Bill of Rights: Engrossed Bill of Rights, September 25, 1789; General Records of the United States Government; Record Group 11; National Archives.Today's trivia question to prepare you for the “Clash of Civilizations”.
What is the Establishment Clause?
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights, contains this clause, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion", known as the Establishment Clause............ .
What is the Establishment Clause?
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights, contains this clause, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion", known as the Establishment Clause............ .
.
On December 16, 2006 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the Tangipahoa Parish, Louisiana, School Board acted improperly by promoting their own sectarian religious beliefs during meetings.
From the ACLU Press release:
“The appeals court upheld the district court finding that the school board had improperly recited sectarian prayers during meetings. Prior to the appeal, both the school board and the ACLU recognized that the school board’s prayer practice fell outside of the 1971 Supreme Court decision in Lemon v. Kurtzman, which held that government action must have a secular purpose, neither advance nor inhibit religion, and not become excessively entangled with religion. However, in filing its appeal, the school board argued that its actions fell under the protection of a 1983 Supreme Court case, Marsh v. Chambers. The Marsh case allows a legislative exception for non-sectarian, non-proselytizing prayers.
Today’s ruling rejected the argument that the prayers were non-sectarian, and instead found that they “aggressively advocate[d] Christianity.” But the court avoided dealing with the central issue of whether school boards in general fall under the Marsh exception.”
Well. There is absolutely no difference between the activities of the Knox Community School Board and the activities of the Tangipahoa Parish, School Board. The Knox School Board policy is to invite a Christian preacher to deliver a prayer to start every public board-meeting meeting. This recent court decision makes it quite clear that sectarian (Christian) prayer is not allowed. The Knox School Board is clearly in violation of the law. If they choose not to suspend the prayer policy, they will be in violation of their oath of office.
From the ACLU Press release:
“The appeals court upheld the district court finding that the school board had improperly recited sectarian prayers during meetings. Prior to the appeal, both the school board and the ACLU recognized that the school board’s prayer practice fell outside of the 1971 Supreme Court decision in Lemon v. Kurtzman, which held that government action must have a secular purpose, neither advance nor inhibit religion, and not become excessively entangled with religion. However, in filing its appeal, the school board argued that its actions fell under the protection of a 1983 Supreme Court case, Marsh v. Chambers. The Marsh case allows a legislative exception for non-sectarian, non-proselytizing prayers.
Today’s ruling rejected the argument that the prayers were non-sectarian, and instead found that they “aggressively advocate[d] Christianity.” But the court avoided dealing with the central issue of whether school boards in general fall under the Marsh exception.”
Well. There is absolutely no difference between the activities of the Knox Community School Board and the activities of the Tangipahoa Parish, School Board. The Knox School Board policy is to invite a Christian preacher to deliver a prayer to start every public board-meeting meeting. This recent court decision makes it quite clear that sectarian (Christian) prayer is not allowed. The Knox School Board is clearly in violation of the law. If they choose not to suspend the prayer policy, they will be in violation of their oath of office.
The Indiana School Board Oath:
"I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States of America, the Constitution of the State of Indiana, and the laws of the United States and the State of Indiana. I will faithfully execute the duties of my office as a member of this governing body, so help me God."
Members of the School Board have religious freedom. Members of the Board are free to kneel and pray any time they so desire, even during a School-Board meeting. The ACLU has fought for their religious freedom to do just that. The ACLU has fought for the right of Christian students to distribute Christian literature at the school. The ACLU has fought for the right of students to conduct prayer meeting at their schools.
Why is it that our school board insists upon this prayer policy that was of dubious legality from its inception? I am not inclined to give the board the benefit of the doubt. I do not believe that the board’s motivation was spiritual, or even Christian. I believe that they wanted to prove their radical right-wing credentials. They wanted to proclaim that they didn’t care what the courts of the land rule; they were going to defy the law. This is self-indulgent, sanctimonious, crap that has nothing whatsoever to do with the education of our students. Well it is now abundantly clear that they are in violation of the law. They are now criminals. I doubt that they care. They are most likely quite proud of themselves.
3 comments:
Marian Cross wrote:
"They are now criminals"
and
"You are a fool and a criminal and are dangerous."
Might I suggest dialing back the rhetoric a notch or two, for credibility's sake?
As a matter and question of good taste, undoubtedly, Dr. Nokes, you are correct to admonish the excessively harsh language. And as a point of fact, you are also correct. This matter is not correctly described as criminal. A violation of the finding of the appellate court doesn’t constitute a criminal act. I apologize to my readers and the School Board. It is however a violation of their oath of office to ignore the courts ruling on this matter. That violation is not criminal but it does expose the school to civil actions. As a practical matter it is a mere point of honor, as no one in Knox will ever sue the board over the prayer issue. The ACLU has stayed out of town to this point.
As an outsider who knows little of the workings of your school board, I feel I should point out to you one major flaw in your argument. The Knox School Board is in violation of nothing for ignoring a ruling of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The State of Indiana is part of the 7th Circuit, located in Chicago, not New Orleans. Until that court makes some decision on a related matter (you haven't mentioned that it has), what happens in any other circuit means absolutely nothing here. Only when conflicting decisions are resolved by the Supreme Court of the United States does a case decision apply to all.
Further alarming is your contention that the ACLU protects our freedoms. You lose more credibility with each word you post.
It would help to be more informed before spewing this diatribe...it's incredible, to say the least!
Post a Comment