Free Speech Killed
02-25-2009, 04:11 PM
#1
iClub Silver Vendor
Thread Starter
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Participating in some Anarchy!
Posts: 15,494
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Free Speech Killed
Justices Rule Sect Cannot Force Placing of Monument
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Wednesday, in one of the most closely watched free speech decisions in years, that a tiny religious sect could not force a Utah city to let it erect a monument to its faith in a public park.
The fact that there is already a Ten Commandments monument in the park in Pleasant Grove City does not mean that city officials must also allow the religious group called Summum to place a monument there to the Seven Aphorisms of its faith, the justices ruled.
The fact that there is already a Ten Commandments monument in the park in Pleasant Grove City does not mean that city officials must also allow the religious group called Summum to place a monument there to the Seven Aphorisms of its faith, the justices ruled.
02-25-2009, 04:47 PM
#4
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Mountains
Posts: 4,650
Car Info: 2007 Nissan Frontier
That is not really a free speech issue as much as it an separation of church and state issue, I would say. Either way, its ****ed up. edit: I know the article says its the other way around, but I hold by my guns.
On the subject, I recently read "Divided by god" by Noah Feldmann. Great book, and addresses exactly why the current system is so problematic.
On the subject, I recently read "Divided by god" by Noah Feldmann. Great book, and addresses exactly why the current system is so problematic.
02-25-2009, 06:38 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
That is not really a free speech issue as much as it an separation of church and state issue, I would say. Either way, its ****ed up. edit: I know the article says its the other way around, but I hold by my guns.
On the subject, I recently read "Divided by god" by Noah Feldmann. Great book, and addresses exactly why the current system is so problematic.
On the subject, I recently read "Divided by god" by Noah Feldmann. Great book, and addresses exactly why the current system is so problematic.
Religion A monument is allowed in the park because of reason X.
Religion B monument is not allowed on the park because of reason Y.
Therefore, religion A must be subject to different laws than religion B.
Does not compute.
The Supreme Court sets precedence with this ruling. Is this the type of precedence we should have in America? Magic 8 Ball says, "Outlook not so good"
02-25-2009, 06:50 PM
#6
VIP Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 22,776
Car Info: '13 BRZ Limited / '02 WRX
Hmmmm, the justice quoted said that such monuments are a form of "government speech." So when are they ripping out the 10 Commandments monument due to separation of church and state?
Religions A and B are definitely being judged by different laws
Religions A and B are definitely being judged by different laws
02-25-2009, 10:38 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
I'm sure the justices had access to some sort of English dictionary at the time of the hearing.
re⋅li⋅gion
[ri-lij-uhn]
–noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
02-25-2009, 10:49 PM
#10
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Mountains
Posts: 4,650
Car Info: 2007 Nissan Frontier
I'm sure the justices had access to some sort of English dictionary at the time of the hearing.
re⋅li⋅gion
[ri-lij-uhn]
–noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
re⋅li⋅gion
[ri-lij-uhn]
–noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.
5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
Do I have a religion now?
Does "Little bird of snow" or her father?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...6_0693_ZC.html
In August, 1983, appellees Stephen J. Roy and Karen Miller sued to prevent the Government from requiring them to provide a social security number for their 2-year-old daughter, Little Bird of the Snow, as a condition for obtaining food stamps and welfare benefits for the child. They object to the social security number requirement because of their sincere religious conviction that the Government's widespread use of a unique numerical identifier for their daughter will deprive her of spiritual power. After it developed at trial that the Government already had a social security [p713] number for Little Bird of the Snow, the District Court enjoined the Government not only from denying benefits to her based on her parents' failure to provide a social security number, but also from using or disseminating the number already in the Government's possession until the child's 16th birthday
A dictionary definition only goes so far.
Last edited by Magish; 02-25-2009 at 10:54 PM.
02-25-2009, 11:35 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
I love basketball. It is the absolute purpose of my existence, and I participate in basketball rituals every weekend. They are awesome. Every night, before I go to bed, I sit with my hands on top of my favorite basketball and I pray that tomorrow I will make two more three pointers.
Do I have a religion now?
Does "Little bird of snow" or her father?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...6_0693_ZC.html
And is Buddhism actually count as a religion? Many practicing Buddhists would not define it as so. As I was told by a Monk in Burma, "you can be a christian Buddhist, or a Muslim Buddhist. It doesn't matter to us"
A dictionary definition only goes so far.
Do I have a religion now?
Does "Little bird of snow" or her father?
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...6_0693_ZC.html
And is Buddhism actually count as a religion? Many practicing Buddhists would not define it as so. As I was told by a Monk in Burma, "you can be a christian Buddhist, or a Muslim Buddhist. It doesn't matter to us"
A dictionary definition only goes so far.
The answer is a resounding no because we know basketball is a sport which has no foundation of any dogmatic belief or any divine faith.
Buddhism is seen by other sects as a religion. All of the cores of religion are there, they just don't worship a set of higher powers but instead seek "enlightenment". "Enlightenment", finding "God's Love", whatever works for you. You can be a Christian-Buddhist. I can be a Jew For Christ. One doesn't necessarily discount the other.
Or, we could flip your question. If we can't constitute what religion is because we can't determine the meaning of a common word in our own language, then logically we can't define what isn't a religion.
Therefor, if you truly think there's nothing substantial to prove what is or isn't religion, then logically there's no recognized religion and both of the memorials should be allowed in the park.
"Ipso facto, I'm your boss" - White Goodman
Last edited by Superglue WRX; 02-25-2009 at 11:38 PM.
02-26-2009, 12:38 AM
#13
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Altos, CA
Posts: 2,585
Car Info: The Latest From WayneTech.
Um...I agree with this 100%. I don't want some fanatic religious group forcing the city I live in to erect a symbol of their faith.
You want it? You buy it and put it on land that you paid for/rent (like...a church maybe?).
Keep your religion out of my life.
You want it? You buy it and put it on land that you paid for/rent (like...a church maybe?).
Keep your religion out of my life.
02-26-2009, 06:46 AM
#15
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Mountains
Posts: 4,650
Car Info: 2007 Nissan Frontier
Does basketball explain the universe to you and your group of basketball worshipers and your practices? Does basketball worship try to give reason to man or his origin. Does it truly govern your conduct and imply a moral code?
The answer is a resounding no because we know basketball is a sport which has no foundation of any dogmatic belief or any divine faith.
Buddhism is seen by other sects as a religion. All of the cores of religion are there, they just don't worship a set of higher powers but instead seek "enlightenment". "Enlightenment", finding "God's Love", whatever works for you. You can be a Christian-Buddhist. I can be a Jew For Christ. One doesn't necessarily discount the other.
Or, we could flip your question. If we can't constitute what religion is because we can't determine the meaning of a common word in our own language, then logically we can't define what isn't a religion.
Therefor, if you truly think there's nothing substantial to prove what is or isn't religion, then logically there's no recognized religion and both of the memorials should be allowed in the park.
"Ipso facto, I'm your boss" - White Goodman
The answer is a resounding no because we know basketball is a sport which has no foundation of any dogmatic belief or any divine faith.
Buddhism is seen by other sects as a religion. All of the cores of religion are there, they just don't worship a set of higher powers but instead seek "enlightenment". "Enlightenment", finding "God's Love", whatever works for you. You can be a Christian-Buddhist. I can be a Jew For Christ. One doesn't necessarily discount the other.
Or, we could flip your question. If we can't constitute what religion is because we can't determine the meaning of a common word in our own language, then logically we can't define what isn't a religion.
Therefor, if you truly think there's nothing substantial to prove what is or isn't religion, then logically there's no recognized religion and both of the memorials should be allowed in the park.
"Ipso facto, I'm your boss" - White Goodman
But who are you to say what constituted religion? Basketball may be a sport, but its my ****ing religion too. It explains the universe to me. Magic Johnson is my Jesus Christ. It absolutely governs my everyday conduct, and gives me a sense of purpose.
Does my religion not count because you think its silly? I know a lot of fundamental Christians who think that Hinduism and Buddhism are ridiculous. Where is the line to be drawn? There is no sub-clause of the establishment clause defining religion. Yes, there is a dictionary definition, but that still is pretty broad. My basketball belief may be really really heartfelt. Who are you to say I can’t believe in basketball?
The fact is, these people have a legitimate, heartfelt, religious belief. The ruling by the Supreme Court directly violates their first amendment right. They messed up.
FWIW, I believe the monument should be allowed. Furthermore, any religious monument should be allowed, as long as it adheres to the same rules and regulations any secular monument would have to abide by (height, width, materials) for a location. However, this is assuming that there are absolutely no public funds involved in the monument’s construction. In other words, if this proposed monument was going to use any public money, its off the table. But if it was all private dollars, it should be allowed. This, I believe, is the strategy most in keeping with the original intent of the founders.
