Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
How is the Supreme court's display is neutral and the Kentucky display an endorsement of a particular religion?
How displaying the ten commandments in a courthouse constitutes a State establishment of religion escapes me. How the display of the ten commandments prevents the free exercize of religion escapes me.
__________________
“votes are collared under democracy, not by talking sense but by talking nonsense.” ~H. L. Mencken
How is the Supreme court's display is neutral and the Kentucky display an endorsement of a particular religion?
How displaying the ten commandments in a courthouse constitutes a State establishment of religion escapes me. How the display of the ten commandments prevents the free exercize of religion escapes me.
The Kentucky Case -they are displaying the Ten Commandments Only - why is that difficult to comprehend?
You don't live in the South, Chaz - you don't understand the mentality of the people down here - they are truly trying to cram their version of Christianity down EVERYONE's throats.
How is the Supreme court's display is neutral and the Kentucky display an endorsement of a particular religion?
How displaying the ten commandments in a courthouse constitutes a State establishment of religion escapes me. How the display of the ten commandments prevents the free exercize of religion escapes me.
I think their ruling is basically "it depends".
My vote, of course, would be to get rid of anything from any religion from any American courthouse.
The Kentucky Case -they are displaying the Ten Commandments Only - why is that difficult to comprehend?
You don't live in the South, Chaz - you don't understand the mentality of the people down here - they are truly trying to cram their version of Christianity down EVERYONE's throats.
Actually I got the impression they are displaying them inside the courthouse...saying they violated the doctrine of separation of church and state.
But I am kinda confused...whats to stop a courthouse from putting up a statue of moses holding the commandments?
You folks seem to have completly missed two of the more important parts of this verdict.
Quote:
"Simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the Establishment clause," he said.
The issue here seems to be intent. If the intent is to push [or ram] christianity at everybody else, it is not constitutional.
If that is not the intent then it may be permissable. As some have said, this country does have christian beginnings.
Quote:
In effect, the court said it was taking the position that issues of Ten Commandments displays in courthouses should be resolved on a case-by-case basis.
This allows for flexability abd judegment, whats the problem.
Quote:
But framed copies in two Kentucky courthouses went too far in endorsing religion, the court held. Those courthouse displays are unconstitutional, the justices said, because their religious content is overemphasized.
In contrast, a 6-foot-granite monument on the grounds of the Texas Capitol - one of 17 historical displays on the 22-acre lot - was determined to be a legitimate tribute to the nation's legal and religious history.
The Kentucky Case -they are displaying the Ten Commandments Only - why is that difficult to comprehend?
You don't live in the South, Chaz - you don't understand the mentality of the people down here - they are truly trying to cram their version of Christianity down EVERYONE's throats.
The Ten Commandments is the Ten Commandments. I don't see how displaying it constitutes a State endorsement of religion.
How exactly does it affect the free exercize of any religion you want to observe?
Now we have to have the Supreme Court judge people's intentions to see if it is ok? Is it the job of the Supreme Court to judge the intent of the display?
Please tell me where you find it in here Jon.
Amendment I
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.
__________________
“votes are collared under democracy, not by talking sense but by talking nonsense.” ~H. L. Mencken
The Ten Commandments is the Ten Commandments. I don't see how displaying it constitutes a State endorsement of religion.
How exactly does it affect the free exercize of any religion you want to observe?
Now we have to have the Supreme Court judge people's intentions to see if it is ok? Is it the job of the Supreme Court to judge the intent of the display?
Please tell me where you find it in here Jon.
Amendment I
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.
Seems very clear to me, Chaz - Congress (and by the 14th Amendment states and counties) shall not establish an official religion - which is what the Kentucky counties are trying to do. Step back from your anti-big government plateau and look at the reality and intent behind what the Kentuckians are trying to do.
Were our laws on stealing and murder based on the Ten Commandments? I guess we have to go back to the makers of the laws and interpret their intent. If they were we might have to wipe those from the laws also.
Seriously I have no problem with them taking the Ten Commandments out of government offices. I don’t see the harm in having them there but I might have a different view if I wasn’t a Christian. It is just moronic that they banned some displays while keeping others such as the one in the Supreme CountBuilding as well as other buildings. If they rule that they do not belong then they shouldn’t belong in any government building. But if that is the decision they make then anything that is displayed that can be associated with any religion (Not just Christianity and Judaism) should not be allowed. That might limit just about anything.
__________________
There will never be enough questions answered to eliminate faith
Dback, I lived in KY. once upon a time. The closest I came to anything resembling religion was when I got blotto on some moonshine. I remember hugging and crying out to the porcelain god.
Seriously, the majority of people in the south aren't so dead set on spreading their religion, but the politicos seem to think it is their God given duty to do so. They think if they get people looking at that part of their makeup, they'll overlook their shady side and can get re-elected.
__________________
“So I became a newspaperman. I hated to do it but I couldn’t find honest employment.” —Mark Twain
Last edited by 40yearfan; June 27th, 2005 at 09:54 AM.
Linear Mode
