Quote:
Originally posted by j8ear
I think I've done gone off and aruged myself two positions ;-)
1. When government goes and tells ANYONE to take down anything, ESPECIALLY religous things, it sickens me. You don't like it, you go and take it down. You want it up, go put it up. Bring your friends if you think you need help.
I did say that I knew nothing about the justice, if the cats a hard corp zealot who frequently quotes scripture in his rulings and demonstrates that he's ~very~ christian in his decision making process, and this was his only motivation for erecting the tablets, then the people of Alabama should go take down the ten commandents. Not the fucking federal governmemt. I submit that the first ammendment to the constitution expressly forbids them from doing so.
Again, I'm no constitutional scholar.
|
Forgive me for being rude but this is the dumbest argument I've heard in a long time.
1. The judge is not acting in his capacity as a private citizen, he's acting as an agent of the federal government. If a private citizen puts up a religious display, it's protected speech because it's his personal opinion, and presumably on his property. However, if an agent of the govt p
(edit) - oops, something happened while this was posting and it got cut off - could a mod please delete? thanks!