NATION

PASSWORD

Nativity Scene Controversy in Central Texas

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Vestr-Norig
Minister
 
Posts: 2319
Founded: Apr 16, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Vestr-Norig » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:03 pm

Socialist States Owen wrote:This is dissapointing.

It's supposed to be the theists bitching about the athiests, not the other way around!

It is not so at all. I would say, that the role has (at least in Europe) been quite turned around, where Christians meets far more opposition for their fate than atheists do.
-- Centre-left --
Agrarianism, Republicanism, Ruralism, Nationalism, Western Norwegian Separatism, Regionalism, Confederalism, Localism, Christian Democracy, Decentralization, Protectionism, National/Cultural Conservatism, Traditionalism, Euroscepticism

Language: Linguistic purism, Norsk Målreising

Religion: Lutheranism
"Sæle dei som ikkje ser, og endå trur" - Joh 20,29

User avatar
Dyakovo
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 83162
Founded: Nov 13, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Dyakovo » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:06 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:Tragic. Just, tragic.

Yeah, it is tragic that some ignorant fuckwads want to break the law...
Unfortunately they've been allowed to get way with it for so long they think its okay.
Don't take life so serious... It isn't permanent...
Freedom from religion is an integral part of Freedom of religion
Married to Koshka
USMC veteran MOS 0331/8152
Grave_n_Idle: Maybe that's why the bible is so anti-other-gods, the other gods do exist, but they diss on Jehovah all the time for his shitty work.
Ifreann: Odds are you're secretly a zebra with a very special keyboard.
Ostro: I think women need to be trained
Margno, Llamalandia, Tarsonis Survivors, Bachmann's America, Internationalist Bastard B'awwwww! You're mean!

User avatar
Vestr-Norig
Minister
 
Posts: 2319
Founded: Apr 16, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Vestr-Norig » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:15 pm

Dyakovo wrote:
Vestr-Norig wrote:Tragic. Just, tragic.

Yeah, it is tragic that some ignorant fuckwads want to break the law...
Unfortunately they've been allowed to get way with it for so long they think its okay.

It is tragic that some atheist who do not live there, try to remove an ancient tradition, which the locals have done for quite a time, while replacing it with a clearly blasphemous and offensive propaganda poster, promoting their disbelief, while mocking religious belief.
Last edited by Vestr-Norig on Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-- Centre-left --
Agrarianism, Republicanism, Ruralism, Nationalism, Western Norwegian Separatism, Regionalism, Confederalism, Localism, Christian Democracy, Decentralization, Protectionism, National/Cultural Conservatism, Traditionalism, Euroscepticism

Language: Linguistic purism, Norsk Målreising

Religion: Lutheranism
"Sæle dei som ikkje ser, og endå trur" - Joh 20,29

User avatar
Hebalobia
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 439
Founded: Dec 06, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Hebalobia » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:16 pm

A couple of points.

1. They way I read the article the banner would be in addition to the Nativity Scene and not instead off. It's an alternative to taking the scene down (besides I'm familier with the FfRF and that's typical).

2. It sounds like the town, if the ONLY display it has is the Nativity Scene, is technically in violation of U.S. law. They could easily solve the problem by adding additional holiday displays such as snow men, reindeers, Santa etc.

3. I personally don't have any issues with Nativity Scenes as long as that's not the sole decoration. In other words, I stand by the Constitution and the law.

4. The townfolk, given their reaction, aren't acting very maturely. They are violating the law and refusing to address the situation. I bet they consider themselves patriots as well.

User avatar
Risottia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54742
Founded: Sep 05, 2006
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Risottia » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:20 pm

Glorious Freedonia wrote:You guys mentioned national holidays. Those are holidays for everyone. There are no specific atheist holy days.


So is Christmas in the USA. It's a national holiday, recognised as such by the government. Hence, not just for Christians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ho ... of_America
Statanist through and through.
Evilutionist Atheist Crusadjihadist. "Darwinu Akhbar! Dawkins vult!"
Founder of the NSG Peace Prize Committee.
I'm back.
SUMMER, BLOODY SUMMER!

User avatar
Hebalobia
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 439
Founded: Dec 06, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Hebalobia » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:21 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Dyakovo wrote:Yeah, it is tragic that some ignorant fuckwads want to break the law...
Unfortunately they've been allowed to get way with it for so long they think its okay.

It is tragic that some atheist who do not live there, try to remove an ancient tradition, which the locals have done for quite a time, while replacing it with a clearly blasphemous and offensive propaganda poster, promoting their disbelief, while mocking religious belief.


Go back and read the article again.

1. The original complaint came from a local resident who's a member of the FfRF.
2. I don't believe they want to replace the creche with the banner, if the town puts up the banner then the creche can stay because it would no longer be by itself.
3. In the U.S. it's not blasphemy, it's free speech.
Last edited by Hebalobia on Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Dyakovo
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 83162
Founded: Nov 13, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Dyakovo » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:21 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Dyakovo wrote:Yeah, it is tragic that some ignorant fuckwads want to break the law...
Unfortunately they've been allowed to get way with it for so long they think its okay.

It is tragic that some atheist who do not live there, try to remove an ancient tradition, which the locals have done for quite a time, while replacing it with a clearly blasphemous and offensive propaganda poster, promoting their disbelief, while mocking religious belief.

It's clear that you didn't bother reading. The Freedom From Religion Foundation does not want to replace the nativity scene with their banner. They want the town to take down the nativity scene because it being displayed on government property is unconstitutional. Also, the Freedom From Religion Foundation has gotten involved at the request of residents of the town.
Don't take life so serious... It isn't permanent...
Freedom from religion is an integral part of Freedom of religion
Married to Koshka
USMC veteran MOS 0331/8152
Grave_n_Idle: Maybe that's why the bible is so anti-other-gods, the other gods do exist, but they diss on Jehovah all the time for his shitty work.
Ifreann: Odds are you're secretly a zebra with a very special keyboard.
Ostro: I think women need to be trained
Margno, Llamalandia, Tarsonis Survivors, Bachmann's America, Internationalist Bastard B'awwwww! You're mean!

User avatar
Dyakovo
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 83162
Founded: Nov 13, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Dyakovo » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:22 pm

Hebalobia wrote:A couple of points.

1. They way I read the article the banner would be in addition to the Nativity Scene and not instead off. It's an alternative to taking the scene down (besides I'm familier with the FfRF and that's typical).

2. It sounds like the town, if the ONLY display it has is the Nativity Scene, is technically in violation of U.S. law. They could easily solve the problem by adding additional holiday displays such as snow men, reindeers, Santa etc.

3. I personally don't have any issues with Nativity Scenes as long as that's not the sole decoration. In other words, I stand by the Constitution and the law.

4. The townfolk, given their reaction, aren't acting very maturely. They are violating the law and refusing to address the situation. I bet they consider themselves patriots as well.

1: That would be correct.
2: Again you are correct.
Don't take life so serious... It isn't permanent...
Freedom from religion is an integral part of Freedom of religion
Married to Koshka
USMC veteran MOS 0331/8152
Grave_n_Idle: Maybe that's why the bible is so anti-other-gods, the other gods do exist, but they diss on Jehovah all the time for his shitty work.
Ifreann: Odds are you're secretly a zebra with a very special keyboard.
Ostro: I think women need to be trained
Margno, Llamalandia, Tarsonis Survivors, Bachmann's America, Internationalist Bastard B'awwwww! You're mean!

User avatar
Flameswroth
Senator
 
Posts: 4773
Founded: Sep 05, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Flameswroth » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:25 pm

Dude, they could just put up Santa and reindeer and whatnot and still be good?! How is this even a problem then!? I'd be putting snowmen all up in that bitch anyways, regardless of the FfRF requests. Deck ALL the halls!
Czardas wrote:Why should we bail out climate change with billions of dollars, when lesbians are starving in the streets because they can't afford an abortion?

Reagan Clone wrote:What you are proposing is glorifying God by loving, respecting, or at least tolerating, his other creations.

That is the gayest fucking shit I've ever heard, and I had Barry Manilow perform at the White House in '82.



User avatar
Vestr-Norig
Minister
 
Posts: 2319
Founded: Apr 16, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Vestr-Norig » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:25 pm

Dyakovo wrote:
Vestr-Norig wrote:It is tragic that some atheist who do not live there, try to remove an ancient tradition, which the locals have done for quite a time, while replacing it with a clearly blasphemous and offensive propaganda poster, promoting their disbelief, while mocking religious belief.

It's clear that you didn't bother reading. The Freedom From Religion Foundation does not want to replace the nativity scene with their banner. They want the town to take down the nativity scene because it being displayed on government property is unconstitutional. Also, the Freedom From Religion Foundation has gotten involved at the request of residents of the town.

Why shouldn't the townsfolk decide themselves what to decorate their town with? Isn't that just local democracy, thus, true democracy, and freedom ? Why should this one person, and a bunch of foreign atheists or agnostics or what youl'd call it, decide how the town should look at Christmas?
Last edited by Vestr-Norig on Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-- Centre-left --
Agrarianism, Republicanism, Ruralism, Nationalism, Western Norwegian Separatism, Regionalism, Confederalism, Localism, Christian Democracy, Decentralization, Protectionism, National/Cultural Conservatism, Traditionalism, Euroscepticism

Language: Linguistic purism, Norsk Målreising

Religion: Lutheranism
"Sæle dei som ikkje ser, og endå trur" - Joh 20,29

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 111674
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Farnhamia » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:29 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Dyakovo wrote:It's clear that you didn't bother reading. The Freedom From Religion Foundation does not want to replace the nativity scene with their banner. They want the town to take down the nativity scene because it being displayed on government property is unconstitutional. Also, the Freedom From Religion Foundation has gotten involved at the request of residents of the town.

Why shouldn't the townsfolk decide themselves what to decorate their town with? Isn't that just local democracy, thus, true democracy, and freedom ? Why should this one person, and a bunch of foreign atheists or agnostics or what youl'd call it, decide how the town should look at Christmas?

The national constitution applies to every level of government.
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
Dyakovo
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 83162
Founded: Nov 13, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Dyakovo » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:31 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Dyakovo wrote:It's clear that you didn't bother reading. The Freedom From Religion Foundation does not want to replace the nativity scene with their banner. They want the town to take down the nativity scene because it being displayed on government property is unconstitutional. Also, the Freedom From Religion Foundation has gotten involved at the request of residents of the town.

Why shouldn't the townsfolk decide themselves what to decorate their town with? Isn't that just local democracy, thus, true democracy, and freedom ? Why should this one person, and a bunch of foreign atheists or agnostics or what youl'd call it, decide how the town should look at Christmas?

Because government endorsement of a religion is illegal in the US.
Don't take life so serious... It isn't permanent...
Freedom from religion is an integral part of Freedom of religion
Married to Koshka
USMC veteran MOS 0331/8152
Grave_n_Idle: Maybe that's why the bible is so anti-other-gods, the other gods do exist, but they diss on Jehovah all the time for his shitty work.
Ifreann: Odds are you're secretly a zebra with a very special keyboard.
Ostro: I think women need to be trained
Margno, Llamalandia, Tarsonis Survivors, Bachmann's America, Internationalist Bastard B'awwwww! You're mean!

User avatar
Sathera
Diplomat
 
Posts: 711
Founded: Nov 13, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Sathera » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:31 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Dyakovo wrote:It's clear that you didn't bother reading. The Freedom From Religion Foundation does not want to replace the nativity scene with their banner. They want the town to take down the nativity scene because it being displayed on government property is unconstitutional. Also, the Freedom From Religion Foundation has gotten involved at the request of residents of the town.

Why shouldn't the townsfolk decide themselves what to decorate their town with? Isn't that just local democracy, thus, true democracy, and freedom ? Why should this one person, and a bunch of foreign atheists or agnostics or what youl'd call it, decide how the town should look at Christmas?


You would call them Atheists. Atheism is completely different from Agnosticism.
Unter unserer glorreichen Imperiums wir regieren!
Für Sathera wir kämpfen! Für Sathera wir lieben!

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 40533
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:44 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Dyakovo wrote:It's clear that you didn't bother reading. The Freedom From Religion Foundation does not want to replace the nativity scene with their banner. They want the town to take down the nativity scene because it being displayed on government property is unconstitutional. Also, the Freedom From Religion Foundation has gotten involved at the request of residents of the town.

Why shouldn't the townsfolk decide themselves what to decorate their town with? Isn't that just local democracy, thus, true democracy, and freedom ? Why should this one person, and a bunch of foreign atheists or agnostics or what youl'd call it, decide how the town should look at Christmas?


???
Last edited by Neutraligon on Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
Vestr-Norig
Minister
 
Posts: 2319
Founded: Apr 16, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Vestr-Norig » Thu Dec 15, 2011 1:58 pm

Neutraligon wrote:
Vestr-Norig wrote:Why shouldn't the townsfolk decide themselves what to decorate their town with? Isn't that just local democracy, thus, true democracy, and freedom ? Why should this one person, and a bunch of foreign atheists or agnostics or what youl'd call it, decide how the town should look at Christmas?


???

people that do not live nor come from the town, and has therfore nothing there to or say about this issue. I mean that the issue should be left to the townsfolk.
-- Centre-left --
Agrarianism, Republicanism, Ruralism, Nationalism, Western Norwegian Separatism, Regionalism, Confederalism, Localism, Christian Democracy, Decentralization, Protectionism, National/Cultural Conservatism, Traditionalism, Euroscepticism

Language: Linguistic purism, Norsk Målreising

Religion: Lutheranism
"Sæle dei som ikkje ser, og endå trur" - Joh 20,29

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 40533
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:01 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:
???

people that do not live nor come from the town, and has therfore nothing there to or say about this issue. I mean that the issue should be left to the townsfolk.


I thought the interference was done at the request of a resident of the town. Also why shouldn't people be able to protest about something they disagree with the the country they live in.(Very badly sated but I'll leave it)
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
Vestr-Norig
Minister
 
Posts: 2319
Founded: Apr 16, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Vestr-Norig » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:11 pm

Neutraligon wrote:
Vestr-Norig wrote:people that do not live nor come from the town, and has therfore nothing there to or say about this issue. I mean that the issue should be left to the townsfolk.


I thought the interference was done at the request of a resident of the town. Also why shouldn't people be able to protest about something they disagree with the the country they live in.(Very badly sated but I'll leave it)

They could protest about issues where they live themselves, not go around the country interfering with locel buisnesses they have nothing to do with at all. And as I understood it, there was one person from some anti-religious organization that protested. Most, or in fact, nearly all of the townfolk suppoerted the local authorities.
Last edited by Vestr-Norig on Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-- Centre-left --
Agrarianism, Republicanism, Ruralism, Nationalism, Western Norwegian Separatism, Regionalism, Confederalism, Localism, Christian Democracy, Decentralization, Protectionism, National/Cultural Conservatism, Traditionalism, Euroscepticism

Language: Linguistic purism, Norsk Målreising

Religion: Lutheranism
"Sæle dei som ikkje ser, og endå trur" - Joh 20,29

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 111674
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Farnhamia » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:17 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:
I thought the interference was done at the request of a resident of the town. Also why shouldn't people be able to protest about something they disagree with the the country they live in.(Very badly sated but I'll leave it)

They could protest about issues where they live themselves, not go around the country interfering with locel buisnesses they have nothing to do with at all. And as I understood it, there was one person from some anti-religious organization that protested. Most, or in fact, nearly all of the townfolk suppoerted the local authorities.

Here's the deal. It doesn't matter if the person protesting comes from the town in question or from Alaska or Maine of Hawaii. He or she is entitled, as an American citizen, to do so. Nor does it matter if everyone in the town supported the display. Strictly speaking, it violates the Constitution, which, as I pointed out before, applies to everyone every where in the US. Okay? Are we clear?
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
Vestr-Norig
Minister
 
Posts: 2319
Founded: Apr 16, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Vestr-Norig » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:23 pm

Farnhamia wrote:
Vestr-Norig wrote:They could protest about issues where they live themselves, not go around the country interfering with locel buisnesses they have nothing to do with at all. And as I understood it, there was one person from some anti-religious organization that protested. Most, or in fact, nearly all of the townfolk suppoerted the local authorities.

Here's the deal. It doesn't matter if the person protesting comes from the town in question or from Alaska or Maine of Hawaii. He or she is entitled, as an American citizen, to do so. Nor does it matter if everyone in the town supported the display. Strictly speaking, it violates the Constitution, which, as I pointed out before, applies to everyone every where in the US. Okay? Are we clear?

I am clear, yes, though, that do not mean I agree with your constitution. Local democracy should be a human right, the very fundation of a civilized and democratical nation, which, if what you say is true, is denied by your constutution. This, I believe, is wrong.
Last edited by Vestr-Norig on Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-- Centre-left --
Agrarianism, Republicanism, Ruralism, Nationalism, Western Norwegian Separatism, Regionalism, Confederalism, Localism, Christian Democracy, Decentralization, Protectionism, National/Cultural Conservatism, Traditionalism, Euroscepticism

Language: Linguistic purism, Norsk Målreising

Religion: Lutheranism
"Sæle dei som ikkje ser, og endå trur" - Joh 20,29

User avatar
Occupied Deutschland
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18796
Founded: Oct 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Occupied Deutschland » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:28 pm

Farnhamia wrote:
Vestr-Norig wrote:They could protest about issues where they live themselves, not go around the country interfering with locel buisnesses they have nothing to do with at all. And as I understood it, there was one person from some anti-religious organization that protested. Most, or in fact, nearly all of the townfolk suppoerted the local authorities.

Here's the deal. It doesn't matter if the person protesting comes from the town in question or from Alaska or Maine of Hawaii. He or she is entitled, as an American citizen, to do so. Nor does it matter if everyone in the town supported the display. Strictly speaking, it violates the Constitution, which, as I pointed out before, applies to everyone every where in the US. Okay? Are we clear?

I Agree with the underlined, but lets not forget the important qualifier here.
"After ______ group requested they be allowed to put up a display and were denied (in this case, atheists) it violates the Constitution."

I don't think anyone can argue that people having religious displays on public ground is unConstitutional. The government stepping in and only allowing one religion to do it, however, is.
I'm General Patton.
Even those who are gone are with us as we go on.

Been busy lately--not around much.

User avatar
Ceannairceach
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26637
Founded: Sep 05, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Ceannairceach » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:28 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Dyakovo wrote:Yeah, it is tragic that some ignorant fuckwads want to break the law...
Unfortunately they've been allowed to get way with it for so long they think its okay.

It is tragic that some atheist who do not live there, try to remove an ancient tradition, which the locals have done for quite a time, while replacing it with a clearly blasphemous and offensive propaganda poster, promoting their disbelief, while mocking religious belief.

Ancient tradition? If I recall correctly, putting up a nativity scene in front of a courthouse in Texas isn't ancient, by fact of Christians not being in Texas long enough for the "tradition" to be considered "ancient".

@}-;-'---

"But who prays for Satan? Who in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most..." -Mark Twain

User avatar
The Island
Secretary
 
Posts: 33
Founded: Oct 27, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby The Island » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:30 pm

Farnhamia wrote:
Vestr-Norig wrote:They could protest about issues where they live themselves, not go around the country interfering with locel buisnesses they have nothing to do with at all. And as I understood it, there was one person from some anti-religious organization that protested. Most, or in fact, nearly all of the townfolk suppoerted the local authorities.

Here's the deal. It doesn't matter if the person protesting comes from the town in question or from Alaska or Maine of Hawaii. He or she is entitled, as an American citizen, to do so. Nor does it matter if everyone in the town supported the display. Strictly speaking, it violates the Constitution, which, as I pointed out before, applies to everyone every where in the US. Okay? Are we clear?


We are not clear. While everyone seems to be take for granted that a Nativity scene somehow violates the Constitution, I am not familiar with a single Supreme Court case that has ever decided the issue. Could someone please give the case name that has settled this? BTW, don't bother giving me cases about the Ten Commandments, it's a completly separate issue.

Incidentally, there is something delicisously ironic about leftists appealing to the Constitution.

User avatar
Ceannairceach
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 26637
Founded: Sep 05, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Ceannairceach » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:30 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Farnhamia wrote:Here's the deal. It doesn't matter if the person protesting comes from the town in question or from Alaska or Maine of Hawaii. He or she is entitled, as an American citizen, to do so. Nor does it matter if everyone in the town supported the display. Strictly speaking, it violates the Constitution, which, as I pointed out before, applies to everyone every where in the US. Okay? Are we clear?

I am clear, yes, though, that do not mean I agree with your constitution. Local democracy should be a human right, the very fundation of a civilized and democratical nation, which, if what you say is true, is denied by your constutution. This, I believe, is wrong.

Until the Constitution is nulled, however, the state and local governments must play by its rules. There is no leaving the game because you don't like it at the moment.

@}-;-'---

"But who prays for Satan? Who in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most..." -Mark Twain

User avatar
The Island
Secretary
 
Posts: 33
Founded: Oct 27, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby The Island » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:31 pm

Occupied Deutschland wrote:
Farnhamia wrote:Here's the deal. It doesn't matter if the person protesting comes from the town in question or from Alaska or Maine of Hawaii. He or she is entitled, as an American citizen, to do so. Nor does it matter if everyone in the town supported the display. Strictly speaking, it violates the Constitution, which, as I pointed out before, applies to everyone every where in the US. Okay? Are we clear?

I Agree with the underlined, but lets not forget the important qualifier here.
"After ______ group requested they be allowed to put up a display and were denied (in this case, atheists) it violates the Constitution."

I don't think anyone can argue that people having religious displays on public ground is unConstitutional. The government stepping in and only allowing one religion to do it, however, is.


I'd be happy to argue it.

User avatar
Hittanryan
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9061
Founded: Mar 10, 2011
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Hittanryan » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:31 pm

Vestr-Norig wrote:
Farnhamia wrote:Here's the deal. It doesn't matter if the person protesting comes from the town in question or from Alaska or Maine of Hawaii. He or she is entitled, as an American citizen, to do so. Nor does it matter if everyone in the town supported the display. Strictly speaking, it violates the Constitution, which, as I pointed out before, applies to everyone every where in the US. Okay? Are we clear?

I am clear, yes, though, that do not mean I agree with your constitution. Local democracy should be a human right, the very foundation of a civilized and democratical nation, which, if what you say is true, is denied by your constutution. This, I believe, is wrong.

Let me tell you something about local government: it can be much worse than state and national governments. Local officials in my hometown literally consisted solely of people on power trips, none of them qualified to really run anything. Many ran unopposed because no one else wanted to. The town supervisor dropped out of 10th grade for fuck's sake. Glorification of local government is stupid.
In-character name of the nation is "Adiron," because I like the name better.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aggicificicerous, Bahrimontagn, Emotional Support Crocodile, Eragon Island, Fractalnavel, Google [Bot], Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States, Greater Miami Shores 3, Ostroeuropa, Polish Prussian Commonwealth, Stellar Colonies, Teditania, The Rio Grande River Basin, Western Theram

Advertisement

Remove ads