We read:
"The Alliance Defense Fund sent a letter Friday to Clay County School District officials informing them that voluntary faculty participation in a community-led, before-school prayer event is protected by the First Amendment despite the objections of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. The letter also explains that a school principal’s internal newsletter, which mentioned the event, is also constitutionally protected.
“Christian faculty acting in their private capacities do not lose their constitutionally protected right to free speech,” said ADF Senior Counsel David Cortman. “The Constitution guards the right of staff to participate in the voluntary prayer event just as other community members can. The inclusion of the event in the newsletter that the principal circulated is also fully protected. Neither amount to an endorsement of religion by the school in any way, shape, or form.”
The Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter to the School District of Clay County on Oct. 11 demanding cancellation of a weekly, community-led “Prayer Around the Flagpole” event at Clay Hill Elementary School that occurs before class time and is not sponsored by the school.
The letter also objected to Principal Larry Davis’s mention of the event in his internal newsletter. The newsletter, which he calls “The Bark,” also mentioned several other events and announcements of interest to school faculty and staff, the only recipients of the newsletter. The newsletter is not circulated to students.
Source
13 comments:
Groups like The Freedom From Religion Foundation, and other radical Leftist groups, rely on intimidation far more then they rely on the law. This is just another clear example of that fact.
Perhaps all those "Archie Bunkers" who deliberately closed their eyes to the arguments I offered in my comments to other similar items in the TT forum will be surprised to learn that I have no problem with the groups who seek to gather followers at a place like a flagpole for morning prayers.
There seems to be little room for moderation in this forum. Everything seems to be viewed simplistically as an issue of "left" or "right". Witness the above comment to this item, written, as so often happens, by a gentleman who seems too embarrassed by the weakness of his contribution to be able provide us with his name.
This "Freedom from Religion Foundation" has nothing to do with left or right. You make no contribution by labeling them as a "radical leftist group" and to accuse them of intimidation when there is no evidence to support that claim.
I absolutely agree that the Freedom from Religion Foundation is dead wrong on the present issue but I also think that, on some other issues, they have made some important points that needed to be made.
For heaven's sake, can't we see some moderate views based on a little intellectual content instead of the rote memorized catch phrases that abound in this forum?
Wait until the leftists groups like FREEDOM from RELIGION and the ACLU to get wind of this a lawsuit is sure to follow from these leftists scum
Witness the above comment to this item, written, as so often happens, by a gentleman who seems too embarrassed by the weakness of his contribution to be able provide us with his name.
For someone who keeps talking about "intellectual content," you seem dismissive of content simply because it is written "anonymously." You are more concerned with the name or lack of a name attached to the comment than the content of the comment.
Many of the Founding Fathers wrote in public forums using nom de plumes, choosing to remain anonymous for any number of reasons.
Furthermore, there is no subjective proof that the name you hide behind while posting is your real name.
This "Freedom from Religion Foundation" has nothing to do with left or right.
Actually it does. Perhaps if you bothered to read their website you would know that.
You make no contribution by labeling them as a "radical leftist group" and to accuse them of intimidation when there is no evidence to support that claim.
You mean that threats of lawsuits are not intimidating?
Is that more of your "intellectual content" way of thinking?
For heaven's sake, can't we see some moderate views based on a little intellectual content instead of the rote memorized catch phrases that abound in this forum?
You mean catch phrases like "intellectual content?" You would like to see them go away?
The bottom line is that if you don't like it here, don't like reading what is said, and don't like posting here, then don't.
You are perfectly free to remove the site from your list of bookmarks and not come back.
Or is that too much "intellectual content" for you to understand?
Thanks Jonathan
As someone who has lurked on this group since before JJR took over as mod I have noticed the level of discourse here has nosedived recently.
People on this site used to be committed to the issue of speech - and not merely 'right' v 'left' namecalling.
It would be nice to return to those days.
I always comment anonymously but I will append my nome de plume from now on (if I remember)
John Paladin
"...voluntary faculty participation..."
And those are the key words. The participants were not participating as representatives of the school, but as private citizens, and are thus fully protected under the First Amendment.
I hope this case can be used as precedent to other similar cases.
So once again a frightened individual who feels threatened by what I have to say has asked me to leave this forum. Sorry to disappoint the learned gentleman but I shall not oblige him.
As for the question of whether I have used my real name, you have only to Google me to find out. You will see that I am a distinguished mathematician, the author of many books and scholarly papers and a professor of many years standing with experience in many parts of the world. I think I am capable of comprehending the "intellectual content" of the anonymous gentleman who so desires me to go away.
Yep, this site is not so much about inappropriate censorship as a majority of "rightists" denouncing all they disagree with as, by definition, "leftist"; and they seem to get particularly upset or excited by the existence of atheists and homosexuals - although that is clearly encouraged by the Moderator, who selects those related topics most of the time (no doubt a freudian reflection on him).
I am a female lesbian liberal woman of color who is an atheist that votes. So, what do you think about that?
Becuase AMERICA wasnt founded by atheists
@12:53 I see you took the bait, jerkoff.
3:04 AM seems to be describing him/her/itself as a right-wing, chauvinist/nationalist, homophobic, misogynistic, religo-freak with self-hating race issues - way to go man/girl/whatever!
@3:05 You sure spent a lot of time responding to flame-bait. LOL
Post a Comment