Page 42 of 42 FirstFirst ... 32404142
Results 411 to 416 of 416

Thread: Is the Bladensburg Cross Unconstitutional?

  1. #411
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Last Seen
    05-24-19 @ 11:50 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,257

    Re: Is the Bladensburg Cross Unconstitutional?

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    jimmy, you are definitely trolling -- OR, you are so ignorant in regards to the Constitution that your answers come across as little more than trolling.

    For the umpteenth time, a religious symbol on a building owned by a religious group is not in any legal or rational understanding, the equivalent of a religious symbol on public property. The fact that a symbol may be seen by the public when placed on a privately-owned property does not mean that said symbol should be placed upon property owned by a government entity.

    DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
    Off-topic/Red:
    I do not think the Constitution demarks the extant limit to which you refer. I don't know what does; I'm merely confident the Constitution isn't it.

  2. #412
    pleb nekrodev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,163

    Re: Is the Bladensburg Cross Unconstitutional?

    Quote Originally Posted by Xelor View Post
    Off-topic/Red:
    I do not think the Constitution demarks the extant limit to which you refer. I don't know what does; I'm merely confident the Constitution isn't it.
    if i'm understanding your criticism properly, then the Constitution definitely does cover it.

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...".

    you could say that this doesn't apply at state level based on just this, but i'm sure that's covered elsewhere, and if not, it is by Supreme Court cases.

    if the government has just a large Christian symbol on the premises, and not symbols for all other religions, or in place of no religious symbols, then they are promoting one over the others, or the lack thereof, which is directly a violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause

  3. #413
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Last Seen
    05-24-19 @ 11:50 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,257

    Re: Is the Bladensburg Cross Unconstitutional?

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    jimmy, you are definitely trolling -- OR, you are so ignorant in regards to the Constitution that your answers come across as little more than trolling.


    For the umpteenth time, a religious symbol on a building owned by a religious group is not in any legal or rational understanding, the equivalent of a religious symbol on public property. The fact that a symbol may be seen by the public when placed on a privately-owned property does not mean that said symbol should be placed upon property owned by a government entity.


    DO YOU UNDERSTAND?


    Quote Originally Posted by Xelor View Post
    Off-topic/Red:
    I do not think the Constitution demarks the extant limit to which you refer. I don't know what does; I'm merely confident the Constitution isn't it.



    Quote Originally Posted by nekrodev View Post
    if i'm understanding your criticism properly, then the Constitution definitely does cover it.

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...".

    you could say that this doesn't apply at state level based on just this, but i'm sure that's covered elsewhere, and if not, it is by Supreme Court cases.

    if the government has just a large Christian symbol on the premises, and not symbols for all other religions, or in place of no religious symbols, then they are promoting one over the others, or the lack thereof, which is directly a violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause
    Blue:
    You've misunderstood my remarks. They pertained to and aimed to help abate your expressed uncertainty regarding the existence and nature of "Jimmy's" ignorance, not the nature or extent of what the Constitution covers or doesn't.

  4. #414
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Last Seen
    11-10-19 @ 11:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,505

    Re: Is the Bladensburg Cross Unconstitutional?

    Quote Originally Posted by nekrodev View Post

    if the government has just a large Christian symbol on the premises, and not symbols for all other religions, or in place of no religious symbols, then they are promoting one over the others, or the lack thereof, which is directly a violation of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause
    wrong of course, the Constitution does not say anything about promoting, just establishing. Now do you understand?

  5. #415
    Guru Glitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Alaska (61.5N, -149W)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,621

    Re: Is the Bladensburg Cross Unconstitutional?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    As far as I can tell, the Bladensburg Cross, while being a Christian symbol, was not specifically erected to advocate for any particular religion and is more for memorial purposes than religious. In which case it would not violate the Establishment Clause and should remain as is.
    Apparently the Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, agrees with me. The Bladensburg Cross does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. See American Legion et al. v. American Humanist Association et al.

  6. #416
    pleb nekrodev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,163

    Re: Is the Bladensburg Cross Unconstitutional?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    Apparently the Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, agrees with me. The Bladensburg Cross does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. See American Legion et al. v. American Humanist Association et al.
    honestly, not surprising given the current SC, but it's still disappointing. all in all, not the worst outcome, though, they didn't blatantly rule that things like this were okay, in general - just that this particular one wasn't really intended to be just a symbol of Christianity.

Page 42 of 42 FirstFirst ... 32404142

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •