Wednesday, June 02, 2010



Conn. Town Can't Hold Graduations in Church, Judge Rules

We read:
"A federal judge has ruled two Connecticut public high schools can't hold their graduations inside a church because that would be an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.

U.S. District Court Judge Janet Hall made the ruling Monday in the case of Enfield High School and Enrico Fermi High School, both in Enfield. [Does the stupid b*tch think the air inside a church is a secret gas that brainwashes people into becoming Christians?]

The Enfield school board says it voted to hold services June 23 and 24 at The First Cathedral in Bloomfield because it had enough space at the right price. But two students and three of their parents sued.

Source

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

A mosque of course would have been fine.
After all, as Muslims claim, a mosque is not a religious building but a place for social events (like plotting whose head to cut off and which school to bomb).

We The People said...

And yet there's this story which seems to prove that the imaginary separation of church and state is apparently flexible. Does it depend on your political ideology?

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/66208

Anonymous said...

yup, if you're a socialist you can do whatever you like.
Didn't you know that free speech and freedom OF religion rather than FROM religion exist only for the exclusive benefit of the political left?

Anonymous said...

This same thing happened in my town in Florida. A local church had the largest seating venue and offered the use of the hall for free. The offer was accepted for 5 years. The church supplied the people to run the sound and lighting. They made DVD's of the ceremony and gave them to the graduating class at cost to sell at whatever price they wanted.

There were two main reasons for the use of the indoor hall. First, it is air conditioned and air conditioning beats sitting in the Florida sun. Secondly, when it rained, the schools moved their ceremonies from the school stadiums into the smaller auditoriums. The church's facilities allowed the schools to keep the same number of tickets for guests where as the outdoor ceremony had two sets of tickets - one for both an outdoor and indoor ceremony, and one for only the outdoor ceremony. When it rained, families would have to decide who was going to see the ceremony in the school auditorium.

So the church stepped up at no cost to the schools. No rental fees. No fees for staff. No electrical fees. Nothing.

But the fact that it was in a church offended someone and they sued. The school board caved in and so now the kids and parents get to witness a proud moment in the heat and rain of Florida.

Anonymous said...

These "PC-ized" govt. indoctrination camps don't always win.


http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local
/ny_school_sued_after_teen_
suspended_lAeU7s8kQf0jpLq2T32klK

Anonymous said...

I am most sympathetic with Anon. 2:22's position.
I think it is awkward and inappropriate for a public school to hold a graduation ceremony at a church - but I also am inclined toward the view that you hold the ceremony at the most suitable and affordable venue...

Anonymous said...

If you dig deep enough into these anti-Catholic, anti-Church complaints, you'll find a leftist jew.

Apparently you don't have to dig as deep to find an ignorant bigot to comment on this blog.

Anonymous said...

It is in decisions like this that we find out the true character of the Judges in our courts. This is obviously a judge who needs to be removed from the bench. Too bad the establishment will not perform their duty and remove her.

Anonymous said...

Do not hold graduation and specifically send in letter with U.S. District Court Judge Janet Hall name address and phone number in if they have any questions

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"Apparently you don't have to dig as deep to find an ignorant bigot to comment on this blog."

Facts are not bigotry, they are merely the truth. Obviously that frightens you, or worse, exposes a truth you wish not be seen.

Anonymous said...

Facts are not bigotry, they are merely the truth.

Clearly your "facts" are nothing more than your bigoted opinion.

Obviously that frightens you, or worse, exposes a truth you wish not be seen.

Bigots don't frighten me. Clearly people who think differently than you do frighten you. I wonder why that is? Could it be that you don't possess the critical thinking skills to process anything other than bigotry?