Ok Marvin, fair enough.
Valedictorian Rips Up Preapproved Speech, Recites Prayer Instead
by Sam Whiskey 469 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Marvin Shilmer
-
I have a couple questions for all participants here.
- Had Roy Costner said the freedom he and all his peers enjoy is a gift from God, would that have been pushing faith down anyone’s throat?
- Had Roy Costner said that God commended planet earth to his and his fellow humans care to preserve and protect, would that have been pushing faith down anyone’s throat?
Marvin Shilmer
-
OUTLAW
I have a couple questions for you.
- If I were to stand before an audience, quote verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, then say “Amen” and stop, what religion does that make me?
- If I were to stand before an audience, quote verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, then say “Amen” and stop, have I made a political statement or a religious statement?
- If I were to stand before an audience, quote verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, then say “Amen” and stop, what have I done that the government needs to protect you from?
- If I were to stand before an audience, quote verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, then say “Amen” what if anything have I necessarily said of my religious belief?
Can you answer those questions?.....MS
I could but I would be helping you derail this thread..
Roy agreed to give a pre approved speech..Thats what the subject is about..
Roy misrepresented himself to School staff..
I have not tried to argue that pre-approved means anything other than pre-approved. So what’s your point in speaking as though I have?....MS
I have seen no evidence that the speaker agreed or had to agree to deliver and only deliver a preapproved speech, whether in writing or
otherwise.....MS
Pre-approved means pre-approved..
Pre-approved means people have to come to an agreement..
You presented an arguement that Pre-Approved could mean "I can do what ever I want"..
I have not tried to argue that someone should have a right to shove their beliefs down anyone’s throat as though doing so is perfectly acceptable.
So what’s your point in speaking as though I have.....MS
And, in the end, there’s nothing anyone can do to penalize Costner because all he did was use the free exercise and free speech clauses of
the US Constitution. He was not speaking of or for his school system. He spoke for himself, and he was willing to answer for himself.
That’s my kind of person ......MS
Roy shoved his beliefs down the audiences throats..
You applauded him for it..
I have very little trouble pointing out your Strawmen and Misdirection..
I`ve done it with only a few words
You`ve gone on for pages and pages.. ...I take that as an Attack on this Forum..
.................................
... OUTLAW -
AndDontCallMeShirley
Marvin: Above I quoted and linked to an op-ed piece in the LA Times expressing Costner’s version of events in which he was allegedly “warned by school officials to refrain from any prayers or religious references in his remarks.” Do you see "or" in that sentence?
---
Simon touched on this already- but really, Marvin, really?
Yes, Marvin, I see the word "or". I also see some other words, such as:
"allegedly"
"Costner's version"
You're taking a version of events at face value from an admitted liar. Of course he's going to make claims to support his actions while villifying the people he deceived.
Do you have any tangible, verifiable proof that Costner's "version" of events has any credibility whatsoever?
Even if it were true that school officials requested he not make any religious references, so what? If this "academic" has nothing worthwhile to talk about beyond his religious beliefs, maybe he's not worth listening to.
Marvin:
I've read and Costner said and then took a view from 30,000 feet. Here's what I saw
From 30,000 feet? Wow. I've suspected all along you make these arguments with your head in the clouds. You just verified it.
Actually, I suspected your head was somewhere else (where the sun doesn't shine). But that's a different thread altogether.
-
Marvin Shilmer
-
“I could but I would be helping you derail this thread..”
Outlaw,
Have you watched the video in this threat’s original entry? A graduate student named Roy Costner stood before his audience, quoted verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, said “Amen” and then stopped.
How is addressing what the subject of this thread actually did a derailing of this thread?
My questions for you remain:
- If I were to stand before an audience, quote verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, then say “Amen” and stop, what religion does that make me?
- If I were to stand before an audience, quote verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, then say “Amen” and stop, have I made a political statement or a religious statement?
- If I were to stand before an audience, quote verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, then say “Amen” and stop, what have I done that the government needs to protect you from?
- If I were to stand before an audience, quote verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, then say “Amen” what if anything have I necessarily said of my religious belief?
“Roy agreed to give a pre approved speech..Thats what the subject is about..
