US Court upholds 10 Commandments on public land

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Ed writes:

Allowing prayer in public schools doesn't establish a religion.

 

Correct Ed, but I haven't seen anyone state that kids can't pray in school, so is this just another random comment on your part?

 

TheScout writes:

No clause in the constitution itself?

 

There's article III: "...the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

 

Those are all more questionable decisions made by the SCOTUS.

 

Yeah. So? The SC makes decisions I disagree with too, but since I like dealing with reality, I take it from there. For a scout-related example, I thought the SC was wrong in saying the BSA was a private organization; I would have ruled that, by chartering thousands of units to public schools for decades and having public schools as their largest chartering partner, and knowing that public schools are restricted by state law (including New Jersey's Law Against Discrimination, which is what the Dale case was based on), that the BSA knowingly and willingly agreed that all public school chartered units would have to admit atheists, and gays in states where schools were prohibited from discriminating on the grounds of sexual orientation, and that partly through the large number of public school charters and other government agencies like police departments, the BSA has been acting as if it was a public accommodation for decades, so it would be far too late to claim to be a private organization.

(continued)

[evmori]

Ed writes:

Allowing prayer in public schools doesn't establish a religion.

 

Correct Ed, but I haven't seen anyone state that kids can't pray in school, so is this just another random comment on your part?

 

I was talking about anyone in a public school. Teachers, janitors, administrative staff, bus drivers, students, security.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

But I'm not on the supreme court, and the BSA won, so you'll notice I call the BSA a private organization, even though I think that was a bad decision.

 

In your little world we should apparently just stop holding elections and let the SCOTUS make all the decisions.

 

Of course not; about all the SC does is tell the government "no, you can't do X". The SC does not pass laws, it does not appoint government officials or ambassadors, it does not make policy, it does not declare war (well, nobody does nowadays), it mostly just reviews laws and settles legal disputes. But for some reason, you think state governments should have unlimited powers unfettered by anything, and having the SC say "states can't do X" is something you don't like. Oh well.

 

Since it is the ultimate arbiter of anything anyway under your perverted theories.

 

It's the ultimate arbiter of what a law means, but they don't write the laws. A lot of laws have been written or rewritten after SC decisions.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

What are you talking about Ed? All of the people you listed can pray.

[evmori]

Then what is you big problem with prayer in public schools Merlyn?

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

What big problem Ed? You need to be more specific.

[evmori]

I need to be more specific?

 

OK. A teacher bows his/her head before the start of a class. Student asks "What are you doing?" Teacher answers "Praying."

 

 

[TheScout]

So is it Marbury or Section III which gives the SC its power. You just changed. LOL.

 

I'm suprised you picked the clause you did. It recognizes the great Congressional power of federal courts (especially in appellate jurisdiction). It also doesn't grant the SC exclusive power and says nothing of the other branchs?

 

The framers of the constitution envisioned a limited role for the SC. Madison's Notes wrote of the clause you mentioned,

 

''The motion of Docr. Johnson was agreed to nem : con : it being generally supposed that the jurisdiction given was constructively limited to cases of a Judiciary nature--''

 

Important to note the "judical" nature of the powers you point out. The convention debated this issue and clearly wanted the SC's power limited to "judical" quesions and not constitutional ones. Recall Madison originally wanted to create a Council of Revision including the Supreme Court justices to determine the constitutionality of federal legislation, something that was rejected 4 times.

 

You like to envison the SC as a passive insturment. It used to be. But look recently. After Brown it ordered integration across the country. Federal courts have ordered school busing. Courts have drawn and reviewed judical districts.

 

We could have just stuck with the British monarch if this was our dream for the Republic.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Ed, when in charge of a class, a teacher is acting as a state agent again.

 

TheScout, I haven't changed my position. A three-word answer of "Marbury v. Madison" includes the rationale for that decision.

[evmori]

So the teacher can't pray?

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Not when in charge of a class, Ed. They can pray on their own time when they aren't acting as a state agent in charge of other people's children.

[evmori]

A teacher isn't allowed to say a silent prayer before the start of class? What happened to the freedom of religion?

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Sure a teacher can pray before the start of class Ed, in the teacher's lounge. They can be in the lounge because class hasn't started yet.

[evmori]

But they can't have a silent prayer in their classroom between classes?

[TheScout]

Well its nice that a clever decision by the SCOTUS, it can give itself powers.

 

It appears you have been snookered by Mr. Marshall too. LOL