BluePirate Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 And so we get to the heart of the matter....All of those were changed Constitutionally, not by the overreaching ruling of a court..... And to this point, runthebone has been feverishly ignoring this reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budda Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I know how to settle this all. First let the government manage the money and provide services, but when and issue of interpretting the law, let the people decide. Put it on a ballot and let the people vote. Then the rights of the majority will not be ignored. It is not right for several judges to be given power to impose their views on us. If the people vote and my side does not win I will abide by their decision with out complaint. Even RTB will agree this would work better. (I think) Then take all the money we save by not paying all the judges can be put to good use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniversalOffseason Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 There is a difference between changing the constitution with an ammendment then changing the constitution judicially which is what some activist judges try to do. One is constitutional one is not. This issue in no ways relates to womens right to vote or slavery both are ammendments. It is not written in the constitution you cannot pray at football games some judges have ruled it is unconstitutional to pray at events that are funded by tax dollars many ruling in the supreme court end with a 5-4 vote so how solid is that ruling Its not very. In fact I was just thinking that if UH ISD were to fight this all the way back to the Supreme Court it wouldnt surprise me if this court changed that ruling. Although Roberts seems to lean more on the rulings of established cases so Im not sure how he would vote. We could be witnessing history in the making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniversalOffseason Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 And so we get to the heart of the matter....All of those were changed Constitutionally, not by the overreaching ruling of a court..... And to this point, runthebone has been feverishly ignoring this reality. And again I say, just because you dont agree with something the Supreme Court does, it doesnt give you the right to ignore it. Im gonna call it a night now. If yall are still here tomorrow Ill pick it up then. I leave you with this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRraiderbandnerd09 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Something to think about......... East Texas is part of the Bible Belt Region of the U.S., therefore any restrictions on religion, such as in this case, prayer before football games, aren't quite as strict, just in case you haven't noticed. Here's a fine example of this; at West Rusk we have always had and still do have a group called First Priority, and I may have mentioned this earlier, but it is led by a teacher, and our Administration is fine with it. Also like i said before..... no one has to go. We choose to go. And I feel like the students in our school have grown closer because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluePirate Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Im gonna call it a night now. If yall are still here tomorrow Ill pick it up then. I leave you with this: Before you call it a night... Enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle57 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Never thought a football board would become an argument on constitutional law but really for the most part shows the smarts of the posters on this board. RTB is correct ifthe supreme court heard the case it would have a chance with the present court to be overturned but I doubt UH has the money to take the case to the supreme court and with the looks of present politics by the time the case gets to the court is may be a bit more leaning to the left although I have not given up the election yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BULLDOGBACKER1 Posted October 13, 2008 Author Share Posted October 13, 2008 man from reading some of this i might need to go hide under a rock and bus my kids to gilmer because uh is going to be shutdown/sued/beaten and banking accounts frozen!!! all we want is to pray before ballgames and because our school board and community stood up and said lets pray and we will deal with what happens if it does when it does!!! although i do appreciate the lectures on law i hope that you appreciate that a school and community with not one nayser among us here at union hill will keep having prayer till someone says i am offended!!! i have never heard from so many people including the visiting team how proud they were and wish that there school would follow suit with prayer as union hill has done!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleeds Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 RTB, you say since the SCOTUS has ruled that prayer before a school sporting event is a violation of the Constitution, then we have no right to question it, right? So, I guess that means we should all roll over and play dead on abortion too. Am I reading you right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GilmerFan86 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 From what I have read on previous pages regarding the judges of the Supreme Court and the Constitution, I can see that some of you have a problem with men interpreting the meaning of this doccument rather than having something so "set in stone." This is their job, this is what they do. Now if you all will do a little research, you will find that men, mortal men, who wrote much of the bible that you and I both read today. These men had to INTERPRET what the messages were that God was trying to convey. So, interpretation has been around a long long time and makes up many of the pages of the good book. The supreme court has ruled on this issue and the justices have done their job. Based on what they have come up with, the actions of UHISD are wrong. There is something to be said about heirarchy here. Union Hill ISD is NOT above the Supreme Court. No person, and for the given situation, no establishment is above the law. I believe that it would be in the best interest of the school district to scrap this idea that they can do whatever they want despite the law. This plan's foundation was built on sand. The rock foundation of the constitution was completely ignored here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleeds Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Man, I know better than to do this, but yet, I can't help myself. GF86, you're wrong about the Bible. These mortal men didn't interpret God's messages to them. The words of our Bible were inspired by God. There was no place, nor room for interpretation. Too much at stake. God gave them His words specifically and clearly so all would have the opportunity to know his plan. Do better. RTB, are you going to answer my question about abortion? Since a group of justices read into the Constitution that a woman had the right to murder her unborn baby, then we should just take that ruling at face value EVEN THOUGH THAT RIGHT IS NOT IN THE SCOTUS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumitstock Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 From what I have read on previous pages regarding the judges of the Supreme Court and the Constitution, I can see that some of you have a problem with men interpreting the meaning of this doccument rather than having something so "set in stone." This is their job, this is what they do. Now if you all will do a little research, you will find that men, mortal men, who wrote much of the bible that you and I both read today. These men had to INTERPRET what the messages were that God was trying to convey. So, interpretation has been around a long long time and makes up many of the pages of the good book. The supreme court has ruled on this issue and the justices have done their job. Based on what they have come up with, the actions of UHISD are wrong. There is something to be said about heirarchy here. Union Hill ISD is NOT above the Supreme Court. No person, and for the given situation, no establishment is above the law. I believe that it would be in the best interest of the school district to scrap this idea that they can do whatever they want despite