5th Circuit says Louisiana law requiring Ten Commandments in classrooms is unconstitutional

‘A federal appeals court on Friday blocked a Louisiana law requiring public school districts to display the Ten Commandments in all classrooms, calling it unconstitutional and setting up a possible Supreme Court battle.

A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit wrote in its ruling that if the law were allowed to stand, “impressionable students will confront a display of the Ten Commandments for nearly every hour of every school day of their public school education in the course of their regular activities.”

“We are grateful for this decision, which honors the religious diversity and religious-freedom rights of public school families across Louisiana,” the Rev. Darcy Roake, who sued to block the statute with her husband, Adrian Van Young, and other plaintiffs, said in a statement Friday. “As an interfaith family, we believe that our children should receive their religious education at home and within our faith communities, not from government officials.”’


The ruling is perfectly warranted, consistent with settled, accepted Establishment Clause jurisprudence.

Unfortunately, we have a Supreme Court dominated by blind partisan conservative ideologues who have time and again exhibited their contempt for settled, accepted precedent.
Poor atheist facediaper.
 
Where do you thought US jurisprudence came from? Are you being intentionally obtuse?

No matter. The Court has already ruled this is Unconstitutional.
EU jurisprudence is from a galaxy far far away.

If it's UC why is the Ten displayed on many Federal and State building's?
 
Where do you thought US jurisprudence came from? Are you being intentionally obtuse?

No matter. The Court has already ruled this is Unconstitutional.

Central Texas? Spent a week in Fredericksburg last month. Beautiful town and nice people.
 
Who are you trying to kid? We could put the Boy & Girl Scout creed and put out just as good of a message, without the religious baggage. I mean, to kids, you don't need 'do not covet thy neighbor's wife (not to mention it's overtly a male centric view) They both use the word 'God', but so does the pledge of allegiance, and no one is complaining, and so, less religion, but just enough to keep everyone happy.
I can't say I agree with your convoluted, helter skelter, illogical, confused explanation of "having just enough God to keep everyone happy".
 
So where is this government endorsement?
By ordering that schools MUST display what is essentially dogma for some religions. To be clear, I strongly agree that the Decalogue is good advice. I wish that those who govern us could be animated by that spirit.

My point is that the First Amendment requires that the government remain neutral on religious matters. Seeking or expecting moral leadership from government is a fool's errand.
 
" Bifurcated Minds Of Sectarian Supremacists "

* A Law Establishing Religion Is Not No Law Against Free Exercise *

Bullshit. It is not the government's purview to establish the 10 commandments as being religious in nature. No law means no law.
Seems the myopia of sectarian supremacist fanatics is missing half the statements in us 1st amendment as there are two directives .

School vouchers to attend religious schools is an establishment of religion ; however the myopia of sectarian supremacist fanatics are trying to devise a means to attache to the government teat for funding its madrassa and parochial schools .

Religions do not pay taxes , which satisfies the no law against free exercise of religion , however school vouchers violate the law against establishment of religion by receiving taxes to promote those religious institutions .

A law stating that a teacher cannot be dismissed for displaying a religious artifact is different than a law directing that a religious artifact be displayed in a public school .
 
Last edited:
15th post
" Bifurcated Minds Of Sectarian Supremacists "

* A Law Establishing Religion Is Not No Law Against Free Exercise *


Seems the myopia of sectarian supremacist fanatics is missing half the statements in us 1st amendment as there are two directives .

School vouchers to attend religious schools is an establishment of religion ; however the myopia of sectarian supremacist fanatics are trying to devise a means to attache to the government teat for funding its madrassa and parochial schools .

Religions do not pay taxes , which satisfies the no law against free exercise of religion , however school vouchers violate the law against establishment of religion by receiving taxes to promote those religious institutions .

A law stating that a teacher cannot be dismissed for displaying a religious artifact is different than a law directing that a religious artifact be displayed in a public school .

The First Amendment is VERY CLEAT. There is no State Sponsored, State Sanctioned, State Funded Religion in the United States. YOU want to live in a country with state supported religion, move to Iran and see how you like it.
 
The First Amendment is VERY CLEAT. There is no State Sponsored, State Sanctioned, State Funded Religion in the United States. YOU want to live in a country with state supported religion, move to Iran and see how you like it.
Jews live in Iran.

 
" Social And Economic Authoritarians Wanting To Declare His Bah Without Under Standing For Independence Of The Individual "

* Abuses Of Native Language With Out Succinct Elocution *

No it isn't. Check your language comprehension skills.
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.

The respecting an establishment of religion is an allusion to respecting any religion , not necessarily a particular religion , and us first amendment is based on a rule for taxation , where religions are not subject to tax as doing so would prohibit the free exercise thereof , and where religions are not subject to receive taxes as doing so would respect an establishment of religion .

When an individual is allowed to purchase attendance for religious education through taxes apportioned by congress , those actions violate the taxation rule and violate an establishment clause of us 1st amendment .

The assemblies of public schools for teachers would be for location information and are otherwise provided to teachers as blank walls which teachers use to construct maps of interrelationships between terms , concepts and principles significant to the topics in the course lessons .

There is not a difference between edicts and tenets of a creed and a religion ; the term rights as synonymous with correct , or valid , or true , or as applied to political science and rules of law such as in constitutions , is slang and an incorrect application the term right , where by abstraction from sound , the term right actually relates with rites , where every action of behavior is a ritual .

Civics from us constitution requires a competent understanding for english diction angles , to include meaning in its phraseology and construction of linguistic statements in law .

While visitation through temporary cultural exchange should always be acceptable , access to us voting booth should be safeguarded by not extending citizenship to any whose creed of religion includes edicts or tenets for violence against independence of individual for citizens of us republic , which excludes adherents for fictional ishmaelism .
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom