Paul Weyrich Is A Hypocrite

Bruce Norbeck MadTom at IX.NETCOM.COM
Fri Jun 9 20:19:03 MDT 1995

        Dennis Putnam, & others:
>I beleive this was back in February and I got it from G. G. Liddy who
>was reading excerpts from the LA Times. Since he quoted the Times I
>had to assume it was true.
        Tell me, Dennis -- what's the chances Liddy might have taken
something out of context? Since he's a media figure with a clear pub-
lic agenda, I think the chances are pretty good. You ought to try to
read the article itself, rather than accept what Liddy said at face
>I do disagree with your new statement that the supreme court never
>ruled one cannot express their religious beliefs in public.
        You may disagree all you want. It doesn't change the fact that
you're wrong.
>That is exactly what it said when it banned paryer in schools in the
>first place.
        Dennis, do us both a big favor -- read what I said. The Court
did not, EVER, say that children cannot pray in school. The Court said
that such prayers cannot be led by school officials, because that would
give the appearance of the school authorities endorsing one religion at
the expense of all the others. That was all the Court said, & no more.
Like I said -- & you essentially agreed with me -- any authorities who
have expanded the Court's ruling to mean that they had the right to pre-
vent children from praying in school did so incorrectly. Whether they
were liberals trying to eliminate Christianity from America, or simply
school officials trying to avoid a lawsuit at all costs, they were in-
        I note, with great interest, that you have failed to respond to
my mention of Christian schoolchildren, here in the ultra-liberal San
Fransisco Bay Area, gathering in the quad at local high schools to pray
in groups. Their action is not forbidden by the Court's ruling, because
no school official is leading them. I also mentioned, sometime back, the
English class I took last fall. While I was there, in night school, the
high school kids were assigned to read *The Good Earth*. They were as-
signed to do an art project illustrating the meaning of words from the
book. The walls of the class were papered with those art projects. At
least three of those art projects had explicitly Christian themes. They
remained there all semester long; no-one ever complained, because there
was no point in complaining. Displaying those pictures was not forbidden
by the Supreme Courts ruling, because they were not endorsed by school
        Let's keep this debate to what the Court said, okay?
Libertarian, pagan, pot-smoker, patriot -- DON'T TREAD ON ME!
madtom at

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list