Taking SCOTUS to the Matt!
4 Likes
âAtheists get the Shaftâ??? Can you at least try to summarize the article in the title? I donât agree with the decision, but the triviality of the lawsuit really makes the title seem a little ridiculous.
We have bigger things to tackle as a society.
Tell the town what you think!
2 Likes
"If Christ were here today there is one thing he would not be - a Christian?
Mark Twain
5 Likes
Oh, donât worry about Bernie. Heâs no Ralph Nader, and wouldnât endanger the country for his own ego.
4 Likes
I dunno. The separation of church and state seems kinda important to me.
19 Likes
What about âfreedomâ from religion? Thanks again to our Roberts court for clearing that up for us. Shame on them.
6 Likes
Whatâs interesting is that #5 is always the same one.
Anthony Kennedy is destroying this nation.
2 Likes
This is the USA. Only Christians have ârealâ rights.
2 Likes
Christians are so fragile. Must be able to pray at all times or else they whine squeal like the little punks that they are.
Separation of church and state. Itâs pretty simple. At least I thought it was.
8 Likes
Yes, there is only one most important thing and we should do nothing about the less important things.
As a person living in a state where it is a (unenforceable) law that atheists cannot run for elect office, this isnât a trivial issue.
10 Likes
I get what youâre saying. Gore should not have played the âBill who?â game.
2 Likes
I take it you consider yourself a Christian.
2 Likes
Actually, having religion established into law is really a big freaking problem.
13 Likes
Sharia-Jesus law is taking over and the Supreme Court is fulfilling its Christo-fundy mission. And people say âIâm just not excited about votingâ! Glug, glug, glug.
3 Likes
"Whatâs interesting is that #5 is always the same one.
Anthony Kennedy is destroying this nation."
It takes all five.
Maybe some think heâs approachable - he occasionally used to be by OâConnor on womenâs issues - but heâs firmly entrenched as a nut job now days.
3 Likes
This development proves the fallacy of the SCâs naive belief that a Christian-dominated body would fight to enable invocations by all groups including marginalized faiths and non-believers. Of course this is not accidental, and continues the pattern of the justices being selectively cynical and naive about causes and intentions.
They overturned large parts of the Voting Rights Act because legislators felt pressure to vote for it, forcing the Court to step in and restore justice. When a challenge arose to the Defense of Marriage Act (certainly subject to at least as much voting pressure), they took the position that the legislature had spoken and the Court must defer.
Their credibility continues to fall as theyâre exposed as a sleazy partisan interest group.
3 Likes
I might be misinterpreting you, but I disagree.
Many of the bigger problems we need to tackle are either driven by or given force by efforts to make the US a nation for evangelical Christians.
It touches health care (Hobby Lobby, abstinence only in place of sexual education, impediments to legal abortion, defunding of family-planning clinics, availability of contraceptives, etc.).
It touches education (government funding for religious schools, textbooks and reading lists and library holdings modified to get approval of committees dominated by evangelicals, schools and teachers overlooking or taking part in abuse of gays and non-Christians, etc.).
It touches efforts to apply our best scientific knowledge and understanding to improve our lives and our economic competitiveness (need I turn on the firehose of anti-science for you?).
It touches efforts to expand basic human rights (another firehose).
It touches our ability to be (and to be perceived as by residents) a moderating influence in non-Christian countries, especially the Middle East (no, really â pushing to restore enough land to the Jews of Israel that the second coming of Christ becomes possible is not helpful in the region).
Sadly, it even touches efforts to establish policies and fund programs that you would think the Jesus described in the Bible would strongly favor. With Evangelical Christians willingly co-opted to support a low-tax, anti-government political agenda, it is quite common to hear the Bible used to justify wealth accumulation and demonization of the poor.
20 Likes
How is that not a content based restriction? Unless the clerk decides that your faith has a sufficient presence in the town, you donât get your prayer approved? Back to SCOTUS Greece NY goes.
6 Likes
WhY woULD pEOPle WHo doNât beLIEve iN jESUS care if THEY can PRAY to JEsus at TOWn counciL meeTINGs? LIbtards MAKE no SEnse!!!1!1!1one!1!!!
7 Likes