You make a strong point. But, on behalf of Mr. Baker, be it for good or ill a lot of people are going to get hurt, and ultimately education will suffer. I doubt the intent of the ten commandments was to oppress anybody. It was an ill considered decision, no doubt about it.
Ultimately a compassionate and responsible individual needs to decide if this is worth it. One needs to measure the affront to Mr. Baker’s sensibilities against the damage that will be created by trying to force a stubborn and pig-headed school board to change its decision in a court of law.
Now if the religious right was holding Mr. Baker hostage, or not allowing him basic civil rights I’d say the damn the cost, this has to be fixed. This is not the case. He just sees something that personally pisses him off.
I see nothing constructive to be gained by destroying this town’s board of education, and bankrupting its school district. Bonds may have to be issued, and taxes raised. The quality of education is going to suffer.
Who will be helped by this?
If we really care, let them have it under protest. Eventually those ten commandments by the doors will become a badge of dishonor to the community. Then they will come down.
People want to be good. You back them into a corner this way, and they’ll have to fight. You lose flexibility of thought, and the defense mechanism becomes ingrained.
Yeah, and so are dinosaur footprints in mud. “religion is a part of who we are as humans”
Who the flock are you to tell me that your religion or any other is a part of my existence? How are you entitled to make a blanket attribution about what is, and what is not a part of my life? It is exactly this sort of inductive reasoning and theistic bigotry that so often makes most religious people come across as total morons on this point.
Come on Scylla, give the Bible thumping a rest and post some more recipes at my thread. At least those were fairly palatable.
Seeing as you grill your steaks I’m also unsurprised at these fallacious comments. I expect as much from your kind.
Where am I thumping a bible? I am simply recognizing the existence of religion. I’m a lapsed and lackadaisical Catholic.
When I say religion is a part of you, what I’m saying is that it’s a part of you in the same sense that human history is a part of you, A John Doeesque “Ask not for whom the bell tolls” kinda thing.
It’s been a major force in human history. People care about it deeply. If you insist on forcing people to drop it arbitrarily(even in circumstance where you are correct,) they will surely dig in their heels, and fight to the bitter end.
If you weren’t such a damn lobster boiler you’d understand this.
My apologies, somehow I misinterpreted your mention of compromise to mean something in that post.
**
Actually, I think many in here believe that they are doing just that. You also seem to assume that the ACLU gallopped over to find someone to files suit without any intermediate steps. Obviously, none of the details have been shared at this point, but isn’t it just as easy to assume that there was some attempt at dialogue between the two sides before the complaintants went to the time and effort of filing suit?
One of the things that bothers me about the entire episode is that it is so obviously and demonstrably unconstitutional. STONE v. GRAHAM, 449 U.S. 39 (1980) is exactly on point in this issue. In part the Court found:
The addition of the other documents to provide ‘historical context’ isn’t substantially different than the ‘required notation regarding secular adoption’ in the above case. The posting of the Ten Commandments in a public school setting is, as a matter of law, unconstitutional.
This is exactly the case. As quoted from the case above, the posting of the Ten Commandments in this setting is a direct violation of a citizen’s civil rights.
I’m sorry, but I simply don’t understand your reasoning behind this statement. The school board and district bear as much of the responsibility for the cost they will incur by insisting on refusing to recognize their error. The fact that they cannot afford the expense is not a reason to allow them to violate the Constitution.
And the implicit comparison here is that anyone who does pursue what they consider to be the right thing in this instance doesn’t care. I feel that’s an unfair and unwarranted generalization. People do care and the fact that they reacti so strongly is an indication of just how mucht hey care. Please remember that your priorities are not theirs. Not only do I hope that the school board drops the entire idea to allow them to apply the money they would have used to the more concrete benefit to their students, I hope that other school districts take notice of the situation and not engage in the same folly.
**I can’t imagine people being hurt more than by having their education compromised by those who would intentionally usurp the Constitution for the sake of promoting their own personal religious views.
Again, I think it is far more important to estop any publicly funded organization from promoting an exclusively personal agenda. This is the real damage in question, the net result of appeasing such repression is more repression.
**
Mr. Baker is being held hostage by a bunch of intolerant religious bigots who place their own views above the education of their community’s children. If such favoritism and exclusionary conduct doesn’t piss you off, then you are part of the problem and not part of the solution.
**
It is the school board who has taken an indefensible stand and will not back down from it. How is the community to benefit from complicity in a direct violation of our constitution? Allowing religion to be brought into the public schools causes the quality of education to suffer by misdirection of the proper emphasis on learning.
An old saying best sums this up:
“All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.”
To merely protest something that desecrates the Constitution is to give short shrift to the very principles our nation was founded upon. Is such conduct acceptable in any form?
Bravo Ankh_Too, I am fairly confident that you are a lawyer. If so, you are the type that I would like to have on my side in a court case. Your powers of incisive observation are superb. Please contribute to any of my threads whenever you feel like it.
No, we are telling people it is unconstitutional. Some people don’t find this offensive. I happen to. YMMV.
**
Then people shouldn’t be spending tons of money trying to come up with new and unique ways to break the rules, wouldn’t you think?
**
My example was neither, and I suggest you leave the debating fallacies out of it since you don’t know what you speak.
I showed a real example of people who did not take the view that you suggest - that if it’s not affecting them directly, why is it there problem? - and made a change for the positive.
It’s called an analogy. A straw man is setting up a false scenerio that easily falls down and that is not the case. I am not saying that civil rights is analagous to posting the 10 Commandments, I am saying the actions of those folks are analogous to the actions of outsiders everywhere who want to fight for what they believe is right.
And as for a slippery slope, I would like to know how you got that idea, because it is nothing of the sort. I never said that something would lead to something else enevitably, now did I?
Simply put: You say that if it’s not there problem, they should stay out of it. I say, others did not take that attitude in other matters throughout history and positive change happened.
**
:rolleyes:
**
Well, if the school board would simply see that they are wrong to begin with… This isn’t rocket science here. A public school cannot endorse a religion. The 10 Commandments are a religious document. Posting it in any way, shape or form is endorsing a religion.
[quote] It’s like instituting the death penalty for a parking ticket. In short, will the outcome be constructive for the pwople of the community, or will it be increasingly divsive and damaging. The latter, I’m sure.[/qu0ote]
And if the school board didn’t try and break rules which are set up in the Constitution, none of this would happen.
But you somehow find fault with the people who are trying to uphold the Constitution instead.
**
No, it’s not a slippery slope to say that saying “well, nobody is being hurt” is not the right way to go about things here. It is not a slippery slope to say let’s not wait for this thing which is unconstitutional anyway to actually result in a kid being made to feel like shit or a family to have a cross burned on their yard.
It is simply illogical to say “if nobody is hurt, ignore that it’s been proven unconstitutional.” It’s already wrong and by extension “hurting” the rights of every American, whether you think it should be legal or not.
**
This must really be a tough thing for you to grasp. I’ll try again, really slowly this time:
It is unconstitutional.
They should not do things which are unconstitutional.
When someone does something unconstitutional, people will challenge it.
When this happens, it is not the fault of those challanging it, it is the fault of those who violated the constitution to begin with.
And if the people who violated the constitution did so knowing full well they were in violation of it, I have no sympathy for them.
They did it to themselves.
Is this clear?
**
The same thing can be said of a school board who knowingly does something unconstitutional, don’t you think?
This whole thing is “oh, the ACLU is making such a big deal about this,” and that’s bullshit. They are reacting to people knowingly breaking the laws of this country.
You are saying, “I can’t believe that they are making a mountain out of a mole hill” about people protecting your rights, while not even acknowledging that the people who don’t give a fuck about your rights are doing this intentionally, are doing it knowing full well they are wrong about it, and will still do it again.
Here’s a newsflash: If the isiotic school boards didn’t start petty shit, the ACLU (and others) wouldn’t be wasting their time on petty shit.
