(2007-03-20) — Supreme Court watchers expect the justices to rule that an Alaskan high school student’s banner proclaiming “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” violated the separation of church and state because it conveyed a particular religious perspective within the proximity of a federally-funded education officer, in this case a high school principal.
“Clearly the student has a first amendment right to express his views about drugs,” said one unnamed legal expert. “But using the name of Jesus in the public square is patently offensive. If the principal had not suspended the student, she would have been fired for dereliction of duty…and rightly so.”
Meanwhile, the high-profile court case has sparked the U.S. Department of Education to send special instructions to school guidance counselors who may be inundated by students who were frightened by the explicit use of the name “Jesus” in a school setting.
“A lot of parents have been calling the school,” said an unnamed secretary at one local high school. “They’re concerned that seeing the name of Jesus could be a gateway for their children, leading to more intense experimentation. One mother actually came to the school and demanded to search her daughter’s locker after hearing a rumor that she had stashed a Bible in there.”
Schools across the nation have beefed up security in the wake of the “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” case. Some have even instituted random urine testing for evidence of so-called “communion juice.”
One suburban Philadelphia middle school got a call that some students had been seen on their knees in the library, secretly praying to Jesus. The principal said he would bring in rug-sniffing dogs to check out the claim.
56 responses so far ↓
1 Fred Sinclair // Mar 20, 2007 at 2:07 pm
NOTICE: Reports of the new pill are false! There is no magic pill available that can cure the disease of Liberalism. Like cancer and chemotherapy; the cancer of Liberalism cannot thrive when treated with massive doses of Conservatism i.e. - Three hours, five days a week of Rush Limbaugh treatments in conjunction with daily doses of Scott Ott’s “ScrappleFace and schoolbooks by Ann Coulter, Mark Steyn and Peter Schwweizer. The only instant cure for liberalism known, is a personal relationship with Jesus, the Christ, known for bringing about an instant conversion to conservatism.
Heirborn Ranger
2 antodav // Mar 20, 2007 at 2:18 pm
The only instant cure for liberalism known, is a personal relationship with Jesus, the Christ, known for bringing about an instant conversion to conservatism.
If only that were indeed true, Fred. If only. But yet, I know many people who for some reason think they can reconcile left-wing politics with Christian values. Just look at the “Christian” protesters who were in Washington this past week. Hypocrisy abounds on the left, as always-and as disgusting as it is, it’s also true that it’s infected our churches as well. I’ve heard my own priest at church spout vile left-wing garbage during homilies in the past. He’s not a bad man, mind you; he’s just confused. There’s very little that can be done about people like that unfortunately, except I guess for prayer.
3 onlineanalyst // Mar 20, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Should the “rug-sniffing dogs” in the library determine that the students were facing Mecca, the whole brouhaha will surely calm down. Education on the public dime “CAIRS”.
4 seneuba // Mar 20, 2007 at 2:34 pm
I gotta get my eyeglass prescription checked. When I first read this, I thought it said
Blog Hits 4 Jesus
I thought it was some sort of government censorship attempt on a Christian web site.
5 tomg // Mar 20, 2007 at 2:39 pm
Whew, that was close. Gotta keep Him out past the perimeter with the sexual predators and the liquor stores. The things we do for “the children.”
6 Anonymous // Mar 20, 2007 at 2:51 pm
A rare case, that can happily unite left and right. It’s terrifying that a school thinks it can punish a student not at school, for a message that means almost nothing, off-campus, at a public event on a public street corner. Fortunately, some of the Christian law groups are involved in this case, seeking to protect the rights of Christian students in the future, as well as disaffected seniors that just want to be on TV.
I hope the student wins this one; Starr’s oral arguments would lead to terrifyingly broad governmental powers over speech.
7 gafisher // Mar 20, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Where’s Janet “Kill or Cure” Reno when we need her? Fire up those tanks!
8 Ms RightWing, Ink // Mar 20, 2007 at 3:17 pm
Bing Bong-Avon calling
9 Ms RightWing, Ink // Mar 20, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Bing??? Bong??? Is the door bell working???