“Roy misrepresented himself to School staff..”
Part of this discussion has been about Costner’s deception. He lied.
“Pre-approved means pre-approved..
“Pre-approved means people have to come to an agreement..
“Yout presented an arguement that Pre-Approved could mean "I can do what ever I want"..”
Of course pre-approved means pre-approved.
In this discussion I’ve expressly said that Costner committed an act of civil disobedience. Disobedience is a term that means, in this case, that Costner acted contrary to his agreement. At no time have I suggested Costner was free to do whatever he wanted. That's a strawman. This discussion has been about whether what Costner did was something he should have been free to do, with a result that his actions have a justification.
Hence the question of whether what Costner did is justifiable or not under the US Constitution.
I believe his civil disobedience is justifiable because his act of quoting verbatim the Lord’s Prayer, stating agreement with it and then stopping presented no threat to his audience in need of government protection.
If this discussion is not about whether it’s governmental overreach to prohibit what Costner did during his speech then you and I have nothing to discuss on the subject.
If this discussion is about whether it’s governmental overreach to prohibit what Costner did during his speech then you and I have something to discuss on the subject, and we can start with answers to the questions posed to you above. If you have any questions along the way I'm willing to answer those too. Because the subject is important to me.
And, guys and gals, it is not my aim to frustrate or derail anything. This subject is important to me for many reasons and that’s why I’ve willingly exposed myself to all that’s been heaped upon me throughout. I don’t mind disagreement, but I don’t at all understand the umbrage of my responding to specifics, answering questions and asking my own questions along the way.
Marvin Shilmer
-
AndDontCallMeShirley
Marvin- I'd like to remind you of what you said on page 12 of this thread:
After just now reading a post-speech interview of Roy Costner, I believe there is ground to say he was dishonest in that he confirms knowing he was not to say anything religious in his speech and that by implication of his submitted manuscript he agreed to this stipulation.
---
Yet here you are still arguing the same points while missing the real point.
Costner had two options when he disagreed with the school's policy:
1. Write his speech in accordance with the policy, get it pre-approved, then deliver it as agreed upon.
2. Refuse to give the speech.
As I've said many times, he pulled a fast one and lied and deceived to get his way.
-
OUTLAW
Marvin..
Roy mislead school staff..
He shoved his beliefs down the audiences throats..
You continue to misdirect the thread..
I see what your doing,DCMS sees what your doing..
More importantly,Simon see`s what your doing..
If you keep it up..
I don`t have much hope for your future here..
.........................
... OUTLAW -
Marvin Shilmer
-
“Do you have any tangible, verifiable proof that Costner's "version" of events has any credibility whatsoever?”
AndDontCallMeShirley,
Yes. See my post number 2772.
Costner’s version of events is well documented and well publicized that he was warned against prayers or religious references in his remarks, and in the many instances where Pickens County School officials have responded not once have they disputed a single word Costner said on this point, or any other that I know of.
Given the notoriety of this event, if Costner’s version of events were false it’s reasonable to think by now school officials would have said so. Frankly, the school system’s chief PR guy all but repeated the same thing himself saying his school system would not approve or carve out time for religious expression by students (supposedly at sponsored events like the graduation).
“Even if it were true the school officials requested he not make religious references, so what?”
The “what” is that it would mean what I already said, that you understate the case to say “The only restriction was on reciting prayers”.
That’s a premise you’ve leveraged heavily in this discussion and there is good reason to believe it’s false.
Marvin Shilmer
-
Simon
Though the school system’s PR representative has many times spoken of this incident, not once has he disputed what Costner said he was warned against. Does that tell you anything?
He probably isn't that concerned with the specific inuendo of individual words and sylables as you seem to be.
What happened and why is blindingly obvious to everyone apart from you Marvin.
You seem to have a double-standard in what you accept as 'evidence' and proof.
-
Simon
Separation of church and state is to protect against needless governmental interference into religious affairs. I can see the societal value in this and agree with it.
It's also to protect against having an official, state run religion. We know Christians would have that forced upon us so we need to protect against it.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
i.e. SEPARATE - not intermixed.
It's a slippery slope that will begin with "let's just allow Christians to say prayers in their speeches"
No thank you.
... OUTLAW