Atticus Posted August 22, 2006 Author Share Posted August 22, 2006 OK, well that's a start. Since that's the precise legal formula used to define violations of the establishment clause, you shouldn't really have a lot of problems with the legal status quo.So your problem is not with the standards used, but their application to other government bodies/individuals that aren't Congress? That's fine, but that seems like a totally different debate. (and Incoprpotation doctrine aside, I hardly think a judge putting up the 10 Commendments with the explicit stated intention of promoting Christianity is a "gray area" when it comes to actions with no legitimate secular purpose) I'm just saying clarify/extend the law! Let's have a clear law--not an "interpretation" of the bill of rights--that (pick your example) prohibits schools from displaying religious messages, if that's what the people want. Or a more blanket law that prohibits institutions (and their employees, agents, etc.) which receive federal funding from promoting religion. Those are just two examples off the top of my head--I just think taking an amendment that specifically refers to acts of Congress and stretching it to cover any entanglement of church and state makes less sense than having the legislature pass laws that are clear on their face... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jhc Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 I'm just saying clarify/extend the law! Let's have a clear law--not an "interpretation" of the bill of rights--that (pick your example) prohibits schools from displaying religious messages, if that's what the people want. Or a more blanket law that prohibits institutions (and their employees, agents, etc.) which receive federal funding from promoting religion. Those are just two examples off the top of my head--I just think taking an amendment that specifically refers to acts of Congress and stretching it to cover any entanglement of church and state makes less sense than having the legislature pass laws that are clear on their face... We have a Bill of Rights precisely so that the legistature cannot take away certain freedoms... tyranny of the majority and all that. I especially wouldn't trust a Republican Congress and an evangelical like Bush to protect religous freedoms (and I'm a Republican!) It's precisely these freedoms where the "leave it to the legislature" philosophy is the most inappropriate. There is a real need for our Consitutional freedoms to be interpreted in a reasonable fashion. You already agreed with me that it would be possible for Congress to respect the very literal letter of the 1st Amendment and yet, for all intents and purposes, violate the spirit of the Establishment Clause. So right then and there, you interpreted the 1st Amendment.. The question is once you start interpreting, you have to draw the line somewhere. I find the Lemon Test to be a very reasonable standard, and it appears you do as well given response 3 posts up. We mainy seem to disagree about who it should be applied to. I'd propose that Congress is hardly the only group of people who, if unchecked, could degrade the concept of religious liberty. I'm more than happy to prevent agents of government at any level to actively promote religion without any legitimate secular purpose. We may have to agree to disagree on this point. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted August 22, 2006 Author Share Posted August 22, 2006 We may have to agree to disagree on this point. Maybe so, but I think we're closer to agreement then either of us may think at present. I think interpretation is necessary, but I also think that the legislature should work out grey areas more often than the courts, since we have some redress with the members of Congress. Regardless, I'd like to thank you for the civilized discourse on the subject, which is more than I can say right now about a few other threads... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Regardless, I'd like to thank you for the civilized discourse on the subject, which is more than I can say right now about a few other threads... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.