10 Ms RightWing, Ink // Mar 20, 2007 at 3:18 pm
sigh
11 Darthmeister // Mar 20, 2007 at 3:22 pm
I guess we’ll start hearing from the left about there being a two-tiered understanding of “religious expression” under the provisions of the First Amendment.
If the “religious expression” is a positive statement about God and Religion (particularly if it casts Christianity in a positive light), then it would be unconstitutional if used within 1000 feet of a school or any other federally-funded facility.
If the “religious expression” is critical statement regarding God and Christianity then it would be constitutionally protected, particularly if used by a teacher in educating impressionable children about the evils of Christianity or maybe even Jooooodaism.
The one caveat being any expression critical of Mohammed or Islam would be deemed intolerant hate speech. Now, are we clear about this?
12 conserve-a-tips // Mar 20, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Hi guys.
Welllll…..I just got a phone call from GOPAC and the guy asked me if I was willing to listen to a message from Newt. I said, “OK.” I listened as Newt went through the litany of the revolution of 1994 and how the Republicans had forgotten their promises and their goals AND their backbone. I listened how we have to get back to those conservative principle basics or else the Republican party is a goner. And then this lady comes on and reads her speech about how this can only be done with the help of grassroots participants, like me,on the local levels and that Newt would like to send me his new book for a gift of $100 or $200 and would I like to receive Newt’s new book?
I said, “No.” I told the lady that if the best that the Republicans could give me was a social liberal from New York, a guy, from Mass., who can’t decide where he stands on abortion, a linguini-spined veteran, from Arizona, who has a need for everybody to like him so much that he changes his views daily, or a has-been Speaker who was supposed to carry the Contract for America through in 1994 and couldn’t because he couldn’t even get his own leaders to work together cohesively, I wouldn’t be voting.
She, shocked, gasped, “But certainly you don’t want Hillary Clinton to win, do you?” I told her first, that Newt had just told me that the Democrats are running on “Vote against George Bush and his policies” and that running against someone never works - and so why would she ask me to vote against Hillary Clinton instead of saying that I had something to vote For in the Republican party?
Then I told her in no uncertain terms that yes, I would let Hillary win if that is what it takes to get the Republican leadership to wake up and smell the coffee. I told her that we can tell people how bad Hillary will be, all day long, but it may take actually having to suffer through her in order for people to see how bad, bad is. I told her that it had been my experience that people don’t change until things get so bad that they decide there has to be something different and so, if the Republican party wants to give me a true conservative for whom to vote, I will support that person with my money and my time, but otherwise, count me out. She was stunned. Oh well.
13 Anonymous // Mar 20, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Darth: I think that’s why the Christian Legal Society weighed in on the student’s behalf: they fear that a judgment against the kid would legalize exactly that radical of a position.
14 Darthmeister // Mar 20, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Wish I had been there to hear her freak, c.a.t. Excellent response.
15 Darthmeister // Mar 20, 2007 at 3:48 pm
…except for the part about not voting. A lot can happen between now and November 2008. Hope the Republican Party figures it out before then, but really, what charismatic conservative is out there to really get the base excited as well as independent voters who dread a sHrillary or Obama presidency?
Anon. I was just being insufferably pedantic.
16 camojack // Mar 20, 2007 at 4:16 pm
I heard that bong hits are legal in Alaska.
Jesus might not be, sadly…
17 Anonymous // Mar 20, 2007 at 4:42 pm
God Bless America!
(can’t believe i got to type that one in)
18 boberinyetagain // Mar 20, 2007 at 4:45 pm
RE: post #2
Kill an Iraqi for Jesus….now there’s a slogan we can all get behind!
Especially Jesus Himself, He would be all over that one
19 Beerme // Mar 20, 2007 at 4:47 pm
Hope those parents are watching out for paraphernalia. That’s one way to spot a sneak religionist, you know. If they have papers (religious tracts), WWJD bracelets or cross jewelry that might be a clue.
20 onlineanalyst // Mar 20, 2007 at 4:49 pm
FYI and worth bookmarking: YouTube has a site for “boots on the ground” clips from the multi-national forces in Iraq: http://www.youtube.com/mnfiraq
21 conserve-a-tips // Mar 20, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Darthmeister, that is why I gave her the caveat: If the Republican Party wants to give me a true conservative for whom to vote and etc…
Yes, I am hoping that Fred Thompson decides to run. I have met him personally in D.C. and thought that he was the stuff. I do want to know his stand on illegal immigration, because I do not know that, but otherwise, I would vote for him.
