Jesus comes down with a cost — it must have been one of those “mysterious ways” things.
A federal judge has awarded the American Civil Liberties Union more than $42,000 to cover attorneys fees and court costs associated with the organization’s fight to remove a portrait of Jesus from Slidell City Court.U.S. District Court Judge Ivan L.R. Lemelle ruled ruled in April that Slidell officials broke the law by hanging the Jesus portrait on the wall at the courthouse. The decision provided the ACLU with $1 in damages and allowed the organization to request reimbursement for the debt the ACLU incurred when it sued the court, Judge Jim Lamz, the city of Slidell and St. Tammany Parish in July 2007.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected a First Amendment challenge to a Florida law that says students must get a parent’s permission to get out of a daily classroom recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. But the court ruled that a part of the law requiring all “civilians” to stand during the pledge in schools is unconstitutional. Christine Frazier had brought suit on behalf of her son, Cameron, in 2005, when her son was in the 11th grade. A federal district judge agreed that the rule “robs the student of the right to make an independent decision whether to say the pledge.” On appeal, 11th Circuit Chief Judge J.L. Edmondson, Senior Judge James C. Hill and visiting 9th Circuit Senior Judge Arthur L. Alarc?n noted that the U.S. Supreme Court held over a half a century ago that local government authorities can’t compel a salute to the flag. But the panel said the Florida law protects parents’ constitutional rights to bring up their children as they see fit. “The State, in restricting the student’s freedom of speech, advances the protection of the constitutional rights of parents: an interest which the State may lawfully protect,” the panel said Wednesday. The panel warned that it considered only Frazier’s challenge to the law on its face and not whether it might be applied constitutionally to any particular student. On the question of standing during the pledge, the state acknowledged that students have a right to remain seated but had urged the court to read the requirement as applicable only to those students who don’t get a parent’s permission to not say the pledge. The 11th Circuit panel said that interpretation was too “improbable.”
I don’t quite get the latter, I guess it means the kids have to pledge allegiance unless they get parents permission to stop, but they can sit down in protest while they do it. I guess parents have rights over what a child says, but not his posture while he says it.
what: try flying a piece of paper on a flag pole.
cynic: So tell me, how would you show your patriotism? And by the way, I am not implying you are ashamed. I see very few people that show pride in the USA anymore. In any manor. Not even in sports.
I see our polititians selling off our country to the highest bidder. Illegal aliens gaining the same rights as US citizens every day. Since Carter, our country has gone down a steep spiral. Soon, the US will cease to exist and it will be NA (North America) unless something is done now. I am sure some here would not mind.
DD
I don’t have a flag pole. What purpose would my having one serve?
Really? Who? I would not read that into anyone’s posts here. I’m sure that many here would be willing to put themselves in great peril to defend the constitution from threats foreign and domestic. Problem is, most threats to the constitution have been domestic ones perpetrated by those waving the flag most visibly.
I show my “patriotism” by living free and expecting others to as well. That may be a little generic for you, but when I’m partaking of the bread and circuses, anything more just smacks of needless and demeaning indoctrination. Not to mention dangerous indoctrination. By the analogy of sporting events (the “ciruses”), those major fans of any given team are increasingly less likely to be objective enough to see the flaws of their team or the virtues of the others. The same is true of patriots.
As for those illegal aliens, I know! I mean, first we stop taking their land, then we start trading with them, then we let them work here. Now they’re getting treated almost as well as citizens. If this terrible trend keeps up, the next thing you know we’ll even treat them like human beings…
whatever. You 2 (if you are Americans) are in for a rude awakening.
Bye
See, that’s what I mean. Fully embracing the pledge of allegience is the first step on the road to becoming so blindly patriotic that you need to question someone’s citizenship if they think sufficiently different than you. You forget that America is founded by people who were such loyal and patriotic people to their countries that they started a revolution and started their own country. And they were, in effect, immigrants to the colonies.
I expect that if you dig deep enough into American history, you’ll find that the very people you ultimately want to pay homage to wouldn’t approve. Not that their opinion matters anyway. The world is now. How we treat people in that world — even illegal immigrants — says more about us as a nation than any flag worshiping, lapel-pin wearing, ribbon-bumpered loyalists to. I’d rather pride myself on my loyalty to the species first, my country second.
Was not going to come back but was curious if either of you 2 had anything intelligent to add.
Nope.
Cynic, you show a bit more logic than What does but you are way off base.
We do not worship flags, own a lapel-pin, or even have a bumper sticker.
My wife is a ?LEGAL? immigrant. We waited in line. We had her police records checked. As well as her financial records. She got a full physical to ensure she was not bringing any diseases into this country.
The extreme left such as ?What? say well fuck the borders. Let anyone come in. They do not care one bit. Just as long as they work for minimum wage or less. People like ?What? are tools and fools. The wealthy want to get richer and screw the middle class. They use people like What to push their greed. Let?s send our technical jobs overseas while we are at it. Before long we will have nothing but the rich and the poor. The cast system if you know what that is.
Also, next time you go to McDonalds or any other fast food place and none are legal Immigrants, I hope you do NOT get some disease they carried across the border and die from it.
Would you mind standing in line for hours, only to have someone cut in line ahead of you just as you are getting ready to enter whatever you are waiting for? If you don?t you are a fool. Many millions of people are waiting in line to come to America legally. To cut in line in front of them is just plain wrong.
I could go on for hours but you need to wake up and see reality and use your head and think both side through.
You are young and I believe you can still form logical thought. ?What? is a waste of time. Cynic, I hope I am not wrong about you.
Given certaining grammatical choices you make, unless you’re a huge fan of Sinead O’Connor, I’m probably older than you.
(The fact that I’m old enough to make such a reference should tell you something.)
This conversation is all over the map, but again I think the important part comes down to the blinding effect “patriotism” has — both on our own opinions and on our interpretations of others. Illegal immigration has been a huge hot-botton topic on the part of “conservatives”, who blame the “liberals”.
(Personally, I think those terms have become too polarizing, but in a discussion of conservatives and liberals, what can we do?)
To wit: Has it escaped your attention that the Mexican immigration problem developed over the span of Reagan’s term? As did NAFTA? That the bulk of illegal immigrants work for companies run by conservatives? (Or in their homes and gardens.) That the jobs outsourced to other countries are from companies run by conservatives? But who gets the blame? Liberals.
The reason is, now that these people are here and need things like health care, they’re out in the open. And we can’t have that. Suddenly the consevatives are outraged, and perhaps for good reasons. But now that they’ve identified illegals as “the enemy”, they — and their families and their children — are to be treated as such.
It’s tough to suggest that it always falls to the “liberals” to suggest that maybe these people be treated like humans once they’re here for whatever reason without making it seem like conservatives as a group aren’t compassionate. But what other conclusion can we draw? Illegals ned help, liberals want to offer it, and suddenly they get caught holding the blame for all of it. Not fair, not true, not honest.
Yes, of course it’s not fair that illegals have stepped in line in front of the those who have followed the rules. Of course it isn’t. But you can’t just eject 11 million people. It’s not possible.
Going forward, maybe the fiscally conservative will be more careful about who they hire so the social liberals won’t have to take the heat for cleaning up the inevitable outcome. And speaking of inevitable outcomes, the primary reason people immigrate, illegally or not, anywhere is because the conditions in their country of origin suck more than the place they’re going. And so it is that the predominant attitude among those patriotic conservatives we’re to emulate tend to do anything but boost conditions in those countries that are NOT the USA, exascerbating the problem.
DD
Can’t make sense out of that one.
You are sure making so huge assumptions. Did I write anything that would indicate that I take the position you have assigned to me? Seems the extreme label might better fit those that assign extreme positions to others before asking them what their actual position is.
If big business (strongly supported by conservative politicians) wanted illegal immigration to stop it would. To saddle liberals with the illegal immigration problem is just delusional.
