Conflicting Constitutionalities
From WorldNetDaily...
The American Civil Liberties Union, on behalf of an offended parent, is suing an elementary school district for allowing its students to attend a non-taxpayer-funded religious education program that meets on campus....
Of the district's 950 eligible children, the ADF reports, nearly 97 percent of the students attend the Associated Churches' voluntary classes. At Horace Mann Elementary, all 61 fourth-graders and 51 of the 54 third-graders receive the instruction....
The lawsuit alleges that the trailers use school electricity, and thus school money, but the ADF brief claims this is mistaken and the program is completely free of taxpayer funding....
The ADF brief claims the physical geography of the Horace Mann school – bounded by a river on one side and highways on the others – prevents the children from being able to safely leave school grounds. Forcing the "By the Book" classes off-campus, the brief argues, would effectively "bring the Association's program at Horace Mann to a screeching, and permanent, halt."
One family complains, while the vast majority participate. The whole issue, legally, it seems, revolves around the use of school electricity. The ACLU argues that that is enough to deprive the majority of families of the benefits of the program.
Now let's look at another case, also from WorldNetDaily...
Outraged at his low pay and uncompensated overtime, an illegal alien in Boston filed a complaint with the Massachusetts attorney general's office against a supermarket – and won his case....
The alien spent years at a Super 88 supermarket seafood counter earning $6 an hour instead of the state's $8 an hour minimum wage. He grew frustrated as the supermarket did not compensate him for his overtime work.
One day, he decided to gather his pay stubs into a plastic bag and deliver them to a lawyer – who turned them over to the state attorney general's office.
To his surprise, Super 88 was ordered to provide back pay and fines of $200,000 to more than 300 workers, the Globe reported.
So the fact that he is in the US illegally was irrelevant to the case.
Interesting how a trivial legality in the first case is used to demand the cessation of an entire program wanted by the families of 650 children, yet a glaring illegality is completely ignored in the second case.
Isn't this pretty much the exact kind of nonsense people came to the New World to escape centuries ago? Where do we go to escape it these days?
Posted by Danny Carlton at January 7, 2009 7:19 AM