I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Six months, one day, 19 hours, 8 minutes and 5 seconds.
7391 cigarettes not smoked, saving $923.99.
Extra life with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 4 days, 15 hours, 55 minutes.
Satan, you really shoot yourself in the foot near the end of your last post.
If this brouhaha and similar actions by other school boards really constitutes “petty shit,” then why should the ACLU or anyone else with sense worry about it?
If these actions are, in fact, assaults on the Constitution, the foundation of American law, then they would not be petty shit, would they?
I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Six months, one day, 19 hours, 54 minutes and 8 seconds.
7393 cigarettes not smoked, saving $924.15.
Extra life with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 4 days, 16 hours, 5 minutes.
Why not post the Pnaktonic Manuscripts and De Vermis Mysteriis? They have a clear historical basis. They also teach children about how people wrote back then. It also gives them a good sense of imagination as they dream of Cthulu coming from beyond the Elder Gates. While we are at it, a nice pentagram in ram’s blood conviniently placed on the school playground would give kids a wonderful place to play hopscotch!
OK, I’m gonna try to catch up here the best I can. I’m going in order, so if somebody already covered some of these, well, too bad.
picmr said:
He then followed it up in the next message by saying:
Ah, but we learn something from this. If people want religion taught in the public schools, there are those who hold this position. Some of them may be teachers. While they will certainly do their best to keep their private views out of the classroom, some will be unable to succeed (I know that some Christian teachers are unable to do that). Do Christians really want to take a chance at getting one of these teachers to tell their kids about religion?
Scylla, in a vain attempt to “strike back,” said:
Neither of us have specific information, obviously, but in general it is local objection. In fact, when it comes to lawsuits, the courts generally will only accept locals, although they can get help from the ACLU or some such group. The fact is that you simply aren’t going to get an area that is in 100% agreement on something like this.
Yes, exactly. The school is wasting taxpayer dollars to fight a lawsuit that goes against the very fabric of the Constitution. If you can’t see how they are to blame in this, I’m going to have to rethink my rather high opinion of you.
Funny, that’s probably exactly what the parents and students may be thinking about the Board trying to erect the 10 Commandments…
Oh, well, that’s great. Except that the Jews and Christians tend to use a different set of “10 Commandments.” Which do you think they’ll use – the Jewish version or the Christian version? The Catholic version or the Protestant version? And, of course, you presume that only Jewish or Christian people are involved, such as when you say:
Somehow I doubt it. You seem to think that there is so little possibility that there is a non-Christian, non-Jew in the area, that you can just ridicule the notion. Well, I find that position ridiculous in and of itself.
You can see it any way you want. You’ll be wrong, but you can see it that way.
Show me the clause about an establishment of corporation in the Constitution and then we can discuss that. Until then, your just throwing out straw men. And you’re normally better than that…
What we need to figure out is if the action is Constitutional. Since it is not, we already know where to go from there. You seem to be ignoring this rather important point.
Take it where? I would suggest the garbage can, which is the appropriate place for it, I’m afraid…
Later, Scylla continued:
They had their chance. They blew it. That’s why we have a Constitution – to protect us from the illegal actions of government “representatives.”
For those of you who want background on this particular case, here are the results from a search on the Cincinnati Enquirer’s site. It includes opinion peices, which, strangely, mostly seem to mirror Scylla’s arguments. Sigh. I hate that fucking newspaper.
Since the opposition seems to be in unusaually firm and unanimous agreement on a wide variety of points allow me to summarize and respond en masse. If I miss something improtant point it out.
Bad judgement on the part of the school board? Yup.
Unconstitutional? Yup.
Unfair? Yup.
Stupid to attempt to defend? Yup.
Are they going to try to defend it anyway? Yup.
I think it is safe to assume that the school board is dug in pretty tight. It’s stubborn and personal. They are not going to give up. Everybody seems to agree that the ultimate effect is that a lot of taxpayer dollars are going to get spent to the detriment of education. After a long drawn out battle the ACLU wins. The commandments come down. The ACLU leaves. We now have a divided and bitter town from the interference, and a school district in financial trouble. Maybe they float some bonds, or raise taxes, but guess who’s gonna suffer ultimately? The poor kids. It is in this environment also that recriminations occur.
There is the matter of degree. Yes it’s unconstitutional. Is it on the same level with an inquisition a crusade or imprisoning people for religious beleifs? No.
The bottom line is that some probably well-intentioned people wanted to give a gift to the school. I can just see a bunch of little old ladies on some joint Church board commisioning this thing probably to give these youngsters a sense of respect. The school board stupidly accepts it, and suddenly everybody’s on their back for trampling the Constitution. The hackles are up and nobody’s going to back down.
If there is one thing that I’ve learned during my time on this board it is that being right isn’t everything. I’m sure I don’t need to go into detail about the terrible things done for just causes. One must also be compassionate and constructive. Destroying a school district is neither.
If this battle goes the distance then the ACLU will be a party to what follows. I see no way around that. In this instance, there may in fact be better battles to fight.
I see the addition of the Magna Carta and such as transparent, but it’s also a step towards capitulation. That needs to be recognized, and not attacked. Perhaps a workable compromise can be found that everyone can live it.
The back of my dollar bills still say “IN GOD WE TRUST,” the Pledge of Allegiance still says “One Nation Under God,” Are these things any more Constitutional? Doesn’t this whole thing seem a little crazy in that light? That’s why I don’t take the Constitutionality of this particular issue very seriously.
We’re going to destroy this one little school district and community over this while the Federal government does THE EXACT SAME THING. It is hypocritical and unfair to pursue this issue in this way.
quote:
You call me optimistic in my assessments, but God save me from people trying to save me.
Funny, that's probably exactly what the parents and students may be thinking about the Board trying to erect the 10 Commandments..."
None of which is the fault of either the ACLU or the citizen who brought forth the suit. There responsibility for denying the students those limited resources lies with the people who are allocating the resources.
Respectfully, I would suggest you research the facts before hazarding a guess such as this. Adams County for the Ten Commandments, the website of the organization which provided funding for the additional ‘historical’ documents states:
This does not seem to bear much of a relationship to the the ‘group of little old ladies’ whom you hypothesized to be responsible for the original sculptures. They seem to be able to mount a serious social outreach program, for which they should be justly lauded. However, a small group of ‘interested citizens’ they are not.
Those statements are much more than simply an attempt to instill a ‘sense of respect’ in the students.
Once again, the complaintant is not the one who is ‘destroying’ the school district. Your statements sound like a terrorist who holds a gun to the head of a hostage, telling the police, “You’re making me kill him.” No matter how the terrorist tries to shift the onus onto the police, he and he alone bears the responsibility.
Of course they will be a party to it, they are involved. They will not, however, bear the responsibility for depriving the students of that school district even one penny. That responsibility belongs to the school board and pastors who insisted on dragging this out, even though the issue is black letter law.
As was made clear by the article first cited by black455 in the OP, the addition of the other historical documents is the attempt by the supporters of these displays at a compromise. Unfortunately, even as a compromise, the case I sited in my earlier post STONE v. GRAHAM, 449 U.S. 39 (1980) shows it to be not only unconstitutional, but flagrantly unconstitutional.
Personally, I’m not in love with it. But it does show a distinct difference between those examples, and the example of the Ten Commandments, which the organization who funded the display feels are are the bedrock of a universal moral code relevant to all people in all places at all times, religious orientation notwithstanding.
On another, more amusing note, Zenster, no I’m not a lawyer,I just play one online. But that’s going to be my sig, thankyouverymuch. (or at least part of it)
[Fixed link --Gaudere]
[Edited by Gaudere on 10-10-2000 at 10:39 PM]
TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Six months, two days, 2 hours, 20 minutes and 21 seconds.
7403 cigarettes not smoked, saving $925.49.
Extra time with Drain Bead: 3 weeks, 4 days, 16 hours, 55 minutes.
