Krieger

Somewhat true, but the Republicans are much closer to fascism than the Democrats are close to communism. In fact I would argue that the Democrats are closer to fascism than they are to communism.

Toto

We're getting a bit off topic here. Please confine debates over degrees of fascism to the Politics Forum.

Thanks

Buffman

This is why I have always hated labels in the absence of specific, mutually agreed, definitions.

fromtheright

Rufus,

Thanks for the defense--I think.

religion to influence and stir up the masses.? I thought it was supposed to be the opiate of the masses.

As to British conservatives I would agree that they are more liberal in many respects, but I think that is primarily due to the greater general acceptance of an expanded role of government in society and the economy but I think they can also be considered conservative pioneers to some extent given Thatcher's privatization initiative. Also, Thatcherite conservatives were, I believe, equally anti-communist to American conservatives.

Edited: Sorry, Toto, I read your last post after responding to Rufus.

[ November 23, 2002: Message edited by: fromtheright ]</p>

RufusAtticus

FTR,

I figure you have at least read some of the decision by now. Have you found anything significant that you disagree with?

~~RvFvS~~

fromtheright

Rufus,

Allow me to C & P below a response to you and SLD on SLD's thread on this topic:

SLD,

I too am pretty certain that Madison would disapprove, but my point is that the history of the period includes definite examples of established religions and that the Founders sought to protect religious liberty by prohibiting Congressional establishment of same (I still need to do some study on incorporation through the 14th Amendment but my initial impression is that while free exercise would probably have been among the liberties extended through the privileges and immunities clause, the unique history of state establishments doesn't lend itself quite so easily to incorporation, though the evaporation of established churches long before the Reconstruction amendments may considerably weaken my point). While the "brick" would probably come well within Madison's rather broad construction, his is not the only voice or experience to be sought. The monument is nowhere near an establishment of religion as those who adopted that language were familiar with true established religions. Oh yes, "respecting an establishment". But let's still not ignore the final word of the phrase.

Interesting to me, I just discovered a personal connection to the case. Richard Hahnemann, noted in the opinion as the one who designed the monument, is a friend of mine here in Huntsville, through my son, as both our sons were in Cub Scouts together a few years ago. Dick's not the fire-breathing fundie you guys fear but a respected sculptor. I would love to get his twist on this whole affair.


Rufus,

Why are private funds being used to decorate to rotunda--is it a rotunda?--of the AL Supreme Court?

A good question, but my question is which is more objectionable to those who disapprove of it? It would seem much more objectionable, as it would be to me, if taxpayer funds had been used.


I don't think they used it to find against him, but rather as part of the pile of evidence that Moore and Coral Ridge are in "buisness" together.

You may be right, but it still troubles me that, even if it is the same party with which Moore became Lemon-entangled, the court included the source of his defense funds as an element which was considered. I don't think Judge Thompson would have decided differently if someone else were providing the funds but I still find it troubling that the Court included it as an element.

[ November 24, 2002: Message edited by: fromtheright ]</p>

Living Dead Chipmunk

Have you read the 10 Commandments?

Do you know what the first four are?

If you answered "yes" to both of those questions, and yet you still can't see how a Taoist would be made to feel like a second-class citizen when the government endorses such a thing on the doorstep of their judicial branch... I'm really, seriously scared.

Buffman

Posted in big time error while still learning how to use UBB Code. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

[ November 26, 2002: Message edited by: Buffman ]</p>

Living Dead Chipmunk

Hello? Was it something I said?

Buffman

Good heavens "NO!" What is even more embarrassing is that I was attempting to work with the UBB Code under an entirely different Topic string. I was attempting to find a way to simply copy-paste the entire URL onto the conversion window via my e-mail program and just flat-out got lost.