Tag must be for SUBMITTER. The ACLU didn't cancel anything, they worked to uphold the constitution and separation of church and state.

rabble rabble but I bet they'd allow a MUSLIN SYMBOL like airplanes hitting buildings rabble rabble rabble

/rabble
//rabble

chemical_angel: Tag must be for SUBMITTER. The ACLU didn't cancel anything, they worked to uphold the constitution and separation of church and state.

It's not a federal courthouse.

RobertBruce: chemical_angel: Tag must be for SUBMITTER. The ACLU didn't cancel anything, they worked to uphold the constitution and separation of church and state.

It's not a federal courthouse.

Oh, that's interesting; you're unaware that the Bill of Rights covers the states, too?

Ah, geez. Not Wilkes-Barre, again.

I live near there.

Right now, there are a bunch of people standing on the sidewalk outside the courthouse doing a live nativity in protest. The county solicitor is now saying the manger and menorah can be placed back on the lawn.

Class, there is no God. I sometimes have discomfort with it.

Now, you'd think that as much as people biatch about how incompetent the government is to run anything - health care, banking, etc - they'd want it to keep as far away from their religion as possible.

/First they came for the tacky public displays of religion that Christ very explicitly said to avoid, and I just laughed.

I'm pretty sure I'd be devastated too if my Christmas celebration involved standing outside the Wilkes-Barre courthouse.

The grounds of Pennsylvania's Luzerne County Courthouse are no longer home to a nativity scene or menorah.

Luzerne county. f*cking ACLU. kiddie court judges took bribes for over 5 years and violated the rights of hundreds of kids...and the ACLU goes after Christmas displays outside the courthouse.

way to go guys.

Weaver95: The grounds of Pennsylvania's Luzerne County Courthouse are no longer home to a nativity scene or menorah.

Luzerne county. f*cking ACLU. kiddie court judges took bribes for over 5 years and violated the rights of hundreds of kids...and the ACLU goes after Christmas displays outside the courthouse.

way to go guys.

Worse yet, I hear they're putting up a gay pride display in its place!

/True story.

St_Francis_P:
Worse yet, I hear they're putting up a gay pride display in its place!

/True story.

read up on the court system in that county sometime. If the ACLU really gave a damn about the law and protecting the rights of people in this country, they'd be pushing lawsuits against the private prison system in this state.

or...you know...they could go after Christmas displays in public places.

It's illegal to slay in a pork house.

Weaver95: If the ACLU really gave a damn about the law and protecting the rights of people in this country, they'd be pushing lawsuits against the private prison system in this state.

The private prison system is distasteful and shameful, but it does not violate the constitution. biatching that the ACLU hasn't fixed this yet is like biatching that the SCPA hasn't filled in the potholes in your street.

what_now: The private prison system is distasteful and shameful, but it does not violate the constitution.

in this case they did. To date, NONE of the prison company officials have seen the inside of a jail cell. Nor has anyone investigated the cops or prosecutors involved in a systemic and widespread corruption of judicial authority. sounds like just the sort of thing the ACLU was formed to combat....or, you know, holiday decorations.

Yeah. because those represent a moral threat to the function of good government.


biatching that the ACLU hasn't fixed this yet is like biatching that the SCPA hasn't filled in the potholes in your street.

Five years they ignored the blatant corruption and abuse of authority. the only time they show up is after someone else does their job for them, and they go after....Christmas displays.

yeah. great move.

RobertBruce: chemical_angel: Tag must be for SUBMITTER. The ACLU didn't cancel anything, they worked to uphold the constitution and separation of church and state.

It's not a federal courthouse.


It's also not a church.

Weaver95: Five years they ignored the blatant corruption and abuse of authority.

Did you call them? They don't just show up out of nowhere, they take on cases when people ask them to.

Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion

/just getting that out of the way

mattharvest: RobertBruce: chemical_angel: Tag must be for SUBMITTER. The ACLU didn't cancel anything, they worked to uphold the constitution and separation of church and state.

It's not a federal courthouse.

Oh, that's interesting; you're unaware that the Bill of Rights covers the states, too?

Not according to the text. The First Amendment says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...." A nativity scene at the county courthouse is not an act of Congress.

The 14th Amendment says that the state may not "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." A menorah at the county courthouse does not deny anyone life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

Vanetia: Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion



Actually, it must mean that too if it means anything at all.

If the establishment clause has any validity, then it is unconstitutional to require any citizen to pay, through taxes, to support a specific religion or denomination, or even the advocacy of religion over non-religion.

