- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
God in Louisiana classrooms? Motto required by 2019
Posted on 5/30/18 at 10:56 am
Posted on 5/30/18 at 10:56 am
LINK
BATON ROUGE — Public schools must display the national motto "In God We Trust" beginning in 2019 after Gov. John Bel Edwards signed a bill this week requiring the signage.
Senate Bill 224 by Regina Barrow, D-Baton Rouge, sailed through the Senate and House with little debate and quickly cleared the governor's desk.
Barrow dismissed any potential concerns about separation of church and state.
"We're not pushing God on anybody; we're incorporating it as part of the history of our nation," she said. "It's our national motto, for goodness sake. If it's good enough to be on our money, it's good enough to be in our schools."
The law will also require instruction about the national motto.
..
Barrow removed language from the bill to assure the legislation wouldn't cost the state or school systems money by requiring expensive signage.
bullshite. It absolutely is going to cost the state fighting the inevitable lawsuit.
BATON ROUGE — Public schools must display the national motto "In God We Trust" beginning in 2019 after Gov. John Bel Edwards signed a bill this week requiring the signage.
Senate Bill 224 by Regina Barrow, D-Baton Rouge, sailed through the Senate and House with little debate and quickly cleared the governor's desk.
Barrow dismissed any potential concerns about separation of church and state.
"We're not pushing God on anybody; we're incorporating it as part of the history of our nation," she said. "It's our national motto, for goodness sake. If it's good enough to be on our money, it's good enough to be in our schools."
The law will also require instruction about the national motto.
..
Barrow removed language from the bill to assure the legislation wouldn't cost the state or school systems money by requiring expensive signage.
bullshite. It absolutely is going to cost the state fighting the inevitable lawsuit.
27
Posted on 5/30/18 at 10:57 am to DavidTheGnome
Sounds good.
Nothing in the Constitution against this. It just says Congress can’t pass a law establishing a national religion.
Nothing in the Constitution against this. It just says Congress can’t pass a law establishing a national religion.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 10:57 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Barrow removed language from the bill to assure the legislation wouldn't cost the state or school systems money by requiring expensive signage.
Which will seem a small penance to the legal avalanche headed his way...
Seriously, we're all so concerned with Washington but our back yard is just AF.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 10:57 am to DavidTheGnome
This is the kind of shite that makes Louisiana look so stupid. Legislate laws not slogans please!
Posted on 5/30/18 at 10:59 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Bull shite. It absolutely is going to cost the state fighting the inevitable lawsuit.
It will be money well spent to beat these commies in court.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:01 am to The Boat
quote:
It just says Congress can’t pass a law establishing a national religion.
Separation of Church and State goes beyond that, and was definitely intended to a certain degree by those that had a hand in writing it.
I would not be surprised if this leads to a SpCrt challenge that goes beyond just this law and extends to "In God we Trust" being placed on money etc.
Following past rulings by the Court, I would say it would be in danger of being found UnCon.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:02 am to DavidTheGnome
Good for them.
The states most certainly should have the right to mention God if they choose. The 1st amendment was written to prevent the federal government from forcing people to violate their religious convictions by being told how to worship (if at all). Putting the national motto up in schools should not be an issue.
The states most certainly should have the right to mention God if they choose. The 1st amendment was written to prevent the federal government from forcing people to violate their religious convictions by being told how to worship (if at all). Putting the national motto up in schools should not be an issue.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:03 am to Fun Bunch
Separation of Church and State doesn’t exist in our Constitution. It doesn’t matter what anyone said after writing it. They should have put it in the Constitution if they wanted it.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:04 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
God in Louisiana classrooms?
Election coming up, and its Louisiana.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:06 am to FooManChoo
The "national motto" that is nowhere to be found in any founding documents?
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:08 am to JuiceTerry
quote:It doesn't have to be. It's more generic than the several state constitutions and charters that specifically mentioned Jesus or Christianity.
The "national motto" that is nowhere to be found in any founding documents?
This post was edited on 5/30/18 at 11:09 am
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:08 am to DavidTheGnome
frick yeah
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:14 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
"This is part of our country's history," Regina said then. "Our nation was build on a Christian foundation.
I mean, I'd say it was more built on Enlightenment principles. The religion many of the founders believed in wouldn't really match up with the religious practices shown throughout the deep South.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:22 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
If it's good enough to be on our money, it's good enough to be in our schools
New study finds that 90% of U.S. currency has cocaine residue on it
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:23 am to FooManChoo
quote:
The states most certainly should have the right to mention God if they choose. The 1st amendment was written to prevent the federal government from forcing people to violate their religious convictions by being told how to worship (if at all). Putting the national motto up in schools should not be an issue.
i see what you did there with the 'if at all', you kinda just slipped that in to marginalize your argument abit.
what God do we trust? knowing you believe this nation is founded on Christian principles just curious, which God do we trust?
when some Muslims insist on it saying In Allah we trust, i wonder if you would be as accomodating.
or if some Satanist wanted...in Asmodeus we trust...
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:26 am to JuiceTerry
quote:
The "national motto" that is nowhere to be found in any founding documents?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator
How about this one? What did they mean here?
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:30 am to The Boat
quote:
Nothing in the Constitution against this. It just says Congress can’t pass a law establishing a national religion.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...”
Respecting in this context means “with reference or regard to.”
Congress shall make no law with reference or regard to an establishment of religion.
If students want to pray or take time for religious and spiritual matters on their own initiative then that’s great.
But when a governmental apparatus is involved they cannot by the Constitution pass a law that adopts any religion.
In God We Trust on money is a relatively new phenomenon that wasn’t widespread and federal until the mid 1950s. Accomodation doctrine allowed it, so long as no one religion is placed above another. But nevertheless that doctrine doesn’t hold true to a textualist interpretation.
Our founding fathers wanted religion to be a personal thing, not a governmental thing, and for religion to be practiced freely with no governmental interference at all. My two cents
Lawsuits will be forthcoming, I’m sure.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:35 am to Cruiserhog
quote:I wasn't trying to marginalize anything. I included "if at all" because a necessary part of the 1st amendment is that the government cannot force anyone to believe anything or worship anyone or anything in any necessary way. That includes both people who hold to a religion different from Christianity (as well as different denominations within Christianity) and those who hold to no religion at all.
i see what you did there with the 'if at all', you kinda just slipped that in to marginalize your argument abit
quote:The founders' understanding of God was based on the Judeo-Christian version of God that some deists stripped some characteristics away from. That God is the God of the Bible: Yahweh, Jehovah, etc.
what God do we trust? knowing you believe this nation is founded on Christian principles just curious, which God do we trust?
quote:I'm personally not as accommodating to Muslims in this regard because Allah is not the same God of the Bible.
when some Muslims insist on it saying In Allah we trust, i wonder if you would be as accomodating.
quote:Also, not the God of the Bible that the founders understood.
or if some Satanist wanted...in Asmodeus we trust...
I hope you realize that the entire reason for including mention of God by the founders was because they believed He existed and was worthy of recognition. He wasn't some substitute for "religion" and thus can be exchanged by anyone who believes whatever they want.
Even so, the founders didn't want to force any person of this country to believe like they did, which is why the 1st amendment was written to ensure that people could worship (or not) as they pleased. The people could disagree with the founders and the religion and faith of those in power in the government and not be punished by it.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:38 am to The Boat
quote:
Separation of Church and State doesn’t exist in our Constitution. It doesn’t matter what anyone said after writing it. They should have put it in the Constitution if they wanted it.
Moreover, when Jefferson wrote his letter to the Danburry Baptists and coined the term "separation of church and state," he was speaking about a separation protecting religious practice from government interference, not advocating for a secular government.
Remember, none of our founding fathers ever objected to congressional sessions beginning with a prayer.
Posted on 5/30/18 at 11:41 am to Volatile
quote:The context of the U.S. at the time of its founding disagrees with the interpretation of the 1st amendment that it was barring the government from anything religious in nature.
Volatile
What the 1A was intended to do was prevent the federal government from interfering with the private and public worship of citizens by forcing them to violate their religious convictions as the Church of England had done as well as the Roman Catholic church which caused the Pilgrims to seek refuge in America years prior.
The interpretation that the government should never mention anything about religion in order to appear completely neutral is just not historically accurate.
Page 1 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News