Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

High School Graduation Held In Church Ruled UnConstitutional

July 25, 2012 by  

High School Graduation Held In Church Ruled UnConstitutional
PHOTOS.COM
A court in Wisconsin ruled that graduation ceremonies held in a church building are unConstitutional.

For years, high schools have used large buildings in the community for graduation. But church buildings might have to be crossed off the list after a ruling in Wisconsin on Monday.

In September, a three-judge panel ruled it was Constitutional for the Elmbrook School District to conduct graduation ceremonies in a church. But that decision was reversed, largely because students were exposed to “conditions of extensive proselytization” (a cross, religious pamphlets and hymnals). The court also cited the involvement of minors as a reason for the decision.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed a complaint on behalf of a group of nine anonymous individuals consisting of parents and students. The initial claim was filed in 2009, but some of the plaintiffs have made claims for monetary damages due to emotional suffering.

“They felt graduation was ruined because it was held in such a deeply religious environment. We’re hopeful this case will have a big impact around the country,” said attorney Alex Luchenitser. “This decision upholds the separation of church and state, it upholds the Constitution. It ensures the students in Wisconsin will not be forced to enter an intensely religious environment as the price of attending their own high school graduation, a seminal event in their lives.”

Similar cases have been tried in Georgia, Maryland and New Jersey.

According to the school district, graduations were held at Elmbrook Church because it was an air-conditioned venue large enough to seat the friends and family of graduates.

Bryan Nash

Staff writer Bryan Nash has devoted much of his life to searching for the truth behind the lies that the masses never question. He is currently pursuing a Master's of Divinity and is the author of The Messiah's Misfits, Things Unseen and The Backpack Guide to Surviving the University. He has also been a regular contributor to the magazine Biblical Insights.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “High School Graduation Held In Church Ruled UnConstitutional”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

    PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATIONS IN MEMPHIS CHURCHES WERE COMMON DURING THE 1970s AND EARLY 1980s. MY GRADUATION WAS IN A CHURCH.

    • Robert Smith

      I wonder…

      Is the school paying rent for the hall?

      Then it’s MY tax money that’s going to a church.

      Rob

      • Randy131

        It’s not going to a church, it’s going for an indoor space large enough to accomadate the graduation process of the school, so why care about who profits from providing for the need of the school? There are many nefarious organizations that profit from providing for a need or service to or for a government agency, yet I here no squable over where the profit goes or who gets it, so why pick on a religious organization for only doing the same? Seems to me that what is going on here is discrimination through prejudice and bias against a group for their religious beliefs by denying them their right and ability to participate in an economic venture and make a profit for doing so, which is definately against our laws. Nobody, including government organiztions, are allowed to descriminate for reasons of race, religion, gender, or sexual preference, according to our most updated laws, and that is what this court has ruled on and for, allowing discrimination against a religious organization, because this is only about a rental agreement for use of a building and it’s property, and no religious services were involved during the time of rental.

      • Patriot1776

        And in this instance, the public is receiving the benefit of using the church’s building for a public event. Just because the building is owned by the church doesn’t mean that the church can’t support the community by allowing the graduation ceremony to be held in their building. If the church does charge a fee for the use of the building, the people attending the ceremony received the use of the building, the facilities, the utilities and the parking area in exchange. It is no different than a church group renting a pavillion at a park for their outing.

      • Vigilant

        RS jumps to an unwarranted conclusion, typical of the left. He syas,:

        “Is the school paying rent for the hall?

        Then it’s MY tax money that’s going to a church.”

        I suggest you research to answer your question before you assume it’s true. It’s by no means clear that anyone’s tax money is going to a church.

        And if your research yields that the use of the church was rent-free, then what will be your next complaint?

      • daniel

        Hey Robert, how about this? How about the school saved your tax money because the church charged less for the ceremonies to be held there? I would call that wise use of tax funds and maybe the school should be sent a thank-you note.

      • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

        Dear Robert Smith,

        But of course you’re all for the government using “MY tax” money to pay for abortions.

        Best wishes,
        Bob

      • Vigilant

        Excellent point, Mr. Livingston. You stole my thunder!

      • Robert Smith

        From Bob Livingston: “But of course you’re all for the government using “MY tax” money to pay for abortions.”

        You bet! The health of each woman should be between her doctor and herself and medical decisions should be made on that basis and only that basis. What are YOUR qualifications to mess with her decision? Are you medicaly more astute than her doctor? Are you more “moral” than she is in the context of HER religion?

        BTW, did you know that in Canada the abortion rate is LOWER than in America partly because women can get good care throughout their pregnancy and after without worrying about the cost?

        How can one be “pro-life” and not support universal health care?

        Rob

        • http://boblivingstonpl.wordpress.com Bob Livingston

          Dear Robert Smith,

          You write: “You bet!” Hypocrisy, meet Robert Smith, Robert Smith, meet hypocrisy. You are fine with “tax” money going to things you approve of, but not fine if you don’t. However, you don’t extend that others.

          You write: “The health of each woman should be between her doctor and herself and medical decisions should be made on that basis and only that basis. What are YOUR qualifications to mess with her decision? Are you medicaly more astute than her doctor? Are you more “moral” than she is in the context of HER religion?” Straw man argument.

          You write: “BTW, did you know that in Canada the abortion rate is LOWER than in America partly because women can get good care throughout their pregnancy and after without worrying about the cost?” Straw man.

          You write: “How can one be “pro-life” and not support universal health care?” No correlation.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

      • Robert Smith

        Patriot proclaims: “If the church does charge a fee for the use of the building, the people attending the ceremony received the use of the building, the facilities, the utilities and the parking area in exchange.”

        So, is the church allowed to discriminate who it rents to here in Amerca? If a Wiccan covan wanted to rent the hall? How about Drewids? Might a couple be able to rent the church for a same sex merriage?

        Rob

      • Vigilant

        “How can one be “pro-life” and not support universal health care?”

        What an idiotic and overused position that is.

        If it comes down to the woman’s life or the baby’s, it’s a moral decision that usually falls in favor of the woman.. If it comes down to the mere preferences of a woman and the life of the infant (or foetus), it’s CLEARLY a pro-life decision to stop the murder they call “abortion.” Or do you think “pursuit of happiness” trumps “life?”

        Try logic with your feeble arguments, Rob, if you want to argue effectively.

      • Robert Smith

        Vigelant proclaims: “it’s CLEARLY a pro-life decision to stop the murder they call “abortion.” ”

        Abortion is mostly legal in most of America so to call it “murder” in any context but your belief system is simply a lie and only your opinion.

        What makes your OPINION more “moral” than that of the woman herself?

        BTW, are you aware of “Catholics for a Free Choice?” They can be found at: http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/about/default.asp

        Rob

      • Patriot1776

        Rob, 1st, yes the church should be allowed to choose who they would rent their space to, just as you have the right to rent a space that you own to whomever you choose. They own the property. They are supporting their community.

        Second, you say “Abortion is mostly legal in most of America so to call it “murder” in any context but your belief system is simply a lie and only your opinion.” As murder is defined as the “unlawful premeditated taking of one human being’s life by another”, perhaps you are technically correct. However, the facts are that an innocent life is being taken, no matter how it is justified. The Bible teaches the we should not kill, therefore, just because a collection of warp minded individuals wrote a law that approves of the taking of innocent lives, it does not make the act morally right.

      • Vigilant

        “What makes your OPINION more “moral” than that of the woman herself?”

        Try the Declaration of Independence and Natural Law.

        BTW, are you aware of “Catholics for a Free Choice?” What does that have to do with the price of tea? If they are for taking the life of an innocent foetus, then they are no more Catholic than I’m a Christian.

      • Robert Smith

        From Patriot: “The Bible teaches the we should not kill,”

        Hmmmm, isn’t the word you mean “murder?”

        Killing is OK for self defense, military, executions, and in some other cases.

        Further, when you mention “Bible” you are asking the state to put THOSE beliefs above those of another religion, thus establishing a state religion. That isn’t allowed as has been pointed out many times around here.

        In America we the people have made our laws based upon social contract. We all agree I won’t kill you or your kin if you don’t kill mine. We certainly agree it is generally wrong (except in cases of self defense) to kill another. So we make laws against that.

        In the case of abortion; It is a MEDICAL procedure.

        Who are YOU to decide the morality or medical issues for another in the abortion issue for another? Society has solved the issue. That’s the way America works.

        Same thing with assisted suicide in Oregon. Same thing with medical pot. The PEOPLE have decided. Remember, when Roe v. Wade came down several states, including NY had VOTED and allowed abortion.

        Quite frankly I find it sad that you would try to decide political issues and the management of America on the basis of your religious views and not what’s best for America.

        Rob

      • jim

        so what? If that building is the biggest in the town ….. and air-conditioned too…what’s the big deal? you don’t realize a building is a building…it’s the people in the building that make it a church building not the building that makes the people a church! The people ARE the church and can meet anywhere they want and still be a church!

      • jim

        Your arguments are really clear….for a 3rd grade graduate who got straight “A”s for expression in selfishness!!! Which, by the way, is the whole problem with abortion….it takes the focus off the UN-BORN BABY and lays it squarely on the mother! Now, I understand the emergencies that can be in child-birth…where a mothers life may become in jeopardy…but the decision to save a mother over the child is not the mothers, it is the doctors practice to do so. A woman may be able to get pregnant again if she survives…but the child may not even survive after child birth!

        So, abortionist never even take under consideration that the UN-born child’s choice of whether or not he/she wants to live is never given a voice!!! We all are led to believe that this un-born child is nothing more than a blob of meat growing in the uterus. We never accept the possibility that the spirit or soul of a person may have entered that little being at the moment of conception…a possibility that can not be scientifically denied as a possible truth!!!

        Just because some group of people got together and passed a law does not make the law right!!! Didn’t Hitler pass a law that allowed for the gathering up of the Jews to murder in the gas chambers?

        Your immature mentality is blatantly arrogant!

      • Robert Smith

        Posted: “We never accept the possibility that the spirit or soul of a person may have entered that little being at the moment of conception…a possibility that can not be scientifically denied as a possible truth!!! ”

        But can not be proven either.

        Define a “human being.” Nobody has yet.

        Remember, some monkies have a huge percentage of DNA that is like us. Yet some born to human women have DNA that is not formed correctly.

        How do you define a “human being?”

        Can you tell us what it is you want to protect?

        Rob

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing Jay

        Murder: an Abortionite sacrament that has historically been practiced in many times and places by nearly every Abortionite sect. The choice of aborting the life of another person.

        Prenatal child-killing has not historically been treated as murder in the legal sense, nor would it be if the protection of law were restored to prenatal children, but abortionmongers have found it effective to make this claim.

      • Peter

        I postulate that people like Robert Smith are wonderfully tolerant souls who gripe about the ‘pointlessness’ of building a Church building when it’s only going to be used once or twice a week for services they don’t agree with anyway, but equally gripe when it is used for general community interests, just because it contains Christian symbols etc.
        Hypocrisy, thy name is the loony left.
        It’s sad also that so many ask, “Where is God in all the evil we experience these days?” He is right where you’ve chosen to put Him, out the door on the end of your grimy boot.
        You bring about your own rotten destiny by your poor choices.
        God gave us free will to choose whether or not we will love and serve Him.
        Obviously Bobby et al choose not to follow Him, but that’s ok, they will endure the consequences of their poor decisions.
        I find it just as sad that the loony left insist on forcing their negative decisions on the rest of us, while accusing us of doing likewise as justification for their fervent ‘religious cleansing’ of western society.
        “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”
        I choose Life!

      • Gordon

        Onde thing about this, it really brings out the BS, doesn’t it? I guess the liberals would expect the rest of us to build thosands of multi-million $ dollar buildings just so they can sit in air conditioning watching graduations. Hey we CAN afford it, just print more fiat money and create more jobs building large buildings that are only used once a year…. or maybe they can throw dope infested rock concerts in them too.

      • doug davis

        Everyone that feels it is wrong to hold graduations in a church get off you tush and buy the school a building large enough to hold the graduation,enough said!

  • Harold Olsen

    Gee, it was ruled unconstitutional because of the appearance of crosses, hymnals and religious pamphlets. But, if they used a place where a bunch of porn was in full view that most likely would have been okay. We can have that sort of thing but anything moral, no way!

    • Native Texan

      Harold, did you also notice that the accusers were allowed to remain anonymous. What happened to the rule of law about being able to face your accusers? We are on the precipice of another Sodom and Gomorrah with no one offering a lifeline.

      • Robert Smith

        What’s Gamority? Am I missing somehting?

        Rob

      • junkmail

        skulking in the dark, cloaked to hide all identity, never coming into the light.
        Sure is today’s liberal left progressive, socialist, anti religion(except islam) democrat.

        Never do something to someone to their face, always lurk
        Most be one of those who managed to fall down a lot when growing up because they were such wimpy jerks

      • Vigilant

        “What’s Gamority? Am I missing somehting?”

        Yes, a functional neocortex.

      • Robert Smith

        From junkmail: “Never do something to someone to their face, always lurk”

        ROFL…

        At least “Robert Smith” is a plausable real name.

        Who knows, it might even be my real name.

        If Mr. Livingston uses my e-mail (a private communication) the answer might be a surprise.

        Rob

    • Vigilant

      Mr. Nash again leaves out an important detail.

      “The practice was challenged by a group of non-Christian students and parents, whose suit alleged that during some graduation ceremonies the church operated its information booth or passed out evangelical literature.” (http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/school_law/2012/07/appeals_court_rejects_use_of_c.html)

      I would say the church folk need to stop their proactive proselytizing before or after these graduation ceremonies. I wonder if the court suit would have come to the bench if the church had simply closed their booth and stored their evangelical literature.

      • TML

        I don’t think Mr. Nash left it out…

        “But that decision was reversed, largely because students were exposed to “conditions of extensive proselytization” (a cross, religious pamphlets and hymnals).”

        Indeed, this does create the problem. Students should be bombarded by religious propaganda during a graduation. The use of the building, or lack thereof, isn’t really the issue.

        Although, I don’t really see how this is a constitutional issue either. The constitution says only that no law can be made to respect a religion or prohibit it’s free exercise.

        This issue should be handled locally with the school concerning policy, not law.

      • TML

        Err… “Students should *not* be…”

      • Robert Smith

        “This issue should be handled locally with the school concerning policy, not law.”

        Is this from the same quarter that insists that Obama is violating “laws” as he sets policy but it’s OK for a school system to decide if a church is OK regardless of law?

        Rob

      • TML

        Robert says, “Is this from the same quarter that insists that Obama is violating “laws” as he sets policy but it’s OK for a school system to decide if a church is OK regardless of law?”

        Not sure that I understand your question, but policies can violate law, and I believe some of Obama’s policies have indeed violated laws and the constitution. But there is no law that says a graduation may not be held in a church, and should certainly be no law that forbids the free practice of religion even if that practice is proselytizing. This story is the equivalent to having a graduation at a stadium and having people handing out religious propaganda at all the entrances.That’s not against the law. The only difference is that it actually was held at a church, and lo and behold, the church handed out religious propaganda. So, it is up to the school as to whether to hold graduation at a church.

        I suppose if no headway is made by appealing to the school boards, then legal actions could be taken…. as I don’t see that it would be unconstitutional to have a law prohibiting public schools from having graduations in church… because such a law would neither be respecting a religion, nor prohibiting the general free exercise of it. But even then it should be handled on a State level. This just isn’t a federal or constitutional issue, IMHO.

  • By George

    As much as I have looked, I still cannot endeavor to place my finger on any reference in the Constitution to cite as supporting the separation of Church and State.

    Perhaps it’s time to change judges who see something that is not there.This assault on Christianity must be stopped somewhere. If not now, when? If not there, where?

    • Jim S

      Thank You. I was about to say the same thing.

      • old hillbilly

        Me too… We need a legislature that will enforce the Constitution as it was written, which means forcibly removing activist judges who can neither read nor follow instructions!

    • http://twitter.com/mrmo57 Maurice Jackson (@mrmo57)

      It’s a shame that all have to suffer for a couplf cry babies. I can only hope they end up being outside and it gets very hot weather or they get a good rain. Than all the people with no problem with a church can thank the cry babies. Oh my they might find out about GOD, can’t have that…

      • http://twitter.com/mrmo57 Maurice Jackson (@mrmo57)

        Sorry for the misspellings this pisses me off !!!!!

      • Opal the Gem

        They should hold the graduation at 3:00PM on a midweek afternoon on the soccer field if they have one otherwise on the football field. It should be held at that location no matter the weather.

  • Patriot1776

    I would certainly like to hear the reasoning of the court in this case. In my reading and understanding of the constitution, there is nothing that would prevent the use of a church building for a public ceremony. The wild-eyed left wingers will cry “separation of church and state!”, but that is not in the current constitution. In many communities churches are used for graduation ceremonies because they are the only venues large enough to accomodate the number of people attending. By holding the ceremony in a church, there is no endorcement of any religion by government. As for those who claim emotional suffering because they walked into a church, they had the option of not attending, they knew when they were invited what the building was.

    • Vigilant

      “As for those who claim emotional suffering because they walked into a church, they had the option of not attending, they knew when they were invited what the building was.”

      Good point.

      If this eventually goes to the Supreme Court, I wonder what the reaction will be of the Americans United for Separation of Church and State when their lawyers enter the SCOTUS building, which has the Ten Commandments and other religious symbols in abundance.

      “Moses appears eight times in carvings that ring the Supreme Court Great Hall ceiling…The Supreme Court building’s east pediment…depicts Moses holding two tablets…Tablets representing the Ten Commandments can be found carved in the oak courtroom doors, on the support frame of the courtroom’s bronze gates and in the library woodwork.” (http://www.christianindex.org/1087.article)

  • http://www.ElectTheRightCandidate.us Bert Loftman

    The problem is the Supreme Court power grab by incorporation of the Bill of Rights to include the States. The First Amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion …” Nine Federal employed lawyers, AKA the Supreme Court changed the word “Congress” to “Any government.”

    • Vigilant

      Food for thought.

      “All three dissenters issued opinions, including Judge Kenneth W. Ripple, who had written the panel decision backing the school district’s policy. Ripple said the majority had misapplied U.S. Supreme Court decisions on government and religion, and he essentially invited the Supreme Court to take up the case.” (http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/school_law/2012/07/appeals_court_rejects_use_of_c.html)

      Therefore, it’s not clear what the SCOTUS would rule, if they even took the case.

      But you are correct in that the Federal Government has absolutely no business ruling on ANYTHING so clearly within the states’ prerogative. This case should have gone no higher than state courts.

      The First Amendment prohibits central government from any role respecting establishment of a national religion. It does not prohibit the states in any way from doing what they want with regard to religion within their own borders. Period.

      The 10th Amendment and the state constitution are the operative guides here, NOT the First Amendment.

  • Brad

    again the majority suffer because we make a few uncomfortable….what a shame we can’t have that! soon all our street signs will look like trees with 50 different languages posted and it will take several hours to get through graduation because they will have to mention each persons name in the ceremony in 50 different languages too. If you do not love the premises this country was founded on I bet they have open arms waiting for you in another one just across the pond or a short trip to our north or in the simply safe haven of drug cartels just to out south. Start walking pukes!!