Just as it's unconstitutional to prohibit a religious practice, so is it unconstitutional to require it.

If only their flagpole were made of aluminum, and had a very high strength-to-weight ratio.

Problem solved.

I have a tough time believing there are many, if any, kids "devastated" by the removal of a nativity scene from the county courthouse. And if there are, these kids need to start getting out more. A lot more.

Here's an update on the story. The ACLU is going to work with the county solicitor to create a "scene" that includes secular objects.


Years ago, they had a snowman next to the baby Jesus. I guess they forgot to do that this year.

Why the hell would anyone side against the ACLU on this? They're only seeing that the law is upheld. Why do you approve breaking the law?

Weaver95: way to go guys.

Last I checked, the ACLU doesn't primarily concern themselves with bribery but sticks to straight civil rights. But go ahead with your 'ACLU is evil' shtick.

SkinnyHead: mattharvest: RobertBruce: chemical_angel: Tag must be for SUBMITTER. The ACLU didn't cancel anything, they worked to uphold the constitution and separation of church and state.

It's not a federal courthouse.

Oh, that's interesting; you're unaware that the Bill of Rights covers the states, too?

Not according to the text. The First Amendment says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...." A nativity scene at the county courthouse is not an act of Congress.

The 14th Amendment says that the state may not "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." A menorah at the county courthouse does not deny anyone life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

You're being intentionally obtuse. The Supreme Court has held repeatedly that the First Amendment applies fully to the individual states.

mattharvest: You're being intentionally obtuse.

Have you not seen him post before?

GAT_00: Why the hell would anyone side against the ACLU on this? They're only seeing that the law is upheld. Why do you approve breaking the law?

Weaver95: way to go guys.

Last I checked, the ACLU doesn't primarily concern themselves with bribery but sticks to straight civil rights. But go ahead with your 'ACLU is evil' shtick.

B-b-b-but they don't just automatically side with my narrow view of what should be right !! They must be bad !!!

mattharvest: You're being intentionally obtuse. The Supreme Court has held repeatedly that the First Amendment applies fully to the individual states.

I said that the text of the constitution does not prohibit courthouse nativity scenes.

I am aware that activist decisions of the Supreme Court say that the 14th Amendment incorporates the establishment clause and makes it binding on state and local governments. I'm just pointing out that the words of the constitution do not support that conclusion.

GAT_00: Why the hell would anyone side against the ACLU on this?

For me, it's one of those things that they are technically right on, but is trivia. Who really gives a fark?

Separation of Church and State doesn't really mean the government is breaking our civil rights if they celebrate national religious based holidays.
You'd think the whole religious beliefs causing them to inhibit certain person's rights to marry would make this seem trivial, but nah.

/OMG Obama said god, impeach him

You know, the Christians sure seem to be losing the War on Christmas, especially when you consider that God's supposed to be on their side...

Meh. My county has a nativity display in front of the county hall and, even though I'm not religious, it doesn't bother me. In fact, I find it hilarious because they included moose and deer in the nativity. You know you live in Canada when your nativity scene has a moose next to the baby Jesus.

/why is voting enabled?

GAT_00: Why the hell would anyone side against the ACLU on this? They're only seeing that the law is upheld. Why do you approve breaking the law?

1) The ACLU's definition of an "establishment of religion" is ridiculously overbroad and not supported by the public meaning of the first Amenmdnet. All the clause prohibits is "establishing" a religion: granting a privilege or imposing a disability on any group of religious believers (or non-believers), that is not applied equally to all other groups. (The clause was there to prevent the federal government (and later the states with the 14th amendment, sorry SkinnyHead) from establishing a "Church of America" like the British had an established "Church of England," where the people who were not members of that church suffered legal penalties.) That's it. Everything else is a 20th Century gloss, particularly the stuff about Hugo Black conflating the text of the First Amendment with Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists. (More history here.)

2) "[T]here are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all."

"Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law." - Martin Luther King, Jr. "Letter from Birmingham Jail.

There, that oughta keep the thread warm.

/Going out to a happy hour

Raiden333: You know, the Christians sure seem to be losing the War on Christmas, especially when you consider that God's supposed to be on their side...

even Jesus can't take on the ACLU.

What a total shiat story. There are no quotes or attributions from any of the ACLU or "Free Thought" organization members. There is no context for information. There is no evidence from the story petitioners were wanting all material removed. Perhaps they wanted a secular display added? How hard is it for journalists and editors to do their farking jobs? All we would need is another 3 paragraphs!

