Response to David M. Frost: This is not a violation of the 1st amendment

Submitted by Adam, J.D. (United States), Mar 17, 2005 at 17:17

please see my previous post, "Response to 'Illegal'" to understand why this is NOT a violation of the First Amendment. On the contrary, the comments of David M. Frost suggest that a parent's rights supercede those of their children, which would be a violation of the 14th amendment if implemented by any state/gov't or court. ... Nothing in the article suggests an establishment of religion, therefore there is no basis for suggesting that there is a violation of the First Amendment. If your ideas really amounted to an unconstitutional establishment of religion, then it would be follow that students wearing crosses or other religious symbols would also be an "establishment". That result is plainly absurd, and I submit, so is your reasoning.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".