FYI re the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment (2 Viewers)

[jpl458]

The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another.

 

[Pat Hartman]

OK, what law are you objecting to?

 

[AccessBlaster]

OK, what law are you objecting to?

Life?

 

[pbaldy]

Presumably:

https://www.npr.org/2024/06/19/nx-s1-5012597/louisiana-10-commandments-law-public-school-classrooms

 

[jpl458]

OK, what law are you objecting to?

Not objecting to anything, except for the New State Law that says that the Ten Commandments be posted in every classrom in every school in that state. As I remember from my education the founders realized that a lot of the people that came here ealry were trying to avoid religious persecution. So that part of the constitution has been the law from day one. Now that we are 250 years old, the Christians want to have their religion be the formal religion of the country. So go back and read my post. Plucked right out of the Constitution. I'll make it easy for you:

The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. There you have it it black and white. What part do you not understand? The founders must have been some Godless souls.

 

[Pat Hartman]

It is a real shame that posting the 10 Commandments anywhere is objected to. They are the basis of our entire Western culture. The first four refer to the God of the bible but the other six are our entire judicial system in a nutshell.

Also, The reference to the Constitution I believe refers only to the Federal government. State governments have their own constitutions.

 

[Steve R.]

Simply posting a document is not the government establishing a religion. Once again you misconstrue something to make inflammatory posts without providing the reader with proper research/analysis.

 

[Mike Krailo]

The ten commandments are not an establishment of a religion, they are the ten commandments. No one is forced to read them, you are free to have your own beliefs. No ordinary human being can live up to and abide in all ten commandments at all times, many have tried, but all have fallen short.

The purpose of the first amendment was to prevent the government from dictating one particular way to worship the creator. It does not do away with the creator and exclude him from government. That is very far from what it means. Those that wish to abolish the creator and have no respect at all for him love to leave the last part out.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

 

[AccessBlaster]

I'm okay with restrictions on the ten commandments as long as they remove climate, and LGBT stuff also.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Also, The reference to the Constitution I believe refers only to the Federal government. State governments have their own constitutions.

Sorry, Pat, but both precedent and constitutional text would find fault in your stated position.

Regarding Louisiana's Ten Commandments law, as it is worded it will probably fail on "separation of church and state" rules. In the past, a similar or identical law was passed in several southern states and in each case was found to be unconstitutional. For one example, from 1980,

Stone v. Graham | Supreme Court Case on Education Rights

Stone v. Graham, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on November 17, 1980, ruled (5–4) that a Kentucky statute requiring school officials to post a copy of the Ten Commandments (purchased with private contributions) on a wall in every public classroom violated the First Amendment’s establishment

www.britannica.com

Kentucky lost that one. I remember others that faded out in appellate courts after Stone vs. Graham set the standard and precedent.

As to state governments having their own constitutions, true but irrelevant. There is a clause in the U.S. Constitution that says its admonitions apply EVERYWHERE. See article 6, 2nd paragraph.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

That "anything...to the contrary notwithstanding" is one of those legal "nuclear deterrent" clauses that is supposed to be a hard barrier.

I'm not a lawyer but I was around when these cases were in the news. If I recall the discussions correctly, ONE of the major flaws is the failure to post the central principles of other religions - i.e. the Analects of Confucius, the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, and I'm sure I've left out a couple. Another major issue was that the commandments were deemed permissible ONLY in the context of a history class that covered the other types of scripture, i.e. a comparative religion class... OR the contributions of each of those holy books to our culture as an advanced historical class on factors in the development of our government.

 

[jpl458]

It is a real shame that posting the 10 Commandments anywhere is objected to. They are the basis of our entire Western culture. The first four refer to the God of the bible but the other six are our entire judicial system in a nutshell.

Also, The reference to the Constitution I believe refers only to the Federal government. State governments have their own constitutions.

