Proposed Missouri Constitutional Amendment on Religious Freedom

@Foofie,

Quote:

Wed 8 Aug, 2012 07:20 pm

I'm not so sure that there will be a deleterious effect on the students that opt out of certain teachings

Perhap, this whole thing would skate by on both cluses of the religious freedom section of the First Amendment.
Im not sure that theres grounds for any court case if the public schools dont fully define the curricula that would be objected to.
Biology could merely become a form of "Civic Biology" wherein the aspects of the science that apply to daily life are studied and not the more theoretical.

Its gonna be interesting because any case that would be brought
forward would need an aggrieved party (or class). I dont know how there could be such a party if noone is really affected. Why should anyone care whether anyone elses kid is getting nothing from science and if the HS achievement requirement dont specify that you are expected to know about, say evolution, or earth science, or resistance to disease by mutation, or continental drift and deep time, then dont worry, be happy.
We will always need people tto say"you want fries with that?"

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

This would be hard to believe except that we've had so much of this ferment for a while now.

Exceptionally depressing result, though expected.

I presume this can be challenged in court(s)?

I hope Farmerman sees your question, Osso. He is good at explaining what it would take for a court case. If something happens in Missouri that violates church-state separation, then maybe the amendment would be questioned in court.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Quote:
Wed 8 Aug, 2012 07:20 pm

I'm not so sure that there will be a deleterious effect on the students that opt out of certain teachings
Perhap, this whole thing would skate by on both cluses of the religious freedom section of the First Amendment.
Im not sure that theres grounds for any court case if the public schools dont fully define the curricula that would be objected to.
Biology could merely become a form of "Civic Biology" wherein the aspects of the science that apply to daily life are studied and not the more theoretical.

Its gonna be interesting because any case that would be brought
forward would need an aggrieved party (or class). I dont know how there could be such a party if noone is really affected. Why should anyone care whether anyone elses kid is getting nothing from science and if the HS achievement requirement dont specify that you are expected to know about, say evolution, or earth science, or resistance to disease by mutation, or continental drift and deep time, then dont worry, be happy.
We will always need people tto say"you want fries with that?"

In my opinion, it is a tempest in a teapot.

Just because one believes in evolution doesn't mean that individual accepts current theory on multiverses, or string theory, or quantum theory. What might be important is how we say "good morning" to our neighbors! If that was the criterion, I fail the test.

1 Reply

@wandeljw,

Im in a qundry to find where the case would come from. The First Amendment guarantees

1free expression of religion

2 prevents against the establishment of a state religion

In this case, there is only a "Freedom From science" based upon ones religious belief.

IS forcing a kid to take that section of biology really establishing a state religion? I cant seeit.

0 Replies

@wandeljw,

This is the kind of **** that could drive me back to drink. Drunk

0 Replies

@Foofie,

Quote:

Just because one believes in evolution doesn't mean that individual accepts current theory on multiverses, or string theory, or quantum theory. What might be important is how we say "good morning" to our neighbors! If that was the criterion, I fail the test

Youre mixing too many subjects and will wind up with nothing. Whether you know it or not.thei "Tempest in a teapot" has already cost lots of time wasted in legislatures and several SUpreme Court decisions that were pulled down to define what the Constitution says .

You should read some of the many laws and court decisions that surround the entire subkect of volution. EVOLUTION is the only aspect (so far) of science that has sides drawn about it in school curricula. Otherr things like "age of the earth" or "descent of man" or "fossil records" "Uniformitarianism" all have theur sides too but so far these havent been tested in courts unless they were part o a larger case on Creationim or Intelligent Design v Evolution.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Quote:
Just because one believes in evolution doesn't mean that individual accepts current theory on multiverses, or string theory, or quantum theory. What might be important is how we say "good morning" to our neighbors! If that was the criterion, I fail the test
Youre mixing too many subjects and will wind up with nothing. Whether you know it or not.thei "Tempest in a teapot" has already cost lots of time wasted in legislatures and several SUpreme Court decisions that were pulled down to define what the Constitution says .

You should read some of the many laws and court decisions that surround the entire subkect of volution. EVOLUTION is the only aspect (so far) of science that has sides drawn about it in school curricula. Otherr things like "age of the earth" or "descent of man" or "fossil records" "Uniformitarianism" all have theur sides too but so far these havent been tested in courts unless they were part o a larger case on Creationim or Intelligent Design v Evolution.

Every morning in grade school the day started with the loudspeaker in the class having the 23rd Psalm read to us. It was like water off of a duck's back for most of the kids, I believe. Most kids were from some watered down version of a Jewish family, and could care less about what the loudspeaker was saying. It was just the way we would learn to read, write, and do math. It meant if we learn our lessons, as taught, one day we could be a mensch.

0 Replies

@wandeljw,

It's unlikely that a defense of this amendment would have a justification, rather than to say that a challenge to it would or would not. This has nothing to do with the "no establishment clause," rather, it is leaning on the "free exercise" clause. It would be the challenge which would rest upon the "no establishment" clause, because for the state to excuse students studying history or science on religious grounds would establish religion (or at least, that's the likely argument of a challenge). In Edwards versus Aguillard in 1987, the Supremes struck down a Louisiana law requiring the teaching of "creation science" in school because it advanced a particular religion. They weren't talking about any specific sect, just christianity, and they weren't talking about all christianity, just the biblical inerrancy crowd.

Any challenge would like rest on the Lemon Test. Of course, only time will tell.

0 Replies

Hey!! You all get to say your little piece again. Can't be bad. 5 to 1 eh?

Think of the legal fees. Think of the atheists getting all the best paid jobs, and having a "vast, devout unskilled labour pool" to manage.

It's like having all your birfdays come at once.

3 Replies

@spendius,

Sorry--I forgot sneering at the masses. That's lovely. Cadres love that.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

The Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates that Missouri's total state product in 2006 was $225.9 billion. Per capita personal income in 2006 was $32,705, ranking 26th in the nation. Major industries include aerospace, transportation equipment, food processing, chemicals, printing/publishing, electrical equipment, light manufacturing, and beer.

The agriculture products of the state are beef, soybeans, pork, dairy products, hay, corn, poultry, sorghum, cotton, rice, and eggs. Missouri is ranked 6th in the nation for the production of hogs and 7th for cattle. Missouri is ranked in the top five states in the nation for production of soy beans, and it is ranked fifth in the nation for the production of rice. As of 2001, there were 108,000 farms, the second-largest number in any state after Texas. Missouri actively promotes its rapidly growing wine industry.

Missouri has vast quantities of limestone. Other resources mined are lead, coal, and crushed stone. Missouri produces the most lead of all of the states. Most of the lead mines are in the central eastern portion of the state. Missouri also ranks first or near first in the production of lime, a key ingredient in Portland cement.

Missouri also has a growing science and biotechnology field. Monsanto, one of the largest gene companies in America is based in St.Louis, Missouri

It doesn't sound like a "vast, devout, unskilled labour pool" to me.

And it's a key swing state in general elections I gather.

0 Replies

the "free expression" clause has had many tests. Wisconsin v Yoder has given us a decision that a parents freedom of religion outweighs the states need to educate their kids.

I see this one heading in that direction. .

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Think money fm. Money, money, money. Never think in any other way. If you do you will be misled. And we don't want a big, hairy arsed bozo like you being swilled around with the rest of the chaff that blew into the river at threshing time. The river's the thing. Not your personal conveniences.

1 Reply

@spendius,

For intellectuals I mean. You don't get to be an intellectual by declaring you are one: either directly, using the RIV or deploying the cachet of certain words whether wholly or partially understood or even not understood at all.

Like genotype for example. I only need lie in the bath and think "Wow--I'm a ******* genotype" and I can titter for ages. The geosphere is another.

"I'm a ******* genotype
Stuck in the geosphere
My Mama dun love me
And my Daddy ain't here," You have to rejig the accents in "geosphere"

1 Reply

@raprap,

Quote:

Of course the major religion thrives at being persecuted even though they tend to be the persecutors.

Exactly. Whatever justifies our pleasure.

I get buried with this stuff when I have to sit through a prayer meeting with 80,000 people just before every South Carolina football game.

They cheer for freedom during the national anthem.

0 Replies

I'm just curious how this will square with the education requirements for the state. Can kids sue for NOT being educated properly?

1 Reply

@parados,

Im thinking that one way to set up a case that could be adjuticated would be to have a kid sue his parents

3 Replies

@farmerman,

It certainly raises questions about the state graduation requirements. Will they allow exemptions or will they deny graduation or will they just lower the standards for all?

1 Reply

@parados,

Religion seems to hold the tie breaker, IMHO. If the USSC has already adjuticated this issue (in one form or another), I dont think itll be a matter of dropping the standards in the schools (CAuse if they did, I believe that that would be in violation of the establishment clause-reducing the standards to merely comply with some religious nonsense would be easily testible). I see this as merely a mater of exclusion FROM standards based solely on religious beliefs.
NOW, is the great state of Mo gonna take this lying down?. I cant see schools having two biiology classes, one for real students and one for religious dummies.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Think of the atheists getting all the best paid jobs

I was just considering something along that line. Without a good basic science education, there is a group of students from Missouri who won't be able to get into premium universities - which will then impact their employment opportunities.

There's a limit to how many English grads the world needs, and that limit was reached decades ago.

2 Replies

Proposed Missouri Constitutional Amendment on Religious Freedom

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know