|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
|
|
Quote:
Smackshadow said: Constitutionally speaking that is untrue. Municipal governments are held to the same standards as the states from which they derive their authority.
In terms of civil rights violations, they are held to almost the same standard (but not quite--not all of the rights the federal constitution protects have been "incorporated" and applied to the states), in terms of almost everything else, the federal constitution doesn't limit them really at all, other than requiring that they have a republican form of government. See, for example, the 10th amendment:
Quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Most glaringly, the states and municipalities have a very wide-ranging police power which the federal government is severely restricted from employing--except in the case of interstate commerce-derived activity since this is explicitly laid out as their domain in the constitution. They have taken a hold of that and expanded it to the point where you might think that the federal government has a general police power, but they do not.
Quote:
Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
The due process clause of the 14th amendment has expanded that to include state governments and their municipalities.
That's true, but even when the state and federal governments are held to the same standards, the state has interests that the federal government does not which allows them to do things that the federal government cannot, not that it matters in this case.
Quote:
As far as I can tell the Supreme Court hasn't heard a case directly on point. Lee v. Weisman went to school prayer and there is some decent on if it applies to adult institutions. I believe that there is a division between circuits on this question. Bunting v. Mellen would suggest that the conduct is unconstitutional as longs as they required you to "be respectfully at rest" during the prayer.
Yeah, case law is sparse, and it would be a tossup in the Supreme Court, but my own opinion is that it's not an issue. OP would have to make a really strong case that there was any coercion going on. If there is a law or a policy requiring the prayer to happen before the meeting, he has a case.
Now that I'm thinking about it even more, I'm sure there is some city employee that is required to be there who is being paid hourly, hence wasting municipal funds for religious purposes... Now that's an angle I don't think has been investigated.
I wonder why the OP didn't stand up and voice an objection at some point in the meeting. It would have been interesting to hear the council's response and might have affected how I feel about it in some way.
|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
|
Re: A city hall meeting [Re: Seuss]
#14310670 - 04/18/11 07:13 AM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: I almost got expelled from high school (a long time ago) over this issue. We were required to stand and recite the "Pledge of Allegiance" each morning before the start of our first class. My junior year, I took issue with the "one nation under god" bit and refused to participate. Needless to say, having a "young atheist free thinker" in the middle of the bible belt didn't go over very well.
The same thing happened to me in high school and in middle school. Their issue then was that I refused to even stand to acknowledge the "event". In high school, the district freaked out at the prospect of being sued when the ACLU chimed in (the local chapter made a press release stating that they were "salivating" over the case). They ended up hanging signs in multiple places at every school in the district clarifying that it is not policy to force students to stand during the pledge. I assume there was some teacher re-education going on behind the scenes as well to keep the district's ass out of the fire. I kept sitting.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: A city hall meeting [Re: ChuangTzu]
#14312678 - 04/18/11 02:59 PM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I had the same issues in school with the pledge, sent to the office who called my mom who is a christian (not the bible thumping church going type), my mother informed them I couldnt be forced to do anything I disagree with and to try and push that issue would invite a lawsuit
I went back to class and was never bothered about it again, in a few days several others were remaining seated during the pledge
|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
|
|
A unifying experience for all then. I was severely lectured during high-school for refusing to say the Pledge. My issues are the "allegiance to the flag", "one nation under God", and the "indivisible" parts. I politely informed my gym teacher that no force in this world or the next would make me profess something I disagreed with, and the matter was dropped.
In fairness to the teachers, this happened shortly after 9/11 so everyone was all up in arms about the whole patriotism thing to begin with.
-------------------- The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. ~H. L. Mencken~
|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
|
|
Quote:
Smackshadow said: In fairness to the teachers, this happened shortly after 9/11 so everyone was all up in arms about the whole patriotism thing to begin with.
Don't even give them that. There is nothing patriotic about what they were trying to do.
|
Smackshadow
It's Time for Wild Speculation


Registered: 09/27/05
Posts: 575
Last seen: 4 months, 6 days
|
Re: A city hall meeting [Re: ChuangTzu]
#14315502 - 04/19/11 02:40 AM (13 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I agree, but I can see why they got up in arms about it.
-------------------- The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. ~H. L. Mencken~
|
|