• 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!

Pro-Life High School Group Says Principal Banned Them From Using Life-Sized Fetus

The Freedom of Speech is many times misunderstood. It is a constitutional proscription that prohibits the government from stopping, preventing or otherwise censoring speech on public grounds. Having said that, Freedom of Speech is NOT absolute. The Supreme Court has ruled many times that free speech has it's limitation.

A public school is on "public grounds" so it would appear natural that Free Speech would be unilaterally tolerated. Legally, it is not that clear cut. When and if this case goes to a Federal court, the issue will not about abortion, but rather, whether the school violated the Establishment Clause by allowing, and thereby sanctioning, a pro-life student group on their campus.

Wrong - freedom of speech that leads to death is restricted - and all that speech is restricted to murder. Like yelling "fire" in a theater or solicitation of murder.
 
The day that students engaging in political exercise is considered a violation of anything is the day we've really lost our political future.

How the heck is allowing a pro-life group to exist in school violating the Establishment clause? That's for religion.

That is called tyranny.

We have a constitution so opinions like yours get muted or are made moot.
 
The day that students engaging in political exercise is considered a violation of anything is the day we've really lost our political future.

How the heck is allowing a pro-life group to exist in school violating the Establishment clause? That's for religion.

Then I suppose you're only comfortable with those who share their progressive views..... God forbid intellectual discussion or alternate ideas on issues.... No in your mind discourse is wrong!

Typical of Stalin authoritarian wannabes.
 
They don't have to Rule on a specific case. they have already ruled on subsequent cases that apply in the same regard.
right their action do but that doesn't mean you can suppress those action just because you think they might happen.

They hadn't crossed any lines.

that is your opinion 1st amendment trumps your opinion.

I'm not saying they have.

I was just trying to discuss the possible downsides - and blah blah. Whatever. I'm done. I'm just trying to have a conversation about the topic. I'm not tooth and nailing anything here and others seem hell bent on gnawing off arms when they aren't even trapped.
 
What is tyranny?

Ignoring the Bill of Rights on purpose, which is going against our founding fathers ideas of freedom, hence going against the United States, our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

There are many forms of tyranny, however they ALL have one thing in common - destroy classical liberalism.
 
`
The day that students engaging in political exercise is considered a violation of anything is the day we've really lost our political future. How the heck is allowing a pro-life group to exist in school violating the Establishment clause? That's for religion.
`
`

"The Establishment Clause has generally been interpreted to prohibit 1) the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or 2) the preference by the U.S. government of one religion over another. The first approach is called the "separation" or "no aid" interpretation, while the second approach is called the "non-preferential" or "accommodation" interpretation. The accommodation interpretation prohibits Congress from preferring one religion over another, but does not prohibit the government's entry into religious domain to make accommodations in order to achieve the purposes of the Free Exercise Clause."​
IF a school allows one group, Pro-life student group, without an opposing perspective such as a Pro-Choice student group, that is where the problem starts. In public K-12 schools, that is just crying for future litigation.

Public schools can routinely and legally ban any and all, non-academic groups.

`
 
Last edited:
Ok, there are a few things obviously left out of this dust up at this school, and the reporting of it...

1. What's wrong with showing the development of a baby?

2. What was on the poster boards?

3. Don't groups sanctioned within a high school have teacher advisers?

The article leaves questions, such as

1. What was the display depicting?

2. Were the students just educating on the levels of gestation?

3. Why is the development of a child in the womb, "controversial"?

It certainly is told to us that it is fine to broach subjects like homosexuality to kindergartners, are we to think that high school students aren't equipped to see how a baby in the womb develops?

My only issue with this is setting it up in the lunchroom. That doesn't seem like the proper place for it, people are trying to eat and relax, throw it in a biology classroom.
 
Yes you deny reality
I deny nothing, on the contrary I embrace it, it is the only way to see the truth.

and the only reason you're siding with the school is because schools are authoritarian in nature
As I said I side with the school because it is the right thing to do.

and progressives love authoritarianism
I have authoritarianism, including that which is born out of religion.

just as long as their politics are being implemented.
If anything that is the playbook of the religious right.

