General discussion


Liberal looniness in the USA

By jardinier ·
I find the following news item appalling. Such a thing would NEVER happen in Australia or any other nominally Christian nation that I can think of.

Face it. American politics is in very bad shape indeed. I don't know what you can do about it and I don't really care. You have a choice between a right-wing loony who thinks he is God, and left-wing loonies who are trying to eliminate God from the education system.

Read on and be appalled as I am.

AgapePress, June 22, 2006

A constitutional attorney is denouncing a Las Vegas school district for pulling the plug on a Christian student's commencement speech because it referred to her faith in Jesus Christ. At a recent graduation ceremony, Clark County School District (CCSD) officials cut the microphone on Foothill High School valedictorian Brittany McComb after she began reading a speech that contained Bible verses and references to God.

The district officials claim McComb's speech amounted to religious proselytizing and could have been perceived as school-sponsored, thus making it a violation of the so-called separation of church and state. But Mat Staver, founder and chairman of the Florida-based pro-family legal organization Liberty Counsel, says the high school valedictorian has every right to take the school district to court over the incident.

"I think this is one of the most outrageous examples of censorship at graduation that I've seen," Staver contends. "For school officials to literally be standing by the switch at the mixing board and cut the microphone on a student, simply because that student mentions God or Jesus, is just unbelievable."

With high school behind her, McComb plans to study journalism at Biola University, a Christian college in Southern California. But during her four years at Foothill, she says, "they taught me logic and they taught me freedom of speech." However, when the school's 2006 valedictorian tried to apply these lessons in her graduation address, the graduating senior with the 4.7 GPA ran into a problem.

In vetting McComb's speech, school officials stripped it of biblical references and approved an edited version, cutting six mentions of God or Christ and omitting two biblical references. At the graduation exercises, however, the teen commencement speaker felt compelled to deviate from the edited version. "God's the biggest part of my life," she says. "Just like other valedictorians thank their parents, I wanted to thank my Lord and Savior."

For the Foothill High School graduate, it all boiled down to her faith and her fundamental First Amendment right to free speech. For those reasons , she asserts, she chose in this instance to rebel against authority for the first time in her life. And, according to an Associated Press report, a sympathetic crowd of nearly 400 graduates and their families booed angrily at the school officials for several minutes after they cut McComb's microphone.

An American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Nevada official who read the unedited version of the young woman's speech told the Las Vegas Review-Journal newspaper the school district did the right thing in cutting the valedictory address short. But Staver disagrees that the district's action was warranted and comments, "In my opinion it's reprehensible, and I also believe it's unconstitutional."

The ACLU spokesperson quoted in the Review-Journal made the argument that graduation speakers like McComb are given a school-sponsored forum and therefore their speech is school-sponsored speech. But Liberty Counsel's chairman insists that student commencement speakers' personal remarks and expressions are free speech under the U.S. Constitution.

"Clearly, the law protects students who are in the graduation podium, on the platform, because they are there for some neutral reason -- in this case, being the valedictorian," Staver says. "That student has the right to be able to give a message of his or her own choice regarding the viewpoint of the particular message that's being delivered."

While the attorney regards the silencing of McComb's speech at the Foothill High School commencement as one of the most egregious acts of graduation censorship he has seen, he notes that it is one among many such incidents that happen to speakers of faith every year -- a problem that has to be stopped. "Schools should not, must not, and must stop censoring these kinds of religious viewpoints simply because they are Christian in nature," he says.

Even now, Staver points out, his organization is involved in a similar case. Liberty Counsel is currently representing a Colorado high school graduate whose diploma was withheld after she shared her faith in Jesus Christ during a commencement speech.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -


by neilb@uk In reply to Liberal looniness in the ...

Lots and lots and lots of lawyers. All with nothing better to do than to nitpick over the Constitution and interpret and reinterpret ad nauseam with the intention of getting more publicity, more money - or more of both! And everyone in any form of authority who isn't a lawyer is running scared as to what the lawyers might do.

There are, I believe, more lawyers in New York City than in the entire country of Japan. I've also read that American lawyers probably make up somewhere between 25 percent and 35 percent of all the world's lawyers.

Really, Julian, your new habit of posting non-religious topics isn't any more inspiring to debate than your religious output. You could aim to be a little more selective and a little more challenging if you consider the standard of debate so low. It's also significant that your involvement in the threads that you have started is non-existent.

Are you in or are you out?

Collapse -

Give it a rest, Neil

by jardinier In reply to Lawyers

You know damned well that you are one of the most active participants in religious discussions.

Am I playing seagull? If you choose to believe that you are welcome to. The fact is that I am busy on various projects -- especially my websites -- and don't have the time for continual participation in discussions. However if you care to check you will readily see that I do in fact chime in from time to time, but usually not until I see the direction the thread is taking.

It is because of the websites that I publish that I subscribe to a number of online newsletters such as the one from which this article is taken.

If I find the discussion has taken off, I will pop in from time to time. Additionally I have been participating in Tech Q & A as you will notice by the number in my little yellow box.

As for my opinion on the quality of discussions, this is an excerpt from a private email by a formerly very active participant at TR. Naturally I cannot name this person because it is a private email. Suffice to know that I am not the only person who is disillusioned in the quality of discussions.

On the discussions, it is not so much that I wised up in relation to the content or lack thereof. I just had to make some decisions about the wise use of my time.

Since I was neither learning anything from the
threads, nor convincing anyone with my thoughts, I
decided to let Max have his playpen to himself and his followers.

Even the few technical threads are degrading into
political diatribes.

Unfortunately, I think TR as an entity is degrading. It used to be that the new questions filled up 2 or 3 web pages each day. Now, a single page of new questions is a banner day.

Collapse -

OK, Jules. Point made

by neilb@uk In reply to Give it a rest, Neil

I was being a bit unfair on you, anyway. Closest target on a sh:tty day.

I'm beginning to find the level of Islamaphobia here a bit frightening which, considering I have long been an Islamaphobe, is a bit worrying. I'd actually given up on the religious debates because I don't care enough and they care too much. As for the political debates - they always come back to Iraq. There's also such a level of Liberalophobia as well that I can't get my head round.

Basically, I'm only left with flaming.


I'm impressed with the 25K points, but!

Collapse -

Hey neil did you hear about the guy in

by Deadly Ernest In reply to Lawyers

New Mexico who got three lawyers on a Monday - the judged put him in prison - there was a 2 bag per day limit on lawyers, if he'd only shot 2 he would've been OK.

What had more penetration power than a 5,000 lb bomb dropped from 20,000 feet - a lawyer dropped head first from the same height , they have a header head.

Collapse -

I think you'll find that in Texas it's much the same

by neilb@uk In reply to Hey neil did you hear abo ...

372.01 Any person with a valid Texas state rodent or armadillo hunting license may also hunt and harvest attorneys for recreational and sporting (non-commercial) purposes.
372.02 Taking of attorneys with traps or deadfalls is permitted.The use of United States currency as bait is, however, prohibited.
372.03 The willful killing of attorneys with a motor vehicle is prohibited, unless such vehicle is an ambulance being driven in reverse. If an attorney is accidentally struck by a motor vehicle, the dead attorney should be removed to the roadside and the vehicle should proceed to the nearest car wash.
372.04 It is unlawful to chase, herd, or harvest attorneys from a power boat, helicopter or fixed-wing aircraft.
372.05 It is unlawful to shout 'Whiplash', 'Ambulance', or 'Free Scotch' for the purpose of trapping attorneys.
372.06 It is unlawful to hunt attorneys within one hundred (100) yards of BMW, Porsche, or Mercedes dealerships, except on Wednesday afternoons.
372.07 It is unlawful to hunt attorneys within two hundred (200) yards of courtrooms, law libraries, health clubs, country clubs or hospitals.
372.08 If an attorney gains elective office, it is not necessary to have a license to hunt, trap or possess same.
372.09 It is unlawful for a hunter to wear a disguise as a reporter, drug dealer, pimp, female legal clerk, sheep, accident victim, bookie, physician, chiropractor or tax accountant for the purpose of hunting attorneys.
372.10 Stuffed or mounted attorneys must have a state health department inspection for AIDS, rabies, and vermin.
372.11 Bag Limits Per Day
1. Yellow Bellied Sidewinder - 2
2. Two-faced Tort Feasor - 1
3. Back-stabbing Divorce Litigator - 4
4. Small-breasted Ball Buster (Female only) - 3
5. Big-mouthed Pub Gut - 2
6. Honest Attorney - EXTINCT
7. Cut-throat - 2
8. Back-stabbing Whiner - 2
9. Brown-nosed Judge Kisser - 2
10. Silver-tongued Drug Defender - $100 BOUNTY
11. Hairy-assed Civil Libertarian - 7

Collapse -

ACLU are scum

by jdclyde In reply to Liberal looniness in the ...

They will stand up for your right to freedom of speech, as long as your not a Christian, as we have seen here.

If the speech were about the three-some she had that inspired her to get good grades so she would have the money to open a gay bar, they would have supported her all the way.

And people ask why Christians feel like they are under attack, like they were at Christmas time. It is because THEY ARE under attack.

You will notice that of all the outrage over Ann Coulters new book "Godless", the liberals have no problem with being called godless, just how Ann make personal comments about the "Jersy girls". And of course, all the complaining did was to ensure that it hit the best seller list.

Collapse -

Ok, here is where we disagree some

by j.lupo In reply to ACLU are scum

I don't care about a persons personal beliefs, but I don't think I need them pushed down my throat or that of others. I can't stand that happening.

If in the speech she is talking about how Jesus helped her (great for her) how does that relate to the rest of the class? Including those who don't believe as she does?

These types of speeches are suppose to be a reflection on the past, present and future for the whole student body, not a time to push ones own personal beliefs.

I would feel the same regardless of the religious or political tone. Yes, I include political beliefs too in this.

Collapse -

So you believe in censorship?

by jdclyde In reply to Ok, here is where we disa ...

This speech is about her, and what got her to be the single best student of that class. What was it that made it all happen.

It did not sound like she was doing a sermon trying to convert anyone, just stating HOW she got to where she is now.

You think all speeches should be censored from now on? Should they have to get turned in and approved?

How about college graduations where Democrats are running around the country making anti-Bush speeches. The scum in the ACLU would be right there if you tried to stop this from happening.

The speech isn't about the class, because they were not the best of the best, she was. The speech IS about her. The guest speakers are there for the motivational talk.

I think your wrong. I would hope you would not advocate censorship of this nature.

Collapse -

no not censorship

by j.lupo In reply to So you believe in censors ...

I am just saying that the beliefs of one individual should not be forced on everyone else. Also, every graduation speech that I have attended the validictorian (sp?) did a motivational speech. I am not saying they didn't thank certain people, beliefs, etc that helped them acheive what they did.

I did not hear her speak so I can't say as to whether it was a sermon or not, but I know I would get up and walk out of any speech that was preaching to me on what I had to believe. It is something I have done in the past. I come back after the speaker is finished. That is my choice to not listen to it.

If she was only saying, as you suggest in your comment to me, that she was saying that was what got her through, then I have no problem with it. If however she was preaching to everyone that they need to embrace Jesus or something along those lines, then I would have issues with that.

I hope this clarifies my point for you. Right or Wrong is irrelavent to the discussion. This is my opinion. One I am entitle to and am always willing to discuss politely with others.

Collapse -

Actually, J.lupo

by vanessaj In reply to no not censorship

Commencement speeches of any kind are the thoughts and beliefs, etc. of the individual and have never been censored until the past 15 years or so, when Christianity has come under fire in the press, from Hollywood, TV, and especially the ACLU. Some of the stunts they have pulled in the past 5-6 years can even be described as "hateful" toward anything "Christian", and I believe everyone feels it. It is popular to discuss anything from diet plans to menopause to long as you don't talk about Jesus.

In speeches at various graduations and even political rallies, meetings I have heard thoughts from Confucius, Buddah, from the Koran and even the Torah, but if you read from the Bible, then you are completely out of line.

You can hear "Jesus Christ" on TV all the times, and it's a favorite curse in most movies I see, but if you say his name with respect or reverence, then all of a sudden it's "religious people trying to condemn you". Why do we have "Jesus-phobia"? Isn't his story and his life an example of love, acceptance and forgiveness? Why would the simple discussion about a Christian's beliefs be taboo? Other religions aren't. And I, personally, in my 44 years, have never come across anyone who tried to shove any religious belief on anyone else.

Sometimes everyone wants to share things they are passionate about. I am certainly not threatened by the guy who just can't stop talking about his new girlfriend, or the woman who just can't tell you enough about her new baby, whom the whole world revolves around. It's boring, and I'm not going to run out and get pregnant, but I can appreciate her zeal.

You can put every kind of low-down, dirty piece of crap on your shirt or the back of your car, or in your movie or on TV, but you can't talk about Jesus or you're going to be VERY unpopular. Something's not right with that.

Related Discussions

Related Forums