Comments On: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge by Cienna Madrid http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/11/19/morning-news-rain-pricks-and-the-520-bridge Comments On: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge by Cienna Madrid en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Sat, 18 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Sat, 18 May 2013 04:15:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_v._D…
Posted by Theodore Gorath]]> Tue, 20 Nov 2012 05:25:29 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by venomlash]]> Tue, 20 Nov 2012 01:43:33 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>

Posted by you got nothing]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 18:17:17 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>
No, but students have no Consitutionally protected free speech in schools. They also are subject to discipline within the school for things that aren't even illegal, much like employees at a workplace.
Posted by keshmeshi]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:17:39 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by Will in Seattle]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:02:33 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by Pope Peabrain]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:36:58 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by anon1256]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 13:23:05 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by venomlash]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 12:15:54 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by Bauhaus I]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 12:15:28 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>
For one, they were incredibly tacky: not the sometimes lovely nativity scenes you might imagine.

NSanta Monica's Christians dressed stiff cast-off department store mannikins in polyester schmatta and displayed them in plywood boxes, behind chicken wire.

And no, not just the basic nativity scene itself, a half dozen or more scenes from the New Testament rigged up with Macy's out-of-fashion dummies.

In laughable -- if not questionable taste -- I couldn't believe the city allowed it to begin, no less continue.

But when the seasonal diplays were opened up to other beliefs, the tacky Christians couldn't even play fair and share: their whining was heard citywide, and the Atheisist display was vandalized.

Sue and be damned, Chrsitianists, your wussy fussing means no more tacky seasonal displays on public land.

Good riddance to bad rubbish, kitsch up your own church lawns.
Posted by judybrowni]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 12:07:36 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>
Also, envy is a deadly sin, but it is "a jealous god." Ridiculous.

My basic test I ask christians to do is ask if they themselves are more moral than their god (they always are: no one wants slaves any more, or thinks that a raped woman should just be sold to her rapist, not even going to mention all the genocide), and if so, why they follow a deity that has a less evolved sense of morality than they do.

Not like it ever changes anything, but at least it makes them think for once.
Posted by Theodore Gorath]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:55:42 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>
Your headline is a tad misleading Cienna. It sounds as if the city didn't ban the nativity scene because atheists put up their own stuff; rather, it seems the city just stopped allowing parties to rent private space in the public park altogether. Probably because vandals damaged the atheists' displays (as @10 noted above).

Religionists routinely exclaim, they're only doing this out of tradition, they're not preaching, the U.S. is a christian nation, etc., etc., but the truth is that they ARE demanding everyone acquiesce to their beliefs and rituals.

If they simply kept their nativity scenes in their own homes and own churches, the atheists would ignore them. But no. The religionists demand, DEMAND, that EVERYONE simply MUST be subjected to the nativity scene, whether they want it or not. If they're so fucking secure in their beliefs, why can't they just be happy with that knowledge and stop trying to convince everyone else that THEY have to believe too?
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:27:58 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>
Because in the QUnited States of Gaymerica opposition to HomoSecularHumanism is not allowed.

If those teachers had been wearing rainbows everything would have been fine...
Posted by KissYourLibertyGoodBye]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:06:47 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>
I'm kind of torn on the issue. On the one hand, it's the teacher's place of business, and I think discussion of politics should be frowned upon, if not banned, in workplaces. But, on the other hand, most commenters at Slog support the free speech of students (for reference, take a look at the Celina high school post just a few above this one). If schools can curb the free speech of teachers, then why not students?
Posted by keshmeshi]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:02:04 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by Cienna Madrid]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:38:19 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>
Also, an amusing passage from that story:
Most of the signs [depicting mythological figures and asking viewers to count how many myths were on display] were vandalized and in the ensuing uproar, the city effectively ended a tradition that began in 1953...

Turns out it was the fundies' own fault that it's an issue today. Prove that you can't respect the rights of others (those rights being the basis of their hypocritical lawsuit today) and that you're making a crusade out of it, and you leave the city no choice.
Posted by Knat]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:20:56 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by six shooter]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:14:04 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/articl…
Posted by chromie]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:08:34 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by Matt from Denver]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:08:12 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by Hernandez]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 10:00:47 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]>

Posted by dirge]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:59:31 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by six shooter]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:56:45 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:35:13 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by Michael of the Green]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:31:50 -0800 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Morning News: Rain, Pricks, and the 520 Bridge]]> Posted by cracked]]> Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:28:23 -0800 The Stranger