Wrong. The religion of liberalism is actively promoted in the public schools.

He takes a page from the Mul playbook and shoots...

yeah ok...Muslims are so put-upon in this country :rolleyes:

That is entirely my point. Why does one group get to play the "poor me" when the other does not?

You don't think there would be hell to pay if this girl was talking about Allah and they cut the mic....

Yea, I don't disagree with you here. If someone wants to thank their God or parents or whatever I don't really have a problem with it. I actually don't get offended by it. Now if a person harps on it again and again and again, it gets a little annoying at best - makes others not privy to their particular belief feel excluded or shunned or even threatened at worst. One or two mentions I could understand - nine (I think the article mentioned) seems to cross the line into prothyletizing. . .

Maybe an athlete, hopped up on adrenaline and the thrill of a just-won victory or something would be a little more able to get away with this; a valedictorian ought to be able to choose very deliberate words and maintain his/her composure in the context of this event. The context is not unimportant - her actions were very deliberate and seem pre-decided JUST to challenge the system. Is that really "practice of religion"?

This explanation is on shaky ground. You're saying an individual loses freedom of speech and the free expression of religion when the government provides funding for the 'forum'. If that is true, then it would violate the Constitution for the President to make any religious-oriented speeches at any public or private event, for the President represents the Government, and is paid by and protected by the Government. But that is not the case. You cannot explain this conflict using your 'separation of church and state' reasoning.

It should be.

It does violate the constitution for the president to make a religious oriented speech. I've seen the president reference religion, which is a different thing than a religious oriented speech. Regardless, it is unconstitutional, it's just not enforced. Who or what is going to chastise the president for this?

The confirmed deist Founders were few. They all, including the deists, highly respected the morality and teachings set forth in the Holy Bible. They were all, including the deists, influenced and inspired by the teachings of Christ.


Benjamin Franklin (ya, deist):

" I've lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing Proofs I see of this Truth —That God governs in the Affairs of Men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his Notice, is it probable that an Empire can rise without his Aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that except the Lord build the House they labor in vain who build it. I firmly believe this, —and I also believe that without his concurring Aid, we shall succeed in this political Building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our Projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a Reproach and Bye word down to future Ages. "


Thank God the ACLU wasn't around back then...He would have been burned at the stake...Could you imagine if a Republican dared utter the words of Benjamin Franklin now?...He would be tarred and feather by the fascist left. He would be painted an extremist and some type of monster for these words.

Yeah. Benjamin Franklin; the most prolific sex addict this side of John Holmes. How many kids did the old codger have? Thirty? Forty? And by how many different women other than his wife?

Poor example.

What did you expect...He was a deist...Christians are more trustworthy, infinitely more trustworthy, than Godless communists and other types of socialism that infest the Democrat party...Benjamin Franklin was flawed, as we all are, but that does not diminish my larger point; he was influenced and inspired by Christianity; the parts of the Bible he rejected accounted for his character flaws.

It would seem Thomas Jefferson would be the socialist/Democrat/athiest. Damn! He was screwing slaves, after all!

Anyway, so I read most of this thread, and it would seem the girl had some sort of right to say what she planned to say. Face it, if Jesus could power every kid to get straight A grades in school, I think a person would have to be a fool to b!tch and moan about she bringing this up in her graduation speech.

But the caveat is some kids are powered into high marks by Allah as well, not to mention Buddah or even, I can imagine, athiesm.

America's greatest universities were founded by Christians.

From the first one I picked - Stanford University:

"Just before 11 a.m., Leland and Jane Stanford mounted to the stage. As Mr. Stanford unfolded his manuscript and laid it on the large Bible that was open on the stand , Mrs. Stanford linked her left arm in his right and held her parasol to shelter him from the rays of the midday sun."

From Stanford University History.

dd74?...You care to regale us with the flaws of the Stanfords? Surely they can be belittled in some way or another, huh dd74?

Yeah, they have a crappy football team.

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives...SmokeMir-X.gif

Just skimmed something on Leland Stanford, Mul. Sounds like he was a true conservative - helped build the country, endowed a university, etc.

A true, meaningful person, giving back to the community, endorsing higher education, bestowing his riches on the everyday man.

Isn't that what conservatism is supposed to be? Well, now I see what's been missing for the last...ur...six years.

P.S.: The school still have a lousy football team, though. :(

Now go read up on Harvard, then Notre Dame, then Georgetown..etc.

I thought you hated universities since they are hotbeds of the dreaded "liberalism"?

The discussion has to do with their founders.