Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are making an error when you assume that the middle is the correct place to be.
Eliminating religion from the public square does not violate free expression. You are free to pray on your own time, post billboards on your front lawn, build a church, go on a mission, hand out missives on street corners, convert your neighbors and wear religious jewelry.
You are not free to use government resources and prominence nice to push your religion, and nobody else can do so for their religion either. The safest way to do this is to eliminate prayer and religious imagery...in government settings.
So I have freedom of religion as long as my foot doesn't stand on tax supported soil? That's restricted freedom of religion. I'm surprised you didn't argue that the street corner is public property so you can't hand out missives there.
I still fail to see how a simple picture equates to pushes or establishing an official religion of the United States. It is merely acknowledging that such and such religion exists. Even our own government traditionally has acknowledged a divine creator.
Mystic, I have to agree with fishbrains on this, I think what a lot of people seem to forget is that a public school is a government building, it's built with gov't money, whether it be Local, State or Federal it's still gov't money and when you stop and think that it is the people, the ordinary citizen that pays their taxes to support these gov't buildings and pay the salary and wages of the administrators and the teachers of the school's, then they are bound by the laws and the constitution of this country, not those of any particular religion.
Freedom OF religion is the freedom to practice or not.
The constitution does not include freedom from religion, which means protection from being subjected to religion.
Religion is all around us and we cannot escape it.
The freedom FROM religion cannot be made a law or it would violate freedom of religion as well as freedom of speech.
Many think freedom of is the same as freedom from, but they are very different.
There is freedom from religion in government endorse/owned places. I only agree with you in the sense that one doesn't have the right to be offended because someone put a religious symbol in their front yard (assuming it doesn't violate local ordinances).
Frankly, I don't get why ultra religious people feel the need to be constantly reminded of their faith every place they go. Is it really that weak?
If I live in an area where 90-95% of the people want that, so be it. That was the vision of the Founding Fathers.
Uh, no it wasn't. The Founding Fathers were quite opposed to tyranny of the majority.
James Madison wrote: "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure."
Frankly, I don't get why ultra religious people feel the need to be constantly reminded of their faith every place they go. Is it really that weak?
And I don't see why atheists go balllistic over something like a cross memorial to a fallen soldier. WHat happened to showing a little bit of respect and tolerance for someone's religious beliefs? I don't get all up in arms if I see a Star of David memorial on government property.
Don't display religious iconography in government buildings. It is unconstitutional.
True. The Supreme Court has ruled many times on this matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWD39
What does a public school have to do with government establishing religion?
The school is run by and funded by the government. A picture of Jesus promotes Christianity over all other religions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth
Congress shall make no laws Respecting an (as in ANY) establishment of religion, such as Christianity. I think the public school is allowed to put a Jesus idol in its hallways if it wants, no problem... except that it is bothering some of the atheists there. .....
You are certainly entitled to your own opinion. However, the Supreme Court disagrees with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
No it is NOT. That is the public square and freedom of religious EXPRESSION is specifically allowed in the public square. What good would political free speech be if it were not allowed in the public square . . . especially government venues? Religious expression is ALSO specifically protected from government interference . . . just like political speech.
Certainly religious expression is protected by the constitution, even in the public square. That protection applies to you as an individual. The Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution to mean that the government shall not spend any money or take any actions in any building owned by the public to do anything that promotes one religion over another. If that's not OK with you, take it up with the Supreme Court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains
Don't display religious iconography in government buildings. It is unconstitutional.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
No, it isn't.
Only if it is done in a way that in no way promotes one religion over another. This could be interpreted to mean that a representative portrait from every religion on the earth, as well as representatives of non-religious organizations, would be equally represented in the display. So, if you want to insist on the portrait of Jesus in the publicly-owned building, you might have to settle for a picture of the Flying Spaghetti Monster right beside it. You, of course, are free to say, "No, it isn't," but the Supreme Court is the final authority on what the Constitution means.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlKaMyst
So the Washington Monument needs to be destroyed?
It's a religious symbol.
I don't think it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaznjohn
Not when you acknowledge only one religion.
I support Hobby Lobby's case, so I'm not inconsistent at all. So, why would you support Hobby Lobby, not wanting their money to go toward issues that aren't consistent with their beliefs, but want to take money from non-Christians to support your religion?
I'm assuming that Hobby Lobby is a corporation. Corporations are not people; therefore, they do not have beliefs. Corporations are legal entities that have to adhere to the rules for corporations in order to continue to exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
The Constitution says that Congress can't establish a religion. This isn't an act of Congress and they aren't establishing anything. It's a local school hanging a picture. .....
With the passage of the 14th Amendment, all the provisions of the Constitution apply to all government entities, from every agency of the federal government, all state, county and local governments and their various agencies (including school boards). This has bee uphend by the Supreme Court several times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero
The Supreme Court incorporated the 1st Amendment in Everson v. Board of Education. It applies to every level of government and public school systems.
Right you are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains
Hobby lobby is a secular corporation. By deciding to work within the secular structures of the business world, they agree to be bound by the rules.
One of the rules is providing certain health care benefits. This is not a violation of anyone's religious beliefs. Employers do not get to dictate employees private lives.
Imagine that! A secular corporation that has to abide by the law! What will they think of next?
Why would any school think this is OK when the Supreme Court has already ruled clearly in a parallel case? Why would any school board member waste the taxpayers' money fighting to keep the Jesus picture whenhe knows he will lose in the end?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Extremists always push for the maximum in their direction, ptsum . . . that is the real problem. For the anti-religion crowd it is NOT enough to keep the government from establishing a religion. They want ANY mention of God eliminated from the public square which violates the freedom of expression. If there is no freedom of expression in the public square . . . there is no freedom of expression. For the pro-religion crowd it is not enough to have freedom of expression of their religious views. They want a theocracy with all their moral values instantiated into law for everyone. It seems the extremists will always push for their extreme positions causing significant angst and discord for the majority. The result has been pendulum swings toward the extremes that seem to cycle by generations.
I don't think that is QUITE correct. What the ACLU supports in this case is keeping the government from endorsing in any way (spending money, hanging pictures, etc.) any one religion. Religion needs to be kept completely out of the government.
People, however, are free to use the public square as a venue, as long as they do not try to push their views on school children or government employees in a captive setting.
I think you are right that a lot of Christians think they want the USA to be a theocracy. They say so by such statements as "The US was founded as a Christian nation, based on Christian principles, with laws based on the ten commandments."
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains
You are making an error when you assume that the middle is the correct place to be.
Eliminating religion from the public square does not violate free expression. You are free to pray on your own time, post billboards on your front lawn, build a church, go on a mission, hand out missives on street corners, convert your neighbors and wear religious jewelry.
You are not free to use government resources and prominence nice to push your religion, and nobody else can do so for their religion either. The safest way to do this is to eliminate prayer and religious imagery...in government settings.
Good summary. It's what PEOPLE are free to do and what GOVERNMENTS are restricted from doing.
And I don't see why atheists go balllistic over something like a cross memorial to a fallen soldier. WHat happened to showing a little bit of respect and tolerance for someone's religious beliefs? I don't get all up in arms if I see a Star of David memorial on government property.
It's not about the cross memorializing ONE fallen soldier. It's about a 30 foot tall stainless steel cross dominating the entire veterans' cemetery, making everybody uncomfortable who comes to honor their Muslim, Jewish or Buddhist (or even Pastafarian) fallen soldier.
No. They agreed to no such thing. The rules changed, some say unconstitutionally, to mandate employee health care coverage or a penalty/tax (whichever the Obama administration now considers it), is to be imposed. Until now, employer-provided health care was an optional benefit, used by employers, to attract good workers. I would put this up as a big a travesty as the principle of public buildings promoting a particular religion.
It would seem to me that the way to evaluate this is to determine if Hobby Lobby is being treated any differently than any other corporation. So far, I haven't seen any evidence that they are. Said another way, the rules changed, but they changed for everybody the same way.
Extremists always push for the maximum in their direction, ptsum . . . that is the real problem. For the anti-religion crowd it is NOT enough to keep the government from establishing a religion. They want ANY mention of God eliminated from the public square which violates the freedom of expression. If there is no freedom of expression in the public square . . . there is no freedom of expression. For the pro-religion crowd it is not enough to have freedom of expression of their religious views. They want a theocracy with all their moral values instantiated into law for everyone. It seems the extremists will always push for their extreme positions causing significant angst and discord for the majority. The result has been pendulum swings toward the extremes that seem to cycle by generations.
There is no Freedom of Expression in the Constitution.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What will they think of next?