>A free speech/establishment clause debate that is quite the amazing >feat of mental gymnastics. > >In short,Pleasant Grove, Utah has a city park that has a 10 >Commandments monument in it. It was donated (in part) by Cecile B. >DeMille to promote the Ten Commandments movie. That's all well and >good but now another religious organization called Summum, who believe >in mumification, pyramids and hairless blue aliens, wants to donate >and erect a monument celebrating their Seven Aphorisms that they say >were given to Moses but then Moses decided people weren't ready for >them yet and went with the 10 Commandments instead. > >So, now the the Supreme Court has to figure out the question: Should >Summum be able to put the monument in the park alongside the 10 >Commandments? If not, should the 10 Commandments be allowed to remain? > >The arguments are as fascinating as the oddness of the subject matter. >Anytime religion and law get together it seems to me that the results >end up being bizarre. > >http://www.slate.com/id/2204465/pagenum/all/
No matter how bizarre the plaintiffs are, the town had an even more bizarre excuse, they can put up anything they want in the park because government speech supersedes anything else. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:280283 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