22 conserve-a-tips // Mar 20, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Well la-dee-da: GW has finally stubbed up. Drudge headlines:
BUSH VOWS TO BLOCK SUBPOENAS; WARNS DEMS, NO ‘SHOW TRIALS’
It is about darned time.
23 Anonymous // Mar 20, 2007 at 5:00 pm
he’s doing a good job of expressing his “displeasure” of the situation and the fact that it is his “pleasure” to do so.
good job, Boss.
24 R.A.M. // Mar 20, 2007 at 6:16 pm
I kind of feel the same way about this as I do George Carlin asking, “When will Jesus bring the pork chops?”
It was offensive to read both statements, but GOD will deal with BOTH OF THEM—in HIS time!
“Vengence is MINE, saith the LORD!”
Scott-another satire beauty!
If the ACLU had thought of this, they might have dropped the case.
25 upnorthlurkin // Mar 20, 2007 at 6:19 pm
Sorry I can’t remember where I read this last week but it was in response to someone who threatened to stay home election day if the perfect conservative wasn’t on the ballot…
Would you leave a restaurant hungry just because you didn’t like a couple of items on the menu and go to another where you knew they would serve you poison?
Sitting home in protest got us Slick Willy….after 9/11 we cannot afford another who is soft on terror!!! I would love another Reagan too but I respect the abilities of the terrorists too much to wait for the party to find another perfect candidate.
26 RedPepper // Mar 20, 2007 at 7:00 pm
If I read the Washington Post article correctly, the lower federal courts have ruled in favor of the student. That’s the result that would have been the final word in the case if the Supreme Court had refused to grant certiorari ( i.e. agree to review the case).
There are at present 7,500+ cases every year that could be reviewed by the Supreme Court ; they typically accept about 100 cases for review ( at least 4 of the nine Justices must vote to hear the case ). My question is this ; why is this case so important, so profound, that the Supreme Court must get involved ?
27 Beerme // Mar 20, 2007 at 7:00 pm
unl,
On the other hand, if we keep elected “conservative lights” (sorry, we must have a beer reference, here), won’t that preclude the possibility of ever having a perfect candidate run, much less get elected?
I decided last year to vote for the person I am most in tune with, even if it is not the electable candidate (i.e., Republican). The only thing that would keep me from doing it is a squeaker where my Libertarian/other third party vote would not just be wasted, but would ensure a liberal Democrat would be elected instead of a moderate Republican. Even then, I might not vote Republican…
For the record, Gingrich is not a bad candidate, Hunter and Thompson are good candidates, most of the other Republicans are Miller Light (Zell Miller, that is).
28 Beerme // Mar 20, 2007 at 7:02 pm
make that keep “electing”…duh!
29 JamesonLewis3rd // Mar 20, 2007 at 7:18 pm
Switch “Jesus” on that sign with “Muhammad” and the principal would have been given a medal.
That’s the real issue in this story, if you ask me. Which you didn’t, I know…..but there it is.
30 Darthmeister // Mar 20, 2007 at 7:30 pm
Beerme, I’d vote for Zell Miller for President. That’s the ol’ southern Democrat coming out in me.
31 Darthmeister // Mar 20, 2007 at 7:43 pm
THE RELIGION OF PEACE STRIKES AGAIN
Insurgents in Iraq detonated an explosives-rigged vehicle with two children in the back seat after US soldiers let it through a Baghdad checkpoint over the weekend, a senior US military official said Tuesday.
The vehicle was stopped at the checkpoint but was allowed through when soldiers saw the children in the back, said Major General Michael Barbero of the Pentagon’s Joint Staff.
“Children in the back seat lowered suspicion. We let it move through. They parked the vehicle, and the adults ran out and detonated it with the children in the back,” Barbero said.
The general said it was the first time he had seen a report of insurgents using children in suicide bombings. But he said Al-Qaeda in Iraq is changing tactics in response to the tighter controls around the city.
After going through the checkpoint, the vehicle parked next to a market across the street from a school, said the official, who asked not to be identified.
