School Cancels Christmas Charity

[Dilange]

Renting out property is illegal?

yeah well apparently giving to charity is illegal too

Have you even read the thread?

[Ifreann]

Renting out property is illegal?

yeah well apparently giving to charity is illegal too

Only if you intentionally misinterpret the situation.

This is what I used my 60,000th post on. Dang.

[Cannot think of a name]

Not me, the Supreme Court, the institution put in place by the Constitution for the express purpose of interpreting the Constitution and how it is applicable to the laws passed.

It does in fact cost them money and uses an institution that children are compelled to attend and authority figures they are compelled to listen to in order to promote an organization whose express purpose is to bring the word of Jesus Christ by way of the shoe boxes that the school encourages the kids to make and donate to. This is the promotion of a singular religion in express violation of the First Amendment as interpreted by the court set up by the Constitution to enforce the Constitution.

When the organization uses its own resources and its own time it can do what it likes, it cannot use the school to compel kids to participate. You are twisting yourself into pretzels trying to find a way that this would have been okay. It doesn't matter what version of it you can create that would be, the one that existed was not.

I was not aware that the supreme court ruled on whether religious non-profits can have charity drives in public schools. Do share this case with me so I can investigate further. If not, then there is still no proof that it is unconstitutional.

Let me introduce you to McCollum v the Board of Education, which ruled that you cannot use class time for religious instruction. Since the school is encouraging students to make these boxes and the boxes have the express purpose of evangelism, it would seem that this is in violation of that case.

[Cannot think of a name]

To be fair, the actual phrase Separation of Church and State isn't in there, just the whole "shall make no laws" bit. That phrase comes from the author writing about it later, I believe but don't feel like looking it up at this moment.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I'm just providing the first amendment for you people to read.

To what end?

[Timothia]

I was not aware that the supreme court ruled on whether religious non-profits can have charity drives in public schools. Do share this case with me so I can investigate further. If not, then there is still no proof that it is unconstitutional.

Let me introduce you to McCollum v the Board of Education, which ruled that you cannot use class time for religious instruction. Since the school is encouraging students to make these boxes and the boxes have the express purpose of evangelism, it would seem that this is in violation of that case.

Are the students using class time? I would think not. If they are, then it would be wrong. Besides, the charity isn't focusing on "religiously instructing" the students, they are only collecting boxes from them. The religious instruction isn't taking place in an American school.

[Four States Commonwealth]

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I'm just providing the first amendment for you people to read.

To what end?

You said you didn't remember the rest of it so I thought I'd spare you the time of looking it up.

[Czechanada]

Kids should be learning in schools. so I support shutting down this fundraiser.

I want Lacanian psychoanalysis, Niels Bohr, and economic formulae shoved down their throats instead of making boxes.

[Cannot think of a name]

To what end?

You said you didn't remember the rest of it so I thought I'd spare you the time of looking it up.

That's not even remotely what I said.

[Farnhamia]

Kids should be learning in schools.

I want Lacanian psychoanalysis, Niels Bohr, and economic formulae shoved down their throats instead of making boxes.

Dr. Bohr has been dead since 1962, unfortunately.

[Farnhamia]

You said you didn't remember the rest of it so I thought I'd spare you the time of looking it up.

That's not even remotely what I said.

Not even remotely? Not even a teensy bit?

[Cetacea]

yeah well apparently giving to charity is illegal too

Have you even read the thread?

Yes and I understand the seperation of church and state argument, what I'm clarifying is why schools can accept religious money without it violating the same doctrine

what makes charity bad but rent okay when the outcome (ie church evangalism) is the same?


wouldn't Aha then have an issue with the School renting the school for church use?

[Ifreann]

Kids should be learning in schools.

I want Lacanian psychoanalysis, Niels Bohr, and economic formulae shoved down their throats instead of making boxes.

Dr. Bohr has been dead since 1962, unfortunately.

That's what he wants you to think. Granted, the cremation may have been a step too far in the cover-up.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

Explain yourself.

You dont believe in the ideals of the Founding Fathers.

Perhaps this kind of argument would have merit, if, you know, the founding fathers were some kind of monolithic hive-mind.
I'm sorry, but, they weren't.
Some, like Alexander Hamilton supported the creation of a king(!) in the United States. That means if you don't support an American Monarchy you disagree with the founding fathers!(!!!) The founding fathers are political figures, not deities. Don't treat them as such.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Can they not, somehow, perform the drive without a Billy Graham organization?

