|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,385 Year: 3,642/9,624 Month: 513/974 Week: 126/276 Day: 23/31 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Another example of right wing evil | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8527 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Ah, subie? Your list of cases?
I really don't mean to be pedantic but: Board of Ed. of Independent School Dist. No. 92 v Earls 536 U.S. 822 (2002) has to do with a state's right to drug screen kids for certain activities and the court agreed the state has such a right. Zelman v. Simmons-Harris 536 U.S. 639 (2002) is an Establishment case about assisting poor families to pay for schooling in other than the failed public schools in Cleveland which the court found was proper. Mitchell v. Helms 530 U.S. 793 (2000) is another Establishment case involving funding to private schools for "secular, neutral, and nonideological" programs which the court agreed was proper. Meyer v. State of Nebraska 262 U.S. 390 (1923) deals with individual's rights (via the Fourteenth Amendment) verses a state's attempt seen as an arbitrary restriction on private educational instruction where the court sided with the individual's right to private instruction. These do not appear to apply to the discussion at hand where a state's right to determine public school curriculum is challenged. I haven't the time to go through all the cases. Is there a case listed where the Court granted Congress supremacy over the states in determining public school curriculum? I have no doubt that under some "necessary and proper" clause Congress could at least attempt such control, but I am not aware of such a standing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8527 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
I have objected to the law on the basis that it is a shit ... And I think all of us, even Arte, agree.
... whilst throughout this thread he has advocated it not just on the basis of Tennessee being allowed to make such laws but on the basis that it is somehow anti-nanny state for them to do so and a case of good parenting that they have. I think Arte sometimes gets lost in his own rhetoric and emotion, but I read him as saying Tennessee has such a right, bad implementation as it is, and it's not anyone else's, including the Feds, right to challenge. Let the affected citizens of Tennessee challenge this idiocy. I think the thing Arte misses is that we, all of us, have every right to express our dismay at this foolishness and call the legislature of Tennessee assholes. That is our right. Edited by AZPaul3, : oopps Edited by AZPaul3, : more oopps Edited by AZPaul3, : goo god I am never going to get this right
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1275 days) Posts: 3509 Joined:
|
Wow something in the vastness of history that I didn’t know invalidates, my education ::rolls eyes:: I suppose that's as close as we should expect you to come to admitting you were wrong. Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate ...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1275 days) Posts: 3509 Joined:
|
I was responding specifically to AE's claim that
The US Constitution has no powers over education, that has always been left to the individual states to deal with. However, in answer to your specific question, how about Epperson v. Arkansas 393 U.S. 97 (1968), where the Court held that Arkansas could not forbid the teaching of a particular scientific theory? (I'll leave it to you to suss out what Arkansas wanted kept out of schools. It's not exactly a tough question.) It had nothing to do with the Necessary and Proper Clause or Congress, the Court decided the case under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Any time a state tries to do something with public school curriculum that runs afoul of the Constitution, federal courts are empowered to prohibit the state's action. Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate ...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8527 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Any time a state tries to do something with public school curriculum that runs afoul of the Constitution, federal courts are empowered to prohibit the state's action. When you're right you're right. [Ruth Buzzi] Never mind. [/Ruth Buzzi]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1275 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
[Ruth Buzzi] Never mind.
[/Ruth Buzzi] Not to be pedantic, but I think you meant either Gilda Radner or Emily Litella. Edited by subbie, : Quote box Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate ...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8527 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
Not to be pedantic, but I think you meant either Gilda Radner or Emily Litella. [Gilda Radner] Oh. Nevermind. [/Gilda Radner]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
If we all agree that the law in question is itself objectionable then I guess there is little else for me to discuss.
But you guys really really do seem to have lost sight of the real issue by obsessing over what seems to me the relatively unimportant issue of exactly which branch of legislature is imposing shit laws on people.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
I assume the first paragraph of your post is addressed to someone else?
Straggler writes: If you had said yes it is a pointless and discriminatory law but Tennessee has every legal right to make that decision and I support that right even I object to the law itself - You would not have received the widespread condemnation that you have. AE writes: That is bullshit, but you are entitled to believing that if you want to. Sure people would have disagreed about the legal intricacies. But the wider condemnation wouldn't have occurred if you had made it clear to begin with that you too find the actual law itself objectionable.
AE writes: Individual freedoms is why they can make a silly law like this. And it is this attitude that I find absolutely mystifying. It's like you guys see local government legislators as champions of the people and guardians of freedom no matter how fuckwitted, unlibertarian or pointlessly unnecessary and intrusive the laws they come up with are. It genuinely makes no sense to me.
Straggler writes: If you were that history teacher could you be totally confident that the law would not be applied against you or not? AE writes: Totally confident? No; but worth a shot? Yes. I wouldn't risk my career and livelihood and I doubt many teachers would either. Which means many of the liberal concerns about the effects of this legislation are warranted.
AE writes: The parenting thing is related to the Butt Fucking thing that I thought you wanted to drop? I guess you don’t want to drop it then? I am happy to drop the butt fucking issue but if you want to take another shot I am right behind you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8527 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
But you guys really really do seem to have lost sight of the real issue by obsessing over what seems to me the relatively unimportant issue of exactly which branch of legislature is imposing shit laws on people. Hey, we're Americans! We gotta do things in a complex way. Without all the hand wringing over who has what right to do idiotic things and who has what right to get upset over it, then we are all just voicing our opinions and, in a case like this, that makes for a rather short bland thread. And it can get worse. If we want to discuss what can be done about it then we need to obsess over why the body in question did what it did so we can obsess over who has legal standing as an injured party then obsess over in which court that standing resides and then obsess on what grounds are available in that specific court to make a challenge. We could go another 200 messages in this thread on that discussion. Straggler, ain't this fun for you? But this terribly off topic and I've already crossed the Moose once this week so I think we better move on. Edited by AZPaul3, : added
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4249 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
But you guys really really do seem to have lost sight of the real issue by obsessing over what seems to me the relatively unimportant issue of exactly which branch of legislature is imposing shit laws on people. really? I explained myself on page 4 and had to defend myself for 11 more pages. and I am the obsessed one? ROFLMFAO! Typing the same thing over and over again for 11 pages, if AZPaul3 had never joined in I'd still be saying the same thing right now, who knows if this would have ever ended.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4249 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
I think Arte sometimes gets lost in his own rhetoric and emotion, but I read him as saying Tennessee has such a right, bad implementation as it is, and it's not anyone else's, including the Feds, right to challenge. Let the affected citizens of Tennessee challenge this idiocy. I have not once allowed emotion into this, unless laughing out loud at the nonsense that this place is counts, it has been hilarious. other than that, yah purdy much.
I think the thing Arte misses is that we, all of us, have every right to express our dismay at this foolishness and call the legislature of Tennessee assholes. That is our right. I didn't miss that, people can disagree all they want to about anything, I was merely pointing out the falsehoods in the OP. the "inevitable consequences of the law", when I asked for evidence of this assertion, the answer was basically to attack me (because they have no evidence), and of course they attacked me out of context and off topic, using ad hominem and strawman after strawman (but this is EvC and after 500 posts it is to be expected). Straggler was the only one who wanted clarification, and asked me questions instead of acting like a child. well its been funny; until next time... Edited by Artemis Entreri, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
AZStraggler, ain't this fun for you? Well I guess the "fun" has to stop at some point..... If we all agree that the law itself is objectionable then I have nothing more to say really.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 821 days) Posts: 3193 Joined:
|
But down right disgusting. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor proposes college students pay interest immediately instead of getting deferrments
The House majority leader, who did most of the talking for the Republican side, said those taking out student loans should start paying interest right away, rather than being able to defer payments until after graduation. It is a big-ticket item that would save $40 billion over 10 years. Obama responded:
I’m not going to do that, Obama said. I’m not going to take money from old people and screw students, not without some compromise on the tax-increase side. This, coupled with Boehner saying the debt ceiling is Obama's problem and it's his fault if it doesn't get resolved. Lying fuck. Now, someone remind me: why should ANYONE, other than the uber rich, vote (R)? Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given. "Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3311 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Its obvious they are obstructionists at this point.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024