Sorry,, but you are wrong. Go back and read my post. That post explains the law since the constitution was put together. What about Hinduism, Judisim, Athieism, all perfectly legal to practice, but the government can't pick any one of them to the National religion. It is the law of the land. Read Doc's post.. Which Christian sect is the real one, Catholic? Potestent? Baptist? Which one is the real one? What about Mega Churches, Like the one in Houston with Joel Osteen, it that the true christianity? I truley think that if they post the Ten Commandments then they should have post the first Ten Issues of Mad Magazine as well. Just to be fair.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

they should have post the first Ten Issues of Mad Magazine as well.

I would actually support a law saying that. I rather liked Mad Magazine. Such posting would serve to show how idiotic some "public servants" can get. I'm pretty sure Jeff Landry, our new governor in Louisiana, will find a way to evade blame for the law he signed.

 

[Mike Krailo]

I would actually support a law saying that. I rather liked Mad Magazine. Such posting would serve to show how idiotic some "public servants" can get. I'm pretty sure Jeff Landry, our new governor in Louisiana, will find a way to evade blame for the law he signed.

I was also impressed with Mad Magazine when I was a kid as well. My dad and I went to the book store and I always picked up a copy of Mad and he got his latest Playboy or the like. I would support a law requiring everyone to watch the movie Idiocracy once a year.

I think they should bring the pledge of allegiance back to the schools. That's the American thing to do. It didn't harm anyone. If you lived in China you would have to pledge allegiance to Xi and mean it.

 

[jpl458]

I would actually support a law saying that. I rather liked Mad Magazine. Such posting would serve to show how idiotic some "public servants" can get. I'm pretty sure Jeff Landry, our new governor in Louisiana, will find a way to evade blame for the law he signed.

Between the Comandments and Mad magazine, both in schools, which one do you think would get read more>

 

[jpl458]

I was also impressed with Mad Magazine when I was a kid as well. My dad and I went to the book store and I always picked up a copy of Mad and he got his latest Playboy or the like. I would support a law requiring everyone to watch the movie Idiocracy once a year.

I think they should bring the pledge of allegiance back to the schools. That's the American thing to do. It didn't harm anyone. If you lived in China you would have to pledge allegiance to Xi and mean it.

I agree that the movie Idiocracy should be part of the curiculum in every school.5

 

[Isaac]

The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another.

Have you ever considered the possibility that they meant a more organized type of religion such as the one that they actually fled from? And not Christianity?

Just a thought given the context of the founders...

That's probably why they use the term religion. Christianity is not a religion.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Christianity is not a religion.

No, it's a group of religions. But then, do you compare to Islam? Islam has half-a-dozen sects/denominations, so is it a religion? Buddhism comes in various divisions as well. Shall we go on quibbling about denominations formed through various schisms?

AND, Isaac, you are disingenuously evading the point. They used a generic term because even back then in the late 1700s the founding fathers knew of many different religions and denominations. The point is that they WANTED to use a generic term because whichever member denomination of whichever overall religious group you choose DOESN'T MATTER. NONE of them belong as a matter of government.

 

[jpl458]

Have you ever considered the possibility that they meant a more organized type of religion such as the one that they actually fled from? And not Christianity?

Just a thought given the context of the founders...

That's probably why they use the term religion. Christianity is not a religion.

I don't agree.

 

[Pat Hartman]

I'm okay with restrictions on the ten commandments as long as they remove climate, and LGBT stuff also.

If this drivel can be posted in classrooms, then the 10 commandments certainly have a place.

The point is that they WANTED to use a generic term because whichever member denomination of whichever overall religious group you choose DOESN'T MATTER. NONE of them belong as a matter of government.

And yet our founding documents refer to God.

 

[jpl458]

If this drivel can be posted in classrooms, then the 10 commandments certainly have a place.

And yet our founding documents refer to God.

The founders referred to God as people, not as Government officials. THe Constitution clearly states that there is a separation of church and state. What the Governor did in Lousiana is against the law. Go back and read the post that has the law in it. The way it is written there is zero wiggle room. BTW do you really deny that there is a changing climate? As a former weatherman please note that there is difference between climate and weather. Your grand children should be considered, if you are wrong. IF you think it's bad now, wait 20 years, It's just science. Empiricle observation.