• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Valedictorian Defies School District and Recites Lord's Prayer [W:618]

Should the school have banned the reading of the prayer by the student?

  • Yes

    Votes: 24 27.3%

  • No

    Votes: 60 68.2%

  • Undecided

    Votes: 4 4.5%
  • Total voters
    88
AlabamaPaul said:
So, because schools do not have the funds to defend against frivolous lawsuits is a sufficient reason to alter what is allowed at school functions? I would think that society would take action against those bringing such suits rather than trying to placate those responsible. If one out of a hundred were offended by what might be said at an event, I would suggest they leave should that occur.

Seventeen year olds that are graduating HS are no longer "children". They are the young adults in which you strove to instill personal responsibility and sound decision making capabilities. I could not and would not be upset if one of mine stood up for what he/she believed to be right...
Click to expand...

Blame the lawyers. No 17-year-old high school students for the most part are still under their parents supervision. Parents are still legally responsible for their children until they are 18 unless they get emancipated.
 
ernst barkmann said:
Paul your right , on what you state, becuase no one is made to stand there is listen to them, people are free to keep moving on go on with there business.

but in public buildings, all people have to use them for services.... and becuase people have to convene in certain places to transact business, you dont have a right, to use that situation as a public form for your speech.

because in a sense you have them held captive ,becuase they have to get whatever business they have done.

as the example before, do you think if i am standing in line in the DMV, i want to preaching to me and telling me i am going to hell...or i am a sinner....no i dont have to listen you bow beat me, while i wait for service from the state.
Click to expand...

You would have to hear, not listen, to what anyone is saying just as you have to put up with individuals talking on their cell phone...
 
AlabamaPaul said:
All this "liability" bs given as an excuse to restrict speech is just that, bs. Good evening 2m...
Click to expand...

The recitation of the Lord's Prayer as a revolutionary act ?..................Oh, the humanity.........................
 
ChrisL said:
Blame the lawyers. No 17-year-old high school students for the most part are still under their parents supervision. Parents are still legally responsible for their children until they are 18 unless they get emancipated.
Click to expand...

No, I would not be held responsible if my underage child illegally obtained alcohol and had a car wreck. No, I would not be held responsible for my child's decision to illegally obtain and use drugs. What I might be responsible for is not instilling in them the ability to make sound choices...
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Seventeen year olds that are graduating HS are no longer "children". They are the young adults in which you strove to instill personal responsibility and sound decision making capabilities. I could not and would not be upset if one of mine stood up for what he/she believed to be right...
Click to expand...

That is all fine and good. But as adults we need to find ways to pay for it if one wants to pontificate their ideals. Not on the public dime unless equal time is a given to different veiwpoints. It is called equality.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
All this "liability" bs given as an excuse to restrict speech is just that, bs. Good evening 2m...
Click to expand...

Agreed. I am regularly disappointed, and often depressed, by how eager some people are to diminish freedom. Good evening, AP.:2wave:
 
winston53660 said:
That is all fine and good. But as adults we need to find ways to pay for it if one wants to pontificate their ideals. Not on the public dime unless equal time is a given to different veiwpoints. It is called equality.
Click to expand...

So, we need a fairness doctrine for what might be said at a public function and all attendees should be required to sit through that?
 
AlabamaPaul said:
No, I would not be held responsible if my underage child illegally obtained alcohol and had a car wreck. No, I would not be held responsible for my child's decision to illegally obtain and use drugs. What I might be responsible for is not instilling in them the ability to make sound choices...
Click to expand...

That COMPLETELY depends on the circumstances. There are MANY instances in which parents are held liable for their children's actions. I can find instances where kids have gone out and vandalized a school, and their parents were held financially responsible.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
So, we need a fairness doctrine for what might be said at a public function and all attendees should be required to sit through that?
Click to expand...

On functions supported by tax moneys citizens get an equal voice.
 
ChrisL said:
That COMPLETELY depends on the circumstances. There are MANY instances in which parents are held liable for their children's actions. I can find instances where kids have gone out and vandalized a school, and their parents were held financially responsible.
Click to expand...

Yes, if I had a ten year old out at midnight vandalizing a school, I would and should have some responsibility, but if that "child" were seventeen, not so much...
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Yes, if I had a ten year old out at midnight vandalizing a school, I would and should have some responsibility, but if that "child" were seventeen, not so much...
Click to expand...

The child is still a minor, you are responsible.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
No, one situation is totally different from the other...
Click to expand...

No it isn't. If the child is a minor, they cannot be held financially responsible.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
You would have to hear, not listen, to what anyone is saying just as you have to put up with individuals talking on their cell phone...
Click to expand...

tell me would you have any legal ground to stand on, if you got thrown out of the dmv, If I complain about you and have proof of you badgering me with your speech..............no
 
Henrin said:
What are you getting at?
Click to expand...

When a function is paid with "tax dollars" equal voices must preside. It is not an avenue to pontificate one''s own ideals exclusively.
 
ChrisL said:
No it isn't. If the child is a minor, they cannot be held financially responsible.
Click to expand...

Neither is a parent in most instances unless he/she displayed total disregard as the the child's behavior...
 
ernst barkmann said:
tell me would you have any legal ground to stand on, if you got thrown out of the dmv, If I complain about you and have proof of you badgering me with your speech..............no
Click to expand...

When did I infer that badgering you would be acceptable? In fact, I have been stating that it would not...
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Neither is a parent in most instances unless he/she displayed total disregard as the the child's behavior...
Click to expand...

No. There was a case in a neighboring town where the child lied to the parents, said he was going somewhere else, and he went to the school with a buddy, and they vandalized it. Apparently there was 100,000 dollars worth of damage. A 15 year old and a 16 year old. The parents were held financially responsible. I can get a link to that story if you'd like.
 
The valedictorian is a brave and principled young man who did a fine thing. I hope others emulate him. I'd like to see hundreds of valedictorians across the country (and across all beliefs and unbeliefs) enlivening and enriching graduations with statements of their convictions.:peace
 
AlabamaPaul said:
What right do you have for equality of speech that you would want to deny another?
Click to expand...

Never said i want to deny another's right to free speech. I said I want equal time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom