No God is Welcome in San Diego.......per U.S. District Judge Larry Burns

ConSeaMate

Legend in my own mind
Sep 6, 2005
2,686
286
65
Escondido
Name
Buster Brown
Boat
28' Silverton "ConSeaMate"
Victims of private schools need a grammar and punctuation lesson now and then.

I think what he's trying to say is the Public schools teach an agenda now and not the History of Our Country.....
 
Upvote 0

JFK

I Should Upgrade My Account
Apr 3, 2008
1,639
355
Santa Cruz, Ca
Name
James
Boat
14' Livingston skiff
I think what he's trying to say is the Public schools teach an agenda now and not the History of Our Country.....

Yeah I got that. Having been through the public school system and being fairly familiar with it (my mom is a teacher in public school and my fiance just got her masters in education and CA credential) I will say that there is no "agenda." Public schools have core material they have to cover but no central control, and don't posess the resources to coordinate a mass revision of history. Similarly, the teachers come from different backgrounds and you will get different view points. My high school history/government teacher was the head of the Republican's club. While it may not be the end all, be all of a US history education, you will get the basics and they actually paint the US history in a pretty favorable light. People on either end of the political spectrum will take issue with it because it doesn't comply with their BS revisionist ideal, but that's actually a good read on where the truth lies. If you piss people on the far right and far left off, you're probably pretty close to the truth. I don't deny that the founders had a lot of great ideas, but it's lame to not acknowledge certain contradictions in what they said, versus what they actually did.

I would be interested to learn how private schools do a significantly better job at this, especially when their teacher turn-over rate is so high, with most only teaching there until they can get employment at a more desirable, more secure, public school?
 
Upvote 0

stairman

......
May 16, 2009
5,323
3,502
ramona /ca/usa
Name
doug
Boat
yak and lowe duck hunting skiff but they identify as sportfishing crusiers
I'm a victim too!But thanks for pointing out my grammar deficiencies...it always lets me know you have no other point to make.

If you have read any of the history books being used today in public schools and you say there is no agenda then I don't know what to say to you other then your education in those schools worked.
 
Upvote 0

Rauterki

The worst fisherman on the boat
Oct 8, 2009
1,089
357
53
San Clemente, CA
www.crossfittothecore.com
Name
Jon
Boat
I'm in the market. Make me an offer I can't refuse.
I will say that there is no "agenda." Public schools have core material they have to cover but no central control QUOTE]

I'm honestly not trying to go too far off track or start an argument but....if there is no central control then what the hell does the Department of Education do????

I also have several teachers within my family and each and every single one of them despises Common Core.
 
Upvote 0

JFK

I Should Upgrade My Account
Apr 3, 2008
1,639
355
Santa Cruz, Ca
Name
James
Boat
14' Livingston skiff
If you have read any of the history books being used today in public schools and you say there is no agenda then I don't know what to say to you other then your education in those schools worked.

You liked the old ones where Columbus was a hero, we did the indians a favor by teaching them how to be civilized and the founders were a bunch of benevolent, kind hearted old men?
 
Upvote 0

stairman

......
May 16, 2009
5,323
3,502
ramona /ca/usa
Name
doug
Boat
yak and lowe duck hunting skiff but they identify as sportfishing crusiers
You liked the old ones where Columbus was a hero, we did the indians a favor by teaching them how to be civilized and the founders were a bunch of benevolent, kind hearted old men?

thank you for the example
 
Upvote 0

OILAGER

Hecho en Estados Unidos
Apr 27, 2006
2,339
928
M Class Planet / Riverside
Name
Wayne
Boat
Grady White 228 Seafarer "GOTTA GET'M"
It's a war memorial for American servicemen that fought under the American flag.....and the American flag is the only thing that should be honoring them as a group. If there is a religious preference for a headstone ect.... that's okay, but these servicemen didn't fight in the Crusades under the cross, they fought for the principles set forth in the Constitution and all of its amendments.

There is a lot of wrangling over monuments, mottos etc... that were erected or inscribed during the early/ mid-1950's, most of them an overreaction to the "Red Scare" and "godless communists", and unlike the many unused bomb shelters built during the same era that were eventually filled in, these state sanctioned religious references have managed to to survive when they shouldn't have.
 
Upvote 0

Marcus

"Oddjob"
May 21, 2004
7,971
344
46
Carlsbad
Name
Marcus
Boat
Tuna Jihad toilet cleaner/Intrepid
It's a war memorial for American servicemen that fought under the American flag.....and the American flag is the only thing that should be honoring them as a group. If there is a religious preference for a headstone ect.... that's okay, but these servicemen didn't fight in the Crusades under the cross, they fought for the principles set forth in the Constitution and all of its amendments.

There is a lot of wrangling over monuments, mottos etc... that were erected or inscribed during the early/ mid-1950's, most of them an overreaction to the "Red Scare" and "godless communists", and unlike the many unused bomb shelters built during the same era that were eventually filled in, these state sanctioned religious references have managed to to survive when they shouldn't have.

Well said
 
Upvote 0

@-EZ

Fail, try again.
Apr 9, 2007
14,419
1,906
San Diego, CA.
Name
Max
Boat
Trophy Pro, @-EZ
It's a war memorial for American servicemen that fought under the American flag.....and the American flag is the only thing that should be honoring them as a group. If there is a religious preference for a headstone ect.... that's okay, but these servicemen didn't fight in the Crusades under the cross, they fought for the principles set forth in the Constitution and all of its amendments.

There is a lot of wrangling over monuments, mottos etc... that were erected or inscribed during the early/ mid-1950's, most of them an overreaction to the "Red Scare" and "godless communists", and unlike the many unused bomb shelters built during the same era that were eventually filled in, these state sanctioned religious references have managed to to survive when they shouldn't have.

Winner.
 
Upvote 0

Tues

Not my job...
Mar 17, 2008
6,193
43
Saluki
Name
Likes
Boat
Penis
It's a war memorial for American servicemen that fought under the American flag.....and the American flag is the only thing that should be honoring them as a group. If there is a religious preference for a headstone ect.... that's okay, but these servicemen didn't fight in the Crusades under the cross, they fought for the principles set forth in the Constitution and all of its amendments.

There is a lot of wrangling over monuments, mottos etc... that were erected or inscribed during the early/ mid-1950's, most of them an overreaction to the "Red Scare" and "godless communists", and unlike the many unused bomb shelters built during the same era that were eventually filled in, these state sanctioned religious references have managed to to survive when they shouldn't have.

What she said.
 
Upvote 0

stairman

......
May 16, 2009
5,323
3,502
ramona /ca/usa
Name
doug
Boat
yak and lowe duck hunting skiff but they identify as sportfishing crusiers
What she said.

yes quickly...burn all the associations with Christianity from our country's history.....we just can't have that stuff poisoning children's minds...homo parades in san Francisco are so much better for them to see.
 
Upvote 0

Rauterki

The worst fisherman on the boat
Oct 8, 2009
1,089
357
53
San Clemente, CA
www.crossfittothecore.com
Name
Jon
Boat
I'm in the market. Make me an offer I can't refuse.
It's a war memorial for American servicemen that fought under the American flag.....and the American flag is the only thing that should be honoring them as a group.

Unfortunately, the American flag offends some Americans too......[h=1]Petty tyrants across America try to ban the American flag[/h]
<!-- .entry-meta --> In May 2010, a FoxNews poll found that an astonishing 33% of people in the United States wanted the American flag to be banned. Some among that 33% are actually successful at getting the flag banned even when it’s someone else who’s displaying the flag.
Here are some instances chronicled by FOTM:

  1. A shopping mall in Portland, Oregon, forced the manager of the children’s train to remove American flags that are used to decorate the train ride.
  2. An apartment complex in Springfield, Oregon, served an eviction notice to a Navy veteran because he put up an American flag in a common area of the complex on Navy Day.
  3. A neighborhood association banned a 90-year-old veteran from flying the American flag outside his suburban Virginia home.
  4. An Olive Garden restaurant in Oxford, Alabama, banned a woman from bringing an American flag into the restaurant for a planned Kiwanis Club meeting because the flag would “disrupt the dining experience for all other guests.”
  5. The principal of Denair Middle School in California ordered a 13-year-old boy to remove the flag from his bike for fear the flag of the United States of America would “incite<del> racial incidents”</del> Hispanic outrage.
  6. The Live Oaks High School in Morgan Hill, California, sent three students home for wearing American flag t-shirts to school on Cinco de Mayo because the t-shirts might provoke “violence” on the Mexican holiday.
 
Upvote 0

ConSeaMate

Legend in my own mind
Sep 6, 2005
2,686
286
65
Escondido
Name
Buster Brown
Boat
28' Silverton "ConSeaMate"
Yeah I got that. Having been through the public school system and being fairly familiar with it (my mom is a teacher in public school and my fiance just got her masters in education and CA credential) I will say that there is no "agenda." Public schools have core material they have to cover but no central control, and don't posess the resources to coordinate a mass revision of history. Similarly, the teachers come from different backgrounds and you will get different view points. My high school history/government teacher was the head of the Republican's club. While it may not be the end all, be all of a US history education, you will get the basics and they actually paint the US history in a pretty favorable light. People on either end of the political spectrum will take issue with it because it doesn't comply with their BS revisionist ideal, but that's actually a good read on where the truth lies. If you piss people on the far right and far left off, you're probably pretty close to the truth. I don't deny that the founders had a lot of great ideas, but it's lame to not acknowledge certain contradictions in what they said, versus what they actually did.

I would be interested to learn how private schools do a significantly better job at this, especially when their teacher turn-over rate is so high, with most only teaching there until they can get employment at a more desirable, more secure, public school?

It's called a teachers Union that is corrupt and nobody ever gets fired.......and if you don't see the agenda your already lost......and socialism is for you.....
 
Upvote 0

ConSeaMate

Legend in my own mind
Sep 6, 2005
2,686
286
65
Escondido
Name
Buster Brown
Boat
28' Silverton "ConSeaMate"
[h=1]Public Education is Socialism[/h] [h=2]by Jeffry R. Fisher[/h]
"It's time to admit that public education operates like a planned economy, a bureaucratic system in which everybody's role is spelled out in advance and there are few incentives for innovation and productivity. It's no surprise that our school system doesn't improve; it more resembles the communist economy than our own market economy."

Albert Shanker, President, American Federation of Teachers​
[h=4]What is Socialism?[/h] I am amazed at how often my online arguments must detour to define socialism for people who vehemently support its principles yet just as vehemently deny that they are socialists. Therefore, to head off confusion, I'll put a working definition up front:
Socialism: "Government mandated social engineering (shaping society or shaping individuals to conform to a societal ideal)."
On the political left, that especially involves economic control up to and including collective ownership and operation of commercial enterprise. If you have a different or better definition, or if you can help me to refine mine, please let me know.
[h=4]Social Engineering[/h] Ever since public schools were first organized, various groups have used (or attempted to use) them to mold future citizens and thereby shape society to their own ideals. You can probably think of a few yourself. I bet it's easy to think of the abuses that run counter to your own ideals. Are you open minded enough to confess any applications by your philosophical allies? There are so many dimensions to ideological school content that I plan to write about them separately in Propaganda.
In addition, as agents of the state, teachers are sometimes asked to do more than teach. State legislators are also trying to draw them into the police state and the nanny state. See Reason Magazine's Mental Detector, and Home Invasion.
[h=4]Government Ownership[/h] By taxing residents in advance and then giving away education at no additional charge, government is able to claim a virtual monopoly on K-12 education in almost every school district. The government owns the land and the buildings. With very few exceptions, government operates the facilities and employs all of the teachers.
[h=4]QED[/h] Public education is government owned and operated, and ideologues of various stripes work continuously to effect social engineering by controlling curricula, text books etc. Therefore, public education is socialism.
I feel like the cow in Gary Larsen's Far Side cartoon who suddenly realizes, "Hey! This is grass! We've been eating grass!"
To defend public education, you must first prove that socialism is superior to capitalism. You will never do that. Every tactical claim you make about some classroom level detail will be moot because capitalism can always do better or do the same for lower cost. Always.
We wouldn't allow the government to dispense religion or monopolize food, and we came to our senses in time to avoid nationalizing health care. Why do we continue to tolerate government monopolization of K-12 education? Why to we tolerate a government institution overseeing and second guessing the raising of most families' children? It's an abomination. We should kill it.
Total government control is too extreme. A system where government pays while free enterprise owns and operates it is a much more balanced and moderate compromise between the society's collective interests and citizen's individual liberties.
[h=4]Unintended Consequences[/h] Is it any wonder that all of today's public education problems look just like the plagues on every socialized business ever to exist anywhere?

