Principal Banned for Trying to Ban Christmas

[BjornP]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

How is preventing "Christmas-related symbols" on school grounds a prohibition on the free exercise of religion? No contest on it being assholish, petty and patronizing towards those invisible masses supposedly "marginalized" by "Christmas symbols" (scary Christmas jumpers!).

The way it has been ruled down is that a government institution banning a religious practice is construed as "making a law respecting the establishment of a religion". What a government school cannot do is conduct religious ceremonies.

Somehow I get the impression you faggots would see the problem if the school banned Ramadan posters or something.

And could you please state which "religious practice" is being banned? In detail.

Nah, I would only see a logical problem if the Muslim parent tried to argue that hanging up a Ramadan poster in class was his (kid's) First Amendment right.

[Speaker to Animals]

How is preventing "Christmas-related symbols" on school grounds a prohibition on the free exercise of religion? No contest on it being assholish, petty and patronizing towards those invisible masses supposedly "marginalized" by "Christmas symbols" (scary Christmas jumpers!).

The way it has been ruled down is that a government institution banning a religious practice is construed as "making a law respecting the establishment of a religion". What a government school cannot do is conduct religious ceremonies.

Somehow I get the impression you faggots would see the problem if the school banned Ramadan posters or something.

And could you please state which "religious practice" is being banned? In detail.

Nah, I would only see a logical problem if the Muslim parent tried to argue that hanging up a Ramadan poster in class was his (kid's) First Amendment right.

Of course you don't see the problem.

[Montegriffo]

Go back and see which bit of the definition I highlighted in red.

I didn't see anything in the red highlighted part that states eternity is the length of your life.

No, but you saw the non-religious context in which I was using the phrase ''eternally grateful''.
Your definition as eternal being a Christian construct was nowhere to be seen.
Besides which your repeated attempts at some sort of a gotcha on the meaning of eternal doesn't address the main point of my original post( the damaging environmental consequences of Christmas) which is nothing less than a diversionary tactic or distraction.

[GloryofGreece]

How cryptic is it to ban fucking colors...jeez. "soft" despotism in corporate i mean gov't education. I work in an area where its pretty boiler plate Americana stuff on average, and most people are at least partially christian so its cool. Just don't say your Catholic or Orthodox *(theyll be hella skeptical and dumbfounded).

[Speaker to Animals]

I suppose it needs to be explained to these degenerates as one might need to explain to a mentally-challenged individual:

The correct approach is to allow children to freely express the religious beliefs of their families, share their customs and cultures with other students, and create a bonding experience for all of them. This requires the facilitation of teachers to help display those symbols so other children can explore them.

If you are going to have a truly integrated society, that literally is the only viable option you have. The radical secularization of France worked out exactly in no shape or fashion.

And if it's going to be like that, then just shut down the fucking government schools and let people send their kids to whatever schools they want. You got to the point where you are violating human rights of children because you hate Jesus. For fuck sake look at yourselves.


What you definitely do NOT do is ban Christian symbols while simultaneously in other schools come to find out you are leading Christian children in Muslim prayers.

[BjornP]

Of course you don't see the problem.

So, you're not going to provide any evidence that a public school is violating the First Amendment, then? Well, that I expect you to argue your case, must surely be because I "hate" Christians, I guess. Or, you could read what I post if you wanted to know my stance on this story:

On a more serious note, it's a lazy sort of mindset - it's all about making assumptions about what other people feel, in this case assuming that non-Christian kids would be "traumatized" by seeing a santa hat, or christmas tree, or what Christmas symbolisms one can think of. The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations.

That, the bolded part, is the real problem here. The assumption by the principal that seeing "Christian symbols" somehow "marginalizes" non-Christians. He's not just being an ass to little Johnny wearing Grandma's tacky knitted Christmas jumper, but also to all those students he just naturally assumes are incapable of being tolerant of diversity. Because they're not Christian, apparantly. That's still not preventing people from practising their religion, though.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

How is preventing "Christmas-related symbols" on school grounds a prohibition on the free exercise of religion? No contest on it being assholish, petty and patronizing towards those invisible masses supposedly "marginalized" by "Christmas symbols" (scary Christmas jumpers!).

The way it has been ruled down is that a government institution banning a religious practice is construed as "making a law respecting the establishment of a religion". What a government school cannot do is conduct religious ceremonies.

Like prayers?

[clubgop]

How is preventing "Christmas-related symbols" on school grounds a prohibition on the free exercise of religion? No contest on it being assholish, petty and patronizing towards those invisible masses supposedly "marginalized" by "Christmas symbols" (scary Christmas jumpers!).

The way it has been ruled down is that a government institution banning a religious practice is construed as "making a law respecting the establishment of a religion". What a government school cannot do is conduct religious ceremonies.

Like prayers?

You probably think you can sic the department of education on them, dont ya? Dirty dick dispatch the department deputies?

[Speaker to Animals]

How is preventing "Christmas-related symbols" on school grounds a prohibition on the free exercise of religion? No contest on it being assholish, petty and patronizing towards those invisible masses supposedly "marginalized" by "Christmas symbols" (scary Christmas jumpers!).

The way it has been ruled down is that a government institution banning a religious practice is construed as "making a law respecting the establishment of a religion". What a government school cannot do is conduct religious ceremonies.

Like prayers?

A government school is not allowed to prohibit prayer.

People who want to ban religious practices in public are actually worse than the people who want to use government to indoctrinate religion.

Neither should a government school ban prayer or lead a prayer service as an official function.

[clubgop]

Of course you don't see the problem.

So, you're not going to provide any evidence that a public school is violating the First Amendment, then? Well, that I expect you to argue your case, must surely be because I "hate" Christians, I guess. Or, you could read what I post if you wanted to know my stance on this story:

On a more serious note, it's a lazy sort of mindset - it's all about making assumptions about what other people feel, in this case assuming that non-Christian kids would be "traumatized" by seeing a santa hat, or christmas tree, or what Christmas symbolisms one can think of. The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations.

That, the bolded part, is the real problem here. The assumption by the principal that seeing "Christian symbols" somehow "marginalizes" non-Christians. He's not just being an ass to little Johnny wearing Grandma's tacky knitted Christmas jumper, but also to all those students he just naturally assumes are incapable of being tolerant of diversity. Because they're not Christian, apparantly. That's still not preventing people from practising their religion, though.

A little consistency from you would be nice. I recall a story from another school that banned the American flag or things that look like said flag in their dress code. You bought the whole "flag code" excuse hook, line, and sinker. Instead the soft bigotry of low expectations excuse would have fit well in that situation as well. It is a violation of the first amendment on free expression grounds Supreme Court is pretty clear a a school cant prohibit such expression unless it were to cause a disturbance. An ugly Christmas sweater does not a disturbance make. Neither does a flag and in point of fact such prohibitions cause disturbances in the first place so the school quickly backpedaled in both cases. As I said, I am consistent, come get on my level.