News Discrimination in Texas Constitution?

[chemisttree]

Fair enough. That is one aspect of your government that I wasn't familiar with. Here in Canada, we originally had the Articles of Confederation, which united everyone under English law as a side-effect of forming a nation from a bunch of different areas. Now, we have our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is our equivalent of your constitution. No law can supersede that, although some have tried. Laws are passed on every level from municipal to federal, but if anyone of them is in violation of the Charter it's toast.

No it isn't. The Charter provides a "Nonwithstanding Clause" that actually provides a mechanism for a state's law to supercede that of the Federal.

 

[jtbell]

But even in Florida stores are prohibited from selling spirits until 12 noon on Sundays -- a most inconvenient law which I think has something to do with the Christian religion.

Per the SCOTUS - 'days of rest' (regarding Blue Laws, like TT has described) have a secular value to them.

The regulation of alcohol in the US has a long and mixed history which has both religious and public-health (the "secular value") motivations, with results that vary wildly from one state to another. Here in South Carolina, for example, state law provides for a general ban on sales of alcohol on Sunday, except that counties can authorize Sunday sales by the drink in restaurants, and maybe wine and beer in supermarkets etc. (I'm not sure about the latter because I live in a county which has no alcohol sales on Sunday; my wife and I often visit one of the nearby "big cities" on Sunday, where we've observed the availability of alcohol in restaurants, but we don't shop for groceries on those trips.) And until a few years ago, state-licensed liquor stores, which are still closed on Sunday everywhere in the state, had to close no later than sundown on days that they were open, which led to varying closing hours at different times of year. They still can't stay open late in the evening, but they do have more uniform hours now.

 

[ThinkToday]

The regulation of alcohol in the US has a long and mixed history which has both religious and public-health (the "secular value") motivations, with results that vary wildly from one state to another. Here in South Carolina, for example, state law provides for a general ban on sales of alcohol on Sunday, except that counties can authorize Sunday sales by the drink in restaurants, and maybe wine and beer in supermarkets etc. (I'm not sure about the latter because I live in a county which has no alcohol sales on Sunday; my wife and I often visit one of the nearby "big cities" on Sunday, where we've observed the availability of alcohol in restaurants, but we don't shop for groceries on those trips.) And until a few years ago, state-licensed liquor stores, which are still closed on Sunday everywhere in the state, had to close no later than sundown on days that they were open, which led to varying closing hours at different times of year. They still can't stay open late in the evening, but they do have more uniform hours now.

I would go to Myrtle Beach golfing every spring. I remember the laws that blocked full nude bars, which were blocked by the bars alcohol license. One "bar" wised up and supplied only mixers with their all nude "service" They couldn't be regulated by the same board, since they didn't sell alcohol. haha

 

[Danger]

No it isn't. The Charter provides a "Nonwithstanding Clause" that actually provides a mechanism for a state's law to supercede that of the Federal.

This might be just a matter of interpretation. As I see it, using the "Notwithstanding Clause" to supersede a section is not a violation of the Charter because the Clause itself is a part of the Charter. And we have provinces and territories, not states.

 

[chemisttree]

So your statement,

...No law can supersede that, although some have tried. Laws are passed on every level from municipal to federal, but if anyone of them is in violation of the Charter it's toast.

means that if a territorial law is written with language that identifies it as being subject to the Notwithstanding Clause, it supercedes federal law even though the Judiciary has determined that it is an unconstitutional violation of the Charter? Thanks for clearing that up!

 

[Danger]

"They", the Texas legislators, are not guilty of these travesties. That's the Texas State Board of Education you are talking about, not the legislature.

Yeah, I figured that it was a fair comparison, though, because they're similar types of people in similar positions of public responsibility.

if a territorial law is written with language that identifies it as being subject to the Notwithstanding Clause, it supercedes federal law even though the Judiciary has determined that it is an unconstitutional violation of the Charter?

Not quite. It's the Clause that supersedes another part of the Charter, not the new law itself.

 

[chemisttree]

...Aren't they teaching in Texas that the Civil War was about "states' rights?"

Yes they are but they also teach that the war was largely about slavery.

While it technically was, it was primarily about slavery, and I don't think that's referenced once in the books.

Absolutely false. Where did you get this idea?

The Civil War is taught in 7th (from a Texas History standpoint) and 8th grade (from an American History standpoint).

All textbooks in Texas that teach Texas History (7th Grade) must include the following "Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills" (TEKS):

(5) History. The student understands how events and issues shaped the history of Texas during the Civil War and Reconstruction. The student is expected to:

(A) explain reasons for the involvement of Texas in the Civil War such as states' rights, slavery, sectionalism, and tariffs;

(B) analyze the political, economic, and social effects of the Civil War and Reconstruction in Texas; and

(C) identify significant individuals and events concerning Texas and the Civil War such as John Bell Hood, John Reagan, Francis Lubbock, Thomas Green, John Magruder and the Battle of Galveston, the Battle of Sabine Pass, and the Battle of Palmito Ranch.

All textbooks in Texas that teach American History (8th Grade) must include the following TEKS:

(7) History. The student understands how political, economic, and social factors led to the growth of sectionalism and the Civil War. The student is expected to:

(A) analyze the impact of tariff policies on sections of the United States before the Civil War;

(B) compare the effects of political, economic, and social factors on slaves and free blacks;

(C) analyze the impact of slavery on different sections of the United States; and

(D) identify the provisions and compare the effects of congressional conflicts and compromises prior to the Civil War, including the roles of John Quincy Adams, John C. Calhoun, Henry Clay, and Daniel Webster.

(8) History. The student understands individuals, issues, and events of the Civil War. The student is expected to:

(A) explain the roles played by significant individuals during the Civil War, including Jefferson Davis, Ulysses S. Grant, Robert E. Lee, and Abraham Lincoln, and heroes such as congressional Medal of Honor recipients William Carney and Philip Bazaar;

(B) explain the causes of the Civil War, including sectionalism, states' rights, and slavery, and significant events of the Civil War, including the firing on Fort Sumter; the battles of Antietam, Gettysburg, and Vicksburg; the announcement of the Emancipation Proclamation; Lee's surrender at Appomattox Court House; and the assassination of Abraham Lincoln; and

(C) analyze Abraham Lincoln's ideas about liberty, equality, union, and government as contained in his first and second inaugural addresses and the Gettysburg Address and contrast them with the ideas contained in Jefferson Davis's inaugural address.

You can see for yourself one School District's textbook list http://georgetownisd.org/ccorner/socstudies/documents/Gr6-8_SS_Annotated_Bibliography_000.pdf (pg 19-20) I defy you to find even one of those books that doesn't mention slavery as a significant cause of the Civil War.

Number one on the list:
Burchard, Peter. LINCOLN AND SLAVERY. Atheneum, 1999.
ISBN 0-689-81570-0.
Readers are provided with a rich understanding of the preeminence of slavery as a political and moral issue in 19th century America.

 

[mege]

Saying that 'the civil war is about slavery' mean different things: the US Civil War wasn't about 'freeing the slaves,' it was prominently about the institution of slavery and the regulation of various types of commerce in the context of states rights. Even us yanks learn that; I don't think that Texas is anything special in that regard.

Either concept is a far concept from the civil war being taught as 'the war of northern aggression' etc.

 

[nitsuj]

A cartoon clip I saw of the civil war said it was about labour.

That being said, The bullet points from chemisttree seem to sum it up well.


states' rights,
slavery,
sectionalism,
and tariffs

i.e. fightin' the gov'ment.