It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


UCLA Prohibits Student from Saying 'Jesus' in Graduation Speech

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 12:47 PM
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 12:48 PM
reply to post by Annee

Yes I would. I would have no problem in her thanking Lucifer at a public college graduation. She worked her butt of for at least a few years, probably paid a bunch of money in tuition to attend, and if she wants to thank Buddah, Jesus, or the flying monkey people from Mars then she should be able to.

It is amazing how people act like words or opinions can kill you on the spot.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 01:17 PM
reply to post by moocowman

Yes she was studying science, however it makes no difference what she was studying she still has a right to free speech and the right to thank whomever she wishes. I don't believe that there are any prerequisites for studying the sciences pertaining to a person's spiritual/religious beliefs, or lack thereof. Her spiritual/ religious beliefs in no way make a mockery of her teachers.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 01:18 PM

Originally posted by WhatTheory
And you have the moronic right to believe and express the thought that you came from a monkey.
Enjoy your banana.

That's right as did we all, but of course people like you think the earth is only 6000 years old

The sooner your genes are removed from the pool the better.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 01:21 PM
I am not a religious person, but the more i see the religious people having their rights limited , the more i think about the movie Pale Rider.In the movie the main bad guy is upset that clint eastwood's preacher is now among the 'tin panners'...when one of his henchmen asks what the big deal is , the main bad guy states that he has the ability to give them spirit and something to fight for, something to believe in, and that is very dangerous.
I cannot help but wonder if TPTB also have this rationale, and that, in part , is why religion is being attacked constantly.

[edit on 6/6/2009 by glevel]

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 01:46 PM

Originally posted by jd140
They have to be accepted and agree to pay the college of their choice a tuition and buy their own books. In grade school through High School that would be considered a private school.

Because the government pays the vast bulk of college fees, if they didn't the piddling couple of grand a semester would be well over $10,000.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 01:49 PM

Originally posted by glevel
when one of his henchmen asks what the big deal is , the main bad guy states that he has the ability to give them spirit and something to fight for, something to believe in, and that is very dangerous.

Good movie, but if LCint didn't play a "tough, gunfighting preacher" thos people wouldn't have found any spirit.

It is dangerous because of how easily poeple can be bent to someones will in religion, look at all teh cults baptist preacheers, tele-evangelists etc.

People can speak about god all they just don't subject me to having to listen to it.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 01:51 PM

Originally posted by OKCBtard
lol I was just stating how flawed your position was, atleast here in America. Over in China, they love this kind of censorship. Also LOL at master and slave bit. Either you are actually mentally handicapped or you are a troll. There is no denying it.

You seem remarkably intolerant, what is your agenda ? To advance the religous right, to come to a point in the future where religion is enforced upon people ? That would be a sad day indeed and mark the period in time when this great country starts regressing.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 01:54 PM
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 02:13 PM

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by falcon

Anyways, presidents, including Obama, bring up religion in their speeches all the time. And that is the president. So if a student wants to thank Jesus in her speech, she has every right as a citizen. There's really no argument past that point.

[edit on 6/5/2009 by AshleyD]

I think everyone missed this

Really. If ANYONE shouldn't say stuff like this its the fricken president. So why can't someone say something like that at a school graduation?.

Separation of church and state? There's no church and definitely not a state, shes just saying like 5 words.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 02:25 PM
She should'nt be allowed to thank her parents ether because her parents aren't everyones parents therefore, mentioning her parents is offensive to people with different parents or no parents at all.

[edit on 6-6-2009 by WisdomInChains]

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 02:28 PM
First- (and despite any Court rulings) "Seperation of Church and State" is a myth. Perhaps "myth" is a poor term, but the beginning of its usage to prevent people from invoking their religious beliefs is. Jefferson used this phrase to reassure that their would be no State sponsored religion. The "wall of seperation" was about protecting religious expression, not about denying it. Perhaps saying that the use of the phrase is historically lazy is more appropriate.

