- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Federal judge blocks Louisiana law that requires classrooms to display Ten Commandments
Posted on 11/12/24 at 9:58 am to FooManChoo
Posted on 11/12/24 at 9:58 am to FooManChoo
quote:
I find it interesting how the 1st amendment--which preserves the right to religious belief/expression--is used as an excuse to exclude religion from the public square.
The common thread of people complaining about the judge’s decision is they didn’t go to law school and have no understanding of constitutional law
1
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:01 am to FooManChoo
quote:
is used as an excuse to exclude religion from the public square.
*by the government
Individuals can promote religion in the "public square".
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:02 am to stout
quote:
Seperation of church and state
Except when it comes to places to vote huh?
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:03 am to FooManChoo
quote:
We need a constitutional amendment declaring that Jesus Christ is the King over the nation.
Nutcase. And clearly not conservative. The Founding Fathers would beat you senseless.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:08 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
Landry secures the outcome he was hoping for in the first place. Now he can campaign for President on "They're taking God out of our schools!!!!! That's the problem in America. Vote for me and we'll get rid of communist Judges like this one!"
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:11 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
How about a compromise. Let's have no law that requires posting the commandments and no law banning the posting. Some schools will have it and some schools won't. It's called freedom.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:35 am to Fun Bunch
quote:No, you don't. The governement is of the people, by the people, for the people. Quite literally a representation of the people.
if you you are going to include one religious display you have to include all of them
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:40 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Landry knew what the outcome of this would be when he did it. The SpCrt precedent on this and similar issues is a mile long.
JL's goal all along was to get this issue before SCOTUS and reverse that precedent, given the favorable SCOTUS makeup and the likelihood of success.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:43 am to Melkor
quote:
No, you don't
According to the courts you do. It was not an endorsement of this philosophy, simply a statement of the current precedent.
quote:
The governement is of the people, by the people, for the people. Quite literally a representation of the people.
The people are christians and jews and muslims and hindus and agnostics and atheists and...
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:51 am to BayouBlitz
quote:The founding fathers were quite religious. They promoted days of public prayer, for instance.
Nutcase. And clearly not conservative. The Founding Fathers would beat you senseless.
There is a big difference between requiring a person to adhere to a particular religious belief or practice (or preventing them from their own) and allowing public expression of religion.
The modern idea that the government has to be completely secular was not the intent of the founding fathers.
And my personal opinion is that we shouldn't expect God's blessing on our nation if we reject Christ as King of kings and Lord of lords.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 10:54 am to Proximo
quote:Where does the 1st amendment say that the government must be entirely secular? The founding fathers didn't act as if that were the case.
The common thread of people complaining about the judge’s decision is they didn’t go to law school and have no understanding of constitutional law
Posted on 11/12/24 at 11:06 am to Jake88
quote:
No. There is a special session addressing taxes right now.
Only after commandments and bathrooms have been legislated. You know, the important stuff.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 11:06 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
as they should. stupid fricking law. waste of time and money.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 11:31 am to Fun Bunch
quote:This is what I disagree with. I hope one day the courts will overturn that.
It does not, however if you you are going to include one religious display you have to include all of them. (At least according to the Courts, I am not agreeing or disagreeing one way or the other).
The State cannot choose one endorse and exclude others.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 11:35 am to Fun Bunch
They do display the religion of perversion flag.
They make perversion holidays over traditional holidays.
They make perversion holidays over traditional holidays.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 11:37 am to Zach
What Zach said.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 11:40 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
Can we get a judge to block any more Tiger Stadium appearances from Temu Mike?
Posted on 11/12/24 at 11:41 am to Major Dutch Schaefer
Can’t do that
Posted on 11/12/24 at 12:03 pm to 4cubbies
They pass hundreds of bills annually. The serious mix in with the less serious all the time. One is not done exclusively and then another, etc.
Posted on 11/12/24 at 12:56 pm to stout
quote:
Seperation of church and state and all of that jazz.
What statute covers this? The 1A prohibits congress from establishing a religion or prohibiting the free exercise of religion, so clearly this does not apply in this situation.
I'm all for going with the spirit of the law instead of the letter of the law, but consistency is required. If this is a violation of the constitution, then birthright citizenship and counting illegals in the census is as well. People who argue that anchor babies are legal quote the text of the law while ignoring the spirit of the law, even though the guy that wrote the law also wrote that it did not apply to illegals.
So, why the insistence on ignoring the letter of the law in this case but not others?
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News