the law. This plan's foundation was built on sand. The rock foundation of the constitution was completely ignored here. go stick your head in the sand,change your name,i didnt know we had fans in gilmer like you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluePirate Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 That's difficult to decipher, Bleeds. On one hand, runthebone says… Its all or nothing to me, if the government does something that is so morally objectionable to you or anyone then they should work to have it changed… Yet then says… And again I say, just because you dont agree with something the Supreme Court does, it doesnt give you the right to ignore it. So, we're left wondering how one changes something legislated from the bench. It seems that in the case of the rogue ruling from the SC, the "work to have it changed" is indeed done or at least begun by ignoring it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregEddins Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 From what I have read on previous pages regarding the judges of the Supreme Court and the Constitution, I can see that some of you have a problem with men interpreting the meaning of this doccument rather than having something so "set in stone." This is their job, this is what they do. Now if you all will do a little research, you will find that men, mortal men, who wrote much of the bible that you and I both read today. These men had to INTERPRET what the messages were that God was trying to convey. So, interpretation has been around a long long time and makes up many of the pages of the good book. My faith insists that I believe that the Bible isn't the interpretation of any man, but the living, breathing Word of God...PENNED by men...God gave the words to them and they wrote them....no interpretation needed. Interpretations are fine, if OPINIONS are ok with you....I personally don't care to have people "interpreting" when it comes to my rights and liberties......IMO, it's one of the reasons we have some of the mess we have in this wonderful country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonSwanson Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 My faith insists that I believe that the Bible isn't the interpretation of any man, but the living, breathing Word of God...PENNED by men...God gave the words to them and they wrote them....no interpretation needed. Interpretations are fine, if OPINIONS are ok with you....I personally don't care to have people "interpreting" when it comes to my rights and liberties......IMO, it's one of the reasons we have some of the mess we have in this wonderful country. I know this sounds simple but I believe that God would not have given us the Bible if it was not God breathed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futfan Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Congratulations and Kudos to the Union Hill School Board on their decision. I applaud their interpretation of the situation. Fortunately, not all have the same misguided opinion as those who would seek to twist words that don't exist, ignore what is, and basically turn against something that is so inherently good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GilmerFan86 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I think that you all are missing the point. The point I was making here was that in a previous post, someone had mentioned that the constitution was interpreted by men. My rebuttle was referring to the point that (regardless if you think that the bible was interpreted or inspired) a large part of the book was written by mortal men. According to the teachings of Christianity, we all know that there was only one perfect man. People, myself included, have put their faith in this book despite the aforementioned fact. In the given case, the Supreme Court Justices have interpreted the meaning of the 1st ammendment in the constitution and have ruled that what UHISD is doing is wrong. Perhaps the justices were also inspired, no one really knows in either situation. Bottom line is that the rulings have been made and no one is above the law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleeds Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 GF86, you are wrong. Plain and simple. You cannot compare the inspiration for the Word of God when first given to man to the misguided, politically motivated decisions made by activist judges. I see the analogy you are trying to make, but you metaphor is mixed at best. Try another one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GilmerFan86 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Please prove to me, without using biblical evidence, that I am wrong about men writing a substantial amount of the Bible. As Christians, we have faith that this book is correct. We have no real scientific knowledge that God is real, we have faith that he is. My faith is strong enough that I can respect the ruling of the supreme court and say my prayers silently at a game. A moment of silence allows those who want to pray the chance to pray and does not subject any person who does not wish to hear such prayers to have to. A moment of silence also does not in any way interfere with the Supreme Court's rulings on this issue. "don't fix it if it aint broke" Silent prayer is a win win situation, no matter how you try to INTERPRET it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluePirate Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 In the given case, the Supreme Court Justices have interpreted the meaning of the 1st ammendment in the constitution and have ruled that what UHISD is doing is wrong. Wrong again... The SCOTUS ruled against student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games. That isn't what UH is doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluePirate Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Please prove to me, without using biblical evidence, that I am wrong about men writing a substantial amount of the Bible. As Christians... You are a Chirstian but you don't believe the Bible is the Word of God!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GilmerFan86 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Wrong again... The SCOTUS ruled against student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games. That's isn't what UH is doing. So, please inform me of what they are doing then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WRraiderbandnerd09 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Please prove to me, without using biblical evidence, that I am wrong about men writing a substantial amount of the Bible. As Christians, we have faith that this book is correct. We have no real scientific knowledge that God is real, we have faith that he is. My faith is strong enough that I can respect the ruling of the supreme court and say my prayers silently at a game. A moment of silence allows those who want to pray the chance to pray and does not subject any person who does not wish to hear such prayers to have to. A moment of silence also does not in any way interfere with the Supreme Court's rulings on this issue. "don't fix it if it aint broke" Silent prayer is a win win situation, no matter how you try to INTERPRET it. Maybe the world would be a lot better place if people started relying more on faith in God, rather than science. After all, who created science? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluePirate Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 So, please inform me of what they are doing then. UHDAWGFAN said the prayer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GilmerFan86 Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 You are a Chirstian but you don't believe the Bible is the Word of God!? Not at all what I said. I was referring to the fact that a substantial amount of the bible was written by men. I have a lot of faith in God yet I have very little faith in men. My point is this, I do believe that the Bible is the word of God but do not agree with those who are criticising the supreme court justices for their rulings on the issue. Their job is to interpret these kinds of things. And yes, they could potentially get something wrong (though I dont think they did here) but then again so could have the men who wrote much of the Bible. So being critical of the interpretations is erroneous. do not question my faith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now