In my research, I frequently come across material, wholly irrelevant to my project, but terribly interesting, if only as historical curiosities. The following comes from the New Harmony Gazette, publication of the Owenite Communists, circa 1827:
"A schoolmaster from Harvard [Massachusetts] lately expelled a scholar 18 years of age, from school, on his refusing to pray, when requested, the scholar alleging that he did not come to school to be taught to pray.
"The schoolmaster was indicted for an assault and battery before the court of common pleas at Worcester [Massachusetts], but the jury, without leaving their seats, found a verdict of 'not guilty,' on the ground 'that a schoolmaster has a right to resort to expulsion as one more of punishment, and that the custom of the country sanctions prayer as an exercise in schools."
Massachusetts, juries, our understanding of the First Amendment, and teachers have all changed dramatically in the last 180 years.
Let us not forget the courts, as well. It is there that the Constitution has been stood on it's ear.
What a great story!
Of course, we are still as litigious though. A schoolmaster expels a kid and then gets sued in civil court (I think) for assault and battery? The kid should of gotten a whuppin by his pop and then brought to the school hat in hand to ask to be allowed back in.
If Hillary gets elected, we'll see her lecherous hubby Bill appointed as chief justice of the USSC and praying anywhere will be outlawed.
Interesting story. The real problem here I think is publicly run schools. What is the acceptable convergence point between civil affairs and religious? Everyone has a different opinion, and when the education process is collectively owned, there is no real way to solve it in any lasting manner. Its just a battle of the lobbyists.
Privatize the education system, and people can go to secular schools, or to real ones, as their preference states.
The missing pieces of the puzzle are: 1) the government running the schools and 2) the Fourteenth Amendment.
But Cambridge Mass. hasn't. What a hole of whacked out lefties!
Boy Scouts collecting donations for care packages for U.S. troops were expelled from polling stations when Cambridge officials ruled their generous efforts political.
The Scouts wanted to collect toiletries, magazines, candy and other items for care packages after one of their relatives was injured in an IED explosion while serving in Iraq.
Sometimes it's embarassing to live in this state.
Dan,
This is a good find. Of course, as Veronica implies above, keep in mind that it was before the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. Everyone understood at this point that the First Amendment prevented Congress (i.e., the federal government from making any law "respecting" religious establishments) and that states' rights and local preferences had to be respected.
Of course, that was before the historical fraud of "selective incorporation" was perpetrated by Justice Hugo Black and the Court Left in the 20th Century. They've used "substantive due process" as a battering ram against self-government for decades.
In this context, I was disappointed to see you support the Supreme Court overturning the DC gun ban. I can understand it if you consider DC an appendage of the federal government and not a "state," but the bottom line is the Founders did not intend the Second Amendment to keep states and localities from restricting the use of firearms. The Second Amendment - and the entire Bill of Rights for that matter - was intended to apply only to the federal government, not the states (see no less a Federalist than John Marshall on the subject in Barron v. Baltimore (1833)).
Yes.
Less force people to be a Christian.
That will solve the world's problems.
Retards....
Retards....
What is it with you leftist morons and religion? Especially with regard to Christianity??
I don't see anybody forcing religion down anybody's throat.
Except for the Muslims. Who nobody ever mentions when they talk about how bad religion is.
Talk about 'tards.
