| If a liberal doesn’t like guns, they don’t buy one. If a conservative doesn’t like guns, then no one should have one. |
|
|
|
Asked 176 days ago
by ask001  Canada |
|
About
Do not spoil what you have by desiring what you have not; remember that what you now have was once among the things you only hoped for.
|
| 7 Points |
Well, that is pretty much the difference between liberals and conservatives, isn't it? When Consies don't like a thing, they ban it--a different opinion, religion, drugs,--and when liberals don't like a thing, they just don't do it.
So that whole banning of prayer in schools... that was a conservative thing, right?
Prayer in schools is NOT banned, SCHOOL-LED and or/PUBLIC prayers are banned. That is a very different thing.
It is wrong to use taxpayers monies for public education to support a majority religion, but you can pray as you like to yourself.
Which completely ignores my point. Okay... I will be more precise.
So that whole banning of public prayers in schools... that was a conservative thing, right?
It is EXACTLY on point. The banning was not of prayer, but of STATE_SUBSIDIZED prayer.
If someone prays before a football game where is the "subsidizing?" The point was that liberals didn't like it, so they banned it. Banning what you don't like is not an ideological thing (well... except maybe for Libertarians).
The point is, 'liberals' (not actually, it was atheists,and non-Christians, and those are NOT synonymous with 'liberals')did not like REQUIRED school prayer. Look at the landmark decisions.
In Engel v. Vitale (1962), the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a New York Board of Regents policy that provided for *teacher-led* prayer in public schools.
See? It was the school leading the prayer that was objectionable (and is) NOT THE PRAYING.
The other important case was
Abington Township School District v. Schempp (consolidated with Murray v. Curlett), 374 U.S. 203 (1963),[1] was a United States Supreme Court case argued on February 27–28, 1963 and decided on June 17, 1963. In the case, the Court decided 8-1 in favor of the respondent, Edward Schempp, and declared *school sponsored* Bible reading in public schools in the United States to be unconstitutional.
You really should not take the word of right-wing nuts, but look it up yourself.
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/analysis.aspx?id=15701
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abington_School_District_v._Schempp
So get your facts straight.
Irrelevant. It was a "thing" that conservatives liked and (atheists, if you will) did not like. So the "non-conservatives" got it banned. IF you don't like "teacher led" prayers... let's talk about handguns. Let's talk about fireworks. Heck... we could even use slavery as an example of liberals banning something they don't like. The POINT is that both sides are into banning things they don't like.
They didn't get it "banned." No law was passed banning school prayer, It was found to be inherently illegal. The Supreme Court of the United States declared it to be unConstitutional, i.e, in direct opposition to the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
Quite familiar, ask001. Have you ever had an original thought?
This comment was deleted by plawler .
[1 point] 175 days ago by