“And the two adults were seen to get out of the vehicle, and run from the vehicle, and then followed by the detonation of the vehicle,” the official said.
“It killed the two children inside as well as three other civilians in the vicinity. So, a total of five killed, seven injured,” the official said.
Of course this is all Bush’s fault. The Chimperor and our heavy-handed American stormtroopers have now provoked the religion of peace into using children in its car bombs. If America had only extended the hand of fellowship to al Qaeda and Saddam’s regime, Muslim radicals would have never become … uuuuuh, radical.
32 Darthmeister // Mar 20, 2007 at 7:50 pm
Here’s some more “We Support The Troops” liberals in action.
Clearly these American patriots only wanted to publicly demonstrate how the Bush Administration has not made military BDUs flame retardant, thus posing a health hazard to the brave American soldiers fighting an illegal and immoral war in Iraq.
A secondary statement was also being made highlighting the need for the American flag to be uparmored so it wouldn’t spontaneously burst into flames when too near an ignition source.
(moonbat mode/off)
33 conserve-a-tips // Mar 20, 2007 at 8:02 pm
UpNorth, I learned in AlAnon that you can’t keep doing things to try to keep the bottom from falling out - accepting the unacceptable in order to keep the inevitable from happening. That is how I look at the election this time. Things have gotten so out of whack, and I have watched the Republicans turn into “We’ll say anything to get your vote and stay in power” that it is time to let them either take responsibility and get back to conservative basics or allow the inevitable to happen. You saw what happened with Clinton. The country got sick of him and his party. I really think that the country is getting sick of what is going on in Congress right now via the Democrats, as well. Sometimes people have to experience the truth before they will listen.
I don’t want a perfect conservative, I just want one who says what he means and means what he says and who is fiscally conservative in most areas and socially conservative in many areas. I will not water down conservatism just to get an ‘R’ in the White House. That is what we had before Reagan.
34 Rogue100 // Mar 20, 2007 at 8:10 pm
RedPepper,
I have only tangentially followed the case, but I believe they will hear it because of its First Amendment implications.
The kid was supposed to be in school at the time he unfurled the banner across the street. Since schools may limit First Amendment expression to maintain an environment conducive to education; can they limit his speech when he is off of school property.
Since the school is responsible for the minor during the period of time he unfurled his banner, the school argues that they can take punitive action. The minor argues that he was off of school property and out of their control.
Prior decisions have shown the school responsible for children even when they are walking home after school, so I think the kid will lose.
At least, I think that’s what the case is about.
35 Rogue100 // Mar 20, 2007 at 8:17 pm
P.S. My Master’s is in Educational Leadership and the “control of students” issue was part of my schoolin’.
Hurray for GW — Finally trying to fight back against DumbasCrap libtards.
36 Fred Sinclair // Mar 20, 2007 at 9:23 pm
Ducan Hunter and Fred Thompson is a ticket I will gladly support,
Duncan Hunter and Zell Miller would also get my vote.
Heirborn Ranger
37 upnorthlurkin // Mar 21, 2007 at 7:57 am
testing, testing….
38 upnorthlurkin // Mar 21, 2007 at 8:00 am
Good morning! Where is everyone?! Did something happen last night I haven’t heard about yet? Was it Hawkeye’s birthday party?! No comments since 9:23 pm…that is odd…..?
39 MargeinMI // Mar 21, 2007 at 8:19 am
Mornin’. I was wondering that too. Thought my ‘puter was stuck!
40 conserve-a-tips // Mar 21, 2007 at 8:27 am
Wow, I slept until 8 am this morning!! (It is 8:23 now) I never do that. I was up and down all night and just felt drugged this morning. Hope the rest of you are more perky.
It is a beautiful sunny day, but I plan on scraping all of that horrible popcorn stuff off the ceiling in the bathroom and to tear up the linoleum because I have Spring Fever and want a new bathroom! Ceramic tile, here I come.
41 conserve-a-tips // Mar 21, 2007 at 8:38 am
Regarding the discussion yesterday of whether to vote or not here is an article that says exactly what needs to be said.