MasterThief: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law." - Martin Luther King, Jr. "Letter from Birmingham Jail....There, that oughta keep the thread warm..



You, sir, are no troll.

You (and my hat is off) are a professional.

EatHam: For me, it's one of those things that they are technically right on, but is trivia. Who really gives a fark?

For some it isn't trivial at all. If some public administrator(s) want to believe in their imaginary sky wizard, go nuts, but government buildings shouldn't be used as an advertising site for a few people's personal beliefs.

FredaDeStilleto: Here's an update on the story. The ACLU is going to work with the county solicitor to create a "scene" that includes secular objects.

==

Luzerne County officials are trying to work with a law firm that has volunteered its time to add a seasonal display to the courthouse lawn, county Solicitor Vito DeLuca said Friday.

The display would include the nativity and menorah that were removed Wednesday night after threats of a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

DeLuca said the county and volunteer law firm will work with the ACLU to establish a display that does not violate the constitutional separation of church and state. The display will likely include secular objects, including a reindeer and candy canes, he said. (new window)

Helpful, but still no hard quotes or evidence directly from the would-be petitioners.

What a shame.

/atheist
//will be celebrating Christmas without all the Jesus guilt and church

Every time I've driven through Wilkes Barre, it's been dark, empty, and enshrouded in fog. Every. Farking. Time.

I'm convinced the town is somehow inherently evil, like something out of a Stephen King novel. A bad one.

The war on fun continues with quite a few angry supporters here on Fark. How's that progressive lifestyle working out for you?

This shiat is stupid and it needs to stop.

You know what we should do? We should allow anyone who wants to put up a holiday display in front of a courthouse or whatever to do so, with approval of the town.

If the Jews want a menorah, fine, they can get together and put one up. If the X-tians want an X-mas tree and a manger. Go nuts, keep it tasteful. Same for the Pagans, Muslims, and Buddhists.

If we let any religion put up any tasteful display that they want, can't we allow the use of public land for a display of holiday joy?

Let's be serious here. The law of separation between church and state does not exist because the founding fathers were worried that someone would put up a plastic farking Santa in front of a court house. The law of separation between church and state exists because the founding fathers didn't want public school biology classes teaching that the earth was created 6000 years ago by god in 8 days using the 3 fundamental elements of the Father, The Son, and the Holy Gost.

When the ACLU goes after displays like this they undermine their own efforts to stop REAL invasions of religion into state affairs.

I Said: I bet they'd allow a MUSLIN SYMBOL like airplanes hitting buildings

GAT_00: Why the hell would anyone side against the ACLU on this? They're only seeing that the law is upheld. Why do you approve breaking the law?


Then what the heck are those totem poles still doing on public land?

what_now: Weaver95: If the ACLU really gave a damn about the law and protecting the rights of people in this country, they'd be pushing lawsuits against the private prison system in this state.

The private prison system is distasteful and shameful, but it does not violate the constitution.

8th amendment much?

from the comments:
"This is the United States of America which is founded on Christian beliefs. Our forefathers were Christians that is a fact whether atheists choose to believe it or not."

HA!

/misanthropic for a reason.

Weaver95: The grounds of Pennsylvania's Luzerne County Courthouse are no longer home to a nativity scene or menorah.

Luzerne county. f*cking ACLU. kiddie court judges took bribes for over 5 years and violated the rights of hundreds of kids...and the ACLU goes after Christmas displays outside the courthouse.

way to go guys.

Wow. That jerked knee of yours rammed your foot into your mouth and right out your ass.

I'm suspicious of this story. ACLU lives off donations and public clamor (good and bad). They would have somebody available in at least Pittsburgh if not this dried out shiathole town to comment on this story. I wonder how much the ACLU really had to do with the removal of the display.

fluffy2097: If the Jews want a menorah, fine, they can get together and put one up. If the X-tians want an X-mas tree and a manger. Go nuts, keep it tasteful. Same for the Pagans, Muslims, and Buddhists.

Yes, let's turn cities into religious burghs where the overwhelming religion gets the final say on how the town will lean. Pardon me but you sound kind'a dumb.

fluffy2097: When the ACLU goes after displays like this they undermine their own efforts to stop REAL invasions of religion into state affairs.

Yes, the ACLU can only do ONE THING AT A TIME...

They only have like 1 full-time lawyer and a staff of 3 admins, all working out of Nancy Pelosi's guesthouse in San Francisco.