Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jesus statue on federal land in Montana doesn’t violate the Establishment Clause" (TR)
Washington Post ^ | August 31, 2015 | Eugene Volokh

Posted on 09/02/2015 8:28:58 PM PDT by This_far

A Ninth Circuit panel has just rejected a Freedom from Religion Foundation challenge to the Montana “Big Mountain Jesus” statue, which was apparently first placed on government land in 1954.

Here’s most of the opinion, signed by Judges N.R. Smith and John Owens:

[T]he government’s continued authorization of the [Big Mountain Jesus] statue on federal land does not violate the Establishment Clause. [Footnote: Our analysis assumes, without deciding, that [the U.S. Forest Service’s] continued authorization of the statue on public land constitutes government action.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: establishment; military; montana
I was waiting to hear about this and found it interesting that the 9th actually went with the historical (actual/factual) definition of the clause.

Especially since, there was (possibly) a larger target involved?...

"http://www.ourladyoftherockies.net/"

1 posted on 09/02/2015 8:28:58 PM PDT by This_far
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: This_far

Good!!! PTL.


2 posted on 09/02/2015 8:36:09 PM PDT by BeadCounter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

>> Freedom from Religion Foundation

A collection of clowns that don’t have the capacity to differentiate themselves from “religion.”


3 posted on 09/02/2015 8:38:39 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: This_far

Jesus statue on federal land in Montana doesn’t violate the Constitution...

...but federal ownership of land in Montana almost certainly DOES violate the Constitution.

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!


4 posted on 09/02/2015 8:41:44 PM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: This_far

Libtards need to learn that, to them, Jesus is secular.


5 posted on 09/02/2015 8:53:21 PM PDT by Paladin2 (Ive given up on aphostrophys and spell chek on my current device...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: This_far

They missed the most fundamental reason that the statue should stay. Only Congress could establish a religion through their powers to legislate and they haven’t done that.

The same reason Judge Roy Moore’s Ten Commandments monument should still be in front of his court house.


6 posted on 09/02/2015 9:06:59 PM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason and rule of law. Prepare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

I thought the meaning of the exclusion clause was that the government could NOT establish a common religion (congress/legislature etc)?


7 posted on 09/02/2015 9:24:58 PM PDT by This_far
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: This_far

It is. But the 1st Amendment tacitly acknowledges Congress’ sole authority to establish anything that might be established by explicitly naming things it may not establish.

IOWs what other authority does the government have to establish anything than through a legislative act of Congress? The other two branches, nor any subordinate agency, could establish a state religion, even if it were not prohibited, because they don’t have the Constitutional authority to do so.

Putting up a statue or monument doesn’t constitute such an act in any case. Even if Congress enacted a bill to put a statue of Jesus in the Capitol Rotunda that would not be establishing a state religion. It would be establishing a Congressional decoration of the Capitol.


8 posted on 09/02/2015 9:46:13 PM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason and rule of law. Prepare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: This_far
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.

"Congress" in this case specifically means the Federal legislature. Thus to make a case that the First Amendment is broken, why should one not first be required to identify the specific law that congress made in violation of it? What is this specific law in the case of this statue?

9 posted on 09/02/2015 9:57:41 PM PDT by AndyTheBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
. Only Congress could establish a religion through their powers to legislate and they haven’t done that.

Totally wrong/backwards. The federal congress is singled out as being prohibited from making laws respecting religion in the First Amendment. In the 9th and 10th Amendments its made clear that this prohibition is for the Federal government and that the people and states retain any power not except those positively granted by the Federal Constitution to the Federal government.

10 posted on 09/02/2015 10:04:20 PM PDT by AndyTheBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Putting up a statue or monument doesn’t constitute such an act in any case. Even if Congress enacted a bill to put a statue of Jesus in the Capitol Rotunda that would not be establishing a state religion. It would be establishing a Congressional decoration of the Capitol.

I'd say that we're in agreement on P1 & P2 of yours, plus you've given me, in P3, that which makes the post worthwhile to ME! Thank You

11 posted on 09/02/2015 10:06:31 PM PDT by This_far
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: This_far
3-Judge panel, I doubt this ruling will stand up en banc
12 posted on 09/02/2015 10:07:05 PM PDT by Ready4Freddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ready4Freddy

At this point they are making more enemies/antagonists than supporters even amongst the down hill crowd.

It’s a semi-historical site, put up by military veterans.

Did you go to the accompanying post about ‘Our Lady of the Rockies’?

PBS aired an hour show about that accomplishment (and if a Jesus statue in the middle of a ski mountain upsets a gaggle of atheists, how are they ever going to use US Interstate 90/15 to pass through Butte?)


13 posted on 09/02/2015 10:29:03 PM PDT by This_far
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: AndyTheBear

Yes, I know, that is what I said.


14 posted on 09/03/2015 1:12:54 PM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason and rule of law. Prepare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: This_far
You're welcome. I'm glad you like it!

I argued that a lot about Roy Moore and his TC monument but even here on FR it seemed that not many got it. A rock, a piece of art at best, is not a religion. And it certainly isn't a law as it establishes nothing in any legal sense. Without a doubt you could say that it honors a religion but that in no way makes it a state decree compelling anyone to be observant of that religion.

If the mere sight of a religious object established law then we'd be a nation of subtext not a nation of written laws. A nation of hints and suggestions.

I suggest that if libtards, atheists and secular humanists feel that vulnerable to subliminal stimuli they need to go live in darkened caves far away from normal people. ;-)

15 posted on 09/03/2015 1:34:58 PM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason and rule of law. Prepare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Thank YOU!

More to re-read and learn.

Did you go to the link about ‘Our Lady of the Rockies’ and if so, do you have any thoughts about a challenge to THAT edifice?


16 posted on 09/03/2015 7:41:53 PM PDT by This_far
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: This_far

I hadn’t noticed the URL until you mentioned it. It doesn’t say anything about who owns the land at the site. I don’t see how anyone could challenge it if it’s on private land.


17 posted on 09/03/2015 9:28:23 PM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason and rule of law. Prepare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson