those who are leading students in public prayer, contrary to the judge's order.

I thought "bearing false witness" was against the code of ethics you were commanded to follow?

[The Laughing Man]

I have difficulty believing that you're that dense, so I'm inclined to think your misrepresentation is willful. I'll bet you know full well that the issue isn't "praying" but "forcing prayer on others".

Okay, fine. You believe that "forcing prayer on others" is a jailable offense. Again, interesting.

And of course none of this has anything to do with other criminals who should be in jail as well.

Sure it does. The ACLU regularly defends "less dangerous" criminals and argues that they don't deserve jail. Exactly how dangerous is praying? Obviously quite a bit more as the ACLU is calling for these people to be "removed from society!"

Take your dishonest tactics elsewhere, please.

Ah, yes. Let's concern ourselves with whatever tactics (whether one judges them as "dishonest" or not) I use on a message board instead of the ACLU's tactics in a court of law. Nice priorities.

[Minnesota]

I have to admit that

"The ACLU said school officials' violation of the prayer ban "must result in their removal from society."

Is about as stupid as

"GLSEN needs to be shut down NOW"

So, I'm calling it a tie:

ACLU spokesman = Stupid

TLM ( our Jinxy ) = Stupid