Podcasts about Schempp

This Day in Legal History: Abington School District v. SchemppOn this day in legal history, June 17, 1963, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Abington School District v. Schempp, a landmark case concerning the constitutional boundaries between church and state. The case arose when Edward Schempp, a Unitarian from Pennsylvania, challenged a state law that required public schools to begin each day with Bible readings. The Schempp family argued that this practice violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from endorsing or establishing religion.In an 8–1 decision, the Court ruled in favor of the Schempps, holding that the mandatory Bible readings were unconstitutional. Justice Tom C. Clark, writing for the majority, emphasized that while the government must remain neutral toward religion, the school's policy amounted to state-sanctioned religious exercise. The ruling did not ban the Bible from public schools altogether but clarified that its use must be educational, not devotional.This decision built on the precedent set in Engel v. Vitale (1962), which struck down mandatory prayer in schools, and it reinforced a broader interpretation of the separation of church and state. The ruling provoked strong reactions across the country, with many viewing it as an attack on traditional religious values, while others saw it as a vital protection of individual liberties in a pluralistic society.The case remains a cornerstone in Establishment Clause jurisprudence, shaping debates over religion in public education for decades. It also marked a pivotal moment in the Warren Court's broader effort to expand civil liberties through constitutional interpretation.The American Bar Association (ABA) has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, accusing it of using executive orders to intimidate major law firms based on their past clients and hiring choices. Filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., the lawsuit argues that these actions violate the U.S. Constitution and have created a chilling effect on the legal profession. The ABA claims Trump's actions hindered its ability to secure legal representation, especially in cases opposing the federal government.The suit comes after four law firms successfully challenged similar executive orders, with judges temporarily or permanently blocking enforcement. One of these firms, Susman Godfrey, is now representing the ABA in this new case. Despite court setbacks, nine firms have agreed to provide nearly $1 billion in free legal services to the Trump administration to avoid similar targeting.White House spokesperson Harrison Fields dismissed the ABA's lawsuit as “frivolous,” asserting presidential authority over security clearances and federal contracting. The ABA also alleges the administration has threatened its accreditation authority and slashed funding, particularly in areas like training legal advocates for domestic violence victims.American Bar Association sues to block Trump's attacks on law firms | ReutersThe U.S. Department of Justice is undergoing a significant restructuring under the Trump administration, marked by mass resignations, staff reductions, and departmental overhauls. Approximately 4,500 DOJ employees have accepted buyouts through the administration's deferred resignation program, known as “Fork in the Road,” which allows for paid leave through September before official departure. These exits, along with planned eliminations of 5,093 positions, are expected to save around $470 million and reduce the DOJ's workforce from roughly 110,000.The administration's proposed budget for the next fiscal year aims to reshape the DOJ in line with conservative priorities. This includes dismantling the tax division—once staffed by over 500 people—and distributing its enforcement functions across the civil and criminal divisions. Despite some added funding to these divisions, they are also set to reduce attorney headcounts. The move has drawn backlash from former DOJ and IRS officials, who warned it could undermine tax enforcement. The DOJ's top tax official resigned earlier this year in protest.Political leadership changes have also prompted an exodus from the civil rights division, where two-thirds of career attorneys have either resigned or been reassigned. Cuts are also planned for the Environment and Natural Resources Division and other oversight bodies, such as the DOJ Inspector General's office and the Community Relations Service.Other structural shifts include folding INTERPOL's U.S. office into the U.S. Marshals Service, closing multiple field offices, and launching a new firearm rights restoration initiative. The administration has also proposed merging the ATF with the DEA and cutting the FBI's budget by over half a billion dollars.Justice Department to Lose 4,500 Staffers to Buyout Offers (1)Justice Department to Eliminate Tax Unit as Workforce ShrinksThe NCAA's $2.8 billion settlement—approved earlier this month—has reignited momentum in Congress for national legislation to address key issues in college athletics, particularly around antitrust liability, name, image, and likeness (NIL) compensation, and student-athlete classification. Beginning July 1, colleges can directly pay athletes, marking a historic shift that has intensified calls for a federal framework to standardize these changes.The settlement, which also includes back pay for nearly 400,000 athletes, has been described as a stabilizing force in the chaotic NIL landscape. It is now being used by the NCAA to push Congress for a liability shield to prevent further antitrust lawsuits. Although several NIL reform bills have been proposed in the past, none have passed. Two current bills—the bipartisan SPORTS Act and the GOP-led SCORE Act—aim to balance athlete rights with regulatory uniformity while clarifying that student-athletes are not employees.The SCORE Act would create revenue-based limits on athlete pay and involve multiple House committees, while the SPORTS Act focuses on educational support and fair market value benchmarks for NIL deals. Both would preempt state laws and address core NCAA concerns.Despite the settlement, legal uncertainty remains. Female athletes have already filed appeals challenging the deal under Title IX, and further litigation is expected. Experts note that any legislation granting an antitrust exemption—similar to the unique one held by Major League Baseball—would face judicial skepticism and political resistance.NCAA's $2.8 Billion Settlement Gets Congress Moving Toward FixesIn my column this week I write a bit about how a tax amnesty program in Illinois might provide a roadmap for the rest of the nifty fifty. Illinois' new remote seller amnesty program offers a strategic and replicable model for encouraging tax compliance among previously noncompliant businesses. By waiving penalties and interest and applying a simplified, flat 9% tax rate across the state's many local jurisdictions, the program lowers the barriers to voluntary disclosure. This approach addresses the core problem of the “compliance paradox,” where businesses avoid coming clean for fear of triggering audits. In contrast to fear-based enforcement, Illinois' model promotes intelligence-based compliance, exchanging amnesty for valuable insights into evasion tactics and tools.The program's design could be adapted to brick-and-mortar businesses engaged in sales suppression through tools like zapper software. If these businesses were offered amnesty in return for disclosing how they evaded taxes—such as revealing the software they used and methods employed—states could use this intelligence to improve enforcement. Such disclosures would turn voluntary compliance into a form of strategic reconnaissance, identifying enforcement blind spots and bad actors.Illinois' policy doesn't just recoup lost revenue; it also creates opportunities to map the ecosystem of tax evasion tools and techniques. By incentivizing transparency and simplifying compliance, the initiative provides a blueprint for other states facing fiscal pressure and looking to modernize tax enforcement.Illinois Remote Seller Amnesty Program Offers Roadmap for States This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Sie sind Deutschlands Biathlon-Traumpaar: Gesamtweltcup-Siegerin Franziska Preuß & Vierfach-Weltmeister Simon Schempp. Er im Ruhestand, sie gerade auf dem sportlichen Höhepunkt ihrer Karriere. Im Gespräch mit Felix & Philipp geben die beiden viele private Einblicke in ihr Leben als Sportlerpaar: Sie erzählen von Nächten in getrennten Betten, blicken auf das emotionale Saisonfinale in Oslo zurück und verraten, wie Sportler in einer Beziehung gegenseitig voneinander profitieren.

Bill introduced to require Bible reading in all public schools, sparking constitutional questions - NewsBreakNewsBreak, By LAURA GUIDO, on February 7, 2025https://www.newsbreak.com/share/3794686379971-bill-introduced-to-require-bible-reading-in-all-public-schools-sparking-constitutional-questionsIdaho lawmakers are considering a bill that would require daily Bible readings in public schools, specifically from the King James Version (KJV) or New King James Version (NKJV). Introduced by Representative Jordan Redman and backed by the Idaho Family Policy Center, the legislation mandates that an occupied classroom in every school district read the Bible sequentially each morning, completing the entire book over ten years. The bill's proponents argue that this has historical merit, as Bible readings were common in public schools before the 1960s. However, opponents point out that such a law would be a clear violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, which prohibits government endorsement of religion. Critics argue that this initiative is not just unconstitutional but also fundamentally ineffective in fostering faith, as passive, mandatory exposure to scripture without discussion or interpretation is unlikely to inspire genuine belief. The comparison is made to literature classes—no teacher would require students to read To Kill a Mockingbird without analysis or engagement. The plan, which dictates a rigid reading schedule, would subject students to some of the Bible's more controversial and inappropriate content, such as violent passages or sexually explicit themes, raising concerns about age appropriateness and teacher preparedness. Some skeptics suggest that the plan could backfire, as forcing students to sit through lengthy, archaic passages from the KJV—a version known for its difficult language—may bore them into disinterest. There is also the issue of Christian exclusivity, as the law would not require readings from other religious or philosophical texts, effectively promoting one religious tradition in a public education setting. Even within Christianity, the KJV is not universally accepted, with many denominations—including Catholics—not considering it a primary translation. The bill's opt-out clause, which requires parental permission, is also controversial. Critics argue that default participation assumes that Christianity is the norm and that non-Christian students must actively excuse themselves, which could ostracize them. Furthermore, precedent from cases like Abington School District v. Schempp has already determined that mandatory Bible readings in public schools are unconstitutional, reinforcing the argument that this legislation would not stand up to legal scrutiny. There is broader concern that this is part of a larger effort to push Christian nationalism, using historical precedent as justification. However, as critics point out, historical precedent does not inherently validate a practice—slavery, segregation, and other outdated societal norms were once common but are now rightfully condemned. The push to integrate religious teachings into public institutions appears to be less about historical tradition and more about maintaining ideological control in an increasingly secular society. Ultimately, this bill is viewed by opponents as a blatant attempt to erode the separation of church and state, forcing religious doctrine into public education under the guise of tradition. Supporters claim it is a benign acknowledgment of America's Christian heritage, but the reality is that it privileges one religious group at the expense of everyone else. With significant legal hurdles and widespread opposition, this legislation is likely to face strong challenges, both in the courtroom and in public discourse.The Non-Prophets, Episode 24.7.3 featuring Scott Dickie, Stephen Harder, Helen Greene and The Ejector SeatBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-non-prophets--3254964/support.

Give to help Chris make the Truce Podcast In 1955, the Board of Regents for New York issued an optional prayer to be used in public schools. It became known as the "Regent's Prayer". Here it is: "“Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our Country.” That short prayer was contested not only by non-religious people but also by Protestants who thought that it was too vague. What God is it talking about? Where is the mention of Jesus or the Holy Spirit, salvation, sin, grace, etc.? With help from the ACLU, parents sued and the case made it all the way to the US Supreme Court. It was known as Engle v. Vitale. It overturned prescribed prayer in schools. In this episode, Chris goes through the arguments the court and Justice Hugo Black made during this landmark decision. A year later, the Court heard Abington School District v. Schempp, which ended prescribed Bible reading in public schools. This season we're covering how American evangelicals bonded themselves with the Republican Party. There are a lot of reasons that evangelicals started to vote as a block in the late 70s and early 1980s. They range from women's liberation, changes in attitude toward taxation, and battles over gay and lesbian rights, to education. This is part of our coverage of the education section. This episode has been rewritten and recorded, updating an episode from season 3. Sources: "One Nation Under God" by Kevin Kruse Transcript of Abington School District v Schempp Census data about public and private schools Transcript and audio of Engel v Vitale Discussion Questions: Did you ever pray in school? What did you pray? Did you ever read the Bible in school? Is there an "ideal" prayer that should be read in schools? If so, what is it? What objections might parents have? Is it important for school children to learn about religions in school? Do you agree or disagree with Justice Hugo Black? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In today's Rocket Docket episode, our host, The Cross Examiner, addresses a concerning new development: Louisiana's mandate to display the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom. This controversial decision, signed into law by the governor, has sparked a heated debate about its constitutionality.Our host delves into the history of the First Amendment, examining key cases such as Reynolds v. United States, Abington School District v. Schempp, and the landmark Stone v. Graham decision, which directly parallels the current situation in Louisiana. He also discusses the significant impact of the "McConnell Court" and the troubling rise of Christian nationalism.Is Louisiana's new law a violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause? Will the Supreme Court uphold or overturn this mandate? Tune in as The Cross Examiner provides a comprehensive analysis, equipping you with the facts and arguments you need to understand this critical issue.Don't miss this episode filled with historical insights, legal analysis, and passionate advocacy for the separation of church and state.Thanks for listening to this episode of the Cross Examiner Rocket Docket. If you enjoyed this podcast, please consider liking and subscribing. We'll see you soon.

As the weather heats up, so does the pace of Supreme Court decisions. On our season 5 finale of Respecting Religion, Amanda and Holly recap some recent decisions and discuss what we can expect in the next month. Religion is still at play in several cases, even if religious legal statutes aren't the questions being considered. Plus, they look at some recent statements from Supreme Court justices during extracurricular activities and share what those reveal about the justices themselves and the work at the Court, including a rare – and surprising – statement one justice gave directly to the media.    SHOW NOTES Segment 1 (starting at 00:51): Recent Supreme Court actions Amanda and Holly discussed the two Supreme Court cases dealing with abortion rights in episode 28 of this season: Conscience protections in SCOTUS abortion cases Click here to read the Washington Post article tracking big cases this Supreme Court term. The case upholding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is called Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America, Limited. Amanda and Holly mentioned two articles about it: Amy Howe's piece for SCOTUSblog: Supreme Court lets CFPB funding stand Steve Vladeck's piece for One First: How to describe *this* Court The Louisiana voting map decision comes from the consolidated cases of Robinson v. Callais and Landry v. Callais.  Read Amy Howe's coverage for SCOTUSblog: Court allows Louisiana to move forward with two majority-Black districts Read Steve Vladeck's piece for One First: Louisiana's Congressional Map Comes Back to the Court   Segment 2 (starting at 09:07): Justices on the stump: Shocking statements and unlikely pairings Amanda and Holly mentioned recent reporting on appearances by justices of the Supreme Court. The articles they  referred to are: Justice Kavanaugh on the Presidency, the Court and Taylor Swift by Adam Liptak for The New York Times Justice Thomas Denounces ‘the Nastiness and the Lies' Faced by His Family by Abbie VanSickle for The New York Times Justice Alito Warns of Threats to Freedom of Speech and Religion by Adam Liptak for The New York Times The Supreme Court seems bitterly divided. Two justices say otherwise. by Ann E. Marimow for The Washington Post According to reports discussed in this show, Justice Kavanaugh mentioned that the school prayer cases are settled law. School District of Abington Township v. Schempp (1963) and Engel v. Vitale (1962) are commonly called the “school prayer cases,” with the decisions in those cases finding government-sponsored religious exercises unconstitutional in public schools, providing protection for the religious liberty rights of all students. Learn more in this 2013 piece by Holly Hollman.  Amanda and Holly discussed this New York Times story by Jodi Kantor that the American flag outside of Justice Samuel Alito's home was flown upside down in the days before the inauguration of President Joe Biden. After we recorded this episode, new reporting revealed Justice Alito's summer house displayed the “Appeal to Heaven” flag in 2023. Read more in this New York Times story by Jodi Kantor, Aric Toler, and Julie Tate: Another Provocative Flag Was Flown at Another Alito Home To watch the iCivics event featuring Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, visit this C-SPAN link.   Segment 3 (starting 26:58): A reading recommendation Amanda's book is called How to End Christian Nationalism, and it will be released October 22 from Broadleaf Books. Click here for links to pre-order the book. Learn more about the work of the Christians Against Christian Nationalism campaign by visiting the website. Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC.

Education Headline RoundupThis week's headline roundup brings an update to the evolving story of U.S. colleges & universities rescinding test-optional admissions policies. Yale, MIT, and Georgetown have joined Dartmouth in reinstating a requirement that students submit test scores with their college applications. Students at Dartmouth attended a tense office hours session on Feb. 5 with university administrators to voice concerns with the College's reinstatement of mandatory test score submission, arguing that it will result in a less diverse applicant pool. In other Dartmouth news from last week, the college also just settled in class-action suit involving 17 elite universities that alleged they engaged in an anti-competitive tuition price-fixing scheme that may have disadvantaged certain applicants due to their financial status.The Chicago Board of Education has voted unanimously to remove school resource officers from Chicago Public Schools by the start of next academic year. This decision followed years of debate and advocacy, driven by several key factors, including concerns about disproportionate policing impact on minority students and the efficacy of SRO programs in preventing safety incidents. Advocates proposed investing in social workers, counselors, and restorative justice programs as more effective and equitable approaches to address safety concerns.Harvard University is forming a working group to explore formalizing a policy of “institutional neutrality” following recent controversies involving pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli student demonstrations that ultimately led to the resignation of Harvard president Claudine Gay.Landmark Supreme Court Cases That Changed U.S. Education: Part IJoin us as we embark on a two-part series exploring landmark Supreme Court cases that have profoundly impacted the landscape of education in the United States. This week's episode includes discussions of the following cases:Brown v. Board of Education (1954): Challenging racial segregation in public schools.Engel v. Vitale (1962) & Abington School District v. Schempp (1963): Establishing the separation of church and state in public education.Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969): Defining students' First Amendment rights to symbolic expression.San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973): Addressing disparities in school funding across districts.Lau v. Nichols (1974): Ensuring equal educational opportunity for students with limited English proficiency.Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978): Addressing the use of affirmative action in college admissions.Board of Education v. Rowley (1982): Establishing the standard for providing education to students with disabilities.Stay tuned for Part II!Sources & Resources:Yale University Joins Dartmouth, MIT, and Georgetown in Requiring Applicants to Submit Standardized Test Scores; Kaplan Survey Suggests Other Schools Will Join ThemChicago Board of Education votes to remove police officers from schools.Chicago Board of Education unanimously votes to remove school resource officers from CPSStudents voice complaints about testing requirement reinstatement during ‘tense' office hours - The DartmouthClass-action lawsuit accuses 17 elite universities of running 'price-fixing cartel'‘This Has to Stop': Harvard Set to Consider Institutional Neutrality | NewsBrown v. Board of Education (1954) | National ArchivesPlessy v. Ferguson (1896) | National ArchivesFacts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale | United States Courtshttps://books.google.com/books?id=Qc5Ove6xYf8C&pg=PA16#v=onepage&q&f=falseAbington School District v. Schempp :: 374 U.S. 203 (1963)First Amendment and Religion | United States CourtsSchool District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania v. Schempp (1963) | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information InstituteSchool District of Abington Township v. Schempp | First Amendment & Education | BritannicaThe Schempp-Murray Decision On School Prayers and Bible ReadingTinker v. Des Moines School Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969).Tinker v. Des Moines | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information InstituteThe Young Anti-War Activists Who Fought for Free Speech at School | History| Smithsonian MagazineMcCreary County v. American Civil Liberties UnionMcCreary County v. ACLUSafford Unified School District v. Redding | OyezEspinoza v. Montana Dept. of Revenue | Constitution CenterStudents for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College | Definition, Questions, Grutter v. Bollinger, Affirmative Action, & Decision | BritannicaStudents for Fair Admissions v. Harvard FAQ: Navigating the Evolving Implications of the Court's Ruling - Stanford Center for Racial JusticeKennedy v. Bremerton School District | OyezSupreme Court Sides With Coach Over Prayers at the 50-Yard Line - The New York TimesSupreme Court school prayer ruling in Lee v. Weisman and family's quest - The Washington PostBoard of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley | BritannicaRegents of the University of California v. Bakke | OyezRegents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information InstituteLau v. Nichols | OyezSan Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez | Oyez1973: San Antonio ISD v. Rodriguez - A Latinx Resource Guide: Civil Rights Cases and Events in the United StatesThe Worst Supreme Court Decisions Since 1960 | TIME

Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). New National Geographic Documentary Fails to Tell the True Story of John Allen Chau: The Voice of the Martyrs' Todd Nettleton.Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and encourage its recitation in public schools, due to violation of the First Amendment. The ruling has been the subject of intense debate.Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963) School-sponsored Bible reading before class is unconstitutional. Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000)Students may not use a school's loudspeaker system to offer student-led, student-initiated prayer.Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that invalidated an Arkansas statute prohibiting the teaching of human evolution in the public schools.[1] The Court held that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits a state from requiring, in the words of the majority opinion, "that teaching and learning must be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any religious sect or dogma." The Supreme Court declared the Arkansas statute unconstitutional because it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. After this decision, some jurisdictions passed laws that required the teaching of creation science alongside evolution when evolution was taught. These were also ruled unconstitutional by the Court in the 1987 case Edwards v. Aguillard.Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning the constitutionality of teaching creationism. The Court considered a Louisiana law requiring that where evolutionary science was taught in public schools, creation science must also be taught. The constitutionality of the law was successfully challenged in District Court, Aguillard v. Treen, 634 F. Supp. 426 (ED La.1985), and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed, Aguillard v. Edwards, 765 F.2d 1251 (CA5 1985). The United States Supreme Court ruled that this law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because the law was specifically intended to advance a particular religion. In its decision, the court opined that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction."

Today I'm bringing on a colleague and friend, Drew Schempp. Drew and I have both been in the CrossFit space for some time, but we didn't cross paths until more recently when we started coaching at a strength and conditioning gym here in California called Performance360. As two people who have both had experience with fitness for much of our lives and have also had extensive careers within the fitness realm, we have a lot of insights on training through the ages. In this episode we talk about the mistakes we made when we were young, how our approach to fitness has changed as we moved into our 30s, and lessons we've learned from the people we've trained who are 60 and over. There are definitely quite a few nuggets within this episode that will be so valuable to you if you're looking to take a train for life approach to your health and fitness and I hope you enjoy. Let's dive in. Connect with Coach Diana Instagram, Threads, TikTok @coachdianaleigh

Dr. Paul Schempp is a behavioral scientist and professor at the University of Georgia where he studies decision making. Through his vigorous research, he's uncovered how to make better decisions consistently and how to avoid bad decisions. Today, he's sharing: How great decision makers use data to predict their future environment One skill that separates great decision makers from those who are mediocre How to make good decisions in the midst of uncertainty The neuroscience behind high-pressure decisions Why it's important to think through contingency plans How the Dunning-Kruger Effect impacts decision making And more… Dr. Schempp will be joining us as a keynote speaker at this year's Champions of Dentistry Summit in New Orleans. At the conference, he'll be sharing the science behind the most impactful dental practice decisions.  We can't wait for his session and we're honored to share the stage with him this year. If you haven't yet, you can get your tickets to the 2024 Summit here: http://championsofdentistry.com/

In dieser Folge hat Prof. Bonnet seinen neuen Kollegen vom Institut für Werkstoffanwendung Prof. Philipp Schempp zu Gast, der dort an der TH Köln seit Juli 2023 als Professor für Werkstoffanwendung berufen ist. Der studierte Maschinenbauingenieur promovierte an der Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung (BAM) in Berlin zum Schweißen und Gießen von Aluminiumlegierungen bevor er 10 Jahre lang als Werkstoff- und Korrosionsingenieur bei der Shell. So liegt der Fokus dieser Folge auf dem Werkstoffingenieur und der Fragestellung, wie es einem als Werkstoffingenieur in der chemischen Industrie ergeht. Hierbei geht es natürlich hauptsächlich um die Themen, mit denen man sich als Werkstoffingenieur auseinandersetzen muss. Klar wird, wie häufig die Arbeit auch einer Detektivarbeit ähnelt, wenn es darum geht herauszufinden, wie es zu einer Material- oder Bauteilschädigung kommen konnte. Genauso spannend ist natürlich die Frage, wie man Schädigungen verhindern kann und wie man sich hierzu heutzutage mehr und mehr auch Big Data und künstliche Intelligenz zu nutze macht. Wer sich also fragt, ob er sich vielleicht in Richtung Werkstoffingenieur spezialisieren sollte oder als Werkstoffingenieur in die Industrie zu gehen, für den ist die neue Folge von "Welt der Werkstoffe - talk" genau richtig. Jedenfalls wünschen wir viel Freude mit dieser Folge.

You will love this 2015 interview with Ellery Schempp. He was involved with the Supreme Court case Abington School district v. Schempp.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellery_SchemppInvesting Skeptically:Where to start with very little moneyA Florida Crypto ScamNew anti ESG law in MissouriThe value of re-balancing your portfolio

When GOD Was Expelled From School! Looking Back At Abington School District v. Schempp _--__- In this post I am expressing my 1st Amendment Right of #FreeSpeech JOIN www.FireAxe.Academy become a TRUE Election Integrity Expert! www.MakeWokeGoBroke.Click www.NeverEverBeef.CLUB – No Antibiotics, No Hormones – NEVER EVER! www.TacRightJovan.com https://jovanhuttonpulitzer.substack.com/ My Newsletter www.MyPillow.Com/Jovan (Promo Code: JOVAN) Get Super Savings Up to 60% Off www.JovanLovesGold.com Switch your IRA, 401k, Retirement Saving and get $10k in Silver if you Qualify www.JovanHuttonPulitzer.Locals.com JOIN ME HERE for Special EXCLUSIVE CONTENT Audio – Radio Program Archives – www.Soundcloud.com/JovanHuttonPulitzer Video – Program Archives – www.Rumble.com/JovanHuttonPuliter https://twitter.com/JovanHPulitzer https://gettr.com/user/jovanhpulitzer https://www.facebook.com/JovanHuttonPulitzer https://www.instagram.com/jovanhuttonpulitzer/ https://truthsocial.com/@JovanHuttonPulitzer https://mewe.com/i/jovanhuttonpulitzer https://gab.com/JovanHuttonPulitzer

IntroductionIf you ask the average American on the street what religious freedom is, you will get all sorts of different ideas. Some places, you will hear: “keep your religion to yourself. Haven't you heard of the separation of Church and State?” Others might answer: “People are free to believe whatever they want. Who am I to judge if they're right or not?” Still others might claim that religious freedom means the ability to pray privately however you want.None of these are what religious freedom actually is specifically. But it should also be noted that the American constitutional notion of religious freedom is not precisely what the Catholic Church holds religious freedom to be. And, so, the object of today's exploration is to look at what religious freedom is in the United States of America. Then, more importantly, to view what religious freedom is, in principle, as defined by the Catholic Church at the Second Vatican Council. Separation of Church and StateThe First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, the first of the ten amendments which comprise the Bill of Rights, adopted on December 15, 1791, reads thusly:“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”For our purposes we will focus on the first phrase: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” This is known as the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.I do not have the time or space here to provide an exhaustive account of American jurisprudence on the matter of religious liberty. But, I do want to draw out a few key moments in American History where this question came up and which will give us a clearer view of what religious freedom is.Thomas Jefferson's Danbury LetterIn a letter to the Danbury Baptists, Thomas Jefferson wrote:“GentlemenThe affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem (Danbury Letter).”He wrote this letter in response to a letter from the Danbury Baptists in order to explain his views on federalism and the meaning of the Establishment Clause. The main meaning of his “wall of separation between Church & State” is an assurance that the government would not interfere with the church of the Danbury Baptists or give special treatment to any particular religion or sect. Justice Hugo Black, an appointee of Franklin Roosevelt to the Supreme Court, would even refer later to the Danbury explanation as an “almost authoritative declaration” of the Founders' intent for the Establishment Clause (cf. Bill of Rights Institute).Two days after sending this letter, though, Jefferson attended a religious service in the House of Representatives location in the Capitol. As Daniel Roeber notes: “Jefferson and others recognized the benefits of developing a national identity that transcended interdenominational division (Roeber).” Yet, since 1795, public worship was administered at the partially completed Capitol Building each Sunday at noon (cf. ibid).Religious liberty was the motivation of the Plymouth Pilgrims and many Catholics who settled in Maryland. However, the colonial period was far from united on religious matters. Protestant sects disagreed amongst themselves. Catholics were seen as untrustworthy papists of low social stature. Jewish people were tolerated, at best. The nascent country needed an identity which transcended these divisions. The importance of developing a national identity was something that would take over a hundred years more as most identified most readily with their own state. Lemon V. Kurtzman and the Three Pronged Test (1971)Let us now skip forward quite a bit to 1971. In that year, a case was brought to the Supreme Court in which the Court considered whether a law in Pennsylvania violated the Establishment Clause. The law reimbursed religious schools with state funds for textbooks and salaries for teachers for non-public, non-secular schools. The Court responded 8-0 with a three-pronged test for determining whether a given statute is constitutional. The government may assist religion only if:* The primary purpose of the assistance is secular* The assistance must neither promote nor inhibit religion, and * There is no excessive entanglement between church and stateIn this specific case, the Pennsylvania law was struck down because of excessive entanglement between church and state. It is worth noticing here what is implicit: there is nothing wrong, in the American understanding, with some implicit entanglement between Church and State. The issue, ultimately, is when the line is crossed towards “excessive.”Marsh v. Chambers (1983)The Nebraska legislature opened each of its sessions with a publicly funded chaplain offering a prayer. The Supreme Court, in Marsh v. Chambers (1983) determined that this was NOT a violation of the Establishment Clause. Though this instance does not pass the “Lemon” three-pronged test, the Justices argued that there is a long historical custom going back to the Continental Congress and the very Congress that resulted in the Bill of Rights. In the majority opinion, Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote: “In light of the unambiguous and unbroken history of more than 200 years, there can be no doubt that the practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer has become part of the fabric of our society. To invoke Divine guidance on a public body entrusted with making the laws is not, in these circumstances, an ‘establishment' of religion or a step toward establishment; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country (Citation: 463 US 783).”As we saw with the Capitol Building services, there is not a strict and non-transversable wall of separation of Church and State. Other Supreme Court CasesI now want to walk through several other Supreme Court cases that touched on religious liberty. Again, this list is not exhaustive, but it can help us round out our picture.Reynolds v. United States (1879)In 1879, in Reynolds v. United States, the Court upheld a federal law banning polygamy. They claimed that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment forbids government from regulating belief but that government can nonetheless punish acts which it judges to be criminal, regardless of religious belief.Torcaso v. Watkins (1961)As of 1961, the State of Maryland had a requirement that a candidate for public office needed to declare that they believed in God in order to be eligible for the position. Unanimously, in Torcaso v. Watkins, the Court agreed that this gives preference to believers who were willing to publicly profess; therefore, Maryland was aiding theistic religions and beliefs overr atheistic ones.Engel v. Vitale (1962)In the 1962 case Engel v. Vitale, the Court ruled 6-1 that a New York prayer to begin the school day was unconstitutional and in violation of the Establishment Clause despite being a nondenominational prayer. Abington v. Schempp & Murray v. Curlett (1963)The following year in 1963, the Court heard the case of Abington v. Schempp and the related case of Murray v. Curlett. In both cases, public schools were involving students in daily Bible readings and in the latter case of the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer. Both of these cases were seen as violating both the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause.Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)In 1972, Amish parents sued the State of Wisconsin for requiring that their children attend school until the age of 16. The unanimous decision held that the Amish teens were exempt from the state law of requiring 14 to 16 year olds to attend school because the Amish religion required a living apart from worldly influences. In other words, though it was in the state's interest that the children receive two years more schooling, this did not outweigh the free exercise of the religion of the Amish.McDaniel v. Paty (1978)A Tennessee law barring clergymen from serving in public office was challenged in 1978 in McDaniel v. Paty. The Court unanimously ruled that this law was a violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment (as well as the Fourteenth Amendment) because it made holding public office contingent on surrendering religious beliefs. Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah (1993)In 1993, the Court heard Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah. There were ordinances passed by the city of Hialeah, Florida that banned animal sacrifice. These laws were not written in a neutral and generally applicable way. They specifically targeted Santeria, a Afro-Caribbean religion based on Yoruba and some Catholic elements. Because animal sacrifice is an important part of Santeria, the Court ruled that the ordinances were designed as a form of religious persecution in violation of the Free Exercise Clause.  Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe (2000)The Sante Fe Independent School District of Texas in 2000 had a policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games. In a 6-3 decision, the Court upheld an appellate court's ruling that this was a violation of the Establishment Clause. The school district tried to argue that because it was student led and initiated, it was private speech, and, thus, protected under the First Amendment. However, Justice John Paul Stevens argued that it was not private speech because it was done over the P.A. system, by a student body representative, under school faculty supervision, and under school policy. Also, it did not pass the “Lemon” test because it did not have a secular purpose and was implemented with the purpose of endorsing school prayer.Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow (2004)California's Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow in 2004 investigated the policy requiring each elementary school class to say the Pledge of Allegiance daily. Michael Newdow, a father of one of the students, challenged this because of the words therein contained of “under God.” Because Newdow did not have custody of the child, he did not have standing to bring the case to court. However, in concurring opinions, Justices William Rehnquist, Sandra Day O'Connor, and Clarence Thomas, said that the words “under God” do NOT violate the Establishment Clause.As the Bill of Rights Institute reports:“Further, they noted, ‘the phrase ‘under God' in the Pledge seems, as a historical matter, to sum up the attitude of the Nation's leaders, and to manifest itself in many of our public observances. Examples of patriotic invocations of God and official acknowledgments of religion's role in our Nation's history abound.' They concluded that ‘the recital, in a patriotic ceremony pledging allegiance to the flag and to the Nation, of the descriptive phrase ‘under God' cannot possibly lead to the establishment of a religion, or anything like it' (Bill of Rights Institute).”Van Orden v. Perry (2005)In a similar case in Van Orden V. Perry in 2005, in a 5-4 decision, the Court determined that a monument inscribed with the Ten Commandments on Texas State Capitol grounds did not violate the Establishment Clause. There were 38 other monuments on the grounds and highlighted different parts of Texan history. Justice William Rehnquist argued that the monument had a religious message, however, it was presented in a context showing that:“[a] secular moral message about proper standards of social conduct and a message about the historic relation between those standards and the law.” Therefore, the religious message is part of a broader context of cultural heritage and patrimony of the people of Texas. Teaching Evolution in SchoolsThere are two Supreme Court cases worth looking at briefly which discuss the teaching of evolution in schools. Generally, there is a perceived discrepancy of considerable magnitude between the theory of evolution and the evidence for creation from the Book of Genesis. I am not getting into that minefield right now, but these cases show how religious liberty and the government of the United States interact.Epperson v. Arkansas (1968)In Epperson v. Arkansas in 1968, Arkansas passed a law saying that public school teachers were banned from teaching evolution because it was in contradiction with the Bible account of creation.Justice Abe Fortas wrote in the majority opinion:“In the present case, there can be no doubt that Arkansas has sought to prevent its teachers from discussing the theory of evolution because it is contrary to the belief of some that the Book of Genesis must be the exclusive source of doctrine as to the origin of man. No suggestion has been made that Arkansas' law may be justified by considerations of state policy other than the religious views of some of its citizens (Epperson v. Arkansas).”He continued to argue that the law of Arkansas is clearly not a religiously neutral act. Instead it was the targeting of a particular theory on Biblical grounds, literally read. Therefore, it is a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.Edwards v. Aguillard (1987)Nineteen years later in Edwards v. Aguillard in 1987, the Court examined a Louisiana law forbidding the teaching of the theory of evolution in public schools unless it was accompanied by an equal treatment of creationism. In a 7-2 decision, the Court declared that this law violated the Establishment Clause because it failed all three parts of the “Lemon” test. It lacked secular purpose, endorsed the view that a supernatural being created mankind, and it entangled the interests of Church and State by seeking “to employ the symbolic and financial support of government to achieve a religious purpose (Citation: 482 US 578).”The American View of Religious LibertyIn sum, the evolution of religious liberty in the United States has its basis on the cultural milieu of the time. In the colonial period and in the early days of the country, there were few true atheists. Deism was exceptionally popular, but even Deists acknowledge a belief in the Creator. So, a nondenominational prayer to the Creator at the state of a session of Congress was a forgone conclusion. Since that time, the United States of America has become far more cultural, religiously, and politically diverse. As a result of this undeniable diversity, it cannot be said that the United States is currently a Judeo-Christian nation, even if the case can strongly be made that it began that way. Private speech and religious practice is unambiguously protected. However, as we have seen, the nature of the public exercise of religion is questioned when public funds are in the mix. Each of the examples mentioned above, and where problems usually arise, is in publicly-funded schools, government property or buildings, and in relation to public office. However, the Supreme Court has upheld that religious beliefs which are not criminal are protected in the public sphere. A religious person need not check their religion at the door when engaging in public matters (and how could they, really). The First Amendment of the Constitution protects all Americans against the establishment of any one religion to the competition or detriment of any others. Any law which would exclude a person from public life on the basis of religion is unconstitutional. And the free exercise of religion is safeguarded and held in a careful balance with the interests of all other religions, beliefs, and ideas. This reality is a blessing and a curse for Catholics. On the one hand, we have freedom to boldly speak the truth without fear of legal reprisal, within due limits. Yet, on the other hand, there is a bland tolerance of false religions and ideas antithetical to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and His Church.The Church's View of Religious FreedomAll of that being said, what is the Catholic view of religious freedom? Is it precisely the American view or are there significant differences? When I speak to American Catholics about this question, there is no real sense of a firm understanding of the Church on the matter. And, frankly, when people read the official Church teaching, they do not understand the nuances offered there. I am going to do my best to help shed some light on the subject! Dignitatis HumanaeOn December 7, 1965, Pope St. Paul VI promulgated a Declaration on Religious Freedom which is one of the sixteen documents of the Second Vatican Council. Dignitatis Humanae (DH) is only fifteen paragraph sections long and is highly worth reading in its entirety. What I will offer here is a brief summary and the main conclusions. In the interest of keeping this to the point, I am going to be looking at three questions:* What is religious freedom in the eyes of the Catholic Church?* Why is religious freedom based on human dignity?* How has God revealed religious liberty?What is religious freedom in the eyes of the Catholic Church?God has made Himself known to man, shown us how we are to serve Him, and how we are saved in Christ and come to eternal blessedness. The Church unequivocally affirms in Dignitatis Humanae that:“We believe that this one true religion subsists in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus committed the duty of spreading it abroad among all men. Thus He spoke to the Apostles: ‘Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have enjoined upon you' (Matt. 28: 19-20) (DH, 1).”Many of those who are suspicious of the Second Vatican Council read this not as the full throated profession of Christ and His Church that it is. Instead, they read the word “subsist” in an uncharitable and ignorant way. We could say that the one true religion IS the Catholic and Apostolic Church, but subsists is actually a richer word. Subsists means to begin in a certain way and remain in that way. In other words, there is no true religion apart from the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of Jesus Christ, as our Lord began it and has constantly sustained it to this day. The Church which, of course, is His own Mystical Body.The Council Fathers continue:“On their part, all men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and His Church, and to embrace the truth they come to know, and to hold fast to it (DH, 1).”Elsewhere in Vatican II in the documents Lumen Gentium and Ad Gentes we hear: “Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved… The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a ‘bodily' manner and not ‘in his heart' (LG, 14).”For those who claim that Vatican II is weak on doctrine and the truth and is overly ambiguous or some other such nonsense, it is abundantly clear that they never read the documents or they have read them in an uncharitable and ignorant way.At any rate, all of this being said, what is religious freedom? The Council Fathers write:“Religious freedom, in turn, which men demand as necessary to fulfill their duty to worship God, has to do with immunity from coercion in civil society. Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ (DH, 1).”So, the moral duty of man towards the Catholic Church remains untouched by religious freedom. What is vital to understand the Church's view is that phrase: “immunity from coercion in civil society.” That is the key. A more substantial definition is then given, with very official verbiage:“This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits (DH, 2).”The Church has always held to this doctrine. We know, for example, that the Church has always condemned forced conversions as illegitimate and compelled baptisms as invalid. As St. John Paul II often said: the Faith is always proposed, not imposed.'Why is religious freedom based on human dignity?This right to religious freedom is rooted in human dignity. The Church even calls for this right to be enshrined in constitutional law throughout the world. Our human dignity points to the fact that God endowed man with reason and free will and therefore personal responsibility. We are impelled by human nature and bound by moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. Once we know the truth, we are bound to adhere to it and order our lives towards it. The Church declares that religious freedom is thus necessary because:“... men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom (DH, 2).”There is no love without freedom, there is no seeking of the truth without freedom. So, religious freedom does not belong to feelings and subjective disposition. No. It belongs to the very nature of the human person. Faith comes from what is heard. And as truth is discovered, “it is by a personal assent that men are to adhere to it,” to use another phrase from Dignitatis Humanae (DH, 2). Personal though this assent is, religious freedom also extends to religious communities. They should not be hindered:“either by legal measures or by administrative action on the part of government, in the selection, training, appointment, and transferral of their own ministers, in communicating with religious authorities and communities abroad, in erecting buildings for religious purposes, and in the acquisition and use of suitable funds or properties (DH, 4).”Nor should they be hindered from public teaching and witness of faith, whether spoken or written. As the preeminent religious community, all of these freedoms belong to the family as well.How has God revealed religious liberty?In Divine Revelation, the doctrine of religious freedom finds its roots. The Council Fathers write:“Revelation does not indeed affirm in so many words the right of man to immunity from external coercion in matters religious. It does, however, disclose the dignity of the human person in its full dimensions (DH, 9).”First and foremost, man's response to God in faith must be free for it to be legitimate. No one can be forced to become Catholic. The act of faith is a free act. Forcing someone to love is not love at all. As Dignitatis Humanae states:“It is therefore completely in accord with the nature of faith that in matters religious every manner of coercion on the part of men should be excluded. In consequence, the principle of religious freedom makes no small contribution to the creation of an environment in which men can without hindrance be invited to the Christian faith, embrace it of their own free will, and profess it effectively in their whole manner of life (DH, 10).”God is very clear, however, in what He has revealed that we are to boldly proclaim the truth. Therefore, are we to be “tolerant” and “accepting” of other religions and simply have a bland indifference? Absolutely not! The Council Fathers write:“The disciple is bound by a grave obligation toward Christ, his Master, ever more fully to understand the truth received from Him, faithfully to proclaim it, and vigorously to defend it, never-be it understood-having recourse to means that are incompatible with the spirit of the Gospel. At the same time, the charity of Christ urges him to love and have prudence and patience in his dealings with those who are in error or in ignorance with regard to the faith (DH, 14).”Freedom from CoercionFreedom from coercion in religious matters is the crux of the Church's view of religious liberty. Really, it pertains directly to the establishing of an environment in which a person may freely seek and adhere to the one, true religion. Though there are elements of truth outside the Catholic Church, there is no salvation. If someone outside the visible bounds of the Church is saved, it is only by the superabundant merits of Jesus Christ and the instrumentality of the Catholic Church, the sacrament of salvation.We must not be indifferent. We must boldly preach the truth at all times. And we must not be afraid to stand up for these beliefs, even when it is inconvenient. In some contexts doing so can lead to our bodily martyrdom. In the United States of America, the constitutional order is more or less compatible with the free practice of the Catholic religion. However, we must be cognizant that there is a distinct difference between religious freedom in the American idea and the Catholic teaching.The American notion protects us, to an extent, but it is more geared to creating a national identity that transcends religion. This should make any faithful Catholic nervous because it is working. How many American Catholics do you know who are more concerned about being American Catholics than being Catholics who happen to be American? Religious freedom is freedom from coercion. Ultimately, it is freedom FOR the truth, FOR the Catholic Faith. We cannot forget this, lest we descend into a banal coexistence or tolerance without the drive to share the fullness of the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ. We cannot be indifferent and we cannot be content to allow anyone to stay in error. We must respect their right to religious freedom by not coercing them and respecting their journey, in good conscience. But the task and privilege of evangelization remains in full force. Get full access to Good Distinctions at www.gooddistinctions.com/subscribe

