Full Text of Prayer Mural Decision
Attached to this article is the full 40-page decision by U.S. District Court Judge Ronald R. Lagueux.
Attached to this article is the full 40-page decision by U.S. District Court Judge Ronald R. Lagueux.
Attached to this article is the full 40-page decision by U.S. District Court Judge Ronald R. Lagueux.
Attached to this article is the full 40-page decision by U.S. District Court Judge Ronald R. Lagueux.
MoonBeamWatcher
7:16 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Now cracks a noble heart . . . as the smoke masks the fire within.
Still cheaper then any deal that would be reached with the ACLU.
Hope this goes to SCOTUS! Set up a fund and I'll contribute to it.
Robin Lionheart
6:19 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
Got a fundraising goal for you: Try to raise at least $456,881.
That’s how much McCreary and Pulaski County, Kentucky owe the ACLU. They posted the Ten Commandments in their courthouses, appealed their lawsuits all the way to the Supreme Court, and lost. Their insurance does not cover it. Poverty-stricken McCreary County was reduced to begging for donations. (If you’d like to mail them a check too, you can find the address in http://mccrearyrecord.com/local/x1557868343/First-10-Commandments-donation-arrives )
David Davis
10:44 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
I'm in with as much $$$ as my overtaxed accounts can bear.
Tiff
11:45 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Why must we be forced to tear down and pack away our heritage?????? Because someone found it offensive? Really America, we're forced to give in to minority demands daily for fear of litigation and the financial burden that follows. It's not a matter of religion it's a matter of banding together to fight for our freedom and the honor in respecting those who brought this country to where we are today. Congrats Miss Alhquist you got your 10 minutes of fame, at what cost? A slap in the face to the true Americans. Don't complain in the future when your children and Grandchildren don't even have the right to bear arms, vote, raise their children with your own families beliefs for its people like you and the dishonorable Judge Lagueux that will cause the fall of America.
Art Rigsby
12:14 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
Tiff, "we're forced to give in to minority demands " is exactly why we are a republic protected by the Constitution. Our Founding fathers did not want the majority forcing their view on a minority. You could take a course in constitutional law or move to North Korea where only one view is allowed, much as you contend.
Lowell Skelton
1:02 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
Tiff - The judge made it crystal clear: "At any rate, no amount of history and tradition can cure a constitutional infraction." An illegal display is illegal no matter how long it's been there. I'm sorry you hate the Constitution.
Chuck Nevola
12:16 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
It is presumptuous for this judge to call this a "Christian prayer" as he does immediately in his ruling. Strip off the "Our Heavenly Father" at the beginning and the "Amen" at the end, and you have a solemn hope - a wish - for good behavior and moral living that could be the hope or wish of anyone of any race, color or creed.
The court (this judge) would have us completely eliminate such things that are considered "religious" in the public square as an absolute to guarding us against the establishment of religion, but it is a violation of our constitutional right to Freedom of Religion to complete erase and eradicate any vestiges of "religion." Such poor rulings are accomplishing the exact opposite of guaranteeing our rights as citizens. I hope this goes further up the appelate chain - it will most certainly be overruled. I understand why some politicians want to hold such judges accountable when I see rulings like this one which immediately inform us of their bias from the outset.
Lowell Skelton
1:06 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
That's the point. The banner said "SCHOOL PRAYER" right at the top. Does "PRAYER" mean something else in your world?
Edward Vidakovic
5:30 pm on Sunday, January 15, 2012
"Strip off the "Our Heavenly Father" at the beginning and the "Amen" at the end, and you have a solemn hope - a wish - for good behavior and moral living that could be the hope or wish of anyone of any race, color or creed."
Jessica and the ACLU attempted to compromise with the school board by suggesting just this course of action. The school board shouted her down and took her to court.
Chuck Nevola
2:31 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
Schools typically have had "school songs" "school mottos" and "school prayers" for generations. OK, say that a tradition is unconstitutional, sure, I agree, if it is, it ought to be done away with - for example, if the school was segregating students by race - but that's not what this is. Again, remove the word "prayer" the greeting and the ending and you don't have a "Christian prayer" at all.
MoonBeamWatcher
2:54 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
Be for or against . . . my 'hope' / prayer is this does go to the SCOTUS.
Even this PATCH headline wrongly suggests this issue is about the ACLU's
"Separation of Church and State" which this case is NOT about.
The First Amendment's Establishment Clause -- Merely states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
That's it.
Now let's break it down.
What do you suppose the Framers of the US Constitution -- a document expressly designed to limit the powers of federal government -- intended with the word "Congress"?
Did THEY mean State government?
Municipal government?
Your local school district?
Your third grade teacher?
The first graduating class' gift to following students?
Of course not. They meant exactly what they said: Congress.
As in: The United States Congress!
It takes someone with a distinctly disingenuous ulterior motive to derive anything else.
Victor Profughi
10:07 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
True the original framers wanted only to restrict the national government with the first 10 amendments. Later came a civil way and the 14th amendment. Following a lengthy series of court decisions starting with one in 1897, further clarified in the 1920s, the amendments now do apply to all levels of government -- religion since 1940 and 1947. By 2010 virtually all protections of the bill of rights, except grand jury indictment had been applied to states and their creatures (i. e. municialities, school districts, etc.). The gift by the first graduating class is not what the case is about. Presumably the gift could be given. What the city may not do, according to the federal distict court, is put a prayer banner on public display in a public classroom facility. It only takes a person with a cursory knowedge of constitutional law to conclude that displayed prayer in a government building, put up by a government violates court interpretations of the establishment clause. There may be sound arguments that the banner posting is not a constitutional violation (although I think it clearly is), but a pre-civil war understanding of the constitution will never be one of them.
Stoney
5:51 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
MoonBeam - there is no justification for violation of the US Constitution - not even for your holy books or Jesus. Grow up, if you can. The behavior of you and yours is not just offensive, but you make a mockery of the very thing that separates us from the rest of the world - a secular government which does not favor any one religion over another and which does not assist in the imposition of one religious view IN THE PUBLIC SPACE. I'm sure you wouldn't want your tax dollars going to an atheist banner in the school. Well, if a Christian banner can be displayed - so can an atheist one. That's the deal. Any takers?
So, if the government is going to allow one religious display, it must allow all religious displays - and even displays against religion. After all, government properly is the property of all - all taxpayers and all views and opinions. The government cannot and must not pick and choose what it deems to be acceptable - as this runs afoul of the 1st Amendment.
The remedy? Keep public space free from all private (not public) displays. On private property - put what ever you want. But, please, keep the public space free from religious favoritism and coercion.
MoonBeamWatcher
6:29 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Tim Thomas said it all!
To think that "We the people" can expect to find justice at the SCOTUS is
a product of my over-active imagination!
I do fear "We the people" will have to find it in the streets!
Art Rigsby
4:10 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
MoonBeamWatcher: Sounds like you got your constitutional law degree from the David Barton school of American History. Do you consider supreme courts justices and all judges "distinctly disingenuous" when they rule against religious displays on government property?
Would you have the same outrage if the rulings was against a display of Islams Five Pillars of Faith? Probably not.
MoonBeamWatcher
7:25 pm on Friday, January 13, 2012
Art, everyone of most EVERY faith prays. Muslims included, even more often then MOST! And EVERY American of every faith would say "AMEN" to not allowing the posting of the 5 pillows of faith! And, not for NOTHING, but, to continue to celebrate Holidays is most wrong as well - since Holidays root is "HOLY Day"! And TRUST me God is in every "Fox Hole!"
Ross Stapleton-Gray
9:02 pm on Tuesday, January 24, 2012
I can't even figure out what you're trying to say here.
DAAGN1
11:16 am on Saturday, January 14, 2012
Bravo Jessica, for having the courage of your convictions, at such a young age. Very well done, Judge Lagueux, and how appropriate that this decision comes out of the state where religious freedom was so prized by its founder, Roger Williams, that he formed a new colony to serve as a haven for people fleeing the religious oppression inflicted by the Puritan majority in other colonies.