Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Be thankful for two things: These women fought for your right to vote, and you don't have to dress like this.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(106)
-
▼
February
(24)
- Obama administration changes a rule
- No credit for commenting on this entry
- speaking of the decline of print media...
- A bizarre first amendment case
- Who did the Obamas invite to the speech last night?
- Categorical funding in CA schools
- Taxation without Representation
- Your Fed Chairman
- Still no budget for California
- Presidential quiz
- Looking for someone to blame?
- I almost forgot!
- Happy birthday to...
- Congratulations!
- "state secrets" privilege
- We're going to have a stimulus bill...probably.
- Bill Gates + mosquitoes =
- Rich people's tax problems
- Baked goods and bipartisanship
- No Secretary Daschle
- Can we blame the recession on men?
- Kurtz article about Palin, Blagojevich, AND Kennedy
- Iraqis voted last week
- An interesting article
-
▼
February
(24)
2 comments:
I had no clue that there was a Religious Sect called the Summum. Before I clicked on the link I assumed Summum was a person's last name or something. This article was sort of strange. It makes sense that state governments can choose what monument donations they are offered. I agreed with the court that the Summum can't force Pleasant Grove City, Utah, to place it's monument, "Seven Aphorisms of Summum," in the city's Pioneer Park. Once the government accepts the donation of the monument from the private party, they are no longer the owner, the government is. This leaves the choice of accepting or refusing the monument up to the government.
I had never heard of Summum. After reading the article I learned that the Summum is a small religious group. The Summum want to place a granite marker in a park in Pleasant Grove City, Utah. The park currently has a monument of the Ten Commandments. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that governments who receive donations of Ten Commandments displays and other monuments for public parks aren't forced to take everything they are offered. The decision was unanimous. The Supreme Court ruled that the Summum, can't force Pleasant Grove City, Utah, to place its granite marker in a park that has had a Ten Commandments monument for 38 years. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said, "Officials do not violate free speech rights when they reject requests to display monuments." He also said that it would be difficult to allow any person or group to have a monument in a public park. The court reversed the ruling of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver that the city violated the Summum's first amendment rights. The first amendment protects the freedom of speech, religion, press, and assembly. According to Alito since the "monuments in public parks help define a city's identity, cities and other jurisdictions take some care in accepting donated monuments." The Summum's argument is that "governments can't favor one religion over another."
I can see both sides of the case but I believe that the park shouldn't have any religious monuments in order to be fair to people who are of different religions.
Post a Comment