XPost: alt.politics.conservative, alt.politics.republicans, alt.   
   olitics.usa.republican   
   XPost: alt.politics.republican, alt.politics.usa.misc, alt.politics.usa   
   XPost: us.politics, talk.politics.usa   
   From: linder.one@osu.edu   
      
   Wilson Woods  wrote:   
      
   >Jeffrey Scott Linder wrote:   
   >> Sarah Austin  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> linder.one@osu.edu (Jeffrey Scott Linder)  wrote :   
   >>>   
   >>>> RichTravsky  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Sarah Austin wrote:   
   >>>>>> Wilson Woods   wrote :   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Preventing school principals from forcing their religious views   
   >>>>>>> on others is not forcing them to do anything - it's preventing   
   >>>>>>> them from doing something.   
   >>>>>> Free speech isnt "forcing one's views" on anyone, as long as it's   
   >>>>>> not done on someone else's private property when they dont want it   
   >>>>>> done.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> IOW you cant come preach religion in my living room, free speech   
   >>>>>> doesnt apply on my private property.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> It SHOULD however apply on all government property and streets.   
   >>>>> Organized religious activities on government property constitutes   
   >>>>> endorsement and hence violates the Constitution.   
   >>>> Government property or public property?  They aren't synonymous.   
   >>> No?   
   >>>   
   >>> A street corner is "in public" and we're supposed to have free speech.   
   >>>   
   >>> Do we not also have free speech in a government building too?   
   >>   
   >> I think that would depend upon the government building.  I think its a   
   >> slippery subject and doesn't really apply in the broad sense being   
   >> discussed here.   
   >   
   >It's just the wrong question, period.  A teacher or principal does not   
   >have a right to teach material that is contrary to the curriculum, and   
   >as religious indoctrination and promotion isn't supposed to be part of   
   >the curriculum at all, then the teacher's "free speech" rights are not   
   >being infringed if he is forbidden from proselytizing students.   
      
   I agree that a government employee acting in their official capacity   
   should not be proselytizing.   
      
   But then what do you about chaplain's in the military?   
      
   JSL   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)