PDA

View Full Version : ACLU 1, Jesus O



BAMAPHIN 22
04-17-2008, 01:09 PM
Federal judge rules lone Jesus painting in Louisiana courthouse was unconstitutional

http://www.finheaven.com/clear.gif



Displaying a portrait of Jesus in the foyer of a Louisiana courthouse is unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled this week, siding with civil libertarians who sued over the display.

But inserting Jesus within a group portrait of historic figures at the courthouse is permissible, the judge said.



In a ruling filed Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Ivan Lemelle awarded "nominal" damages plus attorneys' fees and costs to the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana in its case against Slidell City Court, Judge James Lamz and St. Tammany Parish, which partially finances the court.


http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/wireStory?id=4670883

ih8brady
04-17-2008, 01:12 PM
As long as the good guys are winning... ;)

Aussiefinfan54
04-18-2008, 10:21 AM
thats just ridiculous who looks at that and thinks you know what i am gonna sue so its removed, well done ACLU you're making a difference :rolleyes2:

Tetragrammaton
04-18-2008, 11:33 AM
thats just ridiculous who looks at that and thinks you know what i am gonna sue so its removed, well done ACLU you're making a difference :rolleyes2:

They are. The ACLU is one of the best groups in terms of fighting for freedom.

SirDrums
04-19-2008, 03:12 PM
They are. The ACLU is one of the best groups in terms of fighting for freedom.

Fighting for freedom by taking it away?:err:

ih8brady
04-19-2008, 11:48 PM
Fighting for freedom by taking it away?:err:

Who has the ACLU violated?

cwsox
04-20-2008, 12:18 AM
Fighting for freedom by taking it away?:err:

Fighting for freedom by keeping people's religious expressions where they belong - in the private sector - and not funded by taxpayer dollars and proclaimed on property paid for and maintained by taxpayers

You want a picture of Jesus? Cool! Hang it in your home.

Tetragrammaton
04-20-2008, 01:57 AM
Fighting for freedom by taking it away?:err:

Whose freedom was taken away?

I don't want to be told, subliminally, that I need to follow the law of Jesus. I don't think Christians understand how uncomfortable it is to be an atheist in America.

The ACLU gets flak for being liberal, but that is nonsense. They represent Fred Phelps when he is barred from protesting. They have represented many right-wing figures before.

SirDrums
04-20-2008, 02:50 AM
If your not following Jesus's laws. Then who are you following? and what morals are they based upon?

You will find that most, if not all, laws are based upon some moral foundation writen in a religion somewhere.

Anyway, I dont think a picture of Jesus is hurting anybody. But the ACLU telling you what you can and cannot display publicy is.

Today is a picture of Jesus, tomorrow, perhaps it will be something you like?

ih8brady
04-20-2008, 03:13 AM
Anyway, I dont think a picture of Jesus is hurting anybody. But the ACLU telling you what you can and cannot display publicy is.

Today is a picture of Jesus, tomorrow, perhaps it will be something you like?


It's hurting the US Constitution. Freedom of religion, by definition includes freedom from religion. With my choice to not follow Christianity as my religion comes the government's responsibility to not endorse or champion one religion over all other possible faiths or non-faiths. What if a govt. building in San Fransisco had a portrait of local Anton Levay? Wouldn't like that, would you? :err:

Aussiefinfan54
04-20-2008, 09:47 AM
Fighting for freedom by keeping people's religious expressions where they belong - in the private sector - and not funded by taxpayer dollars and proclaimed on property paid for and maintained by taxpayers

Does it not say that st tammany PARISH partially finances the court???

Tetragrammaton
04-20-2008, 10:54 AM
If your not following Jesus's laws. Then who are you following? and what morals are they based upon?

You will find that most, if not all, laws are based upon some moral foundation writen in a religion somewhere.

Anyway, I dont think a picture of Jesus is hurting anybody. But the ACLU telling you what you can and cannot display publicy is.

Today is a picture of Jesus, tomorrow, perhaps it will be something you like?

I am following the laws of the United States. I hope you are too.

Laws aren't based off of religion, that is nonsense. Hammurabi's Code was around way before Christianity, and may have been written before the start of Judaism. Only two of the ten Commandments are based on U.S. law.

The picture of Jesus is hurting somebody. It makes the suggestion that atheists are without morals, which you also did. It is intimidation.

SirDrums
04-20-2008, 10:57 AM
It's hurting the US Constitution. Freedom of religion, by definition includes freedom from religion. With my choice to not follow Christianity as my religion comes the government's responsibility to not endorse or champion one religion over all other possible faiths or non-faiths. What if a govt. building in San Fransisco had a portrait of local Anton Levay? Wouldn't like that, would you? :err:

No, I wouldn't like that. I am sure that if a judge was part of the church of satan he wouldn't be a judge very long. It wouldn't be because of the ACLU, it would be because of the public outcry. Which is the way it should work.

Tetragrammaton
04-21-2008, 10:06 PM
No, I wouldn't like that. I am sure that if a judge was part of the church of satan he wouldn't be a judge very long. It wouldn't be because of the ACLU, it would be because of the public outcry. Which is the way it should work.

That is why judges are not elected officials. If they are elected, they have to bow to the will of the masses. Brown vs. the Board of Education, Roe vs. Wade, etc, etc. None of those would have happened if the judges were facing re-election (I know abortion is still a controversy, but Brown isn't.)

The judicial branch is perfect the way it is. It allows the elected branches to be checked in order to protect the minority.

Dolphan7
04-22-2008, 12:20 AM
We don't have the right to not be offended in this country. Sorry but we don't. So if someone is offended by this picture.....too bad.

So that leaves......

What is this picture forcing anyone to do?

Blackocrates
04-22-2008, 01:36 AM
We don't have the right to not be offended in this country. Sorry but we don't. So if someone is offended by this picture.....too bad.

So that leaves......

What is this picture forcing anyone to do?

If someone is offended by removing this picture, too bad.

The picture isn't forcing anybody to do anything. It's a specific religious symbol placed on tax payer property, and it shouldn't be there. Just like a picture of Muhammad shouldn't be there. It's pretty simple.

Also Dolphan7, I would like to add a caveat. Since I've been disagreeing with you recently I would like to let you know that I'm a born again Christian. I'm a true believer in Jesus Christ, I just believe a lot of Christians have crossed a line on many issues. I find myself not agreeing with most conservative Christians these days.

For example, I don't believe any religion should intrude on government. I believe in gay marriage because marriage is just a government contract that I think two consenting adults should be allowed to partake in. I also believe any church has the right to decide who they will allow to marry in their church. I believe Christians should be staunchly against immoral wars, and wars in general. I believe Christians should leave evolution alone and stop trying to intrude in public schools. I believe Christians should take care of the earth that God created. I believe Christians should help take care of the poor and heal the sick. Etc. But that's just me, thought I would throw that out there.

poornate
04-23-2008, 09:24 AM
I would like to let you know that I'm a born again Christian. I'm a true believer in Jesus Christ, I just believe a lot of Christians have crossed a line on many issues. I find myself not agreeing with most conservative Christians these days.

For example, I don't believe any religion should intrude on government. I believe in gay marriage because marriage is just a government contract that I think two consenting adults should be allowed to partake in. I also believe any church has the right to decide who they will allow to marry in their church. I believe Christians should be staunchly against immoral wars, and wars in general. I believe Christians should leave evolution alone and stop trying to intrude in public schools. I believe Christians should take care of the earth that God created. I believe Christians should help take care of the poor and heal the sick. Etc. But that's just me, thought I would throw that out there.

...you are also a needle in a haystack.... :nate:

Pagan
04-23-2008, 11:23 AM
We don't have the right to not be offended in this country. Sorry but we don't. So if someone is offended by this picture.....too bad.

So that leaves......

What is this picture forcing anyone to do?
It's amazing how tolerant you are when it's something of your faith placed in public buildings. I can only imagine how accepting you'd be if there was a pentacle placed there instead.

The irony of your statement borders on hilarity, coming from one of a faith that is constantly being "offended" by things. :rolleyes:

cwsox
04-23-2008, 04:34 PM
Put a pentacle in a public building, teach Islamic prayers in the school, and see how quickly some people will get offended and outraged.

Their objection will be this is a "Christian nation."

It is not. It is precisely the opposite. We have a Constitution that forbids the establishment of a religion. We are a pluralistic nation.

Then they'll want to argue that, that the Constitution doesn't mean what it says because of something they cut and paste from a right wing website that takes some snippet from someone's diary from 1786. The founding fathers were mostly deists, not Christians. Jefferson thought the only way to read the Gospels was to cut all the miracle references out and he did, thus creating the Jefferson Bible. Say that to these sorts of Christians and they get all offended.

I am a Christian. I affirm the faith of the Church.

I would reword some of swordfish's excellent statement to make it aligned to my own understandings, but that is just a matter of wording, I appreciate his statement and wish more Christians would post that, swordfish speaks for a lot more Christians than some realize.

In the Scriptures that I hold as authoritative, we are commanded to teach our faith in our homes. We have that right when we gather together in our places of worship. We profane the Scriptures and the faith of the Church when we seek to use public funding and public places for the advancement of our faith. The coercive power of the state is not a proper tool for evangelism, in fact, that is a sin against the Gospel. And how incredible it is that some seek to commit an offense, seek to offend others, by placing their religious symbols in public buildings. It is wrong, it offends, it converts no one even though you may high fives at the Bible study. Jesus never placed religious symbols in Roman buildings, in state owned buildings. Jesus spread the Gospel by acts of love and compassion. Hmmm....

Pagan
04-23-2008, 05:53 PM
Bravo, cwsox AND swordfish...well said.

Blackocrates
04-24-2008, 12:46 AM
...you are also a needle in a haystack.... :nate:

That's true in a lot of ways. But it's also true what cwsox said, there are more of us then what people believe. It's just that I believe those types of Christians don't feel compelled to talk about it, they're private.

Also, you get your head bit off if you come across a conservative Christian. They immediately challenge your own salvation and beliefs. In my experience they like to get into political arguments rather than scriptural discussions. I oblige from time to time, because I get fed up or because I like to get a rise out of them.

spydertl79
04-24-2008, 01:18 AM
It's hurting the US Constitution. Freedom of religion, by definition includes freedom from religion. With my choice to not follow Christianity as my religion comes the government's responsibility to not endorse or champion one religion over all other possible faiths or non-faiths. What if a govt. building in San Fransisco had a portrait of local Anton Levay? Wouldn't like that, would you? :err:
I would describe myself as an atheist- one with enough common sense to realize that an image of Jesus hung in a Louisiana courtroom isn't going to hurt anybody. Even if (as I believe), Jesus was simply an extraordinary human being who carried his message to millions, his image belongs in a courtroom as he has undoubtedly influenced our court system and our moral laws.

ih8brady
04-24-2008, 01:37 AM
I would describe myself as an atheist- one with enough common sense to realize that an image of Jesus hung in a Louisiana courtroom isn't going to hurt anybody. Even if (as I believe), Jesus was simply an extraordinary human being who carried his message to millions, his image belongs in a courtroom as he has undoubtedly influenced our court system and our moral laws.


Well, there's really no evidence that he existed at all. And Christianity has tiny compared to the influence of the British system, the Enlightenment or the Roman Empire. That aside, he is a religious figure who does not belong within the halls of government. Why not Mohammad or Vishnu? What message does that send to non-Christians who use the Court system? How is that not an endorsment of religion(by def. unconstitutional)?

Dolphin1184
04-24-2008, 04:27 AM
Their objection will be this is a "Christian nation."

It is not. It is precisely the opposite. We have a Constitution that forbids the establishment of a religion. We are a pluralistic nation.


Yeah, and I would also like to add that the founding fathers of this country were not Christians but Deists, which believed in a impersonal "watchmaker" type of God. God exists, but there is no personal relationship. He is the uncaused cause.

ganooch
05-01-2008, 10:30 AM
It is amazing how those who believe in an individual's unlimited freedom of speech, suddenly feel that when up against the so called separation of church and state, the former is superceded by the latter.

Bumpus
05-15-2008, 10:27 AM
It is amazing how those who believe in an individual's unlimited freedom of speech, suddenly feel that when up against the so called separation of church and state, the former is superceded by the latter.

There is no such thing in the U.S.A. as "unlimited freedom of speech" - a person's rights end where they begin to infringe upon the rights of another person.

... and, yes, state does supercede church in this country.

Flip Tanneflop
05-15-2008, 11:47 PM
If someone is offended by removing this picture, too bad.

The picture isn't forcing anybody to do anything. It's a specific religious symbol placed on tax payer property, and it shouldn't be there. Just like a picture of Muhammad shouldn't be there. It's pretty simple.

Also Dolphan7, I would like to add a caveat. Since I've been disagreeing with you recently I would like to let you know that I'm a born again Christian. I'm a true believer in Jesus Christ, I just believe a lot of Christians have crossed a line on many issues. I find myself not agreeing with most conservative Christians these days.

For example, I don't believe any religion should intrude on government. I believe in gay marriage because marriage is just a government contract that I think two consenting adults should be allowed to partake in. I also believe any church has the right to decide who they will allow to marry in their church. I believe Christians should be staunchly against immoral wars, and wars in general. I believe Christians should leave evolution alone and stop trying to intrude in public schools. I believe Christians should take care of the earth that God created. I believe Christians should help take care of the poor and heal the sick. Etc. But that's just me, thought I would throw that out there.

In other words you are about one in a thousand Christians who would actually do what Jesus would do when wondering WWJD.