|
11/26/02
|
||
| Not exactly O'Reilly, but could be. John Kasich sat in for O'Reilly, but did not fail to bring stupidity to the small screen. | ||
|---|---|---|
| Where does Fox go to hire all those bozos? (Words in italic are my comments) On 26 November 2002 John Kasich sat in for the O'Reilly dude, who was probably on his way to look me up to get even. It may be hard to believe, but Kasich makes even dumber statements than O'Reilly. In a discussion with Robert Boston who is Assistant Director for Communications at 'Americans United for the Separation of Church and State'. Not a simple title for an intelligent, knowledgeable astute man who was not about to be bamboozled by a more bombastic Kasich. The subject was a pending Supreme Court case wherein 2 Columbine parents wanted to put up decorative tiles containing religious symbols and words in the hallway of the school memorializing their sons who died there in 1999.The school claims that the tiles violate the separation of church and state. Kasich: How could any one, including you, object to any mother wanting to put up a tile memorializing her slain son? Boston: First of all, let's get the facts straight. These tiles were never meant to be a memorial. The school said that from the beginning. They said they would never accept tiles that contain names of victims who were killed that day. K interrupts: ... let me step in right there. That's not true, because when they invited the community to put up the tiles, there were no rules. B: You need to read the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling [overtalk] K: I read the ... [overtalk] B: It was never designed to be a memorial. They said they would not allow references to the date of the shooting. They would not allow religious references, because they would not want to get into a sort-of competing religious warfare in the hallways. They were also not allowing plaques or tiles containing violent imagery. One was even kicked out because it was red, and some people thought that that may even be a symbol for blood. K interrupts: ... look, I don't care what the 10th Circuit said, what the school officials told the families are ... and the neighborhood, come in and put something up. Now look, now let me tell you about the 10th Circuit. That judge made a ruling that said if somebody is allowed to put a tile up that said that god is love, then that means somebody else is allowed to put up a tile that says god is hate. Have you ever heard of any such thing that lacks such common sense in your life, or do you agree with that judge? Mr. Kasich. Are you that ignorant? You don't care what the court said? You don't think what the judge stated made sense? See movie here >>>>> B: Very common-sensical. Every time you open up a forum to religious messages, you must also open up to non-religious messages ... K interrupts: Why? why? B: You don't want to get into that. K: Why? B: Because if it's truly an open forum, and it's truly free speech, we must allow all ??? of free speech, the school says .... more banter K: The District court agreed with the family. and I would hate to think that a guy as young as you who's on his way up would say that there are no bounds and no common sense when it comes to an issue like that. In other words, I don't think anybody that would object if somebody had a tile that said that god is hate we don't want to put that up, and for any judge to say that's a reason not to put any tile up, that's absurd, and I think it's ridiculous. More discussion K: I thought the Constitution said this: It's not the job of government to establish a religion. Nobody ever said in the Constitution that it was the job of the government to drive religion out of our basic institution..... B: Mr Kasich, this decision really has very little to do with separation of church and state. If you read it, you'll find that it's barely even discussed. It's a 'Free Speech case'...... Mr. Kasich..... you are truly a moron. I may want to stop by some Saturday to see if your show 'From the Heartland' is as stupid as you appear to be here. |
||