On the podcast this week is Paul Schempp. Paul Schempp is the Director of the Sports Instruction Research Lab at the University of Georgia. Before this, he was a Performance Coach for the Swedish Golf Federation. He's spent the last 25 years bringing this experience and research to the corporate world, focussing on increasing individual performance in businesses around the world. We talk about: The differences between how winners and losers think. Preparing for success. Maximizing experience. If you enjoyed this episode, why not sign up to our Newsletter? virti.com/newsletter When you sign up, you'll receive a copy of our weekly 'Level Up' newsletter straight to your inbox every Thursday, with the latest Virti product and feature announcements, as well as tips, tricks and news about all things human performance.

This week, the Supreme Court discussed a coach-led prayer practice on the football field, hearing two very different versions of the facts. Amanda and Holly review Monday's oral arguments in Kennedy v. Bremerton in this podcast, sharing their four takeaways and playing key courtroom exchanges. From the fights over the facts to conflating the rights of students and school officials, there are plenty of moments that caused more than fleeting concerns.   SHOW NOTES: Segment 1: Get your facts straight (starting at 00:51) You can see Amanda's videos outside the Supreme Court on oral argument day on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Amanda and Holly previewed Kennedy v. Bremerton in Episode 14. Americans United for Separation of Church and State represented the Bremerton school district, and Richard Katskee presented their arguments in the courtroom. First Liberty represented Coach Joseph Kennedy, and Paul Clement presented their arguments in the courtroom. In this segment, we played the following clips, which are all available from the Supreme Court's audio recording of the oral arguments: Justice Stephen Breyer (from 15:37 in the oral argument) Justice Elena Kagan and Paul Clement (from 37:59 in the oral argument) Chief Justice John Roberts (from 57:28 in the oral argument) You can learn more about Kennedy v. Bremerton and read BJC's brief in the case at BJConline.org/Bremerton.   Segment 2: Tim Tebow, Mohamed Salah, and examples that aren't relevant to this case (starting at 19:30) Amanda and Holly mentioned several cases about religion and public schools: Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) Santa Fe v. Doe (2000) Engel v. Vitale (1962) Abington v. Schempp (1963) Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971 – origin of the “Lemon test”) In this segment, we played the following clips, which are all available from the Supreme Court's audio recording of the oral arguments: Paul Clement answering a question from Justice Brett Kavanaugh (from 43:26 in the oral argument) Justice Brett Kavanaguh and Richard Katskee (from 01:01:42 in the oral argument) Justice Neil Gorsuch and Richard Katskee (from 01:27:16 in the oral argument) Justice Samuel Alito and Richard Katskee (from 01:18:32 in the oral argument) The American Jewish Committee, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the General Synod of the United Church of Christ joined BJC's brief, which was co-authored by Professors Douglas Laycock and Christopher Lund.   Segment 3: Where do we go from here? (starting at 40:40) Holly's reaction to the case was quoted in this article from the Los Angeles Times by David Savage: Supreme Court conservatives lean toward allowing football coach's postgame prayers Dr. Charles Haynes shared his experience teaching guidelines in the public schools in this piece for Baptist News Global: At the Supreme Court: The First Amendment on the 50-yard-line   Respecting Religion is made possible by BJC's generous donors. You can support these conversations with a gift to BJC. 

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. The case is about Joseph Kennedy, a Christian high school football coach in Washington state who regularly prayed before games. Eventually a majority of the players joined in as well, and one player's parent complained that he felt pressured to pray as well. Kennedy lost his job after refusing to comply with school district's orders to stop.  Nicole Garnett of Notre Dame Law School and Rachel Laser of Americans United for Separation of Church and State join host Jeffrey Rosen to discuss the case; the questions raised around the limits of free speech, free exercise of religion, and the separation of church and state in schools; and how the Court might rule based on its prior jurisprudence—from the Lemon v. Kurtzmann test to the Abington v. Schempp case—and some justices' questioning of it. Listen to "Football, Faith, and the First Amendment" from January 31, 2019. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. The case is about Joseph Kennedy, a Christian high school football coach in Washington state who regularly prayed before games. Eventually a majority of the players joined in as well, and one player's parent complained that he felt pressured to pray as well. Kennedy lost his job after refusing to comply with school district's orders to stop.  Nicole Garnett of Notre Dame Law School and Rachel Laser of Americans United for Separation of Church and State join host Jeffrey Rosen to discuss the case; the questions raised around the limits of free speech, free exercise of religion, and the separation of church and state in schools; and how the Court might rule based on its prior jurisprudence—from the Lemon v. Kurtzmann test to the Abington v. Schempp case—and some justices' questioning of it. Listen to "Football, Faith, and the First Amendment" from January 31, 2019. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.

Nachdem die Weltcupsaison beendet ist, beginnt bei uns die Zeit der Interviews. Gleich zum Anfang der neuen Staffel erwartet uns ein echter Kracher. Simon Schempp ist zu Besuch. In seiner aktiven Zeit wächst Simon zu einem der erfolgreichsten Biathleten heran. Er ist Deutschlands große Hoffnung den Gesamtweltcup nach Hause zu holen und es entstehen einzigartige Momente, die wir uns mit ihm noch einmal in Erinnerung rufen. Unvergessen bleibt die Rivalität mit Martin Fourcade, sein Massenstartgold in Hochfilzen und das Fotofinish bei den olympischen Spielen 2018. Durch Simon erfährst du in der heutigen Folge, was es wirklich heißt ein Weltklasse-Athlet zu sein. Denn neben den ganzen schönen Momenten schleichen sich - gerade zum Ende hin - immer häufiger Tiefschläge ein. Eine Anhäufung von Ereignissen, die ihn letztendlich 2021 zum Karriereende bewegen. Wie denkt Simon heute über das Fotofinish im Massenstart? Warum ist er wirklich zurückgetreten? Und wie kam er dazu seinen ‘Zieleinlauf' zu schreiben? Natürlich berichten wir auch weiterhin über die Neuigkeiten der Szene. Die IBU veröffentlicht den neuen Weltcupkalender für die Saison 2022/23. In Norwegen steht das A-Team fest und auf den City-Biathlon müssen wir in diesem Jahr verzichten. All das und noch viel mehr erfährst du in der neuen Extrarunde Biathlon. Verpasse nichts im Biathlon-Weltcup und folge uns auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/extrarunde Oder suche nach @extrarunde Kontaktiere uns über E-Mail: extrarunde.biathlon@gmail.com Oder auf unserer Website: https://www.extrarunde-biathlon.de/ Hier findest du Simon Schempp: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/simonschempp/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SimonSchempp1 Twitter: https://twitter.com/simonschempp?lang=de Webseite: https://www.simon.com.de/

Dr. Paul Schempp is a high-performance leadership expert known for delivering content-rich, engaging, presentations that move people to results-oriented action. He was named a Distinguished Scholar by the International Center for Performance Excellence and served as a Sr. Fulbright Scholar, a Univ of Georgia Professor and corporate consultant all focused on individual and organizational performance. Dr. Schempp has authored six books, 125 articles and delivered over 200 presentations in 29 countries and has lectured at two dozen Universities on three continents.