Now, in this matter, it seems reasonable that the use of Jesus Christ be eliminated. Unless the girl can prove that others were allowed to make reference to specific religions, I don't think she has a case. For one, the speech wasn't really a speech- it seems as if the professor was reading these comments for them. Making someone else read for you in a sense gives tacit approval from the reader at worst, and at best makes the reader simply uncomfortable, as the professor stated it would. Also, there is a common sense issue- mostly for the spirit of the function. It's only a small phrase, but can't secular events just remain secular?

[edit on 6-6-2009 by Pabama]

[edit on 6-6-2009 by Pabama]

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 03:41 PM

Originally posted by rogue1
That's right as did we all

Umm....that's YOUR wrong opinion.

It's your right to believe such dribble but if you want to believe you are a monkey, go ahead, but don't put me in your deluded illusion.

but of course people like you think the earth is only 6000 years old

I believe no such thing so AGAIN, you are wrong and as usual, you like to stereotype people.

The sooner your genes are removed from the pool the better.

Wow, you are such a tolerant person. Typical liberal garbage. You want others to be tolerant of your stupid beliefs but have no tolerance for the beliefs of others. As you stated, you would remove people from existance in order to further your lame theory. Pathetic and sad.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 03:45 PM

Originally posted by Solomons
What theory has already been corrected numerous times on this same issue,he still regurgitates the same tripe all the time and he knows it.Given his sporadic and unusual use of the rational thought process though,it seems he is closer to a monkey than any of us.

Another tolerant and hateful person.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Please show me where I have been corrected numerous times on this issue or shut your intolerant mouth. How would you know? You have only been a member for a few months.

BTW, how can I be corrected when you only believe in a theory which has not been proven?
You are confusing your opinion with fact.
Typical liberal.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link search did not produce a reputable news source reporting this alleged incident... the only results were for christian news wire and world nut daily, both of which are christian political agenda (fascism) propaganda pushers (trash)...

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 03:56 PM
reply to post by Annee

It is a public school but you should be allowed to thank who you want. Taking this a step further, why not prohibit students from thanking thier families? Or from mentioning other countries? I bet, if posted, we could actually find offensive material worth banning in every speech that was or is going to be read.

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 04:09 PM

Originally posted by Annee

NO - I am NOT Joking.

Religion belongs at home or in your church. It does not belong in Government or any public School.

UCLA is a public school.

I read somewhere that the US of A was One Nation under God, with LIBERTY and justice for all.

Can't recall where I read that however, must have been in a church or at home sometime...

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 05:05 PM
Its surprising that of the few of the replys ive seen here in the first 2 pages that quite a number of people are arguing seperation of church and state. This is not matter of the State or the Church why on the one hand the UCLA gets funding tax payer or private that doesnt matter if it was state or church currency.

What this case is about is simply one of the biggest violations of freedom of speech ive seen in many years next to that attempt to create a bible permit recently.

You could argue that if a church funded publicy or privately this university they would have some say if not all say in what could be and could not be in there school especially if there the ones paying for it.

This isnt really a issue over money either this is censorship at its core and I dont care how you try to justify it or say that its acceptable on any level its not. First this women gets censored/prohibited next its one of us or someone else that's not here that does not yet know this news story has taken place.

The national news media had better be making this news story its top priority also because guess what CBS, NBC, FOX, CNN, ABC exc exc exc your next. You think im wrong on this I could site example after example of how many reporters have gotten either fired or lost there jobs for covering some news story that didnt fit all the news that's fit to print and still ended up making some of the biggest news stories as a result of it.

First its this women then its a small city or town doing the same thing then its a large company then a large city then it goes to a national law that prohibits us all from doing something that's perfactly legal and lawful we have now thrown up a wall against.

