Maryland School Officials Threaten Seventh Grader with Disciplinary Action

[OuTpaTienT]

Originally Posted by mad1

I'll wager that the ACLU will side against the student.

You're obviously on drugs, blinded by a bias, or both.

[Theophylact]

Originally Posted by OuTpaTienT

You're obviously on drugs, blinded by a bias, or both.

Not necessarily; he may be a functional illiterate. On the basis of his inability to understand what's been posted, and the quality of his responses, I'd say that's a strong possibility as well.

[Pexster]

"That's it! You're on the list!"

Paul Lazzaro

[OuTpaTienT]

Originally Posted by Theophylact

Not necessarily; he may be a functional illiterate. On the basis of his inability to understand what's been posted, and the quality of his responses, I'd say that's a strong possibility as well.

Eh, you haven't been wrong yet in this thread, so maybe so.

[mad1]

Originally Posted by Pexster

"That's it! You're on the list!"

Paul Lazzaro

Thanks!

[shawshank62]

Reading a bible has nothing to do with seperation of church and state. If the school promoted a Bible Reading hoedown in the cafeteria during the middle of school day, that would be an issue of church and state.

[Mojo Risin']

Unfortunately, what you see happening here are school officials who have become so gun shy about separation of church that they chose to err on what they felt was the side of caution. I’ve gotta believe they feel they are under the microscope and thus fear public outcry and ensuing lawsuits from secular activists waiting to pounce on them.

Nowadays, teachers have to think twice before saying, “Heaven forbid” or “Oh my God” because someone might get offended. Don’t even think of saying the Pledge of Allegiance with “under God” in it because someone will take you to court. It’s turned into a joke, but it isn’t funny. Our urban public schools have been steadily going downhill since the Seventies (which bore the direct result of the Sixties) and nonsense like this is but a small part of why.

We descriptively term decades once they end (e.g. the “Roaring Twenties”, the “Fabulous Fifties”). Well, the Sixties should have been coined the “Psychotic Sixties”. MLK aside, no decade has ever done more to totally screw up this country, and we are still feeling its activist effects today. May God help us.

[-FMA]

I simply do not understand such actions. She's reading the book on her time, not his, and she isn't trying to ram Jesus down anyones throats. What's the big deal? Let her read the book.

I've read the Bible in school, during class when we're just supposed to read anything. It's an interesting read, I don't blame the girl for wanting to spend her free time reading it.

-FMA

[originel]

Originally Posted by mad1

My original claim," I'll wager that the ACLU will side against the student."

My second quote," I see the decison from the ACLU will be not to file a lawsuit, thus supporting the stance of the school official."

Your second quote is a logical fallacy. More specifically, it is a vacuous implication. Since you don't seem to be averse in deductive logic, I'll put it differently. You claimed that since the ACLU hasn't stated their support of a cause, then they do not support the cause. This is false though. Since the ACLU has not stated their position, then that means we don't know their position, aka they could be for or against. We cannot truthfully claim to know their position until they have stated it, we can only theorize on what it is.

[mrniceguy]

yeah, just like cause we don't know iraq doesn't have nuclear weapons doesn't mean they don't have nuclear weapons...just like iran and syria