Printable View
..how can they make a ruling that says it violates it? You always here how there is really nothing in the constitution or elsewhere that includes seperation of church and state.
----------------------------------
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A sharply divided Supreme Court on Monday upheld the constitutionality of displaying the Ten Commandments on government land, but drew the line on displays inside courthouses, saying they violated the doctrine of separation of church and state.
Funny, how different news outlets report things different. The one I read said that it struck down the ability of governments from displaying the Ten Commandment but fell short of calling for a blanket outlaw of the commandments. Instead they decided to take it on case-by-case. In fact the ruling was 5-4 with the liberal block (of four) and sandra day oconner voting to require kentucky courthouse to remove the displays.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slade
If there is no such thing as Separation of Church & State.... then why do we have "In God we trust" on our currency :francais:
Oh and another thing..
Why do we never see baby pigeons? :eek:
Regards,
Lee
Why is there no ham in a hamburger?
Technically "separation of church and state" isn't in the Constitution. It's a concept based on an interpretation of the establishment clause: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
This expressly prohibits the government from interfering in religion, but it doesn't prohibit religion from interfering in the government. However, if the government is too heavily influenced by religion it would eventually become an arm of the religion, which is why some people call for a separation of the two.
To basschick:
When the Founding Fathers talked about God, they were talking about God in the general sense. Notice they don't link God to any specific religion. Some of this God stuff was added to things because of Communism by people who wanted to make a distinction between "Godless Commies" and "God Fearing Americans." For example, God wasn't mentioned in the original Pledge of Allegiance.
Matt D - why a note to basschick? i'm not even on this thread *LOL*
Whoops.Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
This is a failed attempt at multi-tasking. I made a mental note to respond to one of your posts on another thread but I responded to this one first and got the two mixed up. Or maybe I responded to the other post first, but got the names confused. I don't know. While I was doing all this I was also responding to a PM from a person on another board.
If only I were Borg. . .
i agree! :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirt
If we got everyone in the northern hemisphere to jump at the same time, would the penguins all fall down?
Why I dont understand is that if there's a seperation of church and state, then why can't gay people get married, and just not in a church?
For example people get married at city hall, Marilyn Monroe was married in city hall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc
Yeah..but MOST gay men don't have the legs Marilyn had! lol
but they say you do Slade :signhere: :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Slade
Quote:
Originally Posted by gaystoryman
aw..shucks..gee whiz.
all this time I thought it was what seperated my legs! :devil:
Marc:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc
Marriage as a civil institution is independent from churches. For example, your state has its own legal rules on divorce. Whereas the catholic church has seperate rules on divorce, which almost certainly are independent from your state's. They are seperate things.
In fact, someone can be an athiest but still support a state's law that defines marriage as man + woman. All laws --- from murder to hate crime penalty enhancements to insider trading --- are based on moral judgements. The concept of seperation of church and state simply says that those laws are not rooted in the morals of a particular church, like the catholic church or the lutheran church.
Steve