Federal judge nixes license plates with cross
We read:
"A federal judge ruled Tuesday that South Carolina can’t issue license plates showing the image of a cross in front of a stained glass window along with the phrase ‘I Believe.’ U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie said in her ruling that the license plates was unconstitutional because it violates a constitutional ban on establishment of religion.”
Source
How does displaying a particular license plate establish a church???
20 comments:
Well, darn! I guess my college team plate has to go. Football, in many's eyes, is a religion. So too must the I Love My Dog plates. Can't love anything but the gub'ment.
I prefer to have Christians advertise via a license plate so that I can avoid them. I would rather have the driver watch the road instead of praying, "Jesus, take the wheel."
Here's a better question Jon. Does this Federal judge have the constitutional authority to tell a state what it can or cannot do?
As a Christian, i believe license plates should contain the cars registration number and state that issued it. And nothing else! A license plate is an official document. (ie: drivers license, registration, insurance card, etc.) It is not a billboard.
Anonymous said...
"I prefer to have Christians advertise via a license plate so that I can avoid them."
Yes, we would like you atheists to do the same, and for the same reason.
Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof. This plate would not establish religion, only show the car owner's. The owner does not have to buy one if he or she so chooses. But, the judge is prohibiting the free exercise by declaring it unconstitutional. Why do our great legal minds always disregard the second part of that sentence?
You're right annon 5:42.
Only thing I would add is that he got the first part of that sentence wrong too.
It says "Congress" not States and it says "Make no law", Last time I checked a plate design was not a law and Congress was not designing it.
There is sooooo much wrong with the lib interpretation of the establishment clause.
Special Message License Plates are available in many different flavors all over the United States. They advertise everything fro Breast Cancer Awareness to local Sports Teams to self-promotion ("IAM-GR8").
The designs on the license plates are done by government agencies - and if they make an "I Believe" license available with a cross on it, but NOT one with a menorah, and one with a crescent moon and star, and one with a jovial Buddha, and not one with some symbol from EVERY religion (and one with an "I DON'T Believe" and just a big black hole on it) then they are guilty of "endorsing" a religious viewpoint.
Being a Catholic, I'm offended it's NOT a CRUCIFIX myself....
Yes, we would like you atheists to do the same, and for the same reason.
Another original comment by a Christian conservative wackaloon.
I am a religious Jew and I have no issue with the plates.
Stan,
Usually (depepends on state) there is a petition process. If enough people sign up to request the special plate to make it economical, and it is not "foul" then it can be implemented.
The state would not HAVE to have a plate for every religion, just fairly process the request for a plate from every religion. And in keeping with CYA, keep very good records that all rules are followed exactly.
It's pathetic to advertize one's identity on a vehicle in that way; it's the equivalent of marking one's territory with piss.
Anonymous 7:18 said...
"Another original comment by a Christian conservative wackaloon."
Just another cry from the Godless. How pathetic.
"Another original comment by a Christian conservative wackaloon."
Another original comment by a troll.
Wow! This is easy!
Who says I am Godless? I could be Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Pastafarian, Scientologist, agnostic or atheist. But why should I tell that to some damn Christian conservative wackaloon? Religion is a private matter. You people turned it into Big Business.
Anon 1:58 - check your history - Religion has rarely, if ever, in the history of the world been a "Private Matter."
Nor is it a "private matter" in over 1/2 of the world's population.
Chinese are forbidden from having a religion, and thus are probably the only place in the world where people truly do keep it "private" when they espouse a belief.
Ancient Romans were expected - nay required - to participate in Religious Ceremonies to their various gods. Egyptian Pharaohs were descendants of the Sun god, and worshiped by the people. Even in modern times, religion is THE ruling law of much of the Islamic world (those countries where Muslims form a substantial majority).
Religion is anything but "private," in most of history, and even in much of the modern world.
It seems only "polite" people, who wish to avoid conflict, want religion relegated to Sunday Mornings.
To me religion is private. And that is all that matters.
May your private god, bless you.
It's because religion wasn't a private matter that it has so often been the cause or excuse for persecution, conflict and many bloody wars throughout history and throughout the world. Keep religion behind closed doors like gays are so often asked to do with their practices.
BTW, you just proved my point by naming several other Godless groups.
So what? I named a plurality of groups that are non-Christian.
Oh, and that's "RASTafarian".
Google FSM
ClaysAmerica.com has a pretty good explanation of the rationale for separating church and state:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
This means: Separation of Morality and State. Religion co-opted morality when Moses gave us the Ten Commandments and Jesus the Golden Rule, the foundation of our laws. This new idea of separation makes it illegal for any taxpayer-funded agency to include morality as part of its function. Imagine, going to jail because you did not kill someone. How about being sued by the ACLU because you treated someone as you would want them to treat you? Who turned America upside down? Even if I were an athiest, how could I take issue with common decency and morality? However, it cannot be, because there can now be no religion or morality associated with any behavior taking place in the public square.
Post a Comment