Lakeland General Store is a "one-stop" shop in lakes country, supplying gas, hardware, sporting goods and lawn care goods.  This unique approach brings customers in seeking a variety of items.  Owner Bob Schempp talks about what that means to cabin owners and campers in allowing them to get what they need to make their time away from home more enjoyable. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dr. Paul Schempp joins Christoph Trappe on this live recording of the Business Storytelling Podcast to talk about his book on the topic of becoming an expert. Grab his book here: https://amzn.to/3tpBR8t  More podcast episodes: https://lnkd.in/eiUSn7h --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/ctrappe/message

The Non-Prophets 20.16 2021-04-14 Martin Robert, Neil the 604 Atheist, Laura Magee, PhoenixOn this week's episode of the Non-Prophets, we discuss some great topics. Phoenix opens up the floor with some history about Madalyn Murray O'Hair, the life and times of one of the most prominent atheists in America. Next, Laura and Martin discuss how religiosity influences a greater wage gap, as opposed to more secular workforces which tend to have a smaller gap. After that, our hosts go over the ins and outs of Scientology's monetary habits, and how they may be losing their financial foothold as a non-profit. Our fourth article is about the Freedom From Religion Foundation and how they dropped a recent lawsuit after the state they were suing accommodated the FfRF's request...or did they? Alabama sure is a tricky one. Lastly, we get into the issue of censorship in Italy and how the grasp of religiosity has been removed from their movie industry.Looking Back...https://freethoughtalmanac.wordpress.com/2011/04/13/april-13-madalyn-murray-ohair/Additional Articleshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_Murray_O%27Hairhttps://www.britannica.com/topic/School-District-of-Abington-Township-v-Schempp#ref1203585https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abington_School_District_v._Schempphttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Atheistshttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCA7B39A80C71F248https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yflQd2jyp7Yhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPrsitqV04ghttps://katv.com/news/local/creationism-bill-passed-in-house-headed-to-senateSecond Article: https://www.psypost.org/2021/04/religion-is-a-driving-force-behinHid-the-gender-wage-gap-study-finds-60278https://www.psypost.org/2019/11/new-psychology-research-indicates-that-subtle-exposure-to-religious-words-can-increase-benevolent-sexism-54956https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amj.2019.1254https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amj.2019.1254.summaryhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/43496468?seq=3#metadata_info_tab_contentshttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26303306?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=religion+and+wage+gap&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dreligion%2Band%2Bwage%2Bgap&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&refreqid=fastly-default%3A4cfb74c259f6801fb8e0ae28956295fa&seq=53#metadata_info_tab_contentsThird Article: https://www.smh.com.au/national/push-for-investigation-into-scientology-s-charity-status-20210401-p57fsj.htmlhttps://www.ualberta.ca/folio/2018/01/once-thriving-church-of-scientology-faces-extinction-says-cult-tracker.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_status_of_Scientology_in_the_United_Stateshttps://www.theage.com.au/national/scientology-shifts-millions-to-safe-haven-australia-and-books-multi-million-dollar-profits-20210325-p57e18.htmlhttps://www.smh.com.au/national/scientology-is-shrinking-fast-and-getting-richer-how-is-this-possible-20210326-p57ea3.htmlhttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9019027/Church-Scientology-received-30-PPP-loans-worth-4-million.htmlFourth Article: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/06/italy-ends-censorship-of-films-on-moral-and-religious-groundshttps://www.al.com/news/2020/10/freedom-from-religion-group-sues-alabama-over-so-help-me-god-voter-oath.htmlhttps://ffrf.org/news/action/item/38707-take-action-oppose-religious-takeover-of-public-schools-in-arkansashttps://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/Bills/Detail?ddBienniumSession=2021%2F2021R&measureno=HB1701https://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/Bills/FTPDocument?path=%2FBills%2F2021R%2FPublic%2FSB662.pdfEnding on a High Note: https://www.al.com/news/2021/04/freedom-from-religion-foundation-drops-lawsuit-after-alabama-amends-so-help-me-god-voter-oath.htmlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_and_censorship_in_Italy_during_the_First_World_Warhttps://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/pressjournalism_italyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Italy

Zu Gast in der Episode 006 ist der Contao Core-Entwickler und Schatzmeister der Contao Association Andreas Schempp. Andy, wie ihn alle nennen, ist ebenfalls Geschäftspartner von Yanick Witchi bei terminal42 und kann nicht nur wegen seiner Herkunft als das Schweizer Taschenmesser für Contao bezeichnet werden. Als Schatzmeister spielt er seit Jahren eine zentrale Rolle in der Contao Association. In seiner Rolle als Core-Entwickler bringt er wichtige Impulse und übernimmt Verantwortung für komplexe Themengebiete wie den Contao Manager und bereichert mit terminal42 die Community-Szene mit wichtigen Erweiterungen wie z. B. dem Shopsystem Isotope oder dem Notification Center. Auf YouTube

1. America is a Christian Nation. Bible reading was common-place in schools at one time. Taking a second look at the Abington v. Schempp (1963) Supreme Court decision that removed Bible reading from public schools.   2. Climate Change and the denial of science. Socialism, at every turn, contradicts real science. So also in the global drive to cause America to submit beneath the United Nations' doctrine of "Climate Change."   3. GUEST: Dr. Samuel Mitcham. Speaking about his new book: The Death of Hitler's War Machine: The Final Destruction of the Wehrmacht. What lessons can we learn from this? - -   American Liberty with Bill Lockwood is about the culture of America — not simply about politics. Bill Lockwood is a preacher, teacher, writer, and radio host with a weekly program based in West Texas. PODCAST: Apple | Castbox | PodcastAddict | Spotify | Stitcher | Google | PodBean | TuneIn | Deezer | Podchaser | RSS Feed Read Bill Lockwood’s blog, and other great articles at his website https://americanlibertywithbilllockwood.com  VIDEO / SOCIAL MEDIA: YouTube Bill Lockwood Facebook @AmLibwithBill1 Twitter @AmLibRadio SUPPORT MONTHLY: Patreon | SubscribeStar BILL ON-RADIO IN TEXAS: Sat 11am on NewsTalk 1290 in Wichita Falls Sun 5pm on 1470 KYYW in Abilene Sun 5pm on KFYO 790 AM / 95.1 FM in Lubbock   Bill Lockwood is a preacher at Iowa Park church of Christ. Catch Bill on The Jesse Lee Peterson Show last Tuesday of the month, 8am U.S. Central Time (Jesse’s first hour). YouTube Playlist

Das ausgebliebene Skisprungwunder von Bischofshofen inspiriert Malte Asmus und Andreas Wurm im ersten Sportpodcast des Tages dazu, über die aus ihrer Sicht größten Sportwunder zu philosophieren, ehe sie sich dann den harten Themen des Tages zuwenden, die sie u.a. mit Hilfe von Handball-Experte Tim Dettmar (Anwurf) und mit Unterstützung des Sportinformationsdienstes SID aufarbeiten. Offensive hui und sonst? So steht es um die WM-Form der DHB-Herren Stand jetzt Wir beantworten eine Hörerfrage Wie teilen eigentlich eigentlich DEL, BBL und HBL die TV-Einnahmen auf? Simon Schempp freut sich auf Oberhof und über seine Rückkehr ins Biathlon-Team Außerdem gratulieren Malte und Andreas einem deutschen Radprofi zum Geburtstag, dem in Frankreich eine ganz besondere Ehre zuteil wurde und erinnern an eine der vielen Rekordmarken einer NBA-Trainerlegende. ...

Das ausgebliebene Skisprungwunder von Bischofshofen inspiriert Malte Asmus und Andreas Wurm im ersten Sportpodcast des Tages dazu, über die aus ihrer Sicht größten Sportwunder zu philosophieren, ehe sie sich dann den harten Themen des Tages zuwenden, die sie u.a. mit Hilfe von Handball-Experte Tim Dettmar (Anwurf) und mit Unterstützung des Sportinformationsdienstes SID aufarbeiten. Offensive hui und sonst? So steht es um die WM-Form der DHB-Herren Stand jetzt Wir beantworten eine Hörerfrage Wie teilen eigentlich eigentlich DEL, BBL und HBL die TV-Einnahmen auf? Simon Schempp freut sich auf Oberhof und über seine Rückkehr ins Biathlon-Team Außerdem gratulieren Malte und Andreas einem deutschen Radprofi zum Geburtstag, dem in Frankreich eine ganz besondere Ehre zuteil wurde und erinnern an eine der vielen Rekordmarken einer NBA-Trainerlegende. ...

Das ausgebliebene Skisprungwunder von Bischofshofen inspiriert Malte Asmus und Andreas Wurm im ersten Sportpodcast des Tages dazu, über die aus ihrer Sicht größten Sportwunder zu philosophieren, ehe sie sich dann den harten Themen des Tages zuwenden, die sie u.a. mit Hilfe von Handball-Experte Tim Dettmar (Anwurf) und mit Unterstützung des Sportinformationsdienstes SID aufarbeiten. Offensive hui und sonst? So steht es um die WM-Form der DHB-Herren Stand jetzt Wir beantworten eine Hörerfrage Wie teilen eigentlich eigentlich DEL, BBL und HBL die TV-Einnahmen auf? Simon Schempp freut sich auf Oberhof und über seine Rückkehr ins Biathlon-Team Außerdem gratulieren Malte und Andreas einem deutschen Radprofi zum Geburtstag, dem in Frankreich eine ganz besondere Ehre zuteil wurde und erinnern an eine der vielen Rekordmarken einer NBA-Trainerlegende. ...

