[The FFRF has called for the resignation of a public school principal who regularly preaches Christianity to his students.]

Mountain Dew Fan
Um. All that the atheists are asking is for the principal of a school to OBEY THE LAW OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! Gee, is that asking too much?

Slidellman4life
What law would that be? I don't recall hearing of a law passed that restricted religious expression. Maybe that's because the Constitution says no.

Mountain Dew Fan
If you actually read the article, the author points out that not only what the principal is doing is illegal and unconstitutional, but the principal actually admitted that he knows what he is doing is "crossing the line", and continues to do it anyway. What he is doing violates the Establishment Clause. Here is a definition of the Establishment Clause from the LegalDictionary website.

Establishment Clause:
A clause in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution that prohibits the government from establishing an official religion, or taking actions that favor one religion over another, or over or a non-religion.

The principal is a representative of the government because he works for a PUBLIC school. So he may not take ANY ACTIONS that favor one religion over another or over a non-religion.

Slidellman4life
I've read the Constitution. The First Amendment says Congress can neither create its own religion nor keep people from practicing theirs. That's it. All of this gobbledygook that you reference isn't in there as it wasn't intended to be, and it sure as hell wasn't meant to be used as a weapon to abridge an individual's right to free speech because of where he works.

Mountain Dew Fan
Well ... no one will ever know what the original intention was. However, the definition which I gave you is the one which the current Supreme Court of the United States currently uses. In fact, there is something called the "Lemon Test", to determine if something the government is doing violates the Establishment clause.

Under the "Lemon" test, government can assist religion only if (1) the primary purpose of the assistance is secular, (2) the assistance must neither promote nor inhibit religion, and (3) there is no excessive entanglement between church and state.

So clearly what this teacher is doing violates number (2) as he is clearly trying to promote religion.

I'm sorry that you do not like the way that the Supreme Court has interpreted the Establishment Clause, perhaps when you become a member of the Supreme Court, you can change it ... until then ... THIS is what the law is, like it or not.

Slidellman4life
1) The "Lemon Test" is unconstitutional and therefore irrelevant.

2) I ignore rulings that are unconstitutional. Whether you like it or not.