- Joined
- Apr 29, 2012
- Messages
- 17,873
- Reaction score
- 8,364
- Location
- On an island. Not that one!
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
Yeah, that "without penalty" part would work really well :roll:Mississippi May Mandate Ten Commandments and Pledges to State, U.S. Flags in Schools
JACKSON — Mississippi law would require schoolchildren to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and see the Ten Commandments be displayed on public-school walls under new bills in the Legislature this session, requirements that may violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. One would also require Mississippi teachers to teach Mississippi's pledge glorifying the state flag, which contains the Confederate battle emblem in its canton.
#State Rep. Credell Calhoun, D-Jackson, introduced House Bill 427, which would amend the Mississippi Constitution to mandate that public-school teachers and principals must display the Ten Commandments. It would require that school officials display the religious laws "on an appropriately framed background with minimum dimensions" of 11x14 inches in all classrooms, auditoriums, and cafeterias, alongside the motto, "In God We Trust."
#Students would have to recite all 10 commandments within the first hour of class each morning. Any teacher or student who objects to reciting it would be excused "without penalty" from reciting the pledge.
This seems to be not only a violation of free speech but also freedom of religion. The SCOTUS has ruled several times on similar laws and has always found them to be un-Constitutional.
The pledge of allegiance to the national flag is probably the least controversial aspect of the proposed law but the parts requiring teachers and student to recite before their class the Ten Commandments and the pledge to the state flag pose a few problems.
Many in Mississippi have been trying for some time to change the state flag but so far -- no luck.
View attachment 67248415 You can see why pledging allegiance to this flag might be an issue for many Mississippians.
Yeah, that "without penalty" part would work really well :roll:
This seems to be not only a violation of free speech but also freedom of religion. The SCOTUS has ruled several times on similar laws and has always found them to be un-Constitutional.
The pledge of allegiance to the national flag is probably the least controversial aspect of the proposed law but the parts requiring teachers and student to recite before their class the Ten Commandments and the pledge to the state flag pose a few problems.
Many in Mississippi have been trying for some time to change the state flag but so far -- no luck.
View attachment 67248415 You can see why pledging allegiance to this flag might be an issue for many Mississippians.
Yeah, that "without penalty" part would work really well :roll:
This seems to be not only a violation of free speech but also freedom of religion. The SCOTUS has ruled several times on similar laws and has always found them to be un-Constitutional.
The pledge of allegiance to the national flag is probably the least controversial aspect of the proposed law but the parts requiring teachers and student to recite before their class the Ten Commandments and the pledge to the state flag pose a few problems.
Many in Mississippi have been trying for some time to change the state flag but so far -- no luck.
View attachment 67248415 You can see why pledging allegiance to this flag might be an issue for many Mississippians.
Yeah, that "without penalty" part would work really well :roll:
This seems to be not only a violation of free speech but also freedom of religion. The SCOTUS has ruled several times on similar laws and has always found them to be un-Constitutional.
The pledge of allegiance to the national flag is probably the least controversial aspect of the proposed law but the parts requiring teachers and student to recite before their class the Ten Commandments and the pledge to the state flag pose a few problems.
Many in Mississippi have been trying for some time to change the state flag but so far -- no luck.
View attachment 67248415 You can see why pledging allegiance to this flag might be an issue for many Mississippians.
Yeah, that "without penalty" part would work really well :roll:
This seems to be not only a violation of free speech but also freedom of religion. The SCOTUS has ruled several times on similar laws and has always found them to be un-Constitutional.
The pledge of allegiance to the national flag is probably the least controversial aspect of the proposed law but the parts requiring teachers and student to recite before their class the Ten Commandments and the pledge to the state flag pose a few problems.
Many in Mississippi have been trying for some time to change the state flag but so far -- no luck.
View attachment 67248415 You can see why pledging allegiance to this flag might be an issue for many Mississippians.
Yeah, that "without penalty" part would work really well :roll:
The country was founded in 1776 yet here we are in 2019 with such a basic idea as this getting a "Well, it might be legal but maybe not, nobody knows because they system has not managed to get that far in deciding" is disgusting.
This seems to be not only a violation of free speech but also freedom of religion. The SCOTUS has ruled several times on similar laws and has always found them to be un-Constitutional.
The pledge of allegiance to the national flag is probably the least controversial aspect of the proposed law but the parts requiring teachers and student to recite before their class the Ten Commandments and the pledge to the state flag pose a few problems.
Many in Mississippi have been trying for some time to change the state flag but so far -- no luck.
View attachment 67248415 You can see why pledging allegiance to this flag might be an issue for many Mississippians.
Yeah, that "without penalty" part would work really well :roll:
This is a bad hill to die on because the courts have consistently held that these kinds of requirements in public schools are most definitely unconstitutional. The article points this out, actually. citing USSC cases in 1980 for the 10 Commandments, and 1946 on the pledge of allegiance. So your worries were all but put to bed decades ago. What a relief!
So then how does this story run do you think.....are these people too dim to know that the proposals are illegal....or do they rather not care? It could be that they dont care, I watched Seattle pass a law that they knew the courts would strike...they decided that they had to "do something".
As I said in another post, they very likely know it's not legal, and don't even expect or care if it gets signed into law. They've made their statement - they stand with the 10 commandments and the pledge of allegiance! America! That's all there is.
In Tennessee this kind of thing is as predictable as the spring. Guys with nothing better to do with their time in the legislature sitting on a back bench propose a bunch of stupid crap, send out a press release, hope the stories run locally at least, and that's the end of the legislation.
This seems to be not only a violation of free speech but also freedom of religion. The SCOTUS has ruled several times on similar laws and has always found them to be un-Constitutional.
The pledge of allegiance to the national flag is probably the least controversial aspect of the proposed law but the parts requiring teachers and student to recite before their class the Ten Commandments and the pledge to the state flag pose a few problems.
Many in Mississippi have been trying for some time to change the state flag but so far -- no luck.
View attachment 67248415 You can see why pledging allegiance to this flag might be an issue for many Mississippians.
Yeah, that "without penalty" part would work really well :roll:
Let's see if the bill actually passes the MS House first, before we get all bent out of shape. Even if it does, it will have to pass the MS Senate, and then get signed by the Governor, and of course be successful in the court challenge that will surely follow.
So far, one guy has introduced a bill in the state House. Not exactly enough for us to get all sweaty and angry about. There are state legislators in every state that introduce legislation that is ill conceived and/or unConstitutional, all the time. This is no exception.
If by some fate the bill passes out of both chambers of the legislature and is signed into law, then I am sure it will immediately be taken to court where a federal judge will issue a stay on its enforcement, and eventually (and probably quickly) be found in conflict with the US Constitution, federal court precedent, and federal case law.
In the mean time, if it helps to show hate toward an entire state and devout religious people as a whole, then by all means - continue.
True it doesn't bring in the Ten Commandments portion of Rep. Calhoun's bill but the penalty fine does appear to violate the free speech clause in the ConstitutionRepublican Bill Goes Further
#While Calhoun's bill does not suggest a fine for non-compliance, another a bill authored by State Rep. William Shirley, R-Quitman, would impose a fine.
#Shirley's bill, House Bill 172, would impose $1,500 fines on schools for instances in which they do not require teachers to have their classrooms recite the Pledge of Allegiance within the first hour of class.
If you had read past the first couple paragraphs, you might have found the following
True it doesn't bring in the Ten Commandments portion of Rep. Calhoun's bill but the penalty fine does appear to violate the free speech clause in the Constitution
Please explain how my words have shown hatred toward "devout religious people as a whole"? By posting such words, Beaudreaux, appear to be claiming that you only see certain segments of the American citizenry as "devout religious people"
Some who call Mississippi home are trying to move the state into the 21st Century
A new Mississippi flag has a surprising champion: A segregationist’s grandchild
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?