Dr. Paul Schempp is a Professor at the University of Georgia. He is a research professor who studies experts and the development of expertise. Dr. Schempp has identified that a common characteristic among experts is having good mentorship. He has studied hundreds of experts and authored the book "5 Steps to Expert: How to Go from Business Novice to Elite Performer."  In his interview, Dr. Schempp dives deep on the value of mentorship, especially for those nearing their business exit. Mentoring a protege can help pass your values onto the next generation, and meanwhile, proteges seeking expertise will greatly benefit from having a mentor - the relationship is symbiotic. For our listeners who may hope to one day begin an expertise-based practice, Dr. Schempp also shares some tips to help you achieve elite performance levels. We all have the ability to achieve mastery, and guidance is essential in that journey, so don’t miss Dr. Schempp’s advice on attaining the level of success you desire. 1-Minute Sections: 5:23-6:18: Informal relationships between mentors and proteges can be most effective. 10:52-12:00: Tips for identifying good proteges and transferring your values to the next generation. 15:02-15:58: The greatest experts are not necessarily the greatest mentors. 18:45-19:42: Speaking about "5 Steps to Expert: How to Go from Business Novice to Elite Performer" We've built a special collection of 20 minute interviews from members of Provisors and Vistage speakers. To see the directory and choose an interview visit ExitCoachRadio.com Are you and your Company Transition-Ready? Click Here for a free report & assessment!

Olympia-Stars zu Gast bei "Extra Time"Unter dem Motto #goldeneZeiten sprechen die deutschen Biathlon-Stars Arnd Peiffer und Simon Schempp mit Eurosport-Moderator Wolfgang Nadvornik und Kommentator Sig Heinrich über ihre ganz persönliche Geschichte der Olympischen Spiele 2018 in Pyeongchang.Alles Wichtige aus der Welt des Sports findet Ihr auf Eurosport.de.Folgt uns auch auf unseren Social-Media-Kanälen:Twitter: @Eurosport_deInstagram: @eurosportdeFacebook: @Eurosport See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Our guide to what to watch during lockdown continues with special guest Dr Alaina Schempp, film academic and scriptwriter who talks to us about the amine delights to be found on netflix and the joy of sharing a screen with others.

In 1956, as an 11th grader, Ellery Schempp challenged the mandatory Bible readings at his public school in Abington, Pennsylvania. His protest became a landmark Supreme Court case, Abington School District v. Schempp, that ended the practice, and Ellery and his family were represented by lawyers from the ACLU-PA and from the law firm Drinker Biddle. He visited with ACLU-PA staff recently and reflected on the case.

Micro-scissors are more compact, increase productivity and safety on the job site, and are more widely available than ever before. In this episode we discuss the pros and cons of each manufacturer's version.

On this day, we remember the School Edict from Julian the Apostate in 362, and the landmark ruling Abington School District v. Schempp in 1963. Our reading is the poem "Leading Questions" by Margaret Avison. We’re proud to be part of 1517 Podcasts, a network of shows dedicated to delivering Christ-centered content. Our podcasts cover a multitude of content, from Christian doctrine, apologetics, cultural engagement, and powerful preaching. Support the work of 1517 today.

Democrats are NOT doing their job- Iran Nuclear Explain| Cindy Gomez-Schempp USMX border by Tore Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Attorney Michael Smith, joined by associate Josh Whiteside, talks with host Devon Lincoln about the role that religion plays in the lives of public school students and their teachers and other staff, and how schools can create a climate of inclusivity and support for students of every background and faith tradition. Show Notes & References 6:13  Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist. 869 F.3d 813 (2017); School District Need Not Accommodate Coach's Request to Publicly Pray at Football Games (Client News Brief: October 2017) 8:35  Equal Access Act (20 U.S.C. § 4071 et seq.) 10:23  See Ed. Code, §§ 52, 53. 12:05  The Satanic Temple Seeks Access to Public Elementary Schools Nationwide (Client News Brief: September 2016) 18:04  Abington v. Schempp (1963) 374 U.S. 203 30:06  Fair Education Act (Ed. Code, § 51204.5.) 36:05  Assembly Bill (AB) 1248; New Law Entitles Students To Wear Tribal Regalia Or Recognized Objects Of Religious, Ceremonial Or Cultural Significance As An Adornment At School Graduation Ceremonies (Client News Brief: January 2019)   For more information on the topics discussed in this podcast, please visit our website at: www.lozanosmith.com/podcast.

Trump had an epic Presser about the National emergency down at our border. #fakenews Jim Acosta was there and yet again it didn't go well for him. Also Cindy Gomez-Schempp host of A Mexican Crossing Lines on 88.1FM KPPP-LP Fargo-Moorhead fills us in on the situation at our border and informs us on who is really running the caravan and much more. -- Producer Josh

Current events and Cindy Gomez-Schempp "A Mexican Crossing Lines" by Tore Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode of the Wealthy Speaker Podcast we are talking with Dr. Paul Schempp about developing confidence.  Dr. Paul Schempp is joining us to discuss how we can be more confident on stage and in business. Dr. Paul G. Schempp is an expert on high performance leadership. As University of Georgia professor, he conducts research into the characteristics and development of expert leaders and sport coaches. He has authored six books including the award […] The post Developing the Confidence of Elite Athletes with Paul Schempp appeared first on Jane Atkinson.

Guest: Corinna Schempp VP of European Policy and Regulation, FIA. Record Date:  6/5/18 Listen on —> iTunes Listen on —> SoundCloud Topics: Corrina’s Backstory & Role at FIA Soft Brexit Still Possible? Core Issues & Concerns around Brexit IDX 2018 Guest Resources: Website Twitter   Futures Radio is a weekly talk show hosted by 18-year futures veteran […]

Guest: Corinna Schempp VP of European Policy and Regulation, FIA. Record Date:  6/5/18 Listen on —> iTunes Listen on —> SoundCloud Topics: Corrina’s Backstory & Role at FIA Soft Brexit Still Possible? Core Issues & Concerns around Brexit IDX 2018 Guest Resources: Website Twitter   Futures Radio is a weekly talk show hosted by 18-year futures veteran […]

Ein russischer Curler soll angeblich positiv auf die verbotene Substanz Meldonium getestet worden sein - das ist die negative Nachricht des Tages aus Pyeongchang an diesem Olympiatag. Doch Malte Asmus hat auch noch positive News von den Olympischen Winterspielen für euch. Nämlich Silber für Simon Schempp im Massenstart der Biathleten. Und die Entscheidung dort fiel auf die knappste Art und Weise. Erst das Zielfoto konnte beweisen, dass der zeitgleiche Martin Fourcade am Ende einen Zehennagel eher im Ziel war als der Deutsche. Trotzdem Hut ab vor der Leistung von Schempp und der der ganzen deutschen Mannschaft. Denn gleich drei deutsche Biathleten landeten in den Top 5. Das lässt Malte Asmus und Lukas Kruse von einer Staffelmedaille träumen. Weniger Grund zum Träumen haben die deutschen Alpin-Ski-Läufer und die Langläufer. Die erlebten bittere Stunden bei ihren heutigen Wettbewerben. Florian Harrer fasst die Ergebnisse bei Malte Asmus zusammen. Außerdem gibt es noch Historisches von den deutschen Eishockeyspielern zu vermelden. Die gewinnen erstmals seit 16 Jahren wieder ein Spiel bei Olympia - und haben noch Chancen auf die KO-Runde.

Ein russischer Curler soll angeblich positiv auf die verbotene Substanz Meldonium getestet worden sein - das ist die negative Nachricht des Tages aus Pyeongchang an diesem Olympiatag. Doch Malte Asmus hat auch noch positive News von den Olympischen Winterspielen für euch. Nämlich Silber für Simon Schempp im Massenstart der Biathleten. Und die Entscheidung dort fiel auf die knappste Art und Weise. Erst das Zielfoto konnte beweisen, dass der zeitgleiche Martin Fourcade am Ende einen Zehennagel eher im Ziel war als der Deutsche. Trotzdem Hut ab vor der Leistung von Schempp und der der ganzen deutschen Mannschaft. Denn gleich drei deutsche Biathleten landeten in den Top 5. Das lässt Malte Asmus und Lukas Kruse von einer Staffelmedaille träumen. Weniger Grund zum Träumen haben die deutschen Alpin-Ski-Läufer und die Langläufer. Die erlebten bittere Stunden bei ihren heutigen Wettbewerben. Florian Harrer fasst die Ergebnisse bei Malte Asmus zusammen. Außerdem gibt es noch Historisches von den deutschen Eishockeyspielern zu vermelden. Die gewinnen erstmals seit 16 Jahren wieder ein Spiel bei Olympia - und haben noch Chancen auf die KO-Runde. Du möchtest deinen Podcast auch kostenlos hosten und damit Geld verdienen? Dann schaue auf www.kostenlos-hosten.de und informiere dich. Dort erhältst du alle Informationen zu unseren kostenlosen Podcast-Hosting-Angeboten.

Ein russischer Curler soll angeblich positiv auf die verbotene Substanz Meldonium getestet worden sein - das ist die negative Nachricht des Tages aus Pyeongchang an diesem Olympiatag. Doch Malte Asmus hat auch noch positive News von den Olympischen Winterspielen für euch. Nämlich Silber für Simon Schempp im Massenstart der Biathleten. Und die Entscheidung dort fiel auf die knappste Art und Weise. Erst das Zielfoto konnte beweisen, dass der zeitgleiche Martin Fourcade am Ende einen Zehennagel eher im Ziel war als der Deutsche. Trotzdem Hut ab vor der Leistung von Schempp und der der ganzen deutschen Mannschaft. Denn gleich drei deutsche Biathleten landeten in den Top 5. Das lässt Malte Asmus und Lukas Kruse von einer Staffelmedaille träumen. Weniger Grund zum Träumen haben die deutschen Alpin-Ski-Läufer und die Langläufer. Die erlebten bittere Stunden bei ihren heutigen Wettbewerben. Florian Harrer fasst die Ergebnisse bei Malte Asmus zusammen. Außerdem gibt es noch Historisches von den deutschen Eishockeyspielern zu vermelden. Die gewinnen erstmals seit 16 Jahren wieder ein Spiel bei Olympia - und haben noch Chancen auf die KO-Runde....

Today we talk with coaching researcher and educator Dr Paul Schempp about the traits and actions of the best instructors and coaches (plus what that difference is).

After honoring “Champions of the First Amendment” Roy Torcaso (1961, Torcaso vs. Watkins) and Ed and Ellery Schempp (1963 Abington vs. Schempp), we talk about atheist rock climber Alex Honnold, who this month made history by ascending Yosemite’s El Capitan free-style with no rope. We hear Roy Zimmerman’s hilarious song “Creation Science 101,” and then talk about the 1925 Scopes Trial with historian Andrew Kersten, author of the book Clarence Darrow: American Iconoclast.

The Mann Center of Performing Arts has served for many decades as the City of Philadelphia’s premier outdoor performing arts festival.  This year, the Mann celebrates its 40th anniversary, and with it comes the launch of new initiatives tailored to reflect the expectations of 21st century audiences. As a nonprofit, the Mann Center is focused on fostering long-standing relationships with its audience, artists, donors, board and staff, volunteers, community and business partners, and other internal and external stakeholders. But how do you move someone from first time attendee to active participant within an organization? This week, Cathy Cahill, CEO, and Kelly Schempp, Vice President of Audience Development and Integrated Marketing joined Beth to discuss the strategy behind the Mann’s marketing and fundraising efforts.

We are not born with the characteristics to achieve greatness.  We must take the time to learn them by not only listening to acquire knowledge but also by gathering information that is readily available.  Following in the footsteps of great leaders and athletes is an often the best way to achieve your potential.  Professor Paul Schempp gives his insights into … Read more about this episode...

Ellery Schempp joins us to discuss the famous 1963 US Supreme Court ruling in "Abington School District v. Schempp". The court decided 8-1 that public school sponsored bible reading was unconstitutional.Investing Skeptically - IRA and ROTH IRA 2015 contribution limits.

In this highly wanted episode of STAB!, host John Ross gets Joe Joe Louis, Kim Martel and Jesse Jones to discuss unfair standardized tests, Berry Manilows, Abington School District vs. Schempp, Desertification and Drought Combat, Orenthal James Simpson, the Statue of Liberty, a trio of NAACPs, Rachel Dolezal’s Google searches, stripper lap dance defying haiku … Continue reading »

Hey what's up HouseKasters ? Glad to see you guys for this brand new episode of HouseKast Selection ! What's on today ? Many new tracks like the new ones of Syn Cole, Joey Dale, Sander van Doorn, Audien, Henry Fong etc... The new Top Track is the great "Pinball" by Pink Is Punk, remixed by the italian guys Merk & Kremont. And we have of course a new Discovery Track : That's a really beautiful progressive song by Puusti & Schempp ft. Mimmi Kapell and it's called "Feel". Don't forget that you can subscribe to the podcast on iTunes and Podomatic.com, then you can receive every new episode as soon as it's released ! Hope you guys will like this episode, see you in two or three weeks for the next one ! Have a great time, ciao ! Tracklist : 01 - Walden - Airodime 02 - Ian G, Matierro & Brenton Mattheus - Flash 03 - Jesse Kiis - The Heist 04 - Syn Cole - Bright Lights 05 - Armin van Buuren - Ping Pong (Hardwell Remix) 06 - Joey Dale - About The Drop 07 - Pink Is Punk - Pinball (Merk & Kremont Remix) [TOP TRACK] 08 - Sander van Doorn, Martin Garrix & DVBBS ft. Alesia - Gold Skies 09 - Henry Fong - Takin' It Back 10 - Tom Fall ft. Yoshi Breen - One For Love 11 - Puusti & Schempp ft. Mimmi Kapell - Feel [DISCOVERY TRACK] 12 - Audien & Matthew Koma - Serotonin 13 - Clean Bandit - Rather Be (Elephante Remix) 14 - Cazzette ft. The High - Sleepless 15 - Meron & Alex Aark - Along With The Stars

01. Watermat - Bullit 02. Bingo Players - Knock You Out 03. Most Wanted: Skytech - Collider 04. Smash of the Week: Twoloud - Greatest Dj 05. Warkids - Earth [Free] 06. Henry Fong & Reece Low - Slapjack 07. Hard Rock Sofa & Skidka - Arms Around Me 08. FTampa, Goldfish & Blink - Kismet 09. Puusti & Schempp ft. Mimmi Kapell - Feel 10. Eddie Halliwell - Diamonds 11. W&W & Blasterjaxx - Rocket 12. Astronaut - Quantum (Enyo & Mario Ayuda Edit) 13. Orjan Nilsen - The Late Anthem (Way Too Late Mix) 14. Jay Hardway - Bootcamp 15. Duck Sauce - NTG (Skrillex & Kill The Noise, Milo & Otis Remix) 16. Firebeatz - Bazooka 17. Dannic & Merk & Kremont - Anubi 18. Nervo, R3hab & Ummet Ozcan - Revolution (Audien Remix)

"Why does all my money have to say 'In God We Trust'?" This week we challenge the motto on U.S. currency as well as on license plates. We hear a young Ellery Schempp in 1963 being interviewed by Eric Sevareid on CBS News about the historic Abington v. Schempp decision by the Supreme Court outlawing bible reading in public schools. Then we talk with Guy P. Harrison, author of the book, 50 Simple Questions for Every Christian.

"Alle Träume können wahr werden - wenn wir den Mut haben, ihnen zu folgen.“ Hans-Martin Schempp im Interview "Wir können nur Miteinander erfolgreich sein!" – antwortet Herr Schempp, Unternehmer und Initiator der „OneWorldFamily-Days“  aus Stuttgart auf die Frage, was das Geheimnis seines Erfolges sei. Weiterhin habe ich ihn gefragt: Wie trägt sein Projekt zur Verbesserung der Welt und der Lebensqualität bei? Was bedeutet Paradies auf Erden für ihn und ob es möglich sei es zu verwirklichen? Ob er glücklich sei und was sein Glück ausmacht?   Sei gespannt auf die Antworten! Höre! Gute Inspiration wünscht dir Katalin Fáy Moderatorin und Herausgeberin des Paradies-Podcast für ein Leben in Fülle, Freude und Faszination für alle Lade herunter, nimm mit, höre, teile mit deinen Freunden!   #1 in "Business News" - 15 Tage nach Launch (international PodOmatic Ranking) Zuhörer weltweit in 52 Länder. 100% Love 100% Life 100% Peace P.S.:   weitere Informationen zum Projekt www.oneworldfamily.eu www.facebook.com/oneworldfamilystiftung      

"Sei du selbst die Veränderung, die du in der Welt sehen willst!" „Jeder von uns kann seinen Teil für eine bessere Welt beitragen!" - Sagt Hans-Martin Schempp, Initiator des One World Family Days in Stuttgart. Zum Motto aller OWF-Aktionen wählte er Mahatma Gandhi's Worte: "You must be the change you want to see in the world“. "Wir wollen neuen Ideen und Konzepten für eine bessere Welt ein Forum geben, Vorbilder und Vorzeigeprojekte präsentieren, ihnen die Gelegenheit geben, sich zu vernetzen und möglichst viele Menschen auch außerhalb dieses Events inspirieren, selbst initiativ zu werden“, sagt Schempp. Das Paradies-Podcast berichtet über den dreitägigen Event. Höre! Gute Inspiration wünscht dir Katalin Fáy Moderatorin und Herausgeberin des Paradies-Podcast für ein Leben in Fülle, Freude und Faszination für alle Lade herunter, nimm mit, höre, teile mit deinen Freunden! #1 in "Business News" - 15 Tage nach Launch (international PodOmatic Ranking) Zuhörer weltweit in 52 Länder. 100% Love 100% Life 100% Peace P.S.:   weiterführende Informationen und Veranstaltungen zum Thema  und zur Filmwechsel®-Methode findest du unter Modultrainings: http://tinyurl.com/ope6nlf  oder http://www.dr-bewusst-sein.de  Weihnachten auf Madeira mit der Filmwechsel®-Methode und Ayurveda: Melde dich gleich an und sichere deinen Platz!  

We file another lawsuit in federal court this week, challenging censorship of freethought literature in Orange County, Florida high schools. FFRF attorney Andrew Seidel gives us the details. Then we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the historic 1963 Abington v. Schempp decision by the U.S. Supreme Court by talking with Ellery Schempp, who was the high-schooler in 1956 who took his complaint to the highest court.

Guest Ellory Schempp discusses how his complaints as a 16-year-old about devotional bible reading and prayer in his Pennsylvania public school turned into the landmark 1963 Supreme Court decision, Schempp v. Abington, ending such practices in the United States. The interview includes audio clips of his father, the late Ed Schempp, reminiscing about the lawsuit. The show includes a look at what's wrong with "The National Day of Prayer," music and Dan Barker's "Pagan Pulpit" on why nothing fails like prayer. The weekly show is hosted by Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-presidents of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. (MP3, 44 min, 20.4 MB)

Fri, 1 Jan 1988 12:00:00 +0100 https://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/5375/1/Zimmermann_Wolfgang_5375.pdf Thompson, John A.; Kleist, Sabine von; Shively, John E.; Fiebig, Heinz-Herbert; Schempp, Werner; Rudert, Fritz; Ortlieb, Barbara; Weber, Bernhard; Zimmermann, Wolfgang

Wed, 1 Jan 1986 12:00:00 +0100 http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8230/ http://epub.ub.uni-muenchen.de/8230/1/8230.pdf Weber, Bernhard; Schempp, Werner; Wiesner, Henning Weber, Bernhard; Schempp, Werner und Wiesner, Henning (1986): An evolutionarily conserved early replicatig segment on the sex chromosomes of man and great apes. In: Cytogenetics & Cell Genetics, Vol. 43: pp. 72-78.