Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ScottKuma
By the way, Pan...
We are on the same side of this issue - both of us agree that it was a bone-headed ruling by the lower courts. And I think that both of us agree that the judge trying to pin ANY religion as "non-mainstream" is absolutely abhorrent and unconstitutional.
I just don't think it's quite the time to start running around, shout that the sky is falling (KIDDING!  ) , or begin the protesting...yet. Should this ruling not be corrected in normal measure, or should rulings like this continue, I'll be right there next to you.
The key is that our system was DESIGNED that these types of decisions would correct themselves. These corrections just happen slowly - as I believe most governmental actions should happen. My argument is perhaps better applied to Congressional actions (law-making), but I think it applies here, too. A government that moves and acts too quickly often does so rashly. |
I agree somewhat that time will tell and hopefully this will be struck down, again, I feel with the GOP and Religious Right putting pressure on what they deem as "liberal" judges and this case being in Indiana (one of the most Cons. states....) it may be harder to overturn than people want to believe.... I pray not but.....
As for shouting, I am very concerned a judge tried to put this in let alone even think about it. This should concern anyone wanting and valuing their rights because obviously the second judge let this stand. And with court dockets, how long does this family have to wait before they can practice their freedom of religion with their child??????
And what about finances....... if they run out and the appeals stop then precedent is set. I can see this happening, and that is a scary thought.
So yes, it is 2 judges or a judge and moderator or whatever, and yes, it is early, but in cases like this I would rather panic too fast than watch as someone loses their rights until their case can be appealed.
I like your arguments and the facts that you provided to give me cause to think as to why someone would consider this ok. You have provided good dialogue and hopefully people (INCLUDING MYSELF ATY TIMES) can use yours, Fool's, X's examples of intelligent dialogues as standards, where we don't have attacks on people or ideas but rational viewpoints discussed.
