HS Marching Band Barred From Playing Halftime Hymn...

The Blaze ^ | 8/22/15 | Dave Urbanski

[Impala64ssa]

...But Fans in Stands Have an Answer for That Ruling

A Mississippi school district had just been through some serious gavel pounding from a federal judge — including a $7,500 fine — and didn’t want any more problems.

U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves gave Rankin County School District the word on July 10, saying it promoted Christianity during school hours after it agreed to stop. So Reeves fined the district $7,500 and again ordered it to stop sponsoring prayers at graduations, assemblies, athletic competitions and other school events, WLBT-TV reported.

“That means administrators, teachers and staff of the Rankin County School District may not participate in any religious activity, or solicit or encourage religious activities at school or while performing duties as a RCSD employee,” Reeves added.

So when the district learned that Brandon High School’s marching band was planning to play the Christian hymn “How Great Thou Art” during halftime at Friday night’s football season opener, it was decided that was too close to the judge’s ban and the performance was cancelled.

But that didn’t stop dozens of parents and students and fans from performing ‘How Great Thou Art” on their own

"It bothers me because you look at the schools and all of the school shootings and all the bad things that are happening, and wonder why,” parent Kimberly Moore told WLBT. “It’s because we’re allowing evil to step in.”

“I don’t fault our school district because I know they are trying to do what’s right as a community and for the school,” Moore added. “But … in another I’m like we gotta take a stand on behalf of Christ.”

[Jim W N]

You’re not paying attention: nobody knows what the RATIFIERS of the 14A meant by including the P&I clause.

It is the ratifiers, not the authors, that determine the intent of the bill. The lack of a record of any debate is very strong evidence the ratifiers did not intend what the constitutional and governmental revolution the author intended.

[Amendment10]

It is the ratifiers, not the authors, that determine the intent of the bill.

Thank you for your patience with this discussion.

The major problem with the 14th Amendment is the following imo. Regardless that the South lost the Civil War, since the Founding States did not foresee such a war as evidenced by the “insure domestic tranquility” clause in the Preamble to the Constitution, the South still had the constitutional authority to block the ratification any proposed amendments to the Constitution. In other words, the losing South still controlled the Constitution.

The way I see the Constitution is that the first version of the Constitution did not survive the first several presidential administrations, the country taking the 2nd PC version of the Constitution into the Civil War.

The 3rd version of the Constitution, the post-Civil War version, amounted to the winning North doing anything that they wanted to do with the Constitution, including forcing the South to essentially ratify the 14th Amendment without first reading it; the spoils of war. But the South did read it, understood it imo, but refused to have anything to do with it, the North forcing the Southern states to “ratify” it anyway.

Note that I regard Woodrow Wilson’s Federal Reserve and the ratification of the ill-conceived 17th Amendment as the beginning of the 4th PC version of the Constitution, and the FDR and Obama administrations as establishing the 5th and 6th PC versions of the Constitution. And I wouldn’t be surprised if other patriots would argue that there are even more PC versions of the Constitution than just those six.

[Jim W N]

Well, no, that idea is again an argument for unbridled federal power and tyranny and I do not believe it is supportable.

The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land (Art VI, Cl 2) and Article V provides the ONLY method of changing it.

The Declaration of Independence gives instruction and guidance for valid secession. The D of I shows valid secession 1) should not be “for light or transient causes” 2) requires a certain “patient sufferance” while “evils are sufferable” 3) notifying and submitting the facts of abuse “to a candid world” (27 specific abuses are listed in the D of I) and finally 4) When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such Government.” This is not a constitutional dictate, but, as the D of I says, what “Prudence, indeed. will dictate...”

The South jumped the gun when they ceded from the Union without first going through the necessary steps outlined by the D of I of first nullifying and notifying the feds of why certain acts are unconstitutional. So the South’s cessation was invalid IMO and I believe the North had a constitutional right to fight them and get them back into the Union.

The Constitution was intact and remained so today, albeit, ignored and violated by dictates from the bench and Congress and the White House. Nevertheless, the Constitution remains the supreme Law of the Land and is the ONLY legal bulwark of freedom against the tyranny of the feds. This tyranny as I say, must be fought and resisted at every level, mainly at the individual state level at this point.

[Jim W N]

I must add, what followed was constitutionally convoluted but certainly did not void the Constitution (just as today’s federal nullification of the Constitution does not void the Constitution).

The South, as again part of the Union, had the power to not ratify the three Reconstruction amendments. I know of no valid way the South could have been omitted from that process. Apparently they were “constructively” omitted because apparently the North coerced the South against their will to ratify the three amendments. (If the duress could be proved, it could nullify the validity of the 12-14 amendments.)

What constitutionally should have happened was allowing the South to voluntarily vote and the amendments wouldn’t have passed, so you’re in the same situation as you were before the Civil War (”Have we learned anything children?”). One would hope the North wouldn’t try to force unconstitutional acts on the South. One would also hope the South would have learned to deal with unconstitutional federal acts on a step-by-step basis.

At that point, the North should have left well enough alone (a benign move giving deference to the Constitution as imperfect but nevertheless the Law of the Land) and there is strong evidence the whole slavery thing would have passed soon enough.

Again, the Constitution remains the supreme Law of the Land though many have tried to use the Civil War and Progressivism to void it. The Constitution may be muted (temporarily I hope) but will not be voided by anything other than an Article V process.

[wintertime]

I will not be responding to the content of any of your posts. If you continue posting to me some may conclude ( right or wrong) that you are a stalker.

[Clintonfatigued]

But school bands don’t sing lyrics, just hit the notes. Without the lyrics, how would they know it was a hymn?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3KeZT8GNoA

[GeronL]

The judge needs to be removed from the bench

[Phlyer]

Solution: Begin the privatization of all K-12 schooling.

I agree completely. Though I wouldn't stop with just K-12.