Offline

WTF? Has Nebraska been overrun with Russian spies posing as teachers?
Thank goodness for the ACLU..
ACLU objects to Nebraska school district asking teachers to sign pro-America pledge
Published August 19, 2015
FoxNews.com
A Nebraska school district is facing complaints from the American Civil Liberties Union for following a state law requiring teachers to sign a pro-America pledge.
The Lincoln Journal Star reports that Hastings Public Schools, in southern Nebraska, has only recently started following the 1951, Cold War-era law.
Superintendent Craig Kautz told the newspaper he started asking teachers to sign the pledge this year, following legal advice.
"So, for the first time in my working career we basically asked our staff to do that -- our teaching staff -- the minimum required by statute," he said.
Those signing it effectively pledge that they believe in the U.S. government and will teach "love and devotion" for the country.
But Amy Miller, with the ACLU of Nebraska, reportedly argued that under Supreme Court rulings, public employees cannot be required to sign these pledges, calling them unconstitutional.
"You need to know that the statute is a dead letter law which has been clearly overruled by the highest court in the land. Attempting to enforce the state statue is unconstitutional and will expose the school district to liability to a civil rights lawsuit," the ACLU wrote in a letter to the school district, the Journal Star reports.
The ACLU wants the district to make clear within seven days teachers don't have to sign the pledge.
Kautz, while defending the pledge request, clarified that there is technically no penalty for not signing.
Other major public school systems in Nebraska do not ask teachers to sign the document.
Offline

"Superintendent Craig Kautz told the newspaper he started asking teachers to sign the pledge this year, following legal advice."
Maybe Mr. Kautz should have asked for a second legal opinion.
Offline
Or get a better qualified lawyer who is not practicing Cold War antiquties.
Last edited by flowergirl (8/19/2015 9:13 pm)
Offline

There is a group of idiots in the comment section on the Fox site supporting mandatory loyalty oaths to the US for all Americans.
One of them uses a confederate flag as an avatar.
You can't make this sh#t up. ![]()
Offline

You know, (and maybe this could be a topic starter for another thread) but I'm beginning to wonder if we, as an entire nation, are intelligent enough to function as a democratic society. I really am.
Offline
Loyalty oaths could be problematic for "Oathkeepers" and other anti-gov types.
Offline

Just Fred wrote:
You know, (and maybe this could be a topic starter for another thread) but I'm beginning to wonder if we, as an entire nation, are intelligent enough to function as a democratic society. I really am.
Intelligence isn't a requirement for a democratic society, it never has been and never will be. If it were, there would be knowledge tests in order to be allowed to vote. While I wouldn't be against that, that's not how this country is, ever was, or ever will be. It would be easier just to move to a country that doesn't allow its people to vote if you want to escape living in a democratic society.
Offline

The Man wrote:
Just Fred wrote:
You know, (and maybe this could be a topic starter for another thread) but I'm beginning to wonder if we, as an entire nation, are intelligent enough to function as a democratic society. I really am.
Intelligence isn't a requirement for a democratic society, it never has been and never will be. If it were, there would be knowledge tests in order to be allowed to vote. While I wouldn't be against that, that's not how this country is, ever was, or ever will be. It would be easier just to move to a country that doesn't allow its people to vote if you want to escape living in a democratic society.
I don't see anywhere that Fred said that we should sort people into piles of those deserving to vote and those that the world would be better off without. Others do that, but not Fred.
I think that Fred is wondering if this nation, with its collective ignorance of issues, its binary worldview of us v them - where them is anybody who is a progressive - where one side deludes inself into thinking it has a monopoly on patriotism, can still address the problems that it faces. The debt, national defense, income inequity, air and water quality , etc.
It's a good question. When I look out and see a nation that addresses problems with nothing any deeper than labels and glib one-liners, and see a circus clown leading the GOP polls,,,, well, it's a damn good question.
Offline

Tarnation wrote:
Loyalty oaths could be problematic for "Oathkeepers" and other anti-gov types.
I wonder if they would appreciate the irony.
Offline

Man, perhaps I should have used the word 'educated' instead of 'intelligent'. Democracy is a great experiment in governance, but it requires an educated populace or it won't work.
You can't simply say you are going to organize a form of government 'of, by, and for the people' without emphasizing the reponsibility of running such a system with an educated and informed citizenry.