Students Kicked Off Campus for Wearing American Flag Tees

[akflightmedic]

I for one am getting sick and tired of having to show 'respect' for other cultures holidays, rites and religions at the expense of my own!

I agree! Which is why there should be no religious input in our schools, healthcare or legal system.

[usmc_chris]

I agree! Which is why there should be no religious input in our schools, healthcare or legal system.

Not to stir the pot too much here, but don't forget that our entire legal system was based on Christian mores. The founding fathers were, for the most part, deeply religious men, and their values are reflected in our government and legal system.

That being said, I certainly don't believe that any one religion, or group of religions should dictate social policy. While I may believe in God, and attend church, I don't believe that my beliefs should be thrust onto others. Just because I choose do to something or not to do something based on my personal beliefs doesn't mean that I can dictate that others can or cannot do that.

That being said, I agree that this incident is a little ridiculous. To be removed from school for wearing a t-shirt depicting the flag of the United States of America, while within the borders of the United States of America, is completely unacceptable in my opinion.

[akflightmedic]

Not to stir the pot too much here, but don't forget that our entire legal system was based on Christian mores. The founding fathers were, for the most part, deeply religious men, and their values are reflected in our government and legal system.

That being said, I certainly don't believe that any one religion, or group of religions should dictate social policy. While I may believe in God, and attend church, I don't believe that my beliefs should be thrust onto others. Just because I choose do to something or not to do something based on my personal beliefs doesn't mean that I can dictate that others can or cannot do that.

That being said, I agree that this incident is a little ridiculous. To be removed from school for wearing a t-shirt depicting the flag of the United States of America, while within the borders of the United States of America, is completely unacceptable in my opinion.

And I suggest a review of our history when making quotes such as this. They were not "deeply" religious and they did their best to establish a system not impacted by any particular set of beliefs. One of the biggest incorrect statements was "this country is founded on christian beliefs".

The majority of the founding fathers were Humanists. They had great values/morals and despite what most religious people say, it is very possible to be good without god. Atheists are not out raping and killing because of no god, they are simply living a good, honorable life.

Humanists, atheists and those of similar mind sets live life without the expectation of reward or fear of punishment after death. They do what is right because it is the right thing to do. A sky daddy does not dictate morals or values.

But anyways, back to the original topic...yes they were wrong for sending them home.

[maverick56]

Follow-up story - the "Mexican-American" (not only do I despise hyphenated titles, it is debatable how many are legally Americans at all) students staged a protest at City Hall.

American Flag Clothing Sparks New Protest

In my humble opinion, whether the students meant to make a statement or not (which I'm sure they did, as I would have), this did not, and would not have, become an "incendiary" incident until the administrators made it one by directing attention to it, by their actions, telling the students that these boys had (1) done something wrong, and (2) that the Mexican's should be offended. They guaranteed that it would become an issue! So guess what? Now they have a huge, national controversy on and have incited racial tension in their city and school. Congratulations!

Oh, by the way, Dwayne? I love that Roosevelt speech! One of the first things that came to mind when I read the article.

edited for formatting

To start with, I doubt the boys wore those shirts to 'stir shit' due to the fact that the article clearly states that they've worn those shirts in the past with no repercussions.

Whether it was a case of intentionally 'stirring shit' or not, there has to be a couple things remembered here:

1. This is the United States of America, not Mexico. If ANY flag is superior to any other flag, the American flag gets the 'top spot'.

2. While Cinco de Mayo may be an important date in Mexico's history, this ain't Mexico! Sure, celebrate the holidays of your native land; but remember this: The United States shouldn't be expected to give those holidays the same reverence that Mexico might!

I for one am getting sick and tired of having to show 'respect' for other cultures holidays, rites and religions at the expense of my own!

While the entire concept of "political correctness" may have been a noble one at it's inception, this is clearly another case of taking things to 'extremes', and having the rights and liberties of the American people trampled once again!

Multiculturalism: Respecting all cultures except your own. The backbone of our educational system right there.

Edited May 8, 2010 by maverick56

[DwayneEMTP]

...it is very possible to be good without god. Atheists are not out raping and killing because of no god, they are simply living a good, honorable life.

I can find many reference to the fact that the founding fathers were Deists (not sure if that's the right word). The fact that they were not Christian does not in fact mean that they had no God.

The Declaration of Independence mentions God, and the Creator, how are we to interpret those words without accepting their belief in a deity?

Dwayne

[akflightmedic]

I can find many reference to the fact that the founding fathers were Deists (not sure if that's the right word). The fact that they were not Christian does not in fact mean that they had no God.

The Declaration of Independence mentions God, and the Creator, how are we to interpret those words without accepting their belief in a deity?

Dwayne

This sums it up nicely....

Many have argued against the separation of church and state by pointing to the Declaration of Independence. They believe that the text of this document supports the position that the United States was founded upon religious, if not Christian, principles, and therefore church and state must remain intertwined in order for this nation to continue properly.

There are a couple of flaws in this argument. For one thing, the Declaration of Independence is not a legal document for this nation. What this means is that it has no authority over our laws, our lawmakers, or ourselves. It cannot be cited as precedent or as being binding in a courtroom. The purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to make a moral case for dissolving the legal ties between the colonies and Great Britain; once that goal was achieved, the official role of the Declaration was finished.

That leaves open, however, the possibility that the document expressed the will of the same people who wrote the Constitution — thus, it provides knowledge about their intent as to what sort of government we should have. Leaving aside for the moment whether or not that intention should bind us, there are still serious flaws to consider. First, religion itself is never mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. This makes it difficult to argue that any particular religious principles should guide our current government.

Second, what little is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence is only barely compatible with Christianity, the religion most people have in mind when making the above argument. The Declaration refers to “Nature’s God,” “Creator,” and “Divine Providence.” These are all terms used in the sort of deism which was common among many of those responsible for the American Revolution as well as the philosophers upon whom they relied for support. Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, was himself a deist who was opposed to many traditional Christian doctrines, in particular beliefs about the supernatural.

One common misuse of the Declaration of Independence is to argue that it states that our rights come from God and, therefore, there are no legitimate interpretations of the rights in the Constitution that would be contrary to God. The first problem is that the Declaration of Independence refers to a “Creator” and not the Christian “God” meant by people making the argument. The second problem is that the “rights” mentioned in the Declaration of Independence are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” — none of which are “rights” discussed in the Constitution.

Finally, the Declaration of Independence also makes it clear that governments created by humanity derive their powers from the consent of the governed, not from any gods. This is why the Constitution does not make any mention of any gods. There is no reason to think that there is anything illegitimate about an interpretation of any of the rights outlined in the Constitution merely because it runs contrary to what some people think that their conception of a god would want.

What this all means is that arguments against the separation of church and state which rely upon the language of the Declaration of Independence fail. First, the document in question has no legal authority with which one could make a legal case. Second, the sentiments expressed therein do not support the principle that government should be guided either by any specific religion (like Christianity) or by religion “in general” (as if such a thing even existed).

[DwayneEMTP]

...The majority of the founding fathers were Humanists. They had great values/morals and despite what most religious people say, it is very possible to be good without god. Atheists are not out raping and killing because of no god, they are simply living a good, honorable life.

Humanists, atheists and those of similar mind sets live life without the expectation of reward or fear of punishment after death. They do what is right because it is the right thing to do. A sky daddy does not dictate morals or values.

I agree with your posted, though not sited, paragraphs above, but fail to see how it applies to my post. What you've posted and I've quoted above would lead most I believe to suppose that you were implying that humanist is equivalent to Atheist, something that you're quoted text shows specifically to be false. They were not atheists, they simply were not Christian. And it was not my intent to make a legal argument that church and state are bound from the genesis of our nation, but to show the error in what I believed to be your statement that the founding fathers were not religious, but humanist, and per your statement, then atheists.

Many things have change since the inception of our country, and I find it hard to argue that it is now not predominantly Christian of one flavor or another. Is it now then, considering that we have, In God We Trust, and One Nation Under God, "Do you swear to tell the truth, so help you God?" so firmly embedded in our governmental, legal, and financial lives, so far fetched to consider that there is in fact no separation between church and state, but only no legal obligation to participate?

And so there should be no misunderstanding, I do not consider myself a Christian, nor a follower of any organized religion.

Dwayne

Edited to add the bolded 'not' above. No other changes.

Edited May 9, 2010 by DwayneEMTP

[Chief1C]

If one were to listen to me say the Pledge of Allegiance, they'd notice that I become mute for a couple words.

[akflightmedic]

This little part was snatched from WIki but is accurate.

"Humanism is a democratic and ethical life stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethic based on human and other natural values in the spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. It is not theistic, and it does not accept supernatural views of reality."

There are several types of Humanism, but it is typically not theistic.

As for the In God we Trust, the God in our pledge and the other insertions...those were placed during the 1950s as a way to insult the secular nation of Russia primarily. Most Americans are under the false assumption that this is how it always has been but it was not until McCarthy got excited during his modern day witch hunt. All it takes is one fanatic to gain enough control to bend ears and then chaos ensues.

Their genius idea was to insert God in money and the pledge which was pretty lame and inconsiderate of all those who make up America. Again, it simply does not belong in our legal system and I will be more than happy when it is removed. It is NOT how we always have been, it is NOT how we were founded.

[Just Plain Ruff]

If one were to listen to me say the Pledge of Allegiance, they'd notice that I become mute for a couple words.

And if you were to hear me say the pledge, I probably get a little louder at the words you go mute on.