Posted on 06/27/2005 7:31:57 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan
(06-27) 07:19 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --
A split Supreme Court struck down Ten Commandments displays in courthouses Monday, ruling that two exhibits in Kentucky cross the line between separation of church and state because they promote a religious message.
The 5-4 decision was the first of two seeking to mediate the bitter culture war over religion's place in public life. In it, the court declined to prohibit all displays in court buildings or on government property. Justices left legal wiggle room, saying that some displays like their own courtroom frieze would be permissible if they're portrayed neutrally in order to honor the nation's legal history.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
It would seem, then, that any courtroom that chose to erect a replica of the USSC frieze would be in the clear constitutionally.
I won't comment on the religious aspect since Christians already know and secularist don't believe or don't care. However, from a political point of view, this ruling probably helps conservatives in the next nominee battle. The camel's back is now officially broken.
Not quite the same 5....O'Connor wrote the scathing dissent in the land use case.
What about the when the judicial branch of government "acts with the ostensible and predominant purpose of rejecting religion "? Doesn't that violate the Free Exercise clause?
No. O'Communist was in the majority on this one.
1. This supreme court holds that there is no such thing as private property.
2. This supreme court hold that displays of a remotely religious nature on public property are forbidden.
1 + 2 =
3. No religious Christmas decorations on your lawn, crosses where they can be seen publically, etc. Just wait.
Count me in!!
O'Connor the swing vote once again. Reagan is rolling over in his grave. My how she's "grown" in office since Reagan appointed her to the bench.
I sincerely hope that she is the Justice rumored to be retiring after this term.
The justices left themselves legal wiggle room on this issue, however, saying that some displays like their own courtroom frieze would be permissible if they're portrayed neutrally in order to honor the nation's legal history.
A bit of history on this subject - FYI:
Judge Roy Moore and The Ten Commandments Monument - A Timeline (ACLU Prompted Removal)
Judge Roy Moore And The Ten Commandemtn Monuments Lawsuit - A Time Line: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Answer:
oligarchy
Pronunciation: 'ä-l&-"gär-kE, 'O-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -chies
Date: 1542
1 : government by the few
2 : a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes; also : a group exercising such control
3 : an organization under oligarchic control
The fertilizer's on the way to the ventilator...the next appointee should be Godly and Right...and may we have the brass to let loose the dogs of war!
BINGO!!!!!!
The simplicity and incitefullness of this post is truly brillant. Absolutely brilliant.
Truly brilliant, I can't wait until this starts happening. I want to write a letter to the folks in Birminham right now...
This will certainly become a wake up call for impending court nomination hearings. I suspect the silent American public will become more engaged than ever before. Too bad we'll only be fighting to hold our ground, since Rehnquist will likely be the first vacancy.
Yep, i can see #3 happening very soon! It is sickening!
Don't know what will be the last straw, but they are so pushing the common belief of such a large number of people on all sorts of issues to the point the government they are shaping is too far away from the consensus of a large portion of the US people.
There could very well be a Rubicon where people no longer will accept it. And with the track record of this court, that day is coming sooner than later.
Have We the People have become so powerless that we are now at the mercy of 5 individuals?
What surprises me is the anger on some other threads about aledged KGB influence in the Russian church but there's not the same level of outrage that in America the Supreme court and ACLU adamatly argue for a state endorsed freedom from religion as bad or worse than the Soviet Era distrust of religious minded folks. Today's state of religion in Russia is extremely brighter than is the situation in the US with the government perging religon whenever it finds it and churches reinventing scripture to support sins against which the bible preaches. This decision is simply a clarification of what I already know: The government intends to mandate athiesm as the state religion.
I agree. It's not the end of the world. There are certain conditions in which 10 Commandment displays would not be entirely appropriate in my opinion.
See Psalm 2
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.