FrontPage: OL on your desk. What is the “first freedom” in the BoR? Why? The Last Word: Chapter 13, Section 2 Pt 2 for Thursday Some people have had it with TV. They've had enough of the 100-plus channel universe. They don't like timing their lives around network show schedules. They're tired of $100-plus monthly bills. A growing number of them have stopped paying for cable and satellite TV service, and don't even use an antenna to get free signals over the air. These people are watching shows and movies on the Internet, sometimes via cellphone connections. Last month, the Nielsen Co. started labeling people in this group "Zero TV" households, because they fall outside the traditional definition of a TV home. There are 5 million of these residences in the U.S., up from 2 million in 2007.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
In other words, how do we know if/when a state/nat’l law “establishes a religion”? It doesn’t actually have to go as far as creating a church for all people to attend…
Facts of the Case: A New Jersey law reimbursed parents whose children rode public transportation to school. Children who attended Catholic schools also qualified for this transportation subsidy. The law was challenged, on the belief that the Catholic students were receiving public money to help them get to a religious school Question for the Supreme Court: Did the New Jersey law (reimbursing these families for transportation to a religious school) violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?
No. A divided Court held that the law did not violate the Establishment clause. The Majority opinion argued that services like bussing, police and fire protection for religious schools are “so separate…from the religious function" that for the state to provide them would not violate the First Amendment. The law did not pay money to parochial schools, nor did it support them directly in anyway. It was simply a law enacted as a "general program" to assist parents of all religions with getting their children to school.
Separation of Church and State?
To prevent the establishment of a national CHURCH, or national government interference with STATE churches Not intended: To completely “SEPARATE GOVERNMENT AND RELIGION **Not in the Constitution Examples:
Use public tax money to buy computers and library books for non-religious purposes in a Catholic school? Does not violate - used for non-religious purposes; Urge schools to use a non-denominational prayer that mentions “Almighty God”? VIOLATES, it is “not the business” of government to compose prayers for schools Lead a crowd in a religious prayer before a sporting event? VIOLATES, this is too much of an entanglement with gov and religion Require a “moment of silence” in school? Does not violate, these are not religious in nature Allow students who are members of a particular religious group to meet on-campus? Does not violate, this group is just like any other group of students on campus Prevent a teacher from teaching evolution in a science class? VIOLATES, states cannot prevent teachers from teaching evolution
The following verse was read each day to a Florida kindergarten class. The school board said the purpose of the verse was to calm kids down and create a sense of appreciation for the world. “We thank you for the flowers so sweet; We thank you for the food we eat; We thank you for the birds that sing; We thank you for everything.” Is the verse a prayer? Does requiring it to be recited in public school violate the Establishment clause?