Do they want Baphomet in their schools? Because this is how you get Baphomet in your schools.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 126 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (18 children)
  • [–] 76 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Because they don’t actually believe in it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (10 children)

    It’s technically not against the Constitution. The First Amendment prevents the government from creating or establishing a religion, and thereby prevents the power of the government from expanding beyond civil matters.

    SCOTUS further restricted religious public education by ruling against religion in public curriculum in Engel v. Vitale in 1962.

    Having religious text on display without induction into the curriculum is legal. Only now that they’ve mandated one religion, other religions have a platform for equal representation. Maybe it’s time for The Satanic Temple to open a Louisiana congregation?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    Lol no. And SCOTUS has said no several times. There is no, "oops I left my Bible out and accidentally converted some kids" carve out for government employees. Religion stays at the door.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (8 children)

    SCOTUS has ruled against it in curriculum, but separation of church and state is from one of Johnson’s speeches, and not technically in the Constitution. I wish it were. My point wasn’t implying defense of the display. I don’t want it in schools either. I’m simply saying if they want to play by the rules of Originalism, then all churches deserve equal representation according to the Constitution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (7 children)

    That's already part of the SCOTUS rulings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (6 children)

    Do you have a link to that case ruling? I’d like to be up to date. I’m familiar with Engel v. Vitale, but that is exclusive to curriculum teaching. It does not apply to religious works on display.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Stone v Graham was exactly this. Kentucky tried to put the Ten Commandments into schools. SCOTUS said no.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    That’s great! So there precedent. It’s only a lawsuit away from being removed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (3 children)

    Right! Precedent, like Roe v Wade!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    Roe v. Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court. Stone v. Graham has not been. If a case challenges the state, they can use it as precedent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Cause they are Putin's Pooh Stains. He (& by his shitting out/spoon feeding marching orders, they) want to dismantle democracy.

    His offense budget (~40k/year per social media troll (how many does he employ?)) does wonders against our defense budget (IDK how many hundreds of billions, but random memory says mid 7s).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment