We read:
"A statue of Jesus on U.S. Forest Service land in the mountains over a Montana ski resort could be evicted as out-of-state groups advocating for the separation of church and state have applied pressure on the Forest Service.
AP reports that the Forest Service gave supporters a small victory by withdrawing its initial decision to boot the Jesus statue from its perch above Whitefish Friday, but the agency warns that “court decisions are stacked against allowing a religious icon on federal land.”
Supporters tout the statue’s significance to the area since its placement in the 1950s, and popularity among skiers passing the statue on the mountain top
The Madison, Wisconsin-based, Freedom From Religion Foundation argues that the icon cannot be on public land, and is pushing the Forest Service to stand by its decision to remove the statue by next year.
The Billings Gazette writes that Flathead National Forest Supervisor Chip Weber announced that he had withdrawn an earlier decision to deny a special-use permit for the statue, based off new information that the statue may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Gazette notes that overwhelming support has been shown for the statue from members of the public.
The special-use permit that originally allowed a local chapter of the Knights of Columbus to install the memorial was granted in 1953. The KOC installed the statue as a memorial to local veterans of World War II.
Source
9 comments:
If the statue has some historical or artistic merit then it might well qualify to remain on those grounds - literally. And if so there ought to be no objection then on equal grounds to some statue of another religious figure such as Budda or Zeus (but thankfully even muslims wouldn't want a representation of any sort of their "hero" MO'dude!).
How about demanding the removal of all pagan religious idols like the quetzalcoatyl in SAN JOSIE and the other idols dedicated to pagan deities
This is what happens to a nation of formally-free people who have allowed themselves to become weak-minded, gullible, sheep, and who lack even enough will to fight for the things they've always held to be sacred.
The US govt. doesn't own anything. Whatever they have, they purchased with OUR tax money, meaning this land is owned by We The People, not the govt. It is up to the people to say what can be on their land. On the other hand, sheep have no say in anything.
4:38 - I really love that argument! I haven't heard anybody put it that way, and you are absolutely right, we do own the government!
Correction. We used to own the govt!
The First Amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an estblishment of religion". Has anyone asked whether this statue was erected pursuant of any law passed by Congress? I have my doubts.
Malcolm Smith: Why do you persist in quoting only part of what the First Amendment has to say about religion?
The whole First Amendment says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I have emphasized the part about religion you keep leaving out because it's that exact part which the courts these days seem driven to violate.
I don't think he is necessarily avoiding the full context. His point may be that the statue may have been erected under state or local law, not Federal law--ie: erected under a law not specifically passed by Congress
Does state or local law ever trump Federal law?
Asked: "Does state or local law ever trump Federal law?"
Good question! It depends on how you will interpret the 10th Amendment which states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The Federal Government uses the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;" as its reason for almost every regulation it places on states and Judges have ruled that Federal Laws trump State or Local laws despite the clear statement given in the 10th Amendment.
Post a Comment