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

To: Looking for Diogenes
where is Thompson's error?

It is my position that Everson v. Board of Education,(1947) is untenable and unacceptable. It will have to be overturned in order to return a semblance of sanity to the Establishment clause. It is simply unjust to scour every remnant of religion from every public place. It is absurd to say it is what the Framers intended.

Any errors of Thompson's are the repetitions of the same errors in dozens of cases. I can quibble with a few little things in the text, but what's the point?

If you are interested, I would gladly do so, but this whole thing is utterly depressing.

109 posted on 08/25/2003 8:43:12 PM PDT by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies ]


To: NutCrackerBoy
Any errors of Thompson's are the repetitions of the same errors in dozens of cases.

In other words, it is consistent with the decisions of other judges and, necessarily, the precedents of SCOTUS. As you may know, lower courts are obliged to follow SCOTUS precedent as best they can. Only SCOTUS can overturn its own precedents.

It is my position that Everson v. Board of Education,(1947) is untenable and unacceptable.

Here is a key passage. What part do you think is untenable and unacceptable?

The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect "a wall of separation between church and State."
Everson v Board of Education

110 posted on 08/26/2003 12:56:33 AM PDT by Looking for Diogenes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies ]

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