Trump’s Assault On the First Amendment Takes Root In Public Louisiana High School
Sep 29, 2017 23:05:29 #
skylane5sp wrote:
So the letter says "Parkway High School REQUIRES..." it doesn't say Parkway High School NOW requires or IS requiring.
This would lead any rational thinking person (present company excluded) to believe that this policy was already in place and more than likely has been for a long time. Probably at most if not all high schools around the nation.
More FAKE 'news'.
This would lead any rational thinking person (present company excluded) to believe that this policy was already in place and more than likely has been for a long time. Probably at most if not all high schools around the nation.
More FAKE 'news'.
So having been in place for a long time justifies anything? That bails out much of the South and segregation, wouldn't it? BTW, have a look at this: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/319us624 Note that the decision was handed down in 1943, when the US was fighting for its existence in the midst of World War II, for those who are ahistorical. For what seems to be the complete opinion of the Court as delivered by Justice Jackson, see this: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/319/624.html
While I am not a lawyer, perhaps there is some equivalency between reciting the Pledge and placing one's hand over one's heart during the playing of our National Anthem. (BTW, the phrase "under God" was inserted in the Pledge in 1954 at the insistence of then-president Eisenhower) If school children are not to be disciplined for refusing to stand, etc, during a school ceremony, why does President Trump feel so threatened by adults making a quiet, respectful protest? It seems that many owners of the various teams are in accord with the protest, why then does President Trump presume to instruct a private business entity on how to conduct its business? Doesn't the Nation have more important matters to consider than the NFL and its players and owners? How about Puerto Rico? How about North Korea and Mr Trump's brother in madness? How about the tax "reform" mess? Health care? and the list goes on and on and on....
Sep 30, 2017 10:37:42 #
Sep 30, 2017 13:00:24 #
thom w
Loc: San Jose, CA
GeorgeH wrote:
Well said! Compared to Widdle Donnie, Dubya is a prince among men. I feel that he was out of his depth, and surrounded by wanna-be puppet masters - think Cheney - but I don't think that Dubya was evil, malicious, etc. Widdle Donnie ... well, we'll be fortunate to survive his reign.
I sure wish you were wrong.
Sep 30, 2017 18:27:18 #
Sep 30, 2017 18:56:20 #
It is a crying shame that liberals have no understanding of our country's constitution what so ever.
Sep 30, 2017 19:48:44 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
It is a crying shame that liberals have no understanding of our country's constitution what so ever.
By reading some your posts not sure yo do. Yuh rather be defending the Pee King
Sep 30, 2017 20:00:04 #
skylane5sp wrote:
Dirt, you continually mistake the peals of uproarious, thigh slapping, gut busting laughter and/or sniggers of derision directed at YOU as whining.
You wouldn't know a smelly bung gas escape from a whine.
When PUTOS gets on Twitter and goes on a personal binge, make no mistake, that's not raucous, tigh slapping laughter, it VERY LOUD WHINING.
But of course, you're clueless.
Get back on you little red Big Wheel and pedal it to the nearest nursing home!!! LoL
SS
Sep 30, 2017 20:01:48 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
It is a crying shame that liberals have no understanding of our country's constitution what so ever.
Funny how only YOURE smart enough to understand the constitution!!!
Must be the realm of the uneducated masses!!!
SS
Sep 30, 2017 20:33:47 #
SharpShooter wrote:
Funny how only YOURE smart enough to understand the constitution!!!
Must be the realm of the uneducated masses!!!
SS
Must be the realm of the uneducated masses!!!
SS
No, not just me, in fact many have paid close attention to the constitution over the years, just not your average liberal, sorry that you are so uneducated although I have heard that you attended a fine school. Well then one has to remember that this is the internet is it not? I am sure that we all attended only the best post grad programs at the country's finest universities.
Sep 30, 2017 20:38:02 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
No, not just me, in fact many have paid close attention to the constitution over the years, just not your average liberal, sorry that you are so uneducated although I have heard that you attended a fine school. Well then one has to remember that this is the internet is it not? I am sure that we all attended only the best post grad programs at the country's finest universities.
Your clueless only thing you do is rant an rant. Nothing else . A floundering fool.
Oct 1, 2017 18:05:08 #
dirtpusher wrote:
Your clueless only thing you do is rant an rant. Nothing else . A floundering fool.
So says Mr. Politicususa.... ROFLMAO!
Oct 1, 2017 18:19:54 #
GeorgeH wrote:
So having been in place for a long time justifies ... (show quote)
No one is required to recite ANY pledge to anything but they are required to stand and show respect, for the flag and the country. There are times to protest but during the National anthem and the pledge is not one of them. The NFL was within their contractual agreement with the players to dismiss any of those not standing.
Oct 1, 2017 18:24:10 #
Blurryeyed wrote:
So says Mr. Politicususa.... ROFLMAO!
Lol says frump suck ass. Brain blurred bt faux lies. Lol
Oct 1, 2017 18:43:14 #
boberic wrote:
No one is required to recite ANY pledge to anything but they are required to stand and show respect, for the flag and the country. There are times to protest but during the National anthem and the pledge is not one of them. The NFL was within their contractual agreement with the players to dismiss any of those not standing.
An frump gave them what they wanted. Last two times it just blowed away away by no response. Frump gave them what they needed. Now people be talking long time about this. Lol
Oct 1, 2017 20:40:41 #
boberic wrote:
No one is required to recite ANY pledge to anything but they are required to stand and show respect, for the flag and the country. There are times to protest but during the National anthem and the pledge is not one of them. The NFL was within their contractual agreement with the players to dismiss any of those not standing.
Ummm.... What is your source of the contractual agreement with the players and the NFL? I was under the impression, perhaps mistaken, that the owners of the various teams hired and fired players, and thus the owners would decide whether they would dismiss those not standing. Given the number of owners who expressed very visibly their support of their players' exercise of the rights granted by the First Amendment it would seem that those owners have no desire to fire their players.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.