Posted on 10/12/2004 8:48:43 AM PDT by Greek
By GINA HOLLAND
(AP) The Ten Commandments monument is pictured in the State Judicial Building in Montgomery, Ala., in a... Full Image
Google sponsored links U.S. Politics Today - Justice Antonin Scalia News Service For Political Professionals www.uspoliticstoday.com
1-3 SCOTUS vacancies over - next four years. What impact if new justices are in Scalia-Thomas mold? www.pfaw.org
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will take up the constitutionality of Ten Commandments displays on government land and buildings, a surprise announcement that puts justices in the middle of a politically sensitive issue.
Justices have repeatedly refused to revisit issues raised by their 1980 decision that banned the posting of copies of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms.
In the meantime, lower courts have reached a hodgepodge of conflicting rulings that allow displays in some instances but not in others.
The high court will hear appeals early next year involving displays in Kentucky and Texas.
(AP) Ousted Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore is shown outside the Alabama Judicial Building... Full Image
In the Texas case, the justices will decide if a Ten Commandments monument on the state Capitol grounds is an unconstitutional attempt to establish state-sponsored religion.
A homeless man, Thomas Van Orden, lost his lawsuit to have the 6-foot tall red granite removed. The Fraternal Order of Eagles donated the monument to the state in 1961. The group gave scores of similar monuments to American towns during the 1950s and '60s, and those have been the subject of multiple court fights.
Separately, they will consider whether a lower court wrongly barred the posting of the Ten Commandments in Kentucky courthouses.
McCreary and Pulaski county officials hung framed copies of the Ten Commandments in their courthouses and later added other documents, such as the Magna Carta and Declaration of Independence, after the display was challenged.
Last week, the justices rejected an appeal from a high-profile crusader for Ten Commandment monuments, ousted Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who lost his job after defying a federal order to dismantle a Ten Commandments monument.
The Ten Commandments contain both religious and secular directives, including the familiar proscriptions on stealing, killing and adultery. The Bible says God gave the list to Moses.
The Constitution bars any state "establishment" of religion. That means the government cannot promote religion in general, or favor one faith over another.
The lawyer for the Kentucky counties, Mathew Staver of the conservative law group Liberty Counsel, told justices that lower courts are fractured on the issue. A divided appeals court panel sided with the American Civil Liberties Union in the Kentucky case.
In the past decade, justices have refused to get involved in Ten Commandments disputes from around the country. Three conservative justices complained in 2001, when the court declined to rule on the constitutionality of a Ten Commandments display in front of the Elkhart, Ind., Municipal Building.
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, joined by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, said the city sought to reflect the cultural, historical and legal significance of the commandments. Rehnquist noted that justices' own chambers includes a carving of Moses holding the Ten Commandments.
The Rev. Barry W. Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State said Tuesday that he hopes the court uses the cases to declare government displays of religious documents and symbols unconstitutional.
"It's clear that the Ten Commandments is a religious document. Its display is appropriate in houses of worship but not at the seat of government," Lynn said.
The cases are Van Orden v. Perry, 03-1500 and McCreary County v. ACLU, 03-1693.
Yeah, right next to Confucious.
"I think there are plenty of "Lock-n-Load" types ready to go and just need a "the last straw" and a leader."
Really? I don't see it. I see a lot of hard blowing going on, but when push comes to shove, I doubt there's a new revolution on the horizon.
I agree there is no revolution on the horizon, but there are plenty or revolutionaries. With the political climate the way it is, a lot of the "hard-blowing" as you say, is going on on both sides of the aisle.
If you want to argue that including a display of the 10 Commandments constitutes an establishment of a state religion, then you are on very shaky ground. But to use the 14th amendment to argue that such a recognition somehow "abridges the privileges or immunities of citizens" or "deprives any person of life liberty or property" then you are really stretching to find some basic liberty to never be offended by seeing a religious display in public. Sorry but that is not a constitutional right.
What privilege or immunity do you think is being abridged if a state court or a city hall "endorses" a particular religion by displaying the 10 commandments or even a scripture verse? What liberty are you being deprived of? This notion of somehow extending the imaginary wall of separation between church and state out to even the most local of government institutions has led courts to curtail the freedom of speech and freedom of religious exercise to students across the country.
> I think this is an effort to EXACTLY boot out GOD
Errrmmm... how does one boot God out of *anywhere*? If he's there to begin with, legislation seems a weak weapon.
Your arguement would allow states to infringe on a feller's rights to keep and bear arms.
Hey! Wait! They're doing that already. Bring on the religious tests!
Actually it wouldn't. Amendment 1 states "Congress shall make no law..." while Amendment 2 states "... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Therefore, while the power to recognize the role of faith/religion in the history of a state/community (especially its founding) is not prohibited to the states by the Constitution, infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is DEFINITELY prohibited to the states or anyone else.
Ok, I concede on that.
> the power to recognize the role of faith/religion in the history of a state/community
Just so that doesn't become an endorsement.
7 of the 9 Supreme Court Justices were appointed by Republicans, and two by Democrats. The two, Ginsburg and Breyer, are clearly on the Left on the Bench. The Republicans appointed two far-Left (Stevens and Souter), two Centrist (Kennedy and O'Connor), and three far-right (Scalia, Thomas, Rehnquist) Justices. Therefore, if a balanced Supreme Court is truly what you want to protect (thats the mantra they bleat anyway, although we all know they really want 9 hard-Lefties), you should vote Republican, the party that has proven itself in its ability to keep the Court balanced!!!
*of course we can. We can post a passage of the Old Testament, The 10 Comandments, while not posting part of the Quran which says Jesus didn't die.
What part of this Christian Nation's First Amendment don't you get?
That's nice, but it really has nothing to do with the case. Other "equal oppurtunity" displays as you call them have been censored by the courts down because of the presence of the 10 commandments.
You know what I mean, boot God out of any public venue so an absence of God reigns.
Absence of God = Hell by the way.
You are correct.
If I allow posted the 10 commandments, then I should permit posted "Mohammed and the cow" or some such. (Bulletin boards, signs, etc.)
However, the decorator can stick up what the decorator likes. And the next decorator can stick up something different.
> boot God out of any public venue so an absence of God reigns.
You seem to indicate that an absense of mentioning of God is the equivalent of saying "Ain't no God here."
That's already being allowed. Islam isn't prohibited by the first amendment, according to the courts; only Christianity is. Reading the Constitution properly again will help re-balance things out the right way.
* I'm not surprised you get this wrong considering your previous post. You don't understand the 1st Ammendment.
If it's anything like the crap being pulled with the California seal this year, then it would indicate there is no place for God, just atheist.
I trust the Supreme Court to turn this into a travesty. They've long been screwing America, I don't know why they would quit now.
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.