You see - you want your politics to be enforced by law.
I do not want anyone's politics enforced by law but clearly you do.

Also, I don't give two ****s what you think about me
I do to, it is not worth the effort or time.

to me progressives don't matter
You are deluding yourself if you think that you do.

and I could give a rats ass what they think because it's always wrong.
You are entitled to your opinion, that hardly makes it right.

And I'm no republican either
I really do not care what org who you are.

the RINO's are your friends and I'm not one of them.
You do not know the first thing about me so why make stupid speculations?

You see - I don't consult my "politics" on issues such as these to come to a moral or ethical conclusion - you do.
More ignorant speculation.

I live my life acknowledging what's ethical and moral
At least as you interpret that.

you live your life by what a bunch of idiots tell you how you SHOULD live your lif
Again that is a moronic assumption with absolutely no basis and no doubt you need it because you have no rational or relevant arguments.
 
The want to prescribe to guys who owned slaves ideas of freedom?

Yeah that's what they teach you in progressive public schools.

You do know many slaves were "indentured servitudes" and they were white. Do you also know that BLACK's imported from Africa were SLAVES in Africa??? Oh and lets not forget the Spanish who raped South America for their gold and silver - yet no one gives the Spanish **** or the African slave owners who sold the ****ing slaves in the first place.

Go learn some history - oh yeah they don't allow real history to be taught or learned anymore these days in public educational institutions, the only thing they teach is White is evil and Brown or Black is a victim.

You want to learn something or do you want to bandwagon bull****?

Also, the founding fathers didn't "own slaves" - they were NOT slaves they were employees and they were treated extremely well, and in some cases were part of the family.

The only slaves that got harsh treatment were the slaves that ended up on a plantation - and they were all males.

This is only a synopsis on slavery - I could elaborate more, I just don't have the time, nor would I waste my time doing such if what I write goes into your eyes and out through your ears.
 
The choice seemed very appropriate if you think it got more attention.
Seriously? No regard for age or the preference of some to eat their lunch without some religious propaganda?

It's the death of a human being.
No to is not. Human beings have organs that support their life functions ro put another way sustain their own lives.
 
Free speech includes the right to not be held captive to speech. The children in the cafeteria have a right to not be subjected to the abortion banners nonsense.
 
I deny nothing, on the contrary I embrace it, it is the only way to see the truth.

As I said I side with the school because it is the right thing to do.

I have authoritarianism, including that which is born out of religion.

If anything that is the playbook of the religious right.

I do not want anyone's politics enforced by law but clearly you do.

I do to, it is not worth the effort or time.

You are deluding yourself if you think that you do.

You are entitled to your opinion, that hardly makes it right.

I really do not care what org who you are.

You do not know the first thing about me so why make stupid speculations?

More ignorant speculation.

At least as you interpret that.

Again that is a moronic assumption with absolutely no basis and no doubt you need it because you have no rational or relevant arguments.

No you don't see anything - You see and interpret through your feelings via your misunderstanding on issues.

You're incapable of dropping the progressive party line and viewing these stories (or any story) objectively. When it comes to news, the only thing that matters is facts, which you will only find at the bottom of every newspaper that leans left.

This is why the Chicago Tribune's headline was "Irish parade bans gays" - that's not only a lie but it's stupid and illogical. Since when do gays look any different than anyone else? yet the Chicago Tribune implies they do - now who is the homophobe here?
 
and you're not living that lifestyle
You are again speculating with no basis in absence of rational arguments.

Abortion is wrong
Because you say so?

you are NOT God
Noe have I claimed to be and by the same token neither are you.

and if you don't believe in God abortion is immoral and unethical, while you're trying to mainstream baby genocide.
Emotional and incoherent tripe do not make good arguments either.

No intelligent concerned and moral human would ever buy what you're selling here.
I am not selling anything, but you are attempting to...
 
And we sure wouldn't want any other views to be expressed that aren't in lock-step with the "wildly inaccurate" ones espoused by the teaching unions that run education and curriculum these days.

Biology isn't a matter of opinion. They were presenting models of what looked like fully developed babies and declaring this was what a fetus looks like at like 8 weeks.
 
Free speech includes the right to not be held captive to speech. The children in the cafeteria have a right to not be subjected to the abortion banners nonsense.

Funny how I read ****-tons of crap I don't agree with...... Maybe I should suggest that all progressives who post here should be banned just so I should not be subjected to their bull****? how would you react to that?

It seems progressives cannot deal with reading ideas they don't agree with - which makes them Kim Jung-Il or better yet Nazi's... Burn dem books that you don't agree with!
 
Yeah that's what they teach you in progressive public schools.
I do not think you know anything about anything taught in schools.

You do know many slaves were "indentured servitudes" and they were white. Do you also know that BLACK's imported from Africa were SLAVES in Africa??? Oh and lets not forget the Spanish who raped South America for their gold and silver - yet no one gives the Spanish **** or the African slave owners who sold the ****ing slaves in the first place.
And that somehow made it right?

Go learn some history
It is crystal clear that you are the one in need of learning.

Also, the founding fathers didn't "own slaves"
Right, they rented them with the option to buy.

they were NOT slaves they were employees and they were treated extremely well, and in some cases were part of the family.
And today they would qualify for Obamacare.

This is only a synopsis on slavery
More like ignorant babble.

I could elaborate more
Please do not, it was already very convincing.

I just don't have the time
Good, save your time.
 
Biology isn't a matter of opinion. They were presenting models of what looked like fully developed babies and declaring this was what a fetus looks like at like 8 weeks.

Exactly - Thumbs up.

Progressives apparently have a problem with that.
 
No you don't see anything - You see and interpret through your feelings via your misunderstanding on issues.

You're incapable of dropping the progressive party line and viewing these stories (or any story) objectively. When it comes to news, the only thing that matters is facts, which you will only find at the bottom of every newspaper that leans left.

This is why the Chicago Tribune's headline was "Irish parade bans gays" - that's not only a lie but it's stupid and illogical. Since when do gays look any different than anyone else? yet the Chicago Tribune implies they do - now who is the homophobe here?
You are desperately grasping and are still failing to make a relevant or intelligent argument.
 
Free speech includes the right to not be held captive to speech. The children in the cafeteria have a right to not be subjected to the abortion banners nonsense.

Funny how I read ****-tons of crap I don't agree with...... Maybe I should suggest that all progressives who post here should be banned just so I should not be subjected to their bull****? how would you react to that?

I did not realize that you are a child in a public schools cafeteria.

My bad :roll:
 
I do not think you know anything about anything taught in schools.

And that somehow made it right?

It is crystal clear that you are the one in need of learning.

Right, they rented them with the option to buy.

And today they would qualify for Obamacare.

More like ignorant babble.

Please do not, it was already very convincing.

Good, save your time.

I don't give one **** what you believe. It is quite obvious you're incapable of understanding my position and only care about yours... So I don't care.

Furthermore, only a desperate "collectivist" would break my posts up like you do.

I'm telling you NOT teaching you.
 
I did not realize that you are a child in a public schools cafeteria.

My bad :roll:

Well, I'm just using the progressive knee-jerk reaction to anything and everything they don't agree with.

It's called fighting fire with fire.
 
You are desperately grasping and are still failing to make a relevant or intelligent argument.

If you want an intelligent argument go read the Bill of Rights. Oh yeah you never did nor did you embrace the US Constitution. You know why? because you don't give a **** about either document until it's useful to your plight - then it matters.

You see - the founding documents aren't for everyone - just for progressive causes (taxation, limitation and segregation), of course with no respect for the Tenth Amendment.
 
Back
Top Bottom