Henderson County Commissioner Joe Hall has vowed to protect a nativity scene on the lawn of the courthouse in downtown Athens, Texas.
“I’m an old country boy, you come to my house looking for a fight, you’re going to get one,” he told WFAA. “That’s from the bottom of my heart.”
The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) sent a letter to Henderson county officials claiming that the display violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another.
In my observation, when religion comes into conflict with the Constitution, religious people always pick religion over the Constitution. Which is one darned good reason I am leery as hell of people who seem to want to turn this country into a Christian theocracy.
Henderson County Commissioner Joe Hall has vowed to protect a nativity scene on the lawn of the courthouse in downtown Athens, Texas.
“I’m an old country boy, you come to my house looking for a fight, you’re going to get one,” he told WFAA. “That’s from the bottom of my heart.”
The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) sent a letter to Henderson county officials claiming that the display violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another.
AspenValley wrote: In my observation, when religion comes into conflict with the Constitution, religious people always pick religion over the Constitution. Which is one darned good reason I am leery as hell of people who seem to want to turn this country into a Christian theocracy.
AspenValley wrote: In my observation, when religion comes into conflict with the Constitution, religious people always pick religion over the Constitution. Which is one darned good reason I am leery as hell of people who seem to want to turn this country into a Christian theocracy.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...
.",
It is a PART of the Constitution!!! :bash :bash :bash
You are obviously the one going against the Constitution. But that is your choice.
Right. Which means you can put up a Christmas nativity scene on your own front lawn and the government can't tell you you can't, but the government can't put one up on public property as it could be seen as promoting or establishing a state religion.
AspenValley wrote: Right. Which means you can put up a Christmas nativity scene on your own front lawn and the government can't tell you you can't, but the government can't put one up on public property.
Please post where it says that in the Constitution.
AspenValley wrote: Right. Which means you can put up a Christmas nativity scene on your own front lawn and the government can't tell you you can't, but the government can't put one up on public property.
Please post where it says that in the Constitution.
Does there have to be specific wording covering every conceivable example of what might be seen as the government either prohibiting free exercise of religion or promoting a state religion before you can understand that the Constitution is simply stating the government has no business EITHER interfering with your private practice of religion OR publically promoting a specific religion itself?
I believe we've already covered that...It was called the "Lemon Test", and it was the Supreme Court's interpretation of the 1st Amendement "establishment" clause. You know, that Supreme Court thing that renders judgements on all of the cases that come before it that require interpretation of the Constitution where the Constitution is ambiguous, or requires determination. (I don't think I remember the Constitution saying anything about highway systems, airports, television/radio/cellphones, or space agencies either...) But it's "quaint" that some here would like to still pretend that we have an 18th-century republic government ruled by a "sacred" document that did NOT come down on stone tablets.
In Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), the Supreme Court has applied a three-pronged test to determine whether government action comports with the Establishment Clause, known as the "Lemon Test". First, the law or policy must have been adopted with a neutral or non-religious purpose. Second, the principle or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion. Third, the statute or policy must not result in an "excessive entanglement" of government with religion.[43]
AspenValley wrote: Right. Which means you can put up a Christmas nativity scene on your own front lawn and the government can't tell you you can't, but the government can't put one up on public property.
Please post where it says that in the Constitution.
Does there have to be specific wording covering every conceivable example of what might be seen as the government either prohibiting free exercise of religion or promoting a state religion before you can understand that the Constitution is simply stating the government has no business EITHER interfering with your private practice of religion OR publically promoting a specific religion itself?
So there isn't anything. Now that we cleared that up. If we have government officials who want to put up Chritmas decorations in the government office that they oversee, then go for it! I am so tired of all you libs trying to continually control other peoples lives if they don't believe exactly like you do.