  • George Thomas Horvat

    No where in the constitution does it say that their is to be a separation of church and state. The constitution merely states that the state shall not “establish” a religion.
    How the hell the courts have gotten away with this for so long is beyond me?
    It must be Obama’s fault.

    • http://Yahoo.com Bill

      I’m a conservative, don’t believe in the democratic philosophy, but come on – this ignorance was going on a hell of a long time before Obama

  • Ron The Marine

    Robert Smith you are such a liberal MORON!

    • Vigilant

      That’s redundant.

    • Robert Smith

      Thank you for such a fine demonstration of right wing communication and discussion.

      Rob

      • Vigilant

        You’re welcome. You need only look elsewhere in the thread for substantive discussion that refutes your points, airhead.

      • daniel

        Robert I have studied the issue of “separation” of church and state. I can say that it does not exist in the Constitutionwhich by now I will assume you know. It is also not inferred by any discussion of church involvement in the state. It is a pre-emtive strike if you will against the Pew Tax and to literally state the government will not establish a state church. The Pew Tax was merely a tax to support the state sponsored or approved church of whichever sovereign at the time.
        The letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists has been taken so far out of context by lawyers it seems a waste but all Jefferson was stating was that the government would in no wise be able to establish a church of any denomination. Moreover a superintendant of the New York school system Jefferson did authorize the use of the Bible as a textbook. You should also know that church services were held in the Supreme Court building on a regular basis. The Congress in those days were made up of lawyers, farmers and preachers too. Hardly a mix of sectarians to say the least. If you read their writings you would be surprised at their eloquence. They were very much Christian.
        Moreover it is said that our laws are not based on the Bible. I will beg to differ on that. All laws in this world are based on religion. Not a social contract as has been suggested. Even socialism is based on humanism which has been declared a religion.
        My biggest gripe with a lot of these lawsuits concerning the separation of church and state is that they get rediculous. A cross beside the road for over 50 years brought down because it was on public land? It was a war memorial. You don’t like the creche display? Don’t look. You don’t want the Star Sppapngled Banner? Please don’t sing it. lol
        I am pretty sure you get the idea. By proclaiming hurt feelers and trauma it makes it sound that sectarians or atheists are a bunch of spoiled crybabies trying to innocently push their beliefs on me. What is going to happen when I hear an imam calling people to prayer 5 times a day? Do I get offended and hurt feelings?

  • The Buse

    I am so sick of supposedly educated lawyers and judges who do not know what is in the constitution. I’m sure these kids were so upset by the hymnals, crosses and such.I bet the problem was when the kids got home and started asking their idiots parents some hard questions they didn’t want to deal with because they were on crack.

  • Lawrence

    The dog has turned to lick up his own vomit. God is in the process of turning them over to strong delusions, vile affections and a reprobate mind.

  • Robert Peterson

    You can thank the aclu and activist judges. Get rid of the aclu and we cure a lot of our problems. By the way, they have a tax exempt status. The term “Separation of Church and State” does not appear anywhere in the constitution. The aclu helped the judges with this. Don’t forget, there are a lot of judges sitting on the bench that worked for the aclu at one time or another. Does Ruth Bader Ginsberg ring a bell??

    • Vigilant

      Ruth Bader Ginsberg doesn’t have the competence to run a night court, let alone sit on the highest court of the land. She should have been impeached long ago for using international laws and protocols, instead of the Constitution, to substantiate her decisions.

      She is a traitor, pure and simple.

  • Gambo Niemogha

    This is the time for he US to turn around from its sinful ways before it is too late and go back to the principles of its founding fathers. This was the basis for its ascendancy to greatness in the comity of nations . The alternative is to invite the wrath of God. It is not late yet but if the nation continues along this track of wanting to outdo Sodom and Gomorrah, what happened to these infamous cities in the Bible will be child’s play to what will happen. For starters, China is about to overtake the US as the largest economy and this is just the beginin of the decline of the US due to her Godless ways. May God save the US from herself in Jesus name . Amen.

  • http://survivingurbancrisis.wordpress.com Silas Longshot

    “some of the plaintiffs have made claims for monetary damages due to emotional suffering”
    There’s your clue, people, as to what this is all about. Scumbag lawyers, in it for the money at every opportunity, catering to a loud minority against a complacent majority who are ‘too nice’ to fight back.
    Also this yet again shows the need for ‘loser pays’ laws to cut these kind of litigation crazed morons down to size.
    click the name

  • http://Yahoo.com Bill

    One of these days, the ignorant are actually going to read what separation of church and state is. Will they then admit that they were wrong in what they thought? I doubt it. I don’t have the exact wording, but what it means in a nutshell is the government won’t force you to become a member of any particular religious belief. Pretty simple to understand!

  • http://www.facebook.com/dan.mancuso.56 Dan Mancuso

    Why doesn’t somebody knock some sense into this group, the so-called ‘Americans United for the Seperation of Church and State’. Explain to them exactly what Seperation of Church and State really means. I mean knock them down and sit on them and explain it – figuratively speaking of course.
    How ridiculess can you get…”It ensures the students in Wisconsin will not be forced to enter an intensly religious environment…” Are you kidding me, do these ‘people’ ever stop and listen to what they say? It’s OK to let them watch all the evil trash that’s on TV and it’s OK to force them to absorb the degenerate evil that’s force fed to them in the public school system – and not just in ‘sex-ed’. It’s OK to drug them with Ritalin and other psycotropics. It’s OK to let them eat poisons -fast food/junk food. It’s OK for them to be forced to live with homosexuals. But God forbid they are exposed to the inside of a church building.
    This has gotten so far beyond the ridiculess that it is so very obvious, to any one with their mind still intact, that the agenda is clearly to get rid of the church and all the sane moral doctrine that is brought to us by the church. The question is…to what end?

  • uvuvuv

    i don’t know about the rest of the country but here they use churches for voting. voting! is that not in violation of separating church and state? think of the trauma for someone seeing those religious symbols. he doesn’t even have to be an atheist or muslim, if a catholic enters a lutheran church he could be highly and i repeat highly offended. so where is the court on this one?

  • trashman

    The actual Constitution makes only one reference to religion and that is Article VI. The first sentence of the 1st Amendment says: ”Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,……” Tell me, what does holding a commencement exercise in a church auditorium have to do with Congress and the establishment of religion? My anser is – absolutely nothing. Then we get to the 10th Amendment concerning rights not delegated to the United States, “they are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

    The federal government has become a Black Hole, consuming everything in its path and leaving nothing in its wake!

    Remember this: 2012 Time to take out the Trash.

  • Average Joe

    “Alex Luchenitser. “This decision upholds the separation of church and state, it upholds the Constitution.

    Dear Mr. Luchenitser,

    Please point out the passage in the Constitution where a separation of Church and State is implied. If you are relying on the 1ST Amendment for your argument, you would be in error. THe 1 ST Amendiment states:
    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

    Congress shall make no law….that is the crux. Congress made no Law and nowhere else in the document is it implied a separation of Church and State…NOWHERE.

    The only reference that I can find, is a letter from Thomas Jefferson and the Danbury Babtists, dated Jan. 1st 1802… and most certainly is not a part of the Constitution.

    Anyone has the choice to attend the event or not to attend the event….based soley on each individuals own convictions. As for RS being worried about who was compensated for the use of thier property…whether held in a church or any other venue…a fee would have been charged for the Hall rental…bityerquitchin’!

