[NYer]

Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

[davisfh]

I have been visited by “beings” who think that they are “highly intelligent.” Does that count?

[sergeantdave]

The first aphorism: Some judges can be idiots, but I repeat myself.

(With a tip of the hat to Mr. Clemmons.)

[big'ol_freeper]

Pfft... everyone knows that Lt. Col. Jack O'Neil kicked Ra's @ss years ago.

[BeAllYouCanBe]

The city of Pleasant Grove will argue that “mayhem” would result if every city, county, or state is forced to allow alternatives to be set up alongside government-sponsored monuments.

My own thought is that next they will want to sex with every government sponsored monument. Well in my opinion that would be bizarre and only legal in Denmark.

[Lil'freeper]

LOLz - if you pay them $67,000 they will mummify ya.

[Amendment10]

The city of Pleasant Grove will argue that “mayhem” would result if every city, county, or state is forced to allow alternatives to be set up alongside government-sponsored monuments. The city has considered removing the Ten Commandments monument entirely.

The basic problem with this controversy, in my opinion, is that state lawmakers have never made tax laws that compliment our basic freedoms.

For example, a comparable problem with Pleasant Grove's complaint about the Summum request is that, up to the late 1830's, it was up to individual communities to decide what religious beliefs, for instance, were taught in the local schools under the protection of the now-wrongly-ignored 10th A. power to address religious issues. And why shouldn't local public school districts have the option of teaching only those faiths that are represented by local taxpayers?

In other words, I find it reasonable that a given community shouldn't be obligated to share its resources with the free speech requests, for example, of people outside their local tax base; roughly analogous to freedom of the press for those who own a press.

Regarding this Summum group, however, given that their tax dollars are helping to pay for the maintenance, upkeep, etc., of the site in question, and I don't know the details, I would be inclined to say that they should be able to manage an area at the site in question, perhaps an area proportional to their contribution to the local taxes. I'm basically trying to resolve tax-related concerns about our basic freedoms that should have been properly addressed by state lawmakers long ago.

Again, state tax laws don't adequately reflect our 1st A. freedoms, in my opinion.