  • It has big, self-perpetuating bureaucracy and large, centralized facilities instead of smaller, convenient ones.
  • It induces uniformity and inhibits variety.
  • Costs are high, but many facilities and equipment are poorly maintained and wages are low.
  • Tedious teacher certification selects the bureaucratic and protects them from competition from the intelligent. Read Thomas Sowell's article.
  • Resource allocation is heavily unbalanced toward the politically strong, and there's a go-to-hell attitude toward everyone else.
  • There are shortages: overcrowding and lack of materials both trivial and critical.
  • Employees are unhappy
  • Customers (parents) are unhappy
  • Powerful, entrenched political organizations like the teachers' union (moguls) shriek continuously about the unknown dangers of changing to anything else. If you ask me, their fear of structural change makes them way too conservative.
  • Perhaps worst of all, a politicized system compromises teaching by adding various social engineering and police tasks to teachers' job descriptions, and the control is becoming more centralized every year.
Is it any wonder that the organizational structure and delivery mode are mostly unchanged after almost two centuries? How many generations of America's disadvantaged must suffer the cycle of ignorance begetting poverty before education's self serving elite confess that the solution is in liberty, not bureaucracy? America needs a radical liberal to liberate American schools the way Margaret Thatcher liberated Britain's nationalized industries in the 1980s.
[h=4]Free Market Power[/h] A competitive free market will give many immediate and far ranging benefits, some going far beyond education:

  1. Economy: If we were wise enough to reduce the government's involvement to just investigating reported fraud and recording quarterly enrollment (not daily or hourly attendance taken by hand like the idiotic bureaucracy does now), we could then eliminate 99% of the government education bureaucracy, thereby eliminating over 50% of the cost of K-12 education in this country. Trimming the bloated bureaucracy would yield tax cuts, higher teacher salaries, and improved facilities/equipment in schools.
  2. Secondary economic effects: Reforming a major segment of our economy would spread economic dividends far and wide. Putting all of those former bureaucrats to work in productive enterprises (like picking lettuce) would fuel explosive economic growth all around. Government waste is mind boggling, and every year we allow that waste in education costs all of us dearly.
  3. Investment Induction: Private enterprise buys its own land, buildings and equipment. That means no more tax levies to build new schools. Not only that, but most communities will get a huge, one-time windfall when it auctions off all of its schools and the land under them.
  4. Improved Facilities: Private Enterprise tends to buy better stuff and take better care of it, at least when and where it makes a difference. Government stuff tends to be crap, unless they paid too much for it. If you ever see top quality government property, then you should ask how much it cost, but first make sure you are sitting down.
  5. Liberty: Consumers rule directly over what they choose to buy, voting with their feet and their dollars. It is the most free and democratic system devised by human kind.
  6. Motivation: Entrepreneurs are motivated not only by the quest for profit but by the risk of bankruptcy (Note: The profit margin in any sector tends to be proportional to its perceived level of risk). Managers must tread a fine line between cutting costs and maintaining high quality. Contrarily, in government, bureaucrats are motivated to build as big of an agency under themselves as they can. Big departments mean promotions, and spending all of one's budget is rewarded by increased funding in subsequent years.
  7. Culling: Unnecessary or overly costly versions of goods and services are ruthlessly driven out of existence by bankruptcy or submission to competing management. That includes schools that yield to extreme activists, unlike public school boards that can be compromised by special interest groups and just go on taxing. In government, unpopular goods and services persist year in and year out as politicians make promises they can't keep, and bureaucrats waste ever bigger bundles of money building ever expanding empires to fail to solve problems they themselves created, and then tell taxpayers to cough up another lung to pay for the same things they were supposed to get from the last tax increase.
  8. Participation: Even apathetic parents will need to make an occasional decision, inducing them to pay at least some attention. The odds are high that they'll stumble into a school that encourages them further.
  9. Structural Evolution: The system will become much more dynamic than when centrally controlled, rapidly adapting to new technologies and other changes. Government inertia is mind boggling, and its strangle hold on education is costing our society dearly. See Innovation.
  10. Diversification: Many providers can bring many variations of a product or service to market simultaneously to satisfy a wide variety of tastes. In government, one complex compromise is imposed on nearly everyone, and it satisfies almost nobody. With a free system, we would no longer be saddled with a lowest common denominator curriculum designed to offend nobody. Instead, we could give full flower to each and every culture that has a following. A free system will promote a wide variety to choose from. Instead of everyone being stuck with their school board's decision on whether to have a football team or a theater program (or both), each family will be free to choose a school that caters to its own tastes. As long as government isn't dictating design choices, it doesn't force consensus where none is needed.
  11. Peace: When every family can get what it wants, then none will need to force their preferences on others just to get something for themselves. The school board fights over religion and budgetary trade-offs should end forever.
[h=4]What about charter schools?[/h] They're a slight reversal of government centralization, but they are still at the mercy of government (see Reason's "Threatened by Success"). Therefore, charter schools merely turn back the clock a few years without curing the fundamental flaw in the system: As long as government owns and operates the schools, education decisions will be driven by political dynamics to the detriment of prosperity and independent citizenship.
Government is like ivy; merely trimming it back is but a temporary respite from its stranglehold. The signs of government's willingness to incrementally creep into charter programs are already appearing. Just keep watching, and you'll realize that charter schools merely demonstrate the economic benefits of independence; they are not a permanent, long term solution. Charter schools are an improvement, so they're worth having, but they should not deter us from demanding the correct solution of total, irrevocable privatization.
[h=4]Why can't public and private coexist, as with colleges?[/h] When I was younger, I couldn't understand why anyone would pay big bucks for a private college when public was available for next to nothing. Only later did I realize that not everyone could get into top public universities, that I had been very fortunate to get high test scores and grades in one of the very best public school districts in the nation.
At the college level, public and private coexist, but there are some special forces at work, and still there are cracks:

  • There have been extreme shortages at the few public universities that have high rankings. If you can't qualify, then paying dearly for an obscure private college is a way to get a good education in spite of weak scores.
  • Public universities are under some pressure from privates, so some are not as horrible as their K-12 counterparts.
  • Public universities aren't as "free" as K-12 schools; they charge some fees and sometimes tuition.
  • Truancy laws don't force people to go to college based on age. People are free to work first and go to college later, if ever.
  • A college education has a shorter payback period.
  • Snobbery: Some families simply don't want their kids mixing with riff raff. They can control that somewhat in K-12 by living in exclusive suburbs, but college is a regional mixture.
  • Government and other institutions offer grants and loans that students can take to private colleges, even religious ones. So I turn the question back at whomever asks it: Government grants money to students to go to private college, so why don't we do the same thing for K-12?
  • Where public universities are highly regarded, they are horribly expensive. While I attended UC Berkeley, I was shocked to learn that its budget per student was higher than Stanford's. Of course, that included all of the bureaucracy. Berkeley's overhead was much, much more than Stanford's. The Berkeley is only able to be as decent as it is because it is fabulously costly to the taxpayers of California.
Ironically, it was because of California's high taxes that I took myself and my knowledge elsewhere as soon as I started earning above average money in my career. Perhaps the State of Washington should thank California for first financing my education and then driving me out.
 
Upvote 0

ConSeaMate

Legend in my own mind
Sep 6, 2005
2,686
286
65
Escondido
Name
Buster Brown
Boat
28' Silverton "ConSeaMate"
[h=1]First Obamacare, Now Obamacore – Part 1: Common Core Sows Seeds of Socialism in Young[/h]

For over 100 years an educational system was in place that served this nation well. Those of us who can relate back to the 1950&#8242;s and before remember a time when the curriculum was left to individual teachers, or to department personnel in larger school systems, and where textbooks were likewise selected by individual teachers or department committees from a state-approved list of school textbooks.
It was an era when if teachers weren’t doing their jobs, they were usually let go after having a chance to improve. This same accountability existed from grades K through graduate school until the 60&#8242;s when teacher unions were organized and took hold in states. The Illinois Education Association (IEA) is one of the strongest in the nation. Its influence is far reaching in setting teacher salaries and in determining rules and regulations under which teachers work in local school districts.
Young men, having been educated under an educational system that some now view as haphazard, were prepared for work and for college. They further acquitted themselves well on the battle field when serving in World War I and II. After the wars these same ordinary men and women built businesses and proved to be productive in many ways.

What happened in the interim, despite all the money this nation has plowed into education, when fast forwarding to 2010 a new education program, Common Core, was conceived and created by the National Governors Association? President Obama and his administration wasted no time in embracing the new Common Core program.
Concluded by the NGA and the SCSSO was that for children to be properly educated there must be national standards, or a national curriculum, with lock-step performance testing curriculum to enable this nation to catch up with the rest of the world in science, math, and engineering. This despite that during much of the last hundred years this nation led the world in the disciplines of science, math and engineering and produced a large number of competent and brilliant scientists, doctors, engineers, architects, etc.
According to an article published on December 4th at Breitbart.com, Barack Obama didn’t simply embrace a concept that others had developed. Rather, the very roots of Common Core are in the early ideas generated by Obama and his fellow radical community organizer, Bill Ayers. It was Obama who headed the Chicago Annenberg Challenge from 1995 to 1999, a school “reform” organization founded by Bill Ayers, which funneled more than $100 million into community organizations and radical education activists.
Regarding the National Governors Association and the Council to Chief State School Officers, who are often cited and given credit for being the originators of Common Core standards, the real architect behind Common Core was David Coleman. As such, Coleman is responsible for bringing change to the entire American education system, even in the absence of any teaching experience.
In applying for a high school teaching job Coleman was turned down, after which he worked for a consulting firm where he advised public schools and became a fixture at NYC Department of Education meetings.
Coleman’s agenda:
Transforming the American education system to fit his lofty ideas of what “real” education is. And it has nothing to do with learning useful skills to help you say, write a cohesive and grammatically correct resume or long division.
Of great concern is that Coleman was hired this past summer to lead the College Board organization. He is now redesigning the SAT’sand AP Program. In this position Coleman has the opportunity to tie what kids are learning to what colleges are expecting.
 
Upvote 0

Tues

Not my job...
Mar 17, 2008
6,193
43
Saluki
Name
Likes
Boat
Penis
. wtf1526966_10202069513213416_890541154_n.jpg
 
Upvote 0

ConSeaMate

Legend in my own mind
Sep 6, 2005
2,686
286
65
Escondido
Name
Buster Brown
Boat
28' Silverton "ConSeaMate"
I knew you would like that one Chris......:rofl:.....
 
Upvote 0

JFK

I Should Upgrade My Account
Apr 3, 2008
1,639
355
Santa Cruz, Ca
Name
James
Boat
14' Livingston skiff
Don't go down the "personal" attacks or this gets shut down at the least.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

FISHINPOC

Member
Jul 5, 2007
496
24
Austin
Name
Rob
Boat
Grady White Gulfstream
The words “separation of church and state” do not appear in the Constitution nor in the Declaration of Independence. The phrase was used by the Supreme Court in a 1947 case titled Everson v. Board of Education, and ever since that case, those who desire to de-Christianize America have used this phrase to subdue or to prevent any acknowledgment of God as the Source and the Author of law and government and the “Blessings of Liberty” in America.
Interestingly, “Separation of Church and State” IS a valid legal concept but it doesn’t mean what I’ve just described. What it actually refers to is the fact that the jurisdiction and functions of these two God-ordained institutions are separate and distinct from each other.
What it doesn’t mean is that either of these institutions is separate or independent from God and His Law.
Another way to say this is that, properly understood, “separation of church and state” does NOT mean “separation of God from government.”

Hogwash. Separation of Church & State was much discussed and written about in those precise words by Madison and Jefferson in the 1700's. You imply that it's new as of 1947 and that "ever since that case" the term has been used by those who wish to "de-Christianize America"
Total and complete horse shit.
A "Christian" American which is not only not what this country is today or what it ever was, would be an America with a National Religion which is the exact opposite form what the framers set out to ensure never happened.
 
Upvote 0

stairman

......
May 16, 2009
5,323
3,502
ramona /ca/usa
Name
doug
Boat
yak and lowe duck hunting skiff but they identify as sportfishing crusiers
Upvote 0

kindafishy

I Post A Lot But I Can't Edit This
Jul 21, 2010
4,294
2,037
hemet/ca/riverside
Name
SCOTT
Boat
bayliner cierra express 2452 "RYLEE'S WAVE RYDER"
How do you separate Church and State when all the principals of this Country were Founded on it?......

VERY SIMPLY.....REMOVE THE $$$ FROM THE EQUASION. (sorry about the caps) all i'm saying is private funding ends this problem. anytime lawyers get involved we all lose.

and as far as the country being founded on religious principles.... its a good thing early Christians cleared the path of natives and savages (american Indians) those whom did not convert where met with death or slavery. (and they were doing gods work)

for myself i have never need a guide book on how to be a good human, it just comes natural. when i'm doing right, i feel good. when i'm doing wrong i feel bad, and try to make it right. for me these "principles" come naturally. if you google 10 commandments you'll find that most religions have their own interpretations of them, mostly similar from my brief reading, so i would consider them to be common sense for living your life.
so where back to this.....government should not in any way support ($$$$) any religion or its symbols without equally supporting all the other "faiths". which would open pandoras box. government itself should represent its constituents without passion or prejudice. and as for getting sworn in on a bible... i'd prefer they swear an oath to serve the people, not the book. their promise should be to those they represent.
 
Upvote 0