    RS and Flashy (amongst a few others) have this irrational fear….if the word GOD or religion is mentioned, they start frothing at the mouth and rambling on …like a deranged lunatic. While we really don’t care if they believe in A God, No God, or anything in between…they go out of thier way to infer that we should not have the beliefs that we have, because somehow, in the backs of thier narrow little minds…they are the enlightened ones and therefore we are inferior to them in thier thinking.

    I would like to pose a question to these “enlightened folks” who have it all figured out.

    If we belive in God, when we die,,,if we are wrong…we have nothing to lose…it’s over. We cease to exist…poof! Our bases are covered

    However, when you folks die…if you are wrong….Have fun shaking hands with all of your friends that helped you get there….while patting yourself on the back for being so…”Enlightened”

    He hoped and prayed that there wasn’t an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn’t an afterlife.
    Douglas Adams

    A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
    Douglas Adams

    Best wishes,
    AJ

  • The Buse

    Rob Smith, your little Catholic group for free choice is a “Man’s” group. Just because Man believes something is right does not mean that God agrees. I can tell you Man’s rules are not always God’s rules. Just because there are Catholics who believe in abortion does not make it right in God’s eyes. Do you get the picture?

    • Robert Smith

      Where is the word “abortion” in your bible?

      OH, and BTW, where did Jesus talk about gays?

      Rob

  • Old504Troop

    Anyone who believes that there is not an ominous, concerted attack on this country needs to wake up. The subtle changing of this nation’s founding principles is happening before our very eyes. This is a Christian nation; the Founding Fathers built it on Christian principles based on the Ten Commandments. That is one of the most important tenets of our nation – too allow everyone the freedom of choice – in their beliefs, religious practices, education, vocation, thoughts, and speech – all from Christian values, multi-denominational as the Founding Fathers sought.
    Now the basic ideals of this great nation are under assault by persons without faith, and those of other faiths. Some of those are refugees from their own countries, who fled those same countries due to persecution by THEIR nation’s religion. But now, in the name of so called “political correctness”, they wish to transform OUR nation into what THEY ran away from. THEIR nations were intolerant of those same freedoms that this country was founded on! This nation has provided them sanctuary and freedom – that is why they came here in the first place. Most individuals want to come to America BECAUSE we have such liberty. But if we allow the basic ideals that this country was founded on to be eroded, we will NOT be the nation where everyone has those same values and freedoms; we will lose all of them.

  • General ” Bull” Shipper

    There will be a seperation of church and state, it’s commonly called the rapture. The bible does not tell of a “rapture” it is called a seperation in 1st Thess. Also I would not want to stand before a holy GOD and say i was in favor of, or voted with my hand/voice or whatever to legalize the murder of your unborn children.

  • Blake Bobbitt

    i NEED TO SUE,this is so stupid I HAVE BEEN DAMAGED MENTALLY b the exposure to this LIBERAL attempt to ruin the occasion for the real students,you know the ones that actually have the ability to become productive in our nation,as aposed to the few that are so worried about the CONSTITUTION that they hate it’s very base in Christian faith.

    Their is a place called CUBA,move their and enjoy the FREEDOM FROM CHRIST you are looking for,the real answer here should have been a JUDGE throwing this in the gutter where it belonged. Judiscial cowards previal again.

  • The Buse

    Rob, There are many verses in the Bible that speak to Homosexulaity. I guess I will have to quote some of them for you since you obviously don’t have a Bible in your home. Maybe you should get the one your Mother had, dust it off and read what Jesus had to say about homosexuality.

    Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind. It is abomination Leviticus 18:22

    If man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; there blood upon them. Leviticus 20:13

    There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel
    Deuteronomy 23:17 ( A Sodomite is a man who has given himself to homosexuality)

    Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; Neither the sexually immoral or idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves or the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

    Thou shall not murder is one of the ten commandments and life does begin at conception!
    You will find out someday.

  • Antonio

    I’m sure there are several large common areas that are air conditioned that the schools could use for graduation located around the state. Most every prison has a common room that would house most graduation attendees. Problem solved.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.