addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramFill 1linklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

The Denver Atheists Meetup Group Message Board Legislation Watch › Supremes Rule Unanimously on Monument

Supremes Rule Unanimously on Monument

Linda R.
LindaRosaRN
Loveland, CO
Post #: 212
Thanks to the Summuns...

http://content.usatod...­
Humanists happy with high court monument ruling
Feb 25, 2009

The American Humanist Association is delighted with Wednesday's U.S. Supreme Court decision that Pleasant Grove, Utah, need not allow a small spiritual sect, the Summum, to post its Seven Aphorisms beside a Ten Commandments monument in the city park.

...Justice Samuel Alito said placement of a permanent marker on public grounds represents a type of government speech.

http://www.americanhu...­
In Wake of Summum, Humanists Will Target Ten Commandments Monuments

..."The unanimous decision of the Court is clear," said Bob Ritter, legal coordinator for the Appignani Humanist Legal Center of the American Humanist Association. "A permanent monument owned by a government entity and located in a public park is a form of government speech. Given this, such a monument isn't permitted to violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. And we humanists are ready to argue that Ten Commandments monuments in U.S. public parks are unconstitutional government endorsements of religion."
A former member
Post #: 187
Unfortunately, they're not going to win though. Scalia has already given fair warning on that.

They'll still use "overall context", "reasonable observer", and "ancient monument" (i.e., over 40 years old), and magically manage to keep most existing monuments in place. New monuments will have a problem, but those that are already there for the most part aren't going to be moved.

Don't expect the Supremes to consistently apply this new principle for all cases, especially those of the kind that have already come before.

-Rusty
Powered by mvnForum

Our Sponsors

  • Secular Hub

    The Secular Hub is a brick and mortar location for secular people.

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy