Re: First Amendment as quoted on this page

More | Report Post

You are correct congress can not restrict the expression of
religion but they can NOT endorse religion. The whole agrument
is that the display "endorses" the Christian religion by having
it on government property.

A misconception is this "Separaton of church and state". This
has no constitutional basis. The supreme court has ruled on
this as being "a Neutral stance toward religion" It can not
endorse NOR refuse the expression.

The case the supreme court decided on was a college allowed
lesbian and gay gatherings, Atheist club ect but Banned the
Christian club to gather on campus. Using this Popularized
misconception of "separation of church and state". So the
supreme court ruled (sorry I can remember the case name) the
government must be neutral toward religion NOT!!! Ban it while
allowing other type of "religions" or social thoughts to use
government property.

Remember peope there is NO Freedom of speech! There is only
freedom of Policical speech. All other speech can be and is
regulated or restricted. Anything that causes Immediate passion
hate or anger is banned. Unfortuneately, the word Christmas is
now looked at by certain groups as offensive and as the years go
on these groups are becoming more militant and more hateful of
the word. So it might be now regulated as Hate speech.

Res ispa Loquitur.

On 12/11/06, tiffany 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 think that prayer should be allowed because without it
> look were the kids are today getting pregnet at an erly age
> and doing whatever with whoever it isnt right but thats the
> way secity is
>> 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.