Mendeleyev, Vinolentus, RusOrthCath, Cavaradossi, Roman Interloper, ftbond, NitaMacdonald1930, SOL, etomaria, Kostyantyn, Benny, Ivanov325, DocH, andria, Joe Smith
4467 Registered Users |
|
|
18 registered (Sepp, Thomas the Seeker, Peter J, Cavaradossi, StuartK, Slavophile, Sbdn. John, Athanasius The L, Paul B, babochka, HeavenlyBlack, Kolbe, Curious Joe, Penthaetria, 4 invisible),
201
Guests and
3
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
4467 Members
26 Forums
30166 Topics
373807 Posts
Max Online: 1087 @ 07/16/07 01:09 PM
|
|
|
#6155 - 02/09/06 09:25 PM
Re: US Court Bans Christian Symbols, but allows...
|
Administrator
Member
Registered: 02/16/05
Posts: 3404
Loc: New York
|
Originally posted by djs: The opinion is here. (Best to save target as... ; it's over 100 pages.) Bob, I believe if you click "here" above, the text of the decision will come up. In IC XC, Father Anthony+
_________________________
Everyone baptized into Christ should pass progressively through all the stages of Christ's own life, for in baptism he receives the power so to progress, and through the commandments he can discover and learn how to accomplish such progression. - Saint Gregory of Sinai
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#6156 - 02/09/06 09:27 PM
Re: US Court Bans Christian Symbols, but allows...
|
Member
Registered: 11/24/05
Posts: 139
Loc: Oregon
|
I'm sorry for the typos and for having a belligerent computer which won't open the document. However, I think that I figured it out and a case record is on the way.
Thanks!
One Love.
bob r.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#6157 - 02/09/06 10:04 PM
Re: US Court Bans Christian Symbols, but allows...
|
Member
Registered: 06/09/02
Posts: 5153
Loc: somewhere betwixt the Alpha an...
|
Originally posted by djs:
The headline and the first sentence are flatly false. The second sentence, while strictly true, leaves out so many relevant facts that it is potentially very misleading. There is not the merest effort to detail the school policy, the facts of the case, the specific issues under litigation, or the actual ruling. The article is at best uninformative and at worst inflammatory and dishonest. I hate to see such writing in a publication that uses the word "Catholic" in its name. Thanks for clarifying. I wanted to understand your thinking on this, since I have not read (nor do I have the legal expertise that you do) the decision.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#6158 - 02/09/06 10:54 PM
Re: US Court Bans Christian Symbols, but allows...
|
Member
Registered: 05/16/02
Posts: 2953
Loc: USA
|
Gordo, I've read through only the first part of the download. This part reviews the policy of the school, the facts about the way it was enacted, some legal precedents on what the SCOTUS requires, which symbols have secular connotations, etc. I don't have any legal experience, but the actual situation is fairly clear.
As to appeals. I think that an appeal might follow along the lines of the dissent. I think it may be found that the criterion of "secular connotations" may be too vague for easy application and thus effectively lead to constant haggling and entanglement of state and religious interests. This situation may be seen as falling outside the guidelines set in the Lemon precedent referred to in the decision.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#6159 - 02/10/06 12:17 AM
Re: US Court Bans Christian Symbols, but allows...
|
Member
Registered: 11/24/05
Posts: 139
Loc: Oregon
|
The dissent seems well reasoned and Lemon seems like a helpful reference point. I thought that Allegheny was being misunderstood or applied too broadly, though.
It seems like there is a good basis for appeal, but why am I stuck thinking that this was bungled by the plaintiff's attorneys?
I hope that this moves forward.
Now, I really am more concerned about the ACLU/Marines case mentioned above in large part because that affects my livlihood. I need details; can anyone provide them?
One Love.
bob r.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index