Is Declaration of Independence unconstitutional?

[lucky wilbury]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41623

Is Declaration of Independence unconstitutional?
School district sued for censoring founding documents, state constitutions

Posted: November 23, 2004
11:38 p.m. Eastern



© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com


In a season typified by lawsuits against manger scenes, crosses and even the words "Merry Christmas," a California case is taking the "separation of church and state" one step further – dealing with whether it's unconstitutional to read the Declaration of Independence in public school.

Attorneys for the Alliance Defense Fund filed suit Monday against the Cupertino Union School District for prohibiting a teacher from providing supplemental handouts to students about American history because the historical documents contain some references to God and religion.

"Throwing aside all common sense, the district has chosen to censor men such as George Washington and documents like the Declaration of Independence," said ADF Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb. "The district's actions conflict with American beliefs and are completely unconstitutional."


Patricia Vidmar, principal of the Stevens Creek School, reportedly ordered the teacher, Stephen Williams, to submit his lesson plans and supplemental handouts to her for advance approval. Aside from Williams, a Christian, no other teachers were subject to the advance-screening requirement, says the ADF.

Just what documents did Williams submit that were deemed unfit for the school's students?

"Excerpts from the Declaration of Independence, the diaries of George Washington and John Adams, the writings of William Penn, and various state constitutions," said the public-interest law firm representing Willliams.

"Less than 5 percent of all of Mr. Williams' supplemental handouts distributed throughout the school year contain references to God and Christianity," McCaleb said. "The district is simply attempting to cleanse all references to the Christian religion from our nation's history, and they are singling out Mr. Williams for discriminatory treatment. Their actions are unacceptable under both California and federal law."

California's Education Code does allow "references to religion or references to or the use of religious literature … when such references or uses do not constitute instruction in religious principles … and when such references or uses are incidental to or illustrative of matters properly included in the course of study."

The case, Stephen J. Williams v. Cupertino Union School District, et al., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Oakland Division.

[FORD]

The BCE is likely behind this. They don't want anybody reading the Declaration of Independence, especially this part.....

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

[knuckleboner]

this is one of those, "sounds bad but we need more info" deals.


handouts and exerpts. that's what we get?

the context of the excepts is important. if this particular lesson plan is, "why America is a Christian nation" and goes on to exerpt every religious reference the teacher can find, that's a bit different than if the lesson was about human rights and just contained a religious reference, like:

"they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights."


big difference.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
this is one of those, "sounds bad but we need more info" deals.

That's usually the case. I have seen numerous references to God, religion, and atheism in teaching materials, literature, and textbooks and it is fine as long as it is nondenominational. But that's NY state, so I don't really know.

[Ally_Kat]

question from the private school kid --

In my social studies book way-back-when in 8th grade, there was a chapter about religions that discussed their origins, basic beliefs and (rituals and holidays included), and some countries that had the largest population of followers of said religion.

Never was a problem in my school cuz we were a religious private one. Could a chapter like that be taught in public schools or would it be nixed citing the ol' separation of church and state rule?

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
question from the private school kid --

In my social studies book way-back-when in 8th grade, there was a chapter about religions that discussed their origins, basic beliefs and (rituals and holidays included), and some countries that had the largest population of followers of said religion.

Never was a problem in my school cuz we were a religious private one. Could a chapter like that be taught in public schools or would it be nixed citing the ol' separation of church and state rule?

We had world cultures in high school and they taught us about all the world's religions. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddism, and Hinduism. Hinduism was more like folklore or something though with the 1000s of gods. Weird. Zen Buddism is the shit. POLAR OPPOSITE of where we are at in this country.

I think if they represent all the religions equally for information only, it's ok. It was for our school about 10 years ago or so.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
question from the private school kid --

In my social studies book way-back-when in 8th grade, there was a chapter about religions that discussed their origins, basic beliefs and (rituals and holidays included), and some countries that had the largest population of followers of said religion.

Never was a problem in my school cuz we were a religious private one. Could a chapter like that be taught in public schools or would it be nixed citing the ol' separation of church and state rule?

Yes it is taught, provided the public school has any decent text books. But content on all religions and their influence on political science is, or at least is supposed to be, taught.

[Ally_Kat]

ah, okay. thanks you guys.

[knuckleboner]

yep, that's the case.


the separation of church and state is a goofy concept in practice. since it stems from the 1st amendment's, no "establishing a religion," there's a lot of leadway.

and...unfortunately for some conservatives (ashcroft :D), it requires judicial interpretation. sometimes the judges are right; teaching cultural aspects of religions. and sometimes they get it wrong (pledge of allegience).

but that's what makes judicial appointments so fun!!

[Warham]

Originally posted by FORD
The BCE is likely behind this. They don't want anybody reading the Declaration of Independence, especially this part.....

No, it really sounds more like that liberal athiest cunt Michael Newdow that sued a school because his daughter had to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

[FORD]

Originally posted by Warham
No, it really sounds more like that liberal athiest cunt Michael Newdow that sued a school because his daughter had to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Hey, don't be calling that asshole a liberal! We don't want him. I imagine the atheists won't even claim that clown. He makes them look bad.

[lms2]

I don't see how it is possible to teach history without at least some mention of religion.

But I guess when you have kids in highschool who can't read the handouts anyway, there may be just a bit bigger problem going on...

[Pink Spider]

Originally posted by Warham
No, it really sounds more like that liberal athiest cunt Michael Newdow that sued a school because his daughter had to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

It's a global atheist conspiracy!

I see nothing wrong with the declaration of independence in it's original form.
The pledge however, was altered 50 years ago to to put "God" in it. There's a difference. Why didn't anyone complain when the pledge was changed? Wouldn't that too be a form of revisionist history? Be consistent.

Originally posted by FORD
Hey, don't be calling that asshole a liberal! We don't want him. I imagine the atheists won't even claim that clown. He makes them look bad.

I don't follow very closely to what he does so maybe I've missed something. How exactly does he make atheists look bad?

[Nickdfresh]

I don't follow very closely to what he does so maybe I've missed something. How exactly does he make atheists look bad?

The girls mother had custody, was an active Christian, and was raising the girl to be one as well. I might be wrong since this is from memory, but I think the mother said he had ulterior motives that had little to do with church and state and more to do with a nasty divorce and custody issues.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Pink Spider
It's a global atheist conspiracy!

I see nothing wrong with the declaration of independence in it's original form.
The pledge however, was altered 50 years ago to to put "God" in it. There's a difference. Why didn't anyone complain when the pledge was changed? Wouldn't that too be a form of revisionist history? Be consistent.

Why didn't anyone bitch two hundred years ago when George Washington mentioned God about a hundred times in his Thanksgiving address that I posted in another thread?

I don't see a problem with the Pledge having God in it when our own Declaration of Independence mentions the Creator.

Certain people have been trying to strip any mention of a creator or God out of our American way of life for the last fifty years.