Posted on 12/20/2005 2:01:25 PM PST by churchillbuff
A U.S. appeals court today upheld the decision of a lower court in allowing the inclusion of the Ten Commandments in a courthouse display, hammering the American Civil Liberties Union and declaring, "The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state."
Attorneys from the American Center for Law and Justice successfully argued the case on behalf of Mercer County, Ky., and a display of historical documents placed in the county courthouse. The panel voted 3-0 to reject the ACLU's contention the display violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution.
The county display the ACLU sued over included the Ten Commandments, the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence, the Magna Charta, the Star Spangled Banner, the National Motto, the Preamble to the Kentucky Constitution, the Bill of Rights to the U. S. Constitution and a picture of Lady Justice.
Writing for the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Richard Suhrheinrich said the ACLU's "repeated reference 'to the separation of church and state' ... has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state."
Suhrheinrich wrote: "The ACLU, an organization whose mission is 'to ensure that ... the government [is kept] out of the religion business,' does not embody the reasonable person."
The court said a reasonable observer of Mercer County's display appreciates "the role religion has played in our governmental institutions, and finds it historically appropriate and traditionally acceptable for a state to include religious influences, even in the form of sacred texts, in honoring American traditions."
Francis J. Manion, Counsel for the ACLJ, argued the case before both the 6th Circuit and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
"This is a big victory for the people of Mercer County and Kentucky generally," said Manion in a statement. "For too long they have been lectured like children by those in the ACLU and elsewhere who claim to know what the people's Constitution really means. What the Sixth Circuit has said is that the people have a better grasp on the real meaning of the Constitution; the Court recognizes that the Constitution does not require that we strip the public square of all vestiges of our religious heritage and traditions."
Well, Hallelujah!
(Now where's that freeper with his "Master of the Obvious" display?)
The first sixteen words of the Bill of Rights are:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...."
While the athiest Democrats of the ACLU like to pretend that those last six words aren't there, they ARE there. And it is certainly gratifying to see that a U.S. Court of Appeals noticed that those last sux words are there. The "tyranny of the minority" has just been slapped down a little. I feel like somebody just threw a glass of cold sanity in my face.
I have never been so proud to be a Kentuckian.
This made my day. Isn't it sad that we have to beg the court to protect religious freedom from the cultural cleansing bigots at the ACLU.
Hey folks, pause for a moment and ponder. You are seeing history in the making. This will bring the whole separation of church and state legal fiction created by the ACLU for the last 50 years crashing down.
Interesting a PA judge rules that God is not allowed in science class and a couple of states away another judge rules that at least His commandments are allowed to be placed in a courthouse. We do live in interesting times.
Congratulations KY, a bit of freedom reinstated for you.
ping.
It's about dang time!
It's beyond me how we got a "separation between church and state" from the First Amendment stating: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...
Hmmmmmmmmn.
At least, at last, they found somebody who has read the same Constitution I studied.
Yes! Yes!
FReepgards,
K4
Roy Moore gives his regards...
Oh, how I hope and pray you are right about this!
Writing for the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Richard Suhrheinrich said the ACLU's "repeated reference 'to the separation of church and state' ... has grown tiresome. The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church and state."
Suhrheinrich wrote: "The ACLU, an organization whose mission is 'to ensure that ... the government [is kept] out of the religion business,' does not embody the reasonable person."
The court said a reasonable observer of Mercer County's display appreciates "the role religion has played in our governmental institutions, and finds it historically appropriate and traditionally acceptable for a state to include religious influences, even in the form of sacred texts, in honoring American traditions."
Thank you, Judge Richard Suhrheinrich! Finally a judge that can read and interpret the First Amendment as it was written and intended by our forefathers.
If only I could make them different colors, it might help me remember better.
I know, I should learn more than 3 html thingies.
Moral Absolutes Ping.
Read it and have some good cheer. "No wall of separation" - that's the truth, folks. Posting the 10 Commandments on a courthouse wall, at a school, in a post office, at a public park - does NOT constitute Congress establishing a religion.
The end.
Freepmail me if you want on/off this pinglist.
I've got to start writing the article about universal moral absolutes before I die of old age.
They would have to put some kind of audio for the name of those colors for me. HEHE
Have a good Christmas.
Great picture. You probably could have knocked him over with a feather. I guess this really ruined his Christmas, huh?
ping!
ping to you, too.
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.