[Poison Pill]

The feds have NO constitutional authority to interfere with private or state freedom of religion.

If the District takes any Federal money, either directly, or funneled through the State, the Federal courts would have a say.

[vette6387]

“If the District takes any Federal money, either directly, or funneled through the State, the Federal courts would have a say. “

Another perfect example of why the Department of Education should be shuttered and Federal Taxes reduced so that the money going into this rathole could be used at the state and local level.

[Jim W N]

Sure, and money is the bottom line, even though this federal action is still barred by the Constitution. But if you’re going to stand up to the feds, of course, you have to already be prepared for financial independence from the feds. But that should be embraced by every freedom-loving state.

First of all, isn’t INDEPENDENCE from tyranny and oppressive regimes the basis for the founding of America to begin with?

And secondly, if a state were smart, kept state government and taxes to a minimum, and let the market economy free of government interference run things, pretty soon that state would be financially more healthy than the bankrupt feds. If tiny, resource-poor Hong Kong sitting on a rock peninsula can do it, any state can do it.

[Phlyer]

The feds have NO constitutional authority to interfere with private or state freedom of religion.

Actually, they do. The 14th Amendment: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; . . . nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This changes the 1st Amendment from "Congress shall make no law . . ." to include the States. And the 'equal protection' clause means that no governmental entity - including a school - can abridge one's free exercise of religion. Which includes atheists . . . who would be 'forced' to endure something against their religion if their tax dollars (including local tax dollars, it's not limited to federal taxes) are 'establishing' a religious exercise with which their own religion (self love, basically) is in conflict.

I don't have to like it, but that's what the words say. One way to look at that is if the muslims demanded that the band get out their prayer blankets and pray to Mecca during the half time, would we consider that a bad thing? I would.

On the other hand, if a bunch of local people just decided to freely exercise their *own* religion - which is what happened - then the courts have no authority to tell them not to. Nor do the school systems have any authority to tell a valedictorian what he/she can say in a speech.

Of course, like a lot of statist nonsense, this is all one way. Christians are prohibited from the free exercise of our religion, but none of the other faith-based doctrines - including state socialism - are limited at all.

I think we need to get state socialism/secular humanism recognized for what it is - a religion. Then we can use these same rulings to get a lot of their faith-based doctrines (because their sure isn't any objective proof of them) out of our schools.

[Scrambler Bob]

If the District takes any Federal money, ==

Federal Money?

That’s the peoples’ money, taken by the Feds to be ‘given’ back.

(Unless it is Monopoly Money, freshly printed with no backing.)

[patriotfury]

What you are saying is the general perception.

However, rhetorically, are Federal Reserve Notes “Federal,” as in U.S. Government issued?

Furthermore, if in some weird universe history were changed, and “Federal Reserve Notes” were actually issued or originated from the U.S. Federal Government, does this mean that all circulation and pay in “Federal” Reserve Notes throughout the U.S. should result in the elimination, by default, of all religious activity since “Federal” Reserve Notes are the only “Legal [Tender]” instruments of monetary value to donate, tithe, or exchange for various services offered by religious organizations?

Of course not! It is highly unlikely this is what you are saying.

At the end of the day, the policy bias emanating from the Federal Government (and government in general) is just that. It is a bias.

To top it off, how can any bias exist without its own “beliefs” (faith) and ideological motivation?

What we have been and are truly witnessing here and now, are the beliefs (ultimately faith) and the natural sequence of totalitarian ideologies of those who appose God being forced upon all of society.

As humanism (or faith in man) gave birth to religious persecution in pre-WWII Germany and during Bolshevik Russia, this same bias is now literally being foisted on American society by brute force and coercion where necessary.