DD,
For a little bit of info regarding the pledge, you might find the post entitled “Time to replace the “gimmicky” pledge?” (at gods4suckers.net) interesting.
Suck it pledge (you too jesus)
Cynic, yes I am all over the map, cause it is not so simple.
First, O?Connor came along many years later than my teens. She coped out to say the least. First she was very pretty till she shaved her head, but I have no problem there. Still she was very talented. Then she tore up the popes picture. But from there, lost respect for her. That is ancient history.
The Hispanic problem did not start with Reagan. It started with Carter with the Cubans. Not to mention, he is the second worst president ever. Reagan went along with it. Clinton furthered the problem. Even went with having our government offices required to speak both English and Spanish. And he passed NAFTA. Now all major businesses require both English and Spanish.
These Hispanics, who walked across our border, violated our laws, refuse to adjust to our customs, refuse to learn English, and steal from my family. Before you jump on this, think of how much OUR medical insurance has increased due to these criminals. How much of a drain on our education system is due to these criminals. How much a drain on our welfare is due to these criminals. The list goes on, but I hope you get the idea.
Those that come to our country illegally are mentally lazy. Period. Radical perhaps but think about it.
They have no real pride in their country. If they did, they would try to make it better. Instead, they come here where they do not have to learn a new language. Where they make many times more money than where they came from, and send large amounts of money back to their families.
Is it not the far left only that is guilty of illegal immigration? Of course not. The far right is just as guilty. Both are tools. Neither can use their minds. They are puppets and that is all.
What do you propose be done about it?
Bottom line there is no razor line on who should go back and who can stay. I would start with those that refuse to learn our language and are able to of course, would be a good starting point.
Those that have grown up here are a different story. You would not send them or their immediate family back.
To allow them all 100% amnesty is plain wrong.
To send them all back is even worst. Even I would not stand for that.
But action on this and our oil situation both have got to get going.
(Would you support pulling all of our bases back to our shores? I would.)
What percentage of them would you say have refused to learn English and why is that a good criteria? If I were to suddenly refuse to speak in any language but French, would you advocate my removal?
What bases? Military bases? Becoming an isolationist nation didn’t work before, doesn’t work for those who attempt it in the current international climate, and won’t work for us now. The world is too small for that now.
A good enough number. If you refused to speak English and insisted that we conduct business in your language cause you are too lazy or hard headed, a non citizen and here breaking our laws, yes. And tell me, why should I have to press 1 to speak English? No other country requires you to have different lanquages.
Since when were we ever an isolationist nation? Is Canada an isolationist nation? They don’t have bases all over the world. Why are we the worlds hated policeman?
30? 40? Are you basing this on ancedontal evidence of there being this one guy who ran into another one that didn’t seem to know the langage that one time he tried to speak to him? Or do you have data tracking single individuals over a significant span of time to determine that they in fact are not trying to learn it?
This country doesn’t require you to have different languages either. Many, many other countries are are bi or multilingual simply because it makes their lives easier to be that way given the composition of their regions and populations. Naturally the American attitude is that we don’t need to adapt — everyone else can. But that’s just childish, right?
America was isolationist in the 1920s, for instance. I expect aren’t THAT old, but maybe it came up in class?
We are the hated policeman simply because we are the policeman. We have the power, and therefore are in the difficult and unenviable postion of either being hated for taking responsibility for it or being hated for failing to. The only way to win is to simply be weak and hope we don’t get annexed.
Canada is not isolationist. They are, however, largely irrevant. (Sorry Canada — nothing personal.) If Peter Parker hadn’t stopped that mugger that killed his Uncle Owen and he WASN’T ibued with Spidy Powers, he wouldn’t have anything to kick himself for. And for that reason, neither does Canada.
I don’t know where you live, but obviously you don’t have the problem there. I live in Northern Virginia. A good 30% do not speak English. We are talking millions.
30 to 40? Why do you think it is a requirement to have both English and Spanish at all government agencies, and why do businesses all have both languages also? If you still think 30 to 40, you have really got to wake up.
I agree that we do not learn enough languages. Every county I have been to (for more than a few weeks) I have learned or studied their language. Spanish, Russian, and Italian.
Yes America was in isolation in the 20′s and 30′s and that is what probably caused the great depression.
But what I suggest by pulling our bases out is not isolationism. Not by any streth of the immagination.
Do you understand the difference between “aren’t willing to learn English” and “can’t speak English yet”? I live in Pittsburgh, where the current nature of the economic climate and industry doesn’t lend itself to an onsought of immigrants. (Wasn’t always the case.)
Most of our (Pittsburgh) present influx comes from places like Russia, Croatia, Poland, India, Hungary — all places where English is commmonly tought alongside their native languages. The kind of immigrants you’re talking about come from countries that don’t do that. There will be a learning curve for them.
I don’t necessarily think we need to learn more languages yet. Europe does and that’s fine because they can justify it. We can’t so much. Yet. And in the meantime there will be a transition, a period of pressure between how it was and how it will be. During such times there will be those who will be indignant about the whole thing and resist the changes. Know anyone like that?
Altruism doesn’t really exist — at least not on a scale that could affect troop or base deployment. That’s why Bush had to spins so many tales to invade Iraq. Even if he had the purest of intentions toward the Iraqi people (and hey, he might have), he wasn’t going to be able to so much as fire spitwads into that country without other motivations to back him up — national security, revenge, fear, economics, etc. People are basically selfish.
You can’t really cast projecting power into the world as selfish and keeping to ourselves as not selfish though. They are both selfish positions. So why are those bases there? To protect “our interests”. If that’s so, then withdrawing them implies that we’re giving those interests up.
How would you define isolationist? What good would it serve? Are you hoping for a global Atlas Shrugged situation?
Don’t know if you are still here but…
Most here have been here for many years and still refuse to learn English. They fly their flags, not ours.
I have friends from Russia, and many satelites. They have learned Enlish in 1 to 2 years.
I think we all need to learn at least two lanquanges. Just to broaden our minds.
What interests? Oil? Fuck the oil.
We do not need to be in other peoples back yards to not be isolationists.
If we need to be somewhere to protect our “national interests” where can we not be, in a matter of a few hours?
Do you have a study to back that up? Look at the Italian immigrants. It’s not uncommon to see first generation italian immgrants who had difficulty learning the language. It’s HARD to learn a new language when you’re older, and quite likely working your ass off to support your children –who will absorb the language without trying at all, like we all did.
The difference is, hispanic immigration isn’t punctuated like the waves from mass movement from Eurpean countries. It’s not a “one wave, next generation integrates” scenario. It’s a “many wave, next generation integrates” scenario. Can you honestly tell me that you’ve done the analysis to show that hispanic immigrant as a whole aren’t learning the languge? Or just the recent ones?
As for flags, just because you leave a country doesn’t mean you’re not proud of your heritage. If you moved to Canada, would you renounce your heritage? Sometimes pride is all we have, and it becomes especially important when trying to hold one’s head up in a nation where it’s publically acceptable to put you down because you’re not from around there. Not to single out the Italians, but when you ever walked inside a mom and pop pizza joint? Seen the flags, the maps, etc. It’s not just ambiance. You’re likely to see that shit in the dens of their houses as well. And it’s not because they hate America, but because they’re proud of who they are in their entirety, not just the part you want them to be proud of.
We’re capable of being anywhere in a few hours BECAUSE of the bases.
Good points all but the last one.
It is called task forces. If we needed to defend our interests, our fleets and airbourne forces would well be able to take out most threats to our allies in a matter of hours. Trust me, I know.
One thing I have observed is most people from other nations try to learn our language. The exeption is from the south. Far too many don’t even attempt. Is it because they are stupid? no. Is it because we want them to remain ignorant and subvervent to us? Afraid that is close to what big business wants. Freak Economics is what it is called I believe.