Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page
Posted by Rahman on 10/17/01
On 10/16/01, Rahman wrote: > On 10/16/01, cbg wrote: >> On 10/16/01, Beth wrote: >>> On 8/25/01, anon wrote: >>>> If congress can't restrict the expression of religion, how >>>> is it they can 1)prohibit the display of Nativity scenes >>>> (just because it is on government property doesn't mean the >>>> government is endorsing it - it just shows free expression} >>>> and 2)the saying of "Merry Christmas" on the radio? You can >>>> only say "Happy Holidays" - "Merry Christmas" is in the >>>> same category as "f..." That seems a shame. Explain that >>>> to me legally. >>> >>> The Constitution calls for the separation of church and >>> state. That is the basis for the objections for displaying >>> religious-themed materials in gov't facilities, prayer in >>> pubic schools, etc. >>> >>> I don't quite know what you're talking about relative to >>> holiday greetings on the radio, but since radio stations are >>> not gov't entities, these choices would be a matter of >>> station policy, not constitutional issues. There are many >>> people in this country that don't observe Christmas - people >>> of the Jewish faith, Muslims, Buddists, etc. Perhaps some >>> radio stations have chosen "happy holidays" to be more >>> inclusive of all their listeners. >> >> Anon, in this area I agree with you, at least so far as the >> radio/television ads are concerned. For some reason it seems to >> be okay to say Happy Channukkah (my sincere apologies if I've >> misspelled it) and to wish everyone a Happy Kwanzaa, but Merry >> Christmas is forbidden. I'm sure Beth is right that they're >> trying to be inclusive, but it bothers me too. > > > The U.S. Constitution does NOT call for the seperation of "church > and State". Further, prayer IS allowed in schools. It becomes > violative of the first amendment when it is "lead" or "initiated" > "BY" the school or an extension thereof. > > With regard to the government endorsing the term "Merry > Christmas", this too is not violative of the First Amendment. > Where are you getting this information from? >
Posts on this thread, including this one
- First Amendment as quoted on this page, 8/25/01, by anon.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 10/16/01, by Beth.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 10/16/01, by cbg.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 10/16/01, by Rahman.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 10/17/01, by Rahman.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 10/19/01, by Jayne Cucchiara.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/11/06, by tiffany.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/11/06, by Bob R/CA.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/11/06, by Res ispa Loquitur..
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/12/06, by Bob R/CA.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/12/06, by Res ispa Loquitur.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/12/06, by v.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/13/06, by Res ispa Loquitur .
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/13/06, by v.
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/14/06, by Res ispa Loquitur .
- Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page, 12/15/06, by v.
|