42 Darthmeister // Mar 21, 2007 at 8:48 am
From a roundtable forum reported by the AmericanSpectator:
On the continuum between sunny optimism and manic depression, Frederick Kagan a military historian, pushes the limits of the former position about as far as one can, given present circumstances. He was a scathing critic of the Bush Administration’s conduct of the war until it embraced his own ideas about the surge.
Kagan argues that, historically, America does very badly at the beginning of its wars, but eventually gets it right in the end. He also believes interventions such as Bosnia and Kosovo demonstrate that the U.S. can ameliorate terrible situations abroad. He sees some evidence that the surge is going well, but he concedes we will not know for some time. He points to the support of the Iraqi government and the militias’ reluctance to engage U.S. forces as positive signs. Moreover, he notes that the troop build-up is still underway.
Kagan simply cannot countenance defeat because that possibility is too awful to contemplate in terms of the Middle East and the spillover effects of terrorism, which will look elsewhere for mischief making. He believes that the greatest danger is “pulling the plug on the operation too early.” He is also working on a follow-up plan to complement this initial troop surge, a proposal for expanding the effort, presumably, to non-military areas.
One caveat I can see to Kagan’s viewpoint. Deposing Saddam’s regime in less than six weeks was a spectacular success. What was missing was an aggressive follow-on in maintaining law and order by not killing and arresting looters and those taking potshots at Coalition troops shortly after the statue came down.
Politically correct death threats from leftists at Georgia Tech.
This is a real sore spot with me. A true confession here:
I too have received threats mailed directly to my home from local leftist scumbags in response to the pro-America letters I’ve written to our local newspaper that were critical of their multiple lies. My wife even received a threatening letter which also contained vicious lies about me. I have a pretty good idea where that particular letter came from and this person is on notice. And these are the people of “peace” and “love”?
Needless to say I’m never far away from my .45 Auto or AR and this is one of the reasons I’ve obtained a conceal carry permit.
That’s why I have a total distrust of the trolls who spew their hate and venom here. Their hate-Bush/blame-America screeds are little different than what I’ve received in the U.S. mail justifying these threatening scumbags hate for me because I vigorously support what the administration is doing in taking the war to Islamofascists.
Note to leftists: Don’t Tread on Me … or my family!
43 Ms RightWing, Ink // Mar 21, 2007 at 9:02 am
re:38
Here I am. Yesterday I was near death, but today I am alive (kind of). It took a few good kicks on the computer to get my postings all the way to Pennsylvania last night, so maybe those further away couldn’t kick hard enough.
The steroids I took last month helped my vision, but now my screen is once more a blur. ‘Tis sad because the cafe is growing cobwebs. sigh
But spring is sprung and someday Ohio will remember that and bloon
44 Ms RightWing, Ink // Mar 21, 2007 at 9:02 am
er, bloom
45 JamesonLewis3rd // Mar 21, 2007 at 9:50 am
Praise be to the LORD my Rock,
who trains my hands for war,
my fingers for battle.~~Psalm 144:1
46 Intergalactic Trout // Mar 21, 2007 at 10:03 am
A really brave kid would have held a sign reading “Whiskey shots for Muhammed”
47 Shelly // Mar 21, 2007 at 10:12 am
I haven’t been listening to Paul Harvey much lately, but I heard on the news this morning that Thompson is filling in for him this week. To paraphrase what Thompson said about illegal immigration, it was basically that our government needs to tell Mexico that we will are a sovereign nation and that we will defend our borders, and also point out that if their only way to survive economically is to export millions of poor citizens to other countries, then they need to realize that they have a very serious problem. He’s the stuff.
48 conserve-a-tips // Mar 21, 2007 at 10:43 am
Thanks Shelly. That answers my question! Bring him on!
49 JamesonLewis3rd // Mar 21, 2007 at 11:01 am
Yay-yuh!
50 Darthmeister // Mar 21, 2007 at 11:48 am
c.a.t.
And Thompson also said he would make it clear to the Mexican president that he would not tolerate alternating rhetoric from Mexico which one year says we’re not doing enough to secure the border and then the next year say we’re doing too much. He also noted the hypocrisy of the whining Mexican government about the supposed “fascist immigration policies” America is enforcing on our southern borders when our policies are far, far less “fascist” than those the Mexican government enforces on its own southern borders to keep out Guatemalans, El Salvadorans, etc.