Are you going to provide the infrastructure to collect and distribute said toys?

The US Marine Corps would gladly do it.

[Luveria]

You dont believe in the ideals of the Founding Fathers.

Perhaps this kind of argument would have merit, if, you know, the founding fathers were some kind of monolithic hive-mind.
I'm sorry, but, they weren't.
Some, like Alexander Hamilton supported the creation of a king(!) in the United States. That means if you don't support an American Monarchy you disagree with the founding fathers!(!!!) The founding fathers are political figures, not deities. Don't treat them as such.

The founding fathers...aren't...deities?

My life has been a lie... ;_;

[Cannot think of a name]

That's not even remotely what I said.

Not even remotely? Not even a teensy bit?

Not even a teensy bit. The part I didn't want to look up was the writing, there wasn't any confusion over the verbage of the first amendment.

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

Perhaps this kind of argument would have merit, if, you know, the founding fathers were some kind of monolithic hive-mind.
I'm sorry, but, they weren't.
Some, like Alexander Hamilton supported the creation of a king(!) in the United States. That means if you don't support an American Monarchy you disagree with the founding fathers!(!!!) The founding fathers are political figures, not deities. Don't treat them as such.

The founding fathers...aren't...deities? :(

My life has been a lie... ;_;

I'm sorry Luvi-chan, but your shrine with a golden head of Thomas Paine? It's really kind of pointless. He can't bless you with pamphlet making skills. :(

[Timothia]

You dont believe in the ideals of the Founding Fathers.

Perhaps this kind of argument would have merit, if, you know, the founding fathers were some kind of monolithic hive-mind.
I'm sorry, but, they weren't.
Some, like Alexander Hamilton supported the creation of a king(!) in the United States. That means if you don't support an American Monarchy you disagree with the founding fathers!(!!!) The founding fathers are political figures, not deities. Don't treat them as such.

WHAT HAS THIS WORLD COME TO! And here I've been a Founding Father cultist all this time...

[Timothia]

Not even remotely? Not even a teensy bit?

Not even a teensy bit. The part I didn't want to look up was the writing, there wasn't any confusion over the verbage of the first amendment.

Are you going to give me another court ruling, amendment or law that can prove it's unconstitutional? Because i looked up McCullom v. Board of Education and it doesn't apply. Unless you can show me where it is unconstitutional, I will assume it is legal and fine.

[Dilange]

You dont believe in the ideals of the Founding Fathers.

Perhaps this kind of argument would have merit, if, you know, the founding fathers were some kind of monolithic hive-mind.
I'm sorry, but, they weren't.
Some, like Alexander Hamilton supported the creation of a king(!) in the United States. That means if you don't support an American Monarchy you disagree with the founding fathers!(!!!) The founding fathers are political figures, not deities. Don't treat them as such.

What is this sorcery?

[Czechanada]

Excellent. Reading this thread gave me another idea for another thread in the future.

Thank you all!

[Umbra Ac Silentium]

Perhaps this kind of argument would have merit, if, you know, the founding fathers were some kind of monolithic hive-mind.
I'm sorry, but, they weren't.
Some, like Alexander Hamilton supported the creation of a king(!) in the United States. That means if you don't support an American Monarchy you disagree with the founding fathers!(!!!) The founding fathers are political figures, not deities. Don't treat them as such.

What is this sorcery?

What mean you

[Farnhamia]

Are you going to provide the infrastructure to collect and distribute said toys?

The US Marine Corps would gladly do it.

Oorah!

[Cannot think of a name]

Not even a teensy bit. The part I didn't want to look up was the writing, there wasn't any confusion over the verbage of the first amendment.

Are you going to give me another court ruling, amendment or law that can prove it's unconstitutional? Because i looked up McCullom v. Board of Education and it doesn't apply. Unless you can show me where it is unconstitutional, I will assume it is legal and fine.

Tell you what, Captain No Effort, why don't you get around to telling me why it doesn't apply. Or in fact why every other reasoning given to you doesn't apply instead of just sitting on your stump going 'nuh uh' and making everyone else come to you. The school knew what they were doing was wrong, that's why they stopped. This is using school resources for the express purpose of promoting a religion. It's a no no.

[Rapidblaze]

'international Christian based organisation'
'no religious affiliation nor speakers'

if there is a need to have a separation between a church and the state, then surely 'operation Christmas child' does not encourage, nor coerce people into religion...