Students suspended for praying

[Guest LadyC]

Uh hold up, it is illegal for the school to do what they did. THey cannot stop them from praying. IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED! The school was 100% wrong

uh, hold up there you.... that is our whole point. the school was NOT EVEN TRYING to get them to stop praying.

in fact the school offered them the use of an entire empty classroom to hold their prayer meetings in.

the school was not violating the constitution.

[apothanein kerdos]

Uh hold up, it is illegal for the school to do what they did. THey cannot stop them from praying. IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED! The school was 100% wrong

uh, hold up there you.... that is our whole point. the school was NOT EVEN TRYING to get them to stop praying.

in fact the school offered them the use of an entire empty classroom to hold their prayer meetings in.

the school was not violating the constitution.

According to Tinker and subsequent rulings after, it was violating the Constitution.

Unless the students intended to block the passage, the school had no ground to ask them to leave.

[Guest LadyC]

can someone tell me where in the constitutional law it says students have a right to pray wherever they choose regardless of who or what it disrupts?

that's not what the law even implies.

the law is that their freedom to pray or worship is not to be forbidden. the school wasn't violating that law, BECAUSE it offered them accommodations on school grounds as a place to meet.

come on, think about this... our highways are funded by the government... does that mean that there can be no laws prohibiting a group of people from standing in the middle of the freeway to pray?

[Guest LadyC]

fine, AK, show me ONE SINGLE court case (since you're dying to do so) that has ruled that students are allowed to cause a disruption or block other students from where they are trying to go.

[Guest Biblicist]

Eliyahuw,

You are also saying that we do not need to obey the laws or rules of the world since we are Christians. That is not Biblical either. The students were clearly disobeying the authority placed over them. Not exactly a good witness to the Lord. He obeyed the authorities placed over him, even unto death.

Romans 13:1-7 1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.

4 For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.

6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing.

7 Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

Explain to me how this is separation of church and state. Since Christ is the head of the church and God institutes authority figures, i.e. governing authorities. Matthew 22:21 does not separate Church and State. That is taken out of context, they were talking about taxes, which by the way Christians should also do without question. Again, Christ was telling us to obey the authorities He has placed over us.

Separation of Church and State isn't even in the Constitution. It was in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists.

[Guest LadyC]

Uh hold up, it is illegal for the school to do what they did. THey cannot stop them from praying. IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED! The school was 100% wrong

uh, hold up there you.... that is our whole point. the school was NOT EVEN TRYING to get them to stop praying.

in fact the school offered them the use of an entire empty classroom to hold their prayer meetings in.

the school was not violating the constitution.

According to Tinker and subsequent rulings after, it was violating the Constitution.

Unless the students intended to block the passage, the school had no ground to ask them to leave.

ok, here ya go, you just answered it for yourself. they were aware that they were blocking passage, and refused to move. therefore it was intentional.

my husband often tries to make the same argument in his own defense... "i didn't mean to hurt you". oh, ok honey, i understand.... buying drugs was a total accident. lying to me was a total accident. baloney honey, that might have worked if we'd never talked about the fact that you lying to me and getting high HURTS me, but since you are now AWARE how deeply it hurts me, you can't use the excuse that you didn't mean to do it.

[apothanein kerdos]

fine, AK, show me ONE SINGLE court case (since you're dying to do so) that has ruled that students are allowed to cause a disruption or block other students from where they are trying to go.

Again, as I stated, one has to show intent to disrupt since disruption, in such a setting, is subjective. The school could deem anything action disruptive and subsequently ban it if intent did not have to be established.

As for court cases that cover the issue of fair treatment and intention of disruption:

Tinker v Des Moines 1969

Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens 1990

Murdock v. Pennsylvania 1943

Lovell v. City of Griffin, GA 1938

The Establishment Clause

The Equal Access Act (The previous two are acts passed that allow the controversial actions)

Those are just a few of the key cases that allow for what I am saying. Again, if it is just a group of students, they are allowed to do what they want. They are not a recognized club, therefore they are just friends hanging out in an area. Unless the school forbids friends from congregating in the commons area, they had no legal right to pursue action against these students.

Seriously, just because you disagree with what they did doesn't mean you can take away their Constitutional rights. I think what they did is horrible, and I'd advise them against it, but they have the Constitutional right to do what they did.

[apothanein kerdos]

Uh hold up, it is illegal for the school to do what they did. THey cannot stop them from praying. IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED! The school was 100% wrong

uh, hold up there you.... that is our whole point. the school was NOT EVEN TRYING to get them to stop praying.

in fact the school offered them the use of an entire empty classroom to hold their prayer meetings in.

the school was not violating the constitution.

According to Tinker and subsequent rulings after, it was violating the Constitution.

Unless the students intended to block the passage, the school had no ground to ask them to leave.

ok, here ya go, you just answered it for yourself. they were aware that they were blocking passage, and refused to move. therefore it was intentional.

my husband often tries to make the same argument in his own defense... "i didn't mean to hurt you". oh, ok honey, i understand.... buying drugs was a total accident. lying to me was a total accident. baloney honey, that might have worked if we'd never talked about the fact that you lying to me and getting high HURTS me, but since you are now AWARE how deeply it hurts me, you can't use the excuse that you didn't mean to do it.

Legally, it doesn't work that way.

If this is how it worked, legally, then the school could do that with ANY group. It would be an easy way to eradicate an unwanted group from campus. I am not arguing that the school was doing this, it's obvious they weren't. However, I am saying that LEGALLY this is not how it works.

Could you at least study the issue before trying to tell me what the law means? At least read the Supreme Court cases.

[Guest Biblicist]

If these kids had been chanting Satanic spells, would anyone care that they were kicked out!?

This issue is not about whether or not they were praying, but whether or not they were obeying. BIG difference.

[apothanein kerdos]

If these kids had been chanting Satanic spells, would anyone care that they were kicked out!?

This issue is not about whether or not they were praying, but whether or not they were obeying. BIG difference.

I'd still disagree with them, but the law still would have been violated. I am not saying I agree with the law, I am not saying the students are right...I am merely stating what the law is.