It is estimated that one-sixth of Mexico’s work force now works inside the United States, most of whom DO NOT pay taxes into our system precisely because they are illegal. We are Mexico’s dumping ground and it is Mexico who is not being a good neighbor by tacitly encouraging those who kind find work to illegally immigrate to America. The Mexican government is a large part of the problem plus the unspoken ideology that Mexicans still believe the American southwest is still theirs by divine right and lapsed treaties.
Here’s Mexico’s “fascist” immigration policies:
1. There are no special bilingual programs in the schools, no special ballots for elections, and all government business will be conducted in Mexico’s official language, Spanish.
2. Foreigners will NOT have the right to vote, no matter how long they live in Mexico.
3. Foreigners will NEVER be able to hold political office.
4. Foreigners will not be a burden to taxpayers. No welfare, no food stamps, no health care, nor any other government assistance programs.
5. Foreigners can invest in Mexico, but it must be an amount equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
6. Foreigners do have legal options to buy land, BUT options will be restricted. For example, an immigrant is not allowed to buy waterfront property. That property is reserved for naturally born Mexican citizens.
7. Foreigners may not protest; no demonstrations, no waving a foreign flag, no political organizing, no “badmouthing” our president or his policies. If one does, he/she will be sent out of the country.
8. If someone does get into Mexico illegally, they will be hunted down, captured, often treated roughly and sent straight to jail. A hearing comes later and the illegal is invariably found guilty and either punished or sent back to their home country.
My views on “open borders” immigration most closely reflected here. Free trade policies and well-regulated immigration policies are not mutually exclusive.
51 Darthmeister // Mar 21, 2007 at 11:50 am
Sheesh … that’s “by tacitly encouraging those who CAN’T find work …”
52 Shelly // Mar 21, 2007 at 1:05 pm
There is an online petition to encourage Fred Thompson to run at:
http://draftfredthompson.com/
Spread the word! Introduce it to your right-minded friends (or kill them, if you’re boberin).
53 Darthmeister // Mar 21, 2007 at 1:06 pm
Executive Privilege 101 For Lefties Something with which the Clinton Administration was intimately familiar.
54 Shelly // Mar 21, 2007 at 1:06 pm
Hopefully you’ll see it eventually…
55 conserve-a-tips // Mar 21, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Well, I knew that Rush couldn’t pass it up. He just played the new Shanklin parody, “Barak, The Magic Negro” sung to the tune of Puff The Magic Dragon” and it was hillarious.
Chorus:
♪Barak the magic negro lives in DC.
The LA Times calls him that,
‘Cause he’s black, but not authentic’ly…
Barak the magic negro lives in DC.
The LA Times calls him that,
‘Cause he’s black, but not authentic’ly…
♪
56 Darthmeister // Mar 21, 2007 at 4:48 pm
From JihadWatch:
Homeland Security: As Democrats hold more silly hearings to embarrass Republicans, the FBI is warning local police to be alert for Muslim extremists hijacking school buses. Reality check, please.
We wonder if any of the grandstanding politicians on Capitol Hill are thinking in terms of one of these nuts driving a fertilizer-filled yellow bus up to a government building — or, easier yet, a school. …
The FBI and Homeland Security Department last week sent out a bulletin to law enforcement across the country warning that Muslims with “ties to extremist groups” are signing up to be school bus drivers. They also noted “recent suspicious activity” by foreigners who drive school buses or are licensed to drive them.
Recent events come on top of several other school bus-related incidents involving Mideast men that raise suspicion of terror activity. They include last year’s surprise boarding of a school bus in Florida by two Saudi men dressed in trench coats. Authorities suspect they were making a dry run to see how easy it would be to hijack or blow up a school bus filled with American children.
Previously, an Arab man from Detroit was caught trying to obtain a job as a school bus driver in New York using fake Social Security documents.
… Terror cells secreted inside America may be planning to use buses as a Trojan horse to infiltrate school campuses and murder students and teachers. Floor plans for schools in Virginia, Texas and New Jersey have been recovered from terrorist hands in Iraq. Videotapes confiscated in Afghanistan show al-Qaida terrorists practicing the takeover of a school.
You must log in to post a comment.