SCOTUS rules in favor of Church 7 to 2

[tinydancer]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[Syriusly]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Victory of religious rights over state's rights- that part of the State constitution is invalidated.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Victory of religious rights over state's rights- that part of the State constitution is invalidated.

I'm just going to point out something here. It's not a state's right to ban gay marriage, but it is a state's right to deny public funds to a church simply because it's a church?

Wait what now?

 

[OKTexas]

I'm really surprised Kagan voted in the majority, there may be hope for her yet.


.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Congratulations to our American brothers and sisters, hopefully this means that Common Sense and Moral Decency is returning to America.

Hopefully the next is that they will say that people who own a business such as baking cakes, have a right to say no to baking cakes for those who's lifestyle is morally not acceptable to the proprietor.

 

[12icer]

Not invalidated, just applied with no prejudice. If leftist claim NO RELIGION has the same standing as a religion as they have to in order to have standing in their slaps at religious people, Then If their programs can get funding a Religious organization can also get equal funding. For liberals to claim standing they must have something to lose, NOT just a hatred of anything decent. That is the TEXT of the first amendment It is NOT establishing any religion over any other just as it is not establishing the ABSENCE of religion, or the Muslim religion over any other As liberals would.

 

[BluesLegend]

I'm really surprised Kagan voted in the majority, there may be hope for her yet.


.

Maybe she's trying to get on God's good side?

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Could they rule on stopping ALL funding for schools that push the LGBTQ Agenda, you know the Gender Neutral crap and the No Such Thing As Gender crap and/or There Are More Than Two Genders crap?

All of that is Cultural Marxist evil propaganda and it should be outlawed, children need protecting from these twisted perverts.

 

[The Irish Ram]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Victory of religious rights over state's rights- that part of the State constitution is invalidated.

No. It is not religious rights over state rights. It has always been religious rights. Ask the Pilgrims. It is states not punishing religious rights because they are rights accompanied by religion...

 

[Syriusly]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Victory of religious rights over state's rights- that part of the State constitution is invalidated.

I'm just going to point out something here. It's not a state's right to ban gay marriage, but it is a state's right to deny public funds to a church simply because it's a church?

Wait what now?

Good point- note that in both cases the Supreme Court decided that Constitutional rights trumped State Constitutions.

I think that the court made a good call in this case too.

 

[IsaacNewton]

So the reaction is basically "Yay, we can use taxpayer money for church projects".

Of course, those taxpayer dollars come with the strings attached to all taxpayer dollars. This is exactly why the founders wanted separation between church and state. It was to protect BOTH of them from the other.

But Kristians see no further than their wallet. "Come into the parlor said the spider to the fly".

 

[bodecea]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Gonna be fun when other than christer religions invoke this.

 

[Syriusly]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Victory of religious rights over state's rights- that part of the State constitution is invalidated.

No. It is not religious rights over state rights. It has always been religious rights. .

Actually it is very specifically states rights versus religious rights. The State Constitution didn't allow the funding- the Supreme Court over ruled the State Constitution.

Hence states rights versus religious rights.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Supremacy Clause beats 10th Amendment?

Is that what happened here?

 

[Votto]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Oh what now? Praying in public? Open worship of God?

Marx help us all.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

I'm really surprised Kagan voted in the majority, there may be hope for her yet.


.

Maybe she's trying to get on God's good side?

She might have seen the writing on the wall.

I read that all it takes now is one retiring and that one who already looks as if she's been embalmed dying and that Court will be Conservative for the next 30 years.

When that happens I think that Abortion on Demand, abortion as a means of contraception will be stopped and abortion will only be for the cases of rape, incest and where the life of the mother is in danger. Abortion used as a means of contraception is murder.

 

[Syriusly]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Victory of religious rights over state's rights- that part of the State constitution is invalidated.

It has always been religious rights. Ask the Pilgrims. ..

You do realize that the Pilgrims didn't actually believe in religious freedom- right? They were Puritans who believed that they had the right to their faith- not that others had the right to their faith.

Which is why Puritan communitees in the future U.S. regularly banned other religions, and required those who didn't attend church to pay fines.

 

[Syriusly]

I'm really surprised Kagan voted in the majority, there may be hope for her yet.


.

Maybe she's trying to get on God's good side?

When that happens I think that Abortion on Demand, abortion as a means of contraception will be stopped and abortion will only be for the cases of rape, incest and where the life of the mother is in danger. Abortion used as a means of contraception is murder.

And abortion in the case of incest is not murder?

How do you rationalize that one?

Either abortion is murder(which I don't think it is)- and it is murder regardless of whether the sperm came from a rapist or not- or abortion is not murder.

 

[Seawytch]

Nothing has been "ruled upon" yet.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

This is great news. The issue was supposed to be about funding for safety.

Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case that will lift an outright ban on state funding

• The justices, in a 7-2 ruling, sided with a Missouri church that had been denied state funding for a playground improvement project
• Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts said the exclusion of Trinity Lutheran Church 'solely because it is a church, is odious to our Constitution'

Read more: Supreme Court backs church in major religious rights case | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Gonna be fun when other than christer religions invoke this.

Don't those other religions already get treated Special, such as they can do anything they want or if you disagree you're racist, even though a religion isn't a race.