Censorship is Censorship a Police State is a Police State. But this is not a spade that's a spade what we are dealing with here in this story is malice and fourthought on the behalf of the UCLA to delberatly stop and prohibit freedom of expression / freedom of speech. This is not just a case that should only be prosecuted by the State against the UCLA for violations of the First and 14th Amendment.

This case may very well be more groundbreaking then the rosa parks case on civil rights viloations. There was no broken law on the behalf of the women in this case and yet the UCLA felt it was within some bestowed authority to attempt to lisense this womens freedom of speach.

I know the 14th amendment and the 1st amendment very well I dont need to quote it here. If the news media as a whole the major networks will not cover this case then you people in those positions need to lose your jobs simply for the fact its going to be you next if you dont support this women as being the new larry fint.

Larry as publishing a unpopular by some publication still has the right to do it, he went to jail and got shot and now spends his life in a wheel chair for all of you to have the right to speak your minds in places like this.

Every Military personal that fought in a overseas war that was a real war not a contracted one like the two ones we have now went to war over everyone in the united states of america's right to more then just freedom of speach.

And to belittle that and or belittle anyone who has been willing to go to jail or more on cases like this belittles your rights you have to even respond to this posting and anothers like it on ats and else where.

The idea and or notion that it is so called "good" that this happened anywhere in this country or anywhere else goes to show the real state of this society and how far we have really fallen as a nation if we turn a blind eye to a issue this large that effects us all.

For those who wish to contradict this message or anyone else who stays its my right to say it was the UCLA's right to censor this women yes you have that right today. You keep up that idealism and you wont have it anymore.

Thats my 2 cents for now on this matter.


posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 06:19 PM
Falcon, thanks for your wisdom, (What Theory); You totally are killing it(way too funny!) I am still laughing!

Every day is, like, How can they top yesterdays stupidity!?!!! It just gets worse and worse. Now we have to read the Pragda(spell?) Russian news media to get uncensored news and to the BBC to find out what is happening here. Chavez and Castro are concerned about Barry showing them up since, as they said, Barry is farther left!? Not making it up!

Multicultural? Just Stop!!! We are Americans First!, if you are even legal.

So, In God We Trust, money should be censored and banned an so on and so on. This is exactly like many SOUTH PARK Episodes!

This is Why it is called by many, THE LATE GREAT USA.

I am now going to polish my guns and watch a hockey game in my fear cage, or room insulated with Aluminum Foil!

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 06:34 PM

Originally posted by badw0lf

I read somewhere that the US of A was One Nation under God, with LIBERTY and justice for all.

Can't recall where I read that however, must have been in a church or at home sometime...

History of the Pledge of Allegiance - - written by Francis Bellamy - a socialist. In 1923 and 1924 the National Flag Conference, under the 'leadership of the American Legion and the Daughters of the American Revolution, changed the Pledge's words, 'my Flag,' to 'the Flag of the United States of America.' Bellamy disliked this change, but his protest was ignored. In 1954, Congress after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus, added the words, 'under God,' to the Pledge. The Pledge was now both a patriotic oath and a public prayer.

Bellamy's granddaughter said he also would have resented this second change.

E Pluribus Unum: E Pluribus Unum describes an action: Many uniting into one. An accurate translation of the motto is "Out of many, one" – a phrase that elegantly captures the symbolism on the shield.

E Pluribus Unum was replaced on our money by - "In God We Trust".

Congress undermined American unity in 1954 when it added "Under God" to our Pledge of Allegiance and again in 1956 when it replaced our 175 year old national motto, E Pluribus Unum ("Out Of Many, One"), with "In God We Trust", thus demoting to an implied outsider status the agnostics, atheists, deists, polytheists and other citizens who do not ascribe to this theology. Ideological contention is a necessary and desired result of the freedoms that are the real source of our unity and strength. These laws, by claiming that our unity rests on disregarding the reality of such sincere individual disagreement, are self-defeating.

[edit on 